The Brussels Journal has a long post describing "multiculturalism" as the "Communism of the 21st Century". Its basic argument is that a kind of fuse-delayed bomb went off in Europe; that although the West resisted Soviet Armies from without it was ultimately subtly subverted from within by socialist ideas. The very moment of Western triumph was simultaneously the moment of its de-legitimization. But the de-legitimization took this most clever of forms: a proclamation that all ideas were equally legitimate and that therefore, no idea was better than the other. The Brussels Journal calls this multiculturalism, the Communism of the 21st century.
As a concept it was devilishly clever. Perhaps because freedom was achieved through choice it became possible for sophists to substitute the notion of indeterminacy for liberty. Freedom was redefined as a process of never arriving anywhere. History became a endless Road trip. So the argument went, one with a kind of mystical appeal. The swindle was to make all journeys on all roads one and the same. As the Brussels Journal points out the hidden assumption lurking in the details was that the choiceless road was the road of choice.
The Brussels Journal more or less stops at this point. But what if we go further? Outside the "West" exist ideologies and cultures which never succumbed to the precepts of "multiculturalism" and for whom the "Communism of the 21st Century" not only lacks appeal but is anathema. Islam, for example, is largely resistant to "the Communism of the 21st Century" and yet it has been imported into Europe on a large scale. Consequently it relates to multiculturalism in a curious way. It is its prime foe at the same time that it is multiculturalism's prime beneficiary. This curious relationship implies that in actuality multiculturalism is playing a losing game with itself; and that the eventual outcome of Western multiculturalism advancing side by side with a confident and ascendant Islam will not be multiculturalism at all but simply a form of Islamic society. The Brussels Journal sees this absurd result and explains that multicultural theorists, having lobotomized themselves have already forgotten their lobotomies.
I have heard individuals state point blank that even if Muslims become the majority in our countries in the future, this doesn’t matter because all people are equal and all cultures are just a mix of everything else, anyway. And since religions are just fairy-tales, replacing one fairy-tale, Christianity, with another fairy-tale, Islam, won’t make a big difference. All religions basically say that the same things in different ways.
But there is another dynamic which is perhaps worth exploring. The most disturbing consequence of accepting the analysis that multiculturalism is abetting the advance of a hostile non-Western culture is that it makes one hope, almost perversely, for the whole ludicrous enterprise to come a-cropper. A kind of wishing for the worst in order to better the situation. Conservatism acquires a mirror image of the bizarre relationship between multiculturalism and Islamism, only flipped. Conservatism is Islamism's main foe at the same that it is Islamism's greatest beneficiary. An almost absurd tableau has been set up where the more the Left pushes multiculturalism, the greater the benefit to radical Islam, while simultaneously the more the Left benefits radical Islam, the greater the benefit to conservatism. This strange engine has already been at work in France. Ironically it was probably Royal and her ilk that elected Sarkozy but only through the agency of the banleius. They raised the negative energy that was by inversion, Sarkozy's positive energy. Someday the Left may wise up and realize that they have more to gain by opposing radical Islam than pandering to it. One day they may sweep American politics by actually leading the war against terrorism; by deciding to win it the way they decided to win against Hitler. But then they've already had their lobotomy.