The Left is in opposition to assimilation. Anti~Assimilation, i.e., Multiculturalism, threatens to transform America into a “cluster of tribes”.
Multiculturalism has been described as “morally, intellectually and economically … a sham. It increases discrimination as different groups battle for supremacy with other groups.
Diversity is not the only deleterious side effect of multiculturalism. Another is to perpetuate population growth because immigration is part of the quid pro quo offered ethnic minorities in exchange for votes. Perpetual large scale immigration cannot be sustained for well-rehearsed environmental reasons. In the end high rates of immigration, i.e., population growth, causes severe suffering and social and economic dislocation.
It follows that multiculturalism should be counteracted as part of a responsible population policy. The charge of racism is often directed at recommendations for reducing immigration overall, even without changing the ethnic mix.
From Wiki: Advocates of multiculturalism argue that immigrants prefer to stick together because of racism and the fear of racial violence, as well as the bonds of community. This is perfectly reasonable, but if this is the case, why not the same for native born Americans too? If multiculturalism is right because minorities feel better among themselves, why have mass immigration at all, since it must obviously make everyone miserable? (And if diversity ‘enriches’ and strengthens, why integrate and assimilate, since that will only reduce diversity?)
All the arguments for multiculturalism—that people feel safer, more comfortable among people of the same group, and that they need their own cultural identity—are arguments against immigration, since American people must also feel the same. If people categorized as “White Americans” are not afforded that indulgence because they are a majority, do they attain it when they become a minority?
In his 1991 work, Illiberal Education, Dinesh D’Souza argues that the entrenchment of multiculturalism in American universities undermined the universalist values that liberal education once attempted to foster. In particular, he was disturbed by the growth of ethnic studies programs (e.g., black studies).
The late Samuel P. Huntington, political scientist and author, known for his Clash of Civilizations theory, described multiculturalism as “basically an anti-Western ideology.” According to Huntington, multiculturalism had “attacked the identification of the United States with Western civilization, denied the existence of a common American culture, and promoted racial, ethnic, and other sub-national cultural identities and groupings.” Huntington outlined the risks he associated with multiculturalism in his 2004 book Who Are We? The Challenges to America’s National Identity.
The late Lawrence Auster, another conservative critic of multiculturalism, argued that although multiculturalism was meant to promote the value of each culture, its real tendency had been to undermine America’s traditional majority culture. In Auster’s view, multiculturalism tended to “downgrade our national culture while raising the status and power of other cultures.” He wrote:
The formal meaning of “diversity,” “cultural equity,” “gorgeous mosaic” and so on is a society in which many different cultures will live together in perfect equality and peace (i.e., a society that has never existed and never will exist); the real meaning of these slogans is that the power of the existing mainstream society to determine its own destiny shall be drastically reduced while the power of other groups, formerly marginal or external to that society, will be increased. In other words the U.S. must, in the name of diversity, abandon its particularity while the very groups making that demand shall hold on to theirs.
This is almost an insane kind of suicidal genocide by the Left.
It’s behind the immense popularity of Donald Trump who is against the entire PC program.
Harvard professor of political science Robert D. Putnam conducted a nearly decade long study how diversity affects social trust. He surveyed 26,200 people in 40 American communities, finding that when the data were adjusted for class, income and other factors, the more racially diverse a community is, the greater the loss of trust. People in diverse communities “don’t trust the local mayor, they don’t trust the local paper, they don’t trust other people and they don’t trust institutions,” writes Putnam. In the presence of such ethnic diversity, Putnam maintains that
“We hunker down. We act like turtles. The effect of diversity is worse than had been imagined. And it’s not just that we don’t trust people who are not like us. In diverse communities, we don’t trust people who do look like us”