by Ron Reale
In a rare display of pan-European agreement German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Nicholas Sarkozy, and British Prime Minister David Cameron have agreed on one thing: “multiculturalism” is an abject failure.
Unless a country is allowed to maintain its own identity, history, and culture while allowing people to integrate, it leads to ethnic strife and violence. Insisting that those joining their community share the same language and accept the culture of their new homeland does not mean the immigrants may not maintain their own culture in their personal lives. It does not, in any way, denigrate the immigrants’ native cultures.
It does, however, imply the blatantly obvious views of most Americans:
You have left your home country, and you are free and welcome in ours — as long as you learn our language, respect our laws, and do not protest our right to continue to run our government and lives as though you never arrived on our shores. If you feel you cannot join and live within the parameters of the free culture to which you have emigrated, you have the same freedom to leave our shores as you had to come here. You do not have the right to try to change this country.
No country can survive the Balkanization created when weak-kneed politicians allow immigrants to set up their own cultural enclaves, complete with foreign justice systems and “no-go zones” for the host countries’ law enforcement.
Only America’s Second Amendment has kept our government from forcing the same lawlessness and chaos upon us. When the Muslims were burning French cities and as the police stood by night after night, did the subjects have any recourse?
When the French and British governments announced to their subjects — because an unarmed populace is comprised only of subjects — they were allowing Muslims to set up their own private enclaves, complete with their own criminal justice system based on Islamic rather than European norms, did the French and British subjects have any say?
Is there any reason, other than our Second Amendment, to explain the absence of the same level of underclass rioting in the United States?
When Muslims rioted and killed people in countries all around the world over the accurate portrayal of Muhammad (may he rest in ham) in some cartoons, did the subjects in the targeted countries subjects have any means of self-defense?
We have Mexicans claiming our country is theirs (particularly the racist group La Raza) and ignoring our laws at will. We now have Muslims proudly proclaiming their intention to force the barbaric, seventh-century Shari’a law upon America.
Eventually, one of these groups, or some other coddled group accustomed to receiving preferential treatment, will take to the streets in force. Their elevated status will lead them to think the time is right, and they will, as their terrorist compatriots in Europe, try to destroy our cities.
Many will never leave the streets, and that will be the fault of the “multiculturalists.”