To Support Diversity, You Must Be a Nationalist

The true essence of diversity is difference, and most profoundly the difference between peoples. Across the globe, from Mumbai to Berlin, these differences can be observed in culture, art, food, and history. Yet the qualitative distinctions between people sew together the cultural tapestry of human existence, which is best described as a mosaic rather than a melting pot.

In order to truly appreciate these differences, one must first recognize them as real, not constructed. It is obvious that nations are not different due to accidents of history, but proceed from the different characters of different people. While it is true that individuals do not always conform to the nature of their groups, it is only ever groups that are capable of producing culture. Where the left takes a constructivist view of the nation, and of race, it diminishes the reality of diversity as an indispensable aspect of being.

It follows that because diversity is more than superficial, it cannot be washed away by the coarse cloth of socialization. If groups are innately different, then these differences should be respected, but there should be no illusion that assimilation is possible. The liberal vision of a color-blind future is impossible because it fails to recognize the inalienable heritage of distinct races and nations.

Where this vision has been implemented in America, it has resulted only in disaster. Since the implementation of the Hart-Cellar immigration act of 1965, nearly 60 million legal immigrants have been brought into the country. After decades of amnesty and open borders, vast swaths of America’s border states no longer share the language or the culture of America 50 years prior. 66 million Americans, with Hispanics being the largest share, don’t speak English at home. Even by the second generation, only 37% of Hispanic migrants see themselves as ‘American’ and instead identify with their country of origin.

As immigration continues, the mass of unassimilated immigrants who don't share the same obligations to America as the rest of the native-born population only grows. The political implications of a taxpayer-dependent class that see America as a broken ATM rather than a country with its own heritage and history, are obviously problematic. However, the cultural dissonance between this faction of migrants and native-born Americans poses an even greater problem. It turns out that immigrants bring their culture with them, and the Hispanicization of the American South is ample evidence of this.

In Europe, where America’s western cousins have sought to integrate foreign peoples through immigration, it has wrought similarly undesirable results. The UK, after decades of immigration from the third world in pursuit of cheap labor, has been transformed by foreign peoples with alien cultures. Arab migration has transformed districts like Blackburn, Birmingham, Burnley and Bradford to 85% Muslim as native-born Britons of white, Christian heritage have been displaced. Much of London has become utterly unrecognizable, with large and segregated ethnic enclaves cropping up between Pakistani, Bangladeshi, and Arab arrivals. Nearly 40% of London is now dominated by people who can’t trace their roots back beyond a generation.

Instead of assimilating, migrants have formed insular communities within Britain at the expense of their native-born counterparts. The growing share of British people who feel as if they are foreigners in their own land is only increasing, and it is clear that multiculturalism is an untenable option. If America is to follow in the footsteps of its English counterpart, it will see a similar breakdown in social cohesion and cultural unity. The failed experiment of multiculturalism demonstrates that assimilation simply does not work because immigrants do not leave their culture, religion, and ideas at the door.

While it is obvious that the left’s melting pot vision, both in Europe and America, has failed in practical terms, even in theory, it is undesirable. If the continents of the world were to be truly homogenized in a gray hodgepodge of globalism, diversity as we know it would be the first casualty. The breadth of human nature is found in this divergent expression of unique cultures. Whereas global capitalism would reduce man to a mere cog in an international engine, the existence of the nation affirms the particular beauty of man’s nature. Migration, as termed the free movement of peoples, may serve as the engine of capitalism but ultimately undermines the sovereignty and unity of nations, which ought to be founded on common heritage and interests. Instead of assimilation, the unnatural integration of people will only lead to disunity and strife.

If diversity is to be maintained, then the sovereignty of unique peoples must be honored in their respective nations, not usurped by foreign clans. Mass migration and colonialism are but two expressions of this illegitimate globalism. Only the natural separation of peoples within the national framework ensures that the distinct interests of each can be executed without the conflicting influence of foreign actors. If the sovereignty of all people is to be maintained and the natural diversity of their interests upheld, nations must retain their historical demographics. It is through the separation of peoples, dominant and sovereign in their respective borders, that diversity is preserved.

The left appreciates diversity in name only, as it seeks to execute a vision that would ultimately destroy the diversity of people. Diversity is harmed by the crude mashing of dissimilar people, and can only be peacefully ensured if men live side by side in their respective nations for the propagation of their unique identities. To this true ideal of diversity, the left stands in utter opposition. They would have us blanch the color and vivacity from God’s tapestry to be replaced with nothing at all. It is the duty of the nationalist to oppose this harmful egalitarianism and to reclaim the rallying cry of diversity. Yet if Westerners, Americans and Europeans alike, aim to preserve the diversity and heritage of all people, they must start by defending their heritage first.