GOOD posted this very sad and disturbing video of a young man named Kevin DeAnna at the Conservative Political Action Conference who is part of the group called Youth For Western Civilization that celebrates Western heritage by actively opposing radical multiculturalism.
There’s obviously a hint of radicalism in his voice and also in the mission of YWC, and I find it incredibly disturbing that a group like this is growing in this day and age (especially on college campuses where I think minds are most susceptible to “new ideas”). This isn’t a new idea, it’s age-old racism and prejudice wrapped in a clean veil.
well put
There are definitely elements that are historically tied to racism. The use of a hammer in their logo, for instance. The website is kind of disturbing. Accusations of censorship is one way groups like this attempt to take the moral high ground. “You’re stifling my free speech!” is often an attempt (from what I’ve seen) to turn liberal politics against itself. Naturally their FAQ says that anyone can join, etc. That’s probably required in order to maintain their nonprofit status.
I don’t see how anyone could say they’re not racist. In this case, their “fighting radical multiculturalism” and stances on immigration (I have not the words) pretty much undermines that perspective. I was going to ask your thoughts on whether or not organizations that celebrate European culture can exist without being accused of racism, but I realized that in this case it’s not the “culture” that’s the problem, it’s the perspective on “defending” it.
The one thing he says that’s almost agreeable is that most of Obama’s policies are pretty much the same as Bush’s work in office. God I wish we could elect someone who’s not a puppet.
To Ryan: You’re ill informed. Apart from his inactivity regarding immigration – which should be rectified come his second term – Obama is NOTHING like Bush and has been perhaps one of the most progressive Presidents we’ve had in ages – particularly regarding health care, the withdrawal from Iraq, LGBT rights, foreign policy, et al.
As a libertarian, I firmly believe the benefits of open (political and religious asylum, reduced costs of production and consumer prices, and general freedom of movement) far outweigh the cost of a strictly enforced border (crime, violence, cost of maintenance of said border) with a small minority (a small segment of the low skilled domestic labor force) benefiting at the expense of the majority (the remaining 99.9% of us).
That being said the argument made by this group is based on a belief of the “cultural superiority” of the west. While this argument is flawed on many levels (least of which is Mr. DeAnna’s discounting of the institutions that allowed “Western” nation states to flourish), it is not “racist.” To engage in ad hominem attacks against an individual does little but draw a line in the sand and ask people to choose a side. In this case it is asking people to do so on the basis of a false dichotomy. Hence why I am defending Mr. DeAnna (at length) despite my ideological differences with him and his organization.
Using the word “racist” perpetuates the myth, created by the social Darwinists to justify slavery, that we as humans are comprised of different “races.” Of course this could not be further from the truth, but unfortunately we still suffer from the remnants of the bullsh*t science that was eugenics.