Jordan Peterson Comes Out Against Multiculturalism: “Miracle of Stupidity”

News outlets have recently come out with an interview that Jordan Peterson had with Camilia Tomney in which he described multiculturalism as “so puerile and moralising and unsophisticated that it’s kind of a miracle of stupidity” (Ben Chapman, GB News, 11/5/2023). Jordan further stated that “multiculturalism is unlikely to succeed due to differing characteristics of different cultures.”

“Unlikely to succeed”? Hasn’t it by now become abundantly apparent that multiculturalism has been an abject failure throughout the West? How could this be a revolutionary thought on his part? And he’s just now saying these kinds of things in public? The dissident Right has been warning against multiculturalism for decades. Yet, as usual, mainstream ‘conservatives’ are always late to the game.

In this same interview, Jordan also stated, “If you think you can import multitude of cultures without a unifying rubric and not import the problem of interpersonal and social conflict, you’re either blind or stupid or both. And both is a dreadful combination. So, like what? On what basis does multiculturalism become peace? You wave some magic wand and all of a sudden everybody gives up their cultural differences and can live in harmony.”

Part of the reason that Jordan came out publicly in this way was because of the comments recently delivered by former Prime Minster, John Howard, who likewise told GB News that he has “doubts” about the idea of multiculturalism: “I believe that when you migrate to another country, you should as far reasonably, be expected to absorb the mainstream culture of that country. Sure, you retain your affection for Greece or wherever you’ve come from.” Home Secretary of the United Kingdom, Suella Braverman, thinks multiculturalism has failed as well.

Yet, we must ask ourselves: Why has Jordan Peterson and certain British dignitaries recently changed their tune when it comes to the issues surrounding multiculturalism? Shouldn’t the problems associated with massive Third-World immigration have been pointed out a long time ago by these same people? Why has this been brought to the forefront now? And what sense could it possibly make to bring various racial groups with conflicting values, cultures, customs and religions together into a “melting pot” that’s destined to cause nothing more than strife and conflict?

Truth is, the elected leaders of Britain, America, and many other western nations knew all along about the inherent problems connected to replacement-level Third-World immigration. They were not in the dark about the social and economic problems it would create. How could they not? All they’d have to do is stand on any street corner in London or New York City and look around.

Could any of these regrets about multiculturalism be the result of how Muslims have reacted to the recent events by Israel’s government against the Palestinian people? It’s hard to imagine anything else being the cause of it because these same folks never said a thing as Whites were being racially and culturally displaced in their own lands for the past fifty years. They were, seemingly, oblivious to it all (they really weren’t), but it didn’t matter until it affected Jews living in Britain and America.

Suddenly, there are ‘concerns’ and ‘reservations’ about importing so many Muslims because most of them feel hostile toward the Jewish people. So now it becomes an ‘issue’ whereas before it was just something that Whites needed to ‘suck up and accept.’ Now, seemingly for no apparent reason, ‘questions’ start to arise. Even the old warmonger himself, Henry Kissinger, has publicly expressed his regrets:

Hamas’ attack against Israel being celebrated on the streets of Berlin indicates that Germany has let too many foreigners into the country,” according to former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. “It was a grave mistake to let in so many people of totally different culture and religion and concepts, because it creates a pressure group inside each country that does that,” the 100-year-old ex-top American diplomat said in an interview with Axel Springer CEO Mathias Döpfner for Germany’s Welt TV. Axel Springer is POLITICO’s parent company. German-born Kissinger — who fled Nazi Germany with his family in 1938, and went on to become the architect of American foreign policy during the Vietnam War — said that it was “painful,” in response to a question about seeing Arabs in Berlin celebrating last weekend’s assault on Israel (RedState, “Henry Kissinger Admits Unchecked Immigration, Multiculturalism a Mistake” by Ward Clark, 10/13/2023).

The lesson here is that multiculturalism only becomes a problem in the West when it affects Jews. It doesn’t matter when it destroys the societies and countries that indigenous Whites have created for themselves. It only becomes a matter of deep concern when Jews are threatened by the very African and Muslim immigration they have labored to bring throughout Europe and America.

The Great Replacement is, apparently, being turned into the being the Great Regret!

