Archive for the Uncategorized Category

In the late 1960s I lived for a year in the country of Korea. In Asian countries, protocol and social graces are of utmost importance. Failure to pay attention to some minute detail can have disastrous social consequences. A classic example of this is what happened when I was in a public building in Seoul, Korea.

I sat on a bench with my friend Jung Dae Wung. I was quite relaxed, and, in typical American fashion, I crossed my legs with the ankle of one leg resting on the thigh of the other, the bottom of my shoe visible to everyone to my left. My friend and I were conversing, when I noticed that several people seemed a bit agitated, and kept looking in our direction.

My Korean friend caught sight of the agitation and annoyed glances, then realized what was happening. He quickly told me to uncross my legs, and to put both feet on the floor. Not understanding why, but sensing the urgency in his voice, I complied. He politely bowed from his seated position, in the direction of the other people, offering some explanation in Korean. I did not understand Korean at that time, but I imagine that he told them that I was American and just did not know any better. Turning to me, my friend explained that showing the bottom of your shoe to someone is tantamount to calling him a dog or worse. It is highly offensive.

Upon hearing this I was quite embarrassed, and turned as red as my brown skin would allow. Needless to say, I never did that again. The point of that example is to bring up a question: If the Koreans and the Americans lived together in a multicultural society, who would have to give up what? Is it wrong to cross one’s legs? Is it wrong to react to the bottom of someone’s shoe being pointed at you? Whose culture is right? Whose culture is wrong?

And the chilling question is this: Who is going to decide? And by whose wisdom?

The founders of America did not think uniformity of opinion was necessary. Are we greater than they? Laws compelling men to buy from, or sell to, or hire particular individuals would have been an appalling intrusion, not just into their personal freedoms, but they would have viewed them as an assault on the very rights of conscience they had waged a revolution to secure. To them each man’s moral ability and freedom to discriminate between right and wrong, between what is acceptable to their conscience and what is an offense to it, were sacred rights. No one’s exercise of his rights could deny another person the free
exercise of his rights. But the politicians of today create “rights” to housing, employment, education, health care, etc., that others must provide, even against their will and conscience. This cannot happen without fostering a seething hostility just beneath the surface of the polite society, ready to explode when the pressure becomes too great.

When several different cultures are brought together through legislation, there are thousands of deep cultural differences just waiting to cause offense and hostility. Political correctness must, of necessity, become the rule. But who is going to give up crossing his leg, and who is going to give up being offended? In such an atmosphere, there is no genuine peace or love, and the only way to keep the lid on the boiling cauldron is more legislation. This is the looming specter of Colossus.

What does “multiculturalism” mean?

To most people, it’s that all cultures are given equal weight, that no one culture is superior to the other, and that all cultures should be equally respected. And that sounds really good, but the fine print reads, “Man isn’t built that way, and he can’t live up to it. It is totally normal for someone to consider his own culture and the way of life of his people to be better than others.”

Consider the rich young Yuppie in his multicultural neighborhood, sitting in his living room ready to enjoy an evening of classical music. Tonight it’s Beethoven. From one side of his house comes the throbbing bass of his neighbor’s stereo as they gather out back for some reggae. The house shudders to every note, while on the other side of his house the neighbors fire up their barbecue and boom box, laughing raucously over the grating syncopation of something called rap. Fleeing from the violent lyrics, our Yuppie hero, himself a multicultural enthusiast, shuts the windows, grits his idealistic teeth and dons his headphones, trying to convince himself that all music is good.

Let’s face it. It is just not reasonable to expect people to live contentedly alongside of others who are culturally and racially different. This is unnatural, and sometimes forces people to go against what they instinctively know in their conscience. They are told, “You can’t discriminate.”

Even though you may view discrimination as an evil sin, isn’t it within a person’s rights to segregate himself if he wants to? Why is it that integration must be forced upon people, under penalty of law? Isn’t it because it goes against the natural grain of humanity, and that people left alone will generally not choose to cross cultures? Yes, it is obviously so, and it makes the advocates of multiculturalism mad because the truth is undeniable. Yet it is totally normal for you to consider your culture as the most desirable, because it is yours. Today we find ourselves manipulated by forces beyond our control, compelling us to accept what is unacceptable to us. We can find ourselves enraged over such manipulations, and not even know why.

What happens to a person if he or she chooses to reject the ideal of “cultural diversity?” In order for multiculturalism to stand unchallenged, this ideal must be constantly kneaded into the loaf of society. You are told that if some other way of life is low and base, you still must have respect for it. Who are you to judge? Everyone is dignified; every culture has equal value no matter how it subjugates, humiliates, oppresses, and destroys. Yes, it sounds so noble that all cultures should live together in harmony, in mutual toleration, in mutual respect. But in reality, to swallow it you have to cast away common sense, and eventually conscