RSS
In 1987, V.S. Naipaul was asked by Andrew Robinson, “Have the immigrants from Asia and the Caribbean changed British life?”
Naipaul, “I feel that there will be a lot of difficulty. I don’t see how it can be avoided, especially with these immigrants who are not seeking a new identity or a new kind of citizenship. They are migrating to allow their barbarism to flower, so they can be more Islamic or more Sikhish than they can be in the comparative economic stagnation of their home societies. I think it is very dangerous.”
Of the US, Naipaul stated, “Americans are really very nice, very humane people. What a humane civilization and culture to have been created from a big melting pot.” As for living there, Naipaul said, “I have no plans, but it would be nice to be in a place where nearly everyone you meet is a stranger.”
Did Naipaul contradict himself? If having a culture where everyone is a stranger is very nice and humane, then why shouldn’t England, or anywhere else, become a “big melting pot,” American style? The caveat, perhaps, is that the immigrant must seek a new identity, must transform or deform himself, so as to shed his “barbarism,” but with multiculturalism replacing the melting pot as an ideal, assimilation, no matter how imperfect, is no longer required, so is the new, barely-tossed salad, where every ingredient is distinct, even more humane and nice?
Born in an Indian-dominated melting pot, Trinidad, Naipaul went to university in England, which has become his home in every sense, but this hasn’t prevented him from having extended stays in numerous places, including a year in India. Born uprooted, Naipaul has chosen to spend much of his life as an outsider, so it’s within this context that one must view his suggestion that an ideal society is one where everybody is similarly estranged.
When asked what aspects of himself he felt was specifically Indian, Naipaul answered, “The philosophical aspect—Hindu I would say. Speculative and probably also pessimistic. What I mean by pessimism is not things turning out badly, but a pessimistic view about existence; that men just end. It is the feeling that life is an illusion. I’ve entered it more and more as I’ve got older.”
So despite his cosmopolitan aura and English manners, Naipaul remains Indian on the deepest level, for all of his experiences and learnings rest on a Hindu foundation, and this, too, informs and dyes all of his emotions.
So what, you may say, for the accommodation of diverse groups is already required of all societies, for none is truly monolithic, but between diversity and homogeneity, what should any society aim for? In traditionally white countries, diversity is the new religion, opposed only by racist louts, so go the white media, while in all the yellow, brown and black countries, ethnocentrism still rules. So who’s on the right path, the “progressive” West or more traditional, “reactionary” societies?
Recently, I visited Chanthaburi, a Thai province with many Chinese, Vietnamese and Cambodians. The first 100 Vietnamese arrived in 1709, as Catholics fleeing persecution. Now, there are more than 8,000 people in Chanthaburi (pop. 550,000) who identify as Vietnamese. Almost none can speak the language, however, and many are also of mixed blood. Religion is the primary glue that holds this community together, and their present church, built 109 years ago, is the largest in all of Thailand.
Standing outside a chapel, I saw a flower-bedecked coffin with a framed portrait of a priest, and two dozen people, mostly old, praying. Immediately, I could tell that it wasn’t Thai, but then it wasn’t Vietnamese either. Every so often, however, I would catch a word or phrase that was somewhat Vietnamese. When they were done, I spoke in Vietnamese to the folks walking out, but the first three couldn’t answer me, then a man approached with tentative English, “Can I help you?”
It turned out they were all Vietnamese, praying in Vietnamese, and to prove it, the 55-ish man showed me his Vietnamese prayer booklet. With his tones all mangled, he proudly read me a sample sentence. In strained English, he then stated, “I want to learn Vietnamese. My father, mother, Vietnamese.” Then, “My tổ, uh, tổ…”
“Tổ tiên [ancestors]?”
“Yes!” He smiled. “My tổ tiên, Vietnamese!”
Until World War II, Vietnamese was still taught in the community, he said, but now, there’s only one old guy at the market who could speak it fluently.
“Have you been to Vietnam?” I asked.
“No, no.”
“Do you feel Thai or Vietnamese?”
After a slight hesitation, “Both.”
Fair enough. If there was a shooting war, however, which way would his rifle be pointed?
In Chanthaburi, I saw several Buddhist temples and shrines that were clearly Chinese, so religion is intertwined with ethnicity to preserve a separate identity for each subgroup. A most fascinating example of this are the Jews of Kaifeng, China. There at least a thousand years, they are indistinguishable from other Chinese, yet still consider themselves very much Jewish. Some have emigrated to Israel.
At the other end of Thailand, there are 64 Chinese villages, populated by descendants of Kuomintang soldiers. Thailand let them in to be a buffer against the Chinese, then Thai Communists, and all have been granted citizenship. In a 2015 New York Times article, a 47-year-old man is quoted, “I may have a Thai ID, but I’m Chinese. My family is Chinese, and no matter where we go, we’re still Chinese.”
After seven decades, these “Thais” are still attached to China, unsurprisingly, although it’s still ruled by the same Party that tried its best to kill off their forebears.
Since blood is thicker than paperwork, its corruption is one way to dilute a competing allegiance. My Chanthaburi friend, Mala, is half Chinese, half Vietnamese, speaks only Thai, considers herself 100% Thai and is married to a Thai man.
Ethnic and race mixing, though, can only go so far, and even if universally applied, will only create new shades, each with its attractions and repulsions, not to mention a lingo that’s inhospitable to outsiders. With each group defining itself against all others, conflicts will continue to erupt, as they always have.
Just as a man who claims to love all women, loves no woman, no one is remotely capable of giving a damn about everybody, no matter how much he may go on, often with righteous, vindictive rage, about universal brotherhood. With self-love as his compass, he will jab, kick and snipe at all those who differ even the slightest from himself, as testified by the comment stream following this very article.
With population and sense of entitlement constantly rising, against resources rapidly depleting, a state of constant war, nearly everywhere, is the best we can hope for, and in such a situation, a fragmented society will have no chance.
Everyone’s barbarism will flower.
Linh Dinh’s latest books are Postcards from the End of America (non-fiction) and A Mere Rica (poetry). He maintains a regularly updated photo blog.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
It’s true, multiculturalism is a failed endeavor.
https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2014/10/09/liberals/
But perhaps not for reason of stereotype…
but with multiculturalism replacing the melting pot as an ideal
No, multicuturalism isn’t the new idealism.
The West is now all about vanity, celebrity, fame, fortune, glitz, and razzle-dazzle.
So, most cultures and peoples get no respect in the West. They are considered boring, lame, and dull by attention-deficit-affected Westeners. Also, the immigrants and their children fall under the spell of what is ‘cool’ and ‘hot’ and, soon enough, they imitate whatever dominates pop culture.
So, the result is neither multi-culturalism(where every culture is deemed to have equal value) nor melting pot(where all peoples meld into the basic foundational template) but more like Magnetic Altars. Most groups, lacking iconic value of their own, gravitate toward the iconic groups in either adulation or imitation.
Video Link
So, if we look at Viets, Laotians, Cambodians, and other Southeast Asian types in the US, they are NOT defined by their own histories and cultures but by imitation of black culture, worship of homo culture, or (if they enter the deep state) service to Zionist power. Linh Dinh is an exception than the rule.
Look at these SE Asian kids in the video below. Their culture is little more than imitating black culture. They gravitate around the Magnetic Altar of blackishness.
Video Link
Only three groups have iconic power in America. Jews, blacks, and homos.
Blacks because they dominate sports and pop music. Also, there is now global obsession of the ‘twerking’ black booty and the black dong.
Homos command much of style and pop culture. And they are the most narcissistic and self-worshiping people, which can’t hurt in the Age of Vanity.
Jews got the media to promote themselves. They also push the Shoah narrative as religion.
But Jews are now vulnerable in one area in which they were very iconic: Comedy and Wit. With PC making so much comedy impossible and with Jews now serving as the Establishment at war with irreverence — NO Jokes about trannies!! — , there is a war on wit, and this is bound to hurt Jewish iconicism. Would people like Woody Allen and Mel Brooks have gotten far in today’s climate? Even milder Jerry Seinfeld gave up the college comedy circuit.
Whites are a strange case. They obviously do have iconic value because other races find both the men and women attractive. Even though white men lose to blacks in sports, their facial features are still more preferred. And white women still dominate fashion.
But whiteness must be a silent iconism that can’t declare itself. It exists to be taken and enjoyed by other groups.
You had to know it was coming right?
“Barbarism is the natural state of mankind. Civilization is unnatural. It is a whim of circumstance. And barbarism must always ultimately triumph.
— Beyond the Black River, 1935”
Let a thousand barbarians blossom!
Bloody hell! If the Chinese had any sense they’d be deporting the rest tomorrow.