I don’t really think, of course, that any of this will stop the coordinated efforts of Jewish activists to replace Whites. They may cease for a while. They will likely continue to support non-White immigration so long as it’s from Asian and African nations where there are smaller Muslim populations. But as for Jews working to forever replace White people, don’t count on this mission ever ceasing. If they did, they’d also have to stop all the hyperventilating they engage in over “Nazis” and the “Holocaust” — and that’s too lucrative of a cash cow!

The many Jewish activist organizations that beg for money from Whites to help ‘the stranger’ (meaning non-assimilating Muslims) and to ‘save Europe from its xenophobia’ (ala Barbara Lerner Spectre) by promoting more foreign immigration may take a hit, but there’s always some Christian Zionist who will be glad to send them their hard-earned shekels.

Here’s a video about how 1200 rabbis each signed a document pledging support for even more immigration into Europe. The rather foul-looking woman jubilant over it reveals just how acceptable and widespread it is among almost all Jews, secular and religious.

Returning to Jordan Peterson — who has become nothing more than Ben Shapiro’s lap dog — have you noticed how angry and animated he has become over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? For some reason, I never saw him this animated in the past about White racial displacement. He didn’t seem to really care. He was animated and even cried when he talked about his physical ailments, including his spiral downward into drug addiction and suicidal thoughts. But he seemed to have no sense of urgency when it came to the daily beatdowns that Whites receive at the hands of Blacks throughout America and Europe. He cared little, from what I could determine, when major cities throughout the West became dangerous places to visit because of Muslim and African criminals.

Much of Europe and the U.S. over several decades has morphed into a hostile and multicultural nightmare, and Peterson has said little if anything until recently. If he has, he certainly hasn’t made it a major theme of his message to the world. And if he dared to advocate ever so slightly on behalf of Whites, it’s highly unlikely that he would have been offered his plush gig to work alongside Ben Shapiro. After all, Shapiro has publicly stated that he doesn’t care about the “browning of America.” Yet, I suspect he would care if that same “browning” were occurring in his beloved land of Israel.

The apparent reversal of a growing number of elected officials throughout Europe and America may only be a temporary thing. My hope is that it will grow. Either way, it demonstrates that despite the high opinions that Jews have of themselves and their purportedly superior intelligence, their efforts to promote mass immigration into the West have exposed just how addicted they are to utopian schemes that they think will benefit Jews, but then turn out not to. The previous was communism.

Their agenda to erase Whites in their own countries has largely backfired on them. Jews no longer feel safe in the countries they sought to subvert. The migrants who were expected to harm and displace Whites are also harming and, in some instances, murdering Jews on the streets, as well as desecrating their synagogues.

As the Israeli government intensifies its slaughter of the Palestinian people, it will only get worse for the Jews living in much of Europe and America. The ‘racial pets’ that Jews expected to savagely extinguish indigenous Whites are turning  on them. None of this has worked out according to the plan of our contemporary Jewish Bolsheviks. No wonder Henry Kissinger is so dismayed by it all. Believe me, he’s not crying for what’s occurring to White Europeans, but for how it’s playing out against Jews!

How should Whites respond to all of this? I don’t pretend to know all the solutions, but perhaps this might be a time to talk to our friends and loved ones about why multicultural societies don’t work? The danger that Jews currently find themselves in might afford us opportunities to remind even them why encouraging and funding mass non-White immigration into our countries is not a good thing — and why Jewish immigration to the West has also been a disaster. Jews, after all, never really assimilated to Western Christian culture. As a media-academic elite, they were instrumental in changing it to suit themselves, and a big part of that has been to displace European-descended peoples and displace their cultures. Their allegiance to their ethnic homeland remains a powerful current among Jews; hence their efforts to dominate the foreign policy of Western countries

Many Jews, as one might expect, will deny their people played any role in the “browning” of Europe and America. But I suspect a growing number of Jews will concede this disturbing reality. How can they not when for decades Jews have been at forefront of every culture-destroying political and social cause, including that of mass immigration?

A Collision at the Intersection

The American term “intersection”, what the British call a “crossroads”, is both a practical solution and a hazard. Aided by traffic lights and signage, it allows the flow of traffic travelling in different, non-parallel directions, but the fact that these differing streams have to traverse common space is what gives it a greater element of risk than driving on a regular road. There are often auto accidents at intersections.

“Intersectionality” is also part of the lexicon used by those under the spell of identity politics. For a definition, who better to turn to than the Center for Intersectional Justice (CIJ)?

