Roger Kimball

Ian Buruma and multiculturalism (April 29, 2007)
Arma Virumque, web blog of New Criterion.

Roger Kimball writes, "multiculturalism [is] university-nurtured version of cultural relativism that has now firmly ensconced itself wherever politically correct college-educated elites congregate, which is to say just about everywhere." He detests multiculturalism. Connecting to multiculturalism, he maintains a pejorative perspective on PC.

Introduction: What was a liberal education?
New Criterion; May2008, Vol. 26 Issue 9, p4-8, 5p

He moans the demise of liberal education, writing:

"Indeed, until at least the early 1960s there was robust agreement about the intellectual and moral goals of a liberal arts education even if those goals seemed difficult to achieve. There was, for example, a shared commitment to the ideal of disinterested scholarship devoted to the preservation and transmission of knowledge—which meant the preservation and transmission of
a civilization—pursued in a community free from ideological intimidation." (p. 4)

"[In the 1970s and 1980s] despite the rise of alternative voices here and there, those dominating the discussion at most institutions are committed to discrediting the traditional humanistic ideals of liberal education by injecting politics into the heart of the educational enterprise."(p. 5)

He finds the root of the demise in multiculturalism and PC. He criticizes:

"what generally travels under the name of "multiculturalism" is really a form of monocultural animus directed against the dominant culture...[Multiculturalists] encourage an orgy of self-flagellating liberal guilt as impotent as it is insatiable. Hence the sensitivity of the multiculturalist is an index not of moral refinement but of moral vacuousness. Multiculturalism is a paralyzing intoxicant; its thrill centers around the emotion of superior virtue; its hangover
subsists on a diet of ignorance and blighted good intentions...The most ironic aspect of this whole spectacle is that what appears to its adherents as bravely anti-Western is in fact part of tlie West's long tradition of self-scrutiny...No civilization in history has been as consistently self-critical as the West." (p. 5)

To Kimball, multiculturalists are enemies of Western civilization and values of American identity grounded in individual liberty and public virtue and these traditional values are "deeply at odds with the radical, de-civilizing tenets of the "multiculturalist" enterprise of political correctness." (p. 5)

He denounces PC resulted in students' poor acquisition of American history while promoting intellectual conformity and sentimentality. He criticizes academics' "self-infatuating embrace of political correctness" for the quintessential Western ideas under attack. He calls attention to:

"Respect for rationality and the rights of the individual; a commitment to the ideals of disinterested criticism and color-blind justice; advancement according to merit, not
according to sex, race, or ethnic origin."

Individual rights, blind justice and meritocracy are highlighted here. Politicization of campus is his ever concern, saying, "it is this failure—the colonization of intellectual life by politics—that stands behind and fuels the degradation of liberal education. (p. 8)

Institutionalizing our demise: America vs. Multiculturalism
New Criterion; Jun2004, Vol. 22 Issue 10, p5-16, 12p

He denounces, "Multiculturalism is a moral intoxicant" (p. 7) in that it threatens Western civilization and national identity; what's more, it fosters social and intellectual consequences beyond an academic phenomenon. He writes:

"One consequence has been a sharp rise in the phenomenon of immigration without--or with only partial--assimilation: a dangerous demographic trend that threatens American identity in the most basic way. These various agents of dissolution are also elements in a wider culture war: the contest to define who we live and what counts as the good in the good life." (p. 8)

Affirmative action is an irony and reverse discrimination from his perspective. He writes, "Multiculturalism and 'affirmative action' are allies in the assault on the institutions of America identity" (p. 10)

He refuses the notion that America is a nation of immigrants, insisting on a country of setters [sic]. He maintains that predominantly Anglo-Protestant settlers defines American culture, founding a state and making possible immigration later on. [In his view, there is no native American before the settlers.] In his view, immigrants became American "by embracing the Anglophone culture of the original settlers" (p. 10)

He asserts that immigration, characterized with Americanization or assimilation to the original culture, became a dangerous matter since the 1960s with the massive immigration from Asia, Latin America and Muslim countries. He criticizes that a great number of immigrants do not make concerted efforts, thus leading to disastrous and potentially irreversible impact on American identity. He rebukes multiculturalism for abetting such phenomenon at school. Thus, he continues to denounce multiculturalism, saying, "The combined effect of the multicultural enterprise has been to undermine the foundation of American national identity" (p. 12)