Decent people (as well as the 0ther sort) can disagree about the degree to which it was caused by either side, but the disorder and suffering created by the existence of a wilfully distinct jewish identity group within western societies cannot be denied. A China that supposedly takes a much longer view than the European derived societies would surely take action now to root out any such possibility.
It’s true, for most people love of group is the highest love they can know, and if you break it down they don’t start loving all of mankind but only loving themselves. Another example of the best being the enemy of the good.
Take away love of group and people just become selfish individualists. And in fact love of group probably predisposes one more to love of mankind than selfish individualism.
It’s clear now the end of nationalism is moral regression, not moral advance.
There is no true love without self love. If the telos of an individual is complete assimilation into some collective that self hatred will manifest itself in its hatred for other collectives. Organic collectives free of governmental coercion; the goal.
In Buddhagnosa’s classic text “the path of purification”, which is a standard text among several Buddhist denominations, the very first exercise in developing compassion for others is to first develop self-love and self-compassion.
Compassion is a widening circle outwards.
My compassion extends infinitly wide when I remember what harms me. I don’t need acceptance in a collective to extend compassion.
The propensity of Asians for a large scale collective, whether emperors or communists, is certainly a defect due in no small measure to its native religions.
I hear you, Felix. It’s such a defect that Asian societies are rapidly becoming wealthier and more powerful than ours while managing to modernize without developing our social ills, and Asians within our country are becoming an elite by collectively promoting their group interests.
But at least you are a special snowflake – a unique individual –
possibly even a genius – beholden to no one, and not an insect-like Asian grind.
“In the course of my life, I have seen Frenchmen, Italians, Russians, etc.; I am even aware, thanks to Montesquieu, that one can be a Persian. But, as for Man, I declare that I have never met him in my life. If he exists, I certainly have no knowledge of him.”
-Joseph de Maistre
The thing is, individualism can work – but only in homogenous societies where the vast majority of people subscribe to individualism. In diverse societies where every other group except yours is tribal, individualism amounts to unilateral disarmament.
Actually, individualism thrives when culture and shared assumptions provide a principle of unity and overarching sense of safety and common purpose.
British culture fostered eccentricity and character when it also offered everyone a sense of safety and security through shared cultural norms that acted as an umbrella for the development of individual character.
Today, I am struck by the character and eccentricity of the Japanese and Chinese people I meet – they are full of humor and quirkiness and a refreshing contrast to the enforced blandness and conformity of Americans. Americans, lacking a unifying cultural principle, cannot afford eccentricity or quirkiness.
British and Europeans who still preserve some semblance of cultural unity also display a refreshing individuality and quirky humor.
Americans are the true bland conformists.
Stop thinking in simplistic binary terms – the American myth of individualism is a compensation fantasy for what we cannot afford to have, lacking any unifying principle.
@AaronB-fuddled
Granted that centuries of ingrained knivery is a practice that can achieve some material gain in the short run and the current culturally accepted practice of intellectual theft from the west is I’m sure widely praised within the collective.
The fact that they do not have the intellectual and creative abilities to develop their own disruptive technologies is a testament to depredations of collectivist thoughts.
They’re able to steal and manufacture like a good worker ant but the mind in the collective is barely able to perceive anything not enjoined by the collective. A progressive dementia that leaves the victim in a state of constant fear; have I satisfied the collective today?
“It’s such a defect that Asian societies are rapidly becoming wealthier and more powerful than ours while managing to modernize without developing our social ills.”
That is patently false. Asian nations are beset with similar problems.
https://asiafoundation.org/2014/01/22/the-critical-issues-affecting-asia
” the American myth of individualism”
That is patently false. Please educate yourself on this important matter.
http://www.hooverpress.org/American-Individualism-P635.aspx
Hey Linhho; our conservative president is doing his job and PROTECTING OR BORDER!
https://www.khmertimeskh.com/50299574/more-than-40-cambodians-deported-from-us-arriving-today/
You say this like it’s a bad thing.
Hi all,
Robert Stark has interviewed a number of Unz contributors, including Ron Unz, Anatoly Karlin and Jayman. Recently, he talked to me. Here’s the link.
Linh
Do you get a certain glee from being excruciatingly tedious? Like a child gets from smelling his own farts?
Great article Linh. I have a strong interest in Southeast Asia with a current focus on Thailand and Vietnam, so I have really been enjoying your recent columns.
Truer words have never been spoken.
You’ve actually seen a child derive glee from this activity, or is this colorful SWiPpLe imagery?
You have the most interesting fantasies.