The concept of intersectionality describes the ways in which systems of inequality based on gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, class and other forms of discrimination ‘intersect’ to create unique dynamics and effects.

Unique dynamics and effects. Keep that in mind, as this Venn-like model is currently producing both, although not in the way the CIJ passionately strive for. Intersectionality is designed to produce a united front of the oppressed and, presumably, each of the separate identities so put upon will find the others right behind them. However, at one particular intersection, a pile-up has been coming for some time. A recent and apparently insignificant example from England perfectly illustrates a culture clash that was built into the system from the outset.

Until recently, the Mayor of Keighley in Yorkshire was a Muslim, Councillor Mohammed Nazam. He attended a pride festival, and later apologized for his attendance on a Facebook page called “Keighley Pakistanis”, calling his decision to attend “a lapse in judgment”. This did not sit well with his political party, the Conservatives (we will return to Muslim conservatism), and he was forced to resign. One point of interest, from his own defense on Facebook, is that he claimed the ceremony contradicted his “personal religious beliefs”.

This is only partly true. There is a sense in which Muslims have personal religious beliefs in that they are technically individuals. But the Muslim faith is collective, that of the ummah. It is sectarian, certainly, but the Five Pillars of Islam, along with the Koran, are a common center of gravity for Muslims, an amalgam of faith and politics which features certain immutable characteristics. One of these is an explicit rejection of homosexuality.

While homosexuality is illegal in around 70 countries, there are 11 which explicitly impose or can impose a death sentence. They are all Muslim countries, and perhaps Gay Times — or at least its tourism advice department — can be relied to know where they are. This thorough-going inventory includes the relevant clause from the various nations’ penal code. The exception is Saudi Arabia, which has no penal code and instead cuts out the middle-man by applying shariah direct from the Koran.

Muslim parents have also protested against LGBTQ in the classroom in Canada and America, stamping on pride flags and not confining their protests to placards at the school gate. Three sets of Muslim parents in Maryland are taking the Montgomery School board to court on the principle that their inability to opt-out from books they find offensive contravenes their First Amendment rights. Muslims are very effective in the law courts, because what individuals don’t know, their imam does.

Protests in Ottawa caused severe cognitive dissonance among counter-protestors, says the National Post, as the opposing marchers “…appeared to be discomfited by the fact that their protestors weren’t their supposed bogeyman [conservative Whites] but included many people of color, including socially conservative Muslims.”

Socially conservative. Watch that phrase, because it has a big future in the Left’s explanation as to why intersectionality has become, to use their language, “problematic”.

Those on the political right are often accused of “not understanding” Islam. We certainly understand it better than did the White liberal residents of Hamtrack, Michigan. From the UK’s Left-wing Guardian;

In 2015, many liberal residents in Hamtrack, Michigan, celebrated as their city attracted international attention for becoming the first in the United States to elect a Muslim-majority city council … This week [published June 17] many of those same residents watched in dismay as a now fully Muslim and socially conservative city council passed legislation banning Pride flags from being flown on city property. [Italics added]

What exactly did they expect? The dominant far-Left in the West, while they are obsessed with hated conservatism, have overlooked the fact that Muslims are the most hyper-conservative creed on the planet. While an old-school British Tory might want to ease the UK back to the 1950s, many Muslims would prefer to route-march us all back to the eighth century. They make the Amish look like progressives.

And so Muslims can be reasonably said not to devote too much time to doing what the rest of us are mandated to do, which is “celebrate” pride month, or season, or year. By all accounts it is not possible to travel far in any British city without seeing the dystopian bunting of the pride flag, an ensign as ugly as the ideology that forces it on schoolchildren and, by proxy, their parents. But you won’t see the pride flag flown in Tower Hamlets, Newham, Luton or any other “social conservative” majority area of London. You will, on the other hand, see so-called “Shariah zone” posters in those areas.

Early versions of such posters had two men hand-in-hand with a cross struck through, but this was removed as Islamic activists doubtless did not want to be seen as homophobic. It would be inadvisable, however, for two men to walk holding hands in the areas mentioned, and many others in the UK. Muslims are the only British group actively promoting hardline conservative values.

But Muslims are not some ideological cavalry riding to save the timid kufr, who dare not otherwise criticize the forced LGBTQ curriculum. Elsewhere in Yorkshire, a teacher and his family, under new identities, are still in hiding after the teacher showed a cartoon of the prophet Mohammed from French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo to the class he was teaching. No one from the “intersectionality” lobby has ever spoken up to help him.

The gay community are also having problems with the trans lobby, and the latter’s embrace of diversity at every level is making it problematic to be homosexual in an increasingly Islamized society. The French gay community, although staunchly against Marine Le Pen and her Rassemblement National due to its opposition to same-sex marriage, still saw one third of them voting for her in the run-off stage of the last French Presidential election.

Unlike Western politicians, representatives of the extensive Muslim community are quite clear on their tolerance level. In the USA, a document precisely outlining the Islamic position on the LGBTQ community was released in May of this year, and it achieves what no Western politician has been able to in that it makes absolutely clear Islam’s attitude to shifting cultural norms. Navigating Differences: Clarifying Sexual and Gender Ethics in Islam has hundreds of signatories from the Western Islamic infrastructure. And these signatories cannot be dismissed as crank lobbyists unsupported by the heads of their religion. Islam has no head, it has no Pope. Imams and Islamic scholars (the ulama) make a consensus by weight of numbers, not by Papal decree.

In the section Our Constitutional Right to Hold Our Views, an interesting legal juxtaposition is made:

We recognize that our moral code conflicts with the goals of LGBTQ proponents. We also acknowledge their constitutional right to live in peace and free from abuse. Nevertheless, we emphasize our God-given and constitutional rights to hold, live by, and promote our religious beliefs in the best manner (Quran, al-Nahl: 125) without fear of legal reprisal or systematic marginalization.

Despite the document claiming “constitutional” rights, the American Constitution is not referenced, despite the famous First Amendment being explicit about religious freedoms. “Constitutional rights” here refer to the Koran.

The Democrat-media complex took a little while to spin this, but eventually wheeled out Jen Psaki to explain that the GOP are “recruiting” Muslims to oppose transgender policies. They surely know that no recruitment is needed. Muslims are already conscripted, just not to the GOP but what they see as a higher authority.

So-called “woke” ideology is becoming a victim of its own pathological obsession with diversity, its intersectional mainframe rupturing as Muslims — and Blacks — will not tolerate homosexuality and all its works. And there are other stress fractures within “intersectionality”. “Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists”, or TERFs, have been ostracized by the LGBTQ community for their biologically realist approach. And left-wing feminists are leaving areas controlled by  Muslims for fear of harassment.

The default left-wing riposte to the Islamic injunction on homosexuality is that the Bible says the same thing as the Koran. Quite so, but if you arrange a drag show in Birmingham, Britain’s second city — 34% Christian, 30% Muslim — it won’t be the Seventh-Day Adventists who pay you a visit. The Koran, incidentally, although it condemns homosexuality, does not endorse the death penalty. That occurs in the Hadith, the supposed sayings of Mohammed: “Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Lut (Lot), execute the one who does it and the one to whom it is done”.

The dar al Islam does not recognize the separation of state and religion it sees in the dar al harb and will not tolerate LGBTQ propaganda in its children’s schools — or anywhere else as their presence increases. The British state — an extension of globalist concerns — will not countenance opposition to its LGBTQ agenda. Either an unstoppable force is about to be stopped, or an immovable object is about to move. Stay clear of the intersection.

Hungarian PM Orban rejects Merkel’s “moral imperialism” in refugee crisis

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s most recent comments on the invasion are beautifully stated in terms of the “moral imperialism” of countries like Germany that are imposing their sense of morality on other EU member states. A theme at TOO is that the anti-White revolution that is displacing Whites from areas they have dominated for hundreds or thousands of years has been rationalized intellectually as a moral imperative. The most important moral imperative in the West today is the evil of any sense of ethnocentrism among Whites. A strong sense of racial identification and pride was common and even dominant in the early twentieth century, but became a victim of the rise of the left and the disaster of World War II. All of the Jewish intellectual movements discussed in The Culture of Critique resulted in moral critiques of the West, particularly centered around the absolute evil and even psychopathology of identifying as Whites and having a sense of White interests. This ideology has occupied all the moral and intellectual high ground in the West for at least the last 50 years and is constantly disseminated throughout the media and educational system. Read more

Is Universalism So Bad for Whites?

Our current disastrous situation is that the White race is rapidly declining in absolute numbers and the countries it built are being taken over by the Third World.

There are, clearly, two elements to this. The first is that Whites are disappearing of their own volition because they don’t reproduce.

The second element is unrestricted immigration and multiculturalism.

It’s my argument that universalism in general and Christianity in particular didn’t produce either (for simplicity I’m assuming that Christianity is universalist although there are exceptions). The distortions of the Left did.

The elephant in the room which nobody is too happy to mention is that the evident reason for the demographic suicide of White, Western peoples is that they have dissociated sex from reproduction, which Christianity teaches not to do. Here, far from Christianity being the cause of this White birth decrease, there is its opposite, the erosion and abandonment of Christianity, at the root of this trend.

There is a Jamie Kelso video in which he confronts young Whites about such an issue as well. Read more

Operation Trojan Horse: Reporting on the Muslim School Plot

In an earlier article, I mentioned Operation Trojan Horse, the plot by Muslim groups in Britain to take over Birmingham schools (see also Francis Carr Begbie’s “Britain baffled by Muslims being Muslims“) and possibly schools elsewhere. The matter has been in the news since March, when a document and an accompanying letter, written anonymously by a concerned citizen, emerged via the Birmingham City Council, which had been in possession of it for some time. The letter alerted the authorities about the existence of the plot and urged the authorities to take action. The document, discovered by the concerned citizen, provided a five point plan on how to take over schools, which the author referred to as Operation Trojan Horse.

Now that two separate government investigations have been carried out and the respective reports published, it is worth examining how the BBC has chosen to cover the issue. I focus on the BBC because its being a public service as well as a prestigious organization means it ought to provide excellent coverage.

Firstly, we must outline the plot.

 Operation Trojan Horse

 According to the BBC, the document

suggests targeting schools with a predominantly Muslim population, especially in poorer areas, before selecting a group of parents, which it describes as “hard liners”, to agitate at the school gate and in the playground and to raise questions about staff, the syllabus and teaching methods.

It goes on to say that after infiltrating the governing body, a policy of disruption should be carried out from within, until the leadership has been changed to one more sympathetic to the group’s religious views.

Trojan Horse, it says, is “totally invisible to the naked eye and allows us to operate under the radar. I have detailed the plan we have in Birmingham and how well it has worked and you will see how easy the whole process is to get the head teacher out and your own person in”.

It identifies four schools at which it claims Operation Trojan Horse had been successfully put into action. Saltley School, Adderley School, Regents Park Community School and Park View Academy.

A Park View governor, Tahir Alam, is named in the document as someone who was involved in the plot . . . Another school, Highfield, is mentioned as a potential target.

By the time the above lines were written in April, 200 separate complaints had already been made about 25 schools, all in parts of Birmingham with a 90% Muslim population. Read more

Multiculturalism and the Racialization of Politics in the United States

This is a recent talk which was intended as a  general overview and designed to appeal to the unconverted.

My background is in evolutionary psychology. Evolutionary psychologists study how the human mind has been shaped by the needs of survival and reproduction over long expanses of evolutionary time. When we look at how the human mind actually evolved, there are troubling implications for multiculturalism.

Social Identity Processes

There are several systems that are relevant for how people respond to others from different groups, but I think the most important one stems from social identity theory. An early form of social identity theory was stated by 19th-century anthropologist William Graham Sumner, who concluded:

Loyalty to the group, sacrifice for it, hatred and contempt for outsiders, brotherhood within, warlikeness without—all grow together, common products of the same situation. It is sanctified by connection with religion. Men of an others-group are outsiders with whose ancestors the ancestors of the we-group waged war. . . . Each group nourishes its own pride and vanity, boasts itself superior, exalts its own divinities, and looks with contempt on outsiders. Each group thinks its own folkways the only right ones, and if it observes that other groups have other folkways, these excite its scorn.

This essentially states that for humans, identifying as a member of an ingroup is a source of conflict with other groups. We are all aware that around the world there are many countries that are engulfed in conflict stemming from religious and ethnic differences—from different social identities. Right now the civil war in Syria is a good example, pitting Sunnis against Shiites, and within these larger groupings there are particular ethnic groups, such as Alewites, Arabs, Kurds, Druze, and Assyrians. Azerbaijan is no stranger to ethnic conflict, as in the war with Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh. Read more