Nice interview, thanks. He does a good job of giving you time to develop your points.
Thanks for your links, corvinus, I will look into these important matters.
What do you think about the idea that people should care about others and not just themselves?
I think it’s healthier and more ethical for people to look beyond their selfish desires and care about other people and not just themselves.
Do you agree?
I think that right now in America people care only about themselves. For instsnce, wealth is increasingly concentrated in the hands of a tiny few, and companies no longer guarantee employment for employees and employees are no longer expected to remain loyal to their companies if a better offer comes along. CEOs make decisions based on short term profits even if this harms their employees in the long run.
Conatrast this with Japan.
One of the themes I’ve noticed about your comments here Corvinus is that you strenuously oppose any effort to get white people to start caring about each other the way other groups in America and across the world do.
It’s almost as if white people caring about each other is a personal threat to you….
Why do you think it’s such a threat to you that I suggest white people start caring about each other like the Japanese or the Chinese or the Jews do?
It’s very strange…
I’m not alt-right, Corvinus, and I think white people should be caring and kind to all people on earth, including non-whites. I just think white people should start caring about each other, which they’re not doing now. Charity starts at home, they say.
I would think my position is pretty benign and uncontroversual, even in keeping with the ethical notions of most of mankind….and yet for the life of me I can’t shake this feeling that you’re opposed to it, and I just can’t figure out why…
“What do you think about the idea that people should care about others and not just themselves?”
In part because of the social media explosion, in part because the Democrats and Republicans within the past decade have been coarser within their own ranks as well as against one another, and in part because of the decline in religious I faith are factors why I believe that there has been a significant decline in why people are neglecting to look out for one another. It seems to me it’s increasingly becoming a “me” world.
“I think it’s healthier and more ethical for people to look beyond their selfish desires and care about other people and not just themselves. Do you agree?”
I was channel surfing this past weekend. I came across on old episode of the Dick Cavett Show. Lauren Becall, F. Lee Bailey, Robert Vaughan, Roy Wilkins, a Republican Congressman, and two others discussed racial tension, the Vietnam War, and economic slowdown–all calmly, reasonably, and civilly.
“I think that right now in America people care only about themselves. For instsnce, wealth is increasingly concentrated in the hands of a tiny few, and companies no longer guarantee employment for employees and employees are no longer expected to remain loyal to their companies if a better offer comes along. CEOs make decisions based on short term profits even if this harms their employees in the long run.”
No argument from me.
“One of the themes I’ve noticed about your comments here Corvinus is that you strenuously oppose any effort to get white people to start caring about each other the way other groups in America and across the world do.”
I strenuously oppose when white people call other white people “race traitors” or “cucks” for not looking out for their own kind. If white people want to form groups and ensure the ways of their race, more power to them. But just do not expect other white people to join in, nor demand that they not call into question the motivations behind it.
It’s almost as if white people caring about each other is a personal threat to you….
“Why do you think it’s such a threat to you that I suggest white people start caring about each other like the Japanese or the Chinese or the Jews do?”
Because white people are NOT the Japanese, Chinese, or Jews. White people are heterogenous. They are a race. The Japanese, Chinese, and Jews are ethnic groups with a distinct history compared to American or European whites. American whites generally do not refer themselves as “Anglos” or “Europeans”. Must they in order for them to be “accepted” by the Alt Right?
It’s very strange…
I’m not alt-right, Corvinus, and I think white people should be caring and kind to all people on earth, including non-whites. I just think white people should start caring about each other, which they’re not doing now. Charity starts at home, they say.
I would think my position is pretty benign and uncontroversual, even in keeping with the ethical notions of most of mankind….and yet for the life of me I can’t shake this feeling that you’re opposed to it, and I just can’t figure out why…
That’s silly. Americans do have a distinct history, and the Chinese have plenty of “non-distinct” history; I mean, what is the distinct history of the Malaysian Chinese, Singaporean Chinese or mainland Chinese? Its all pretty meaningfully different. But there’s still an effort, even if its lip service, to consider the impact of the self as a member of the community. Because ultimately, we’re isolated cells. We’re all fish inside the larger stream of society, and our actions impact more than ourselves.
Its one of those things which seems almost ridiculous silly to argue with AaronB with, as he pretty obviously has nontrivial knowledge on this.
That’s the beauty of being free from a collectivist mind. The motion of the world is swayed by the ingenuity of American individualists.
Good response in return of this question with solid arguments and explaining all concerning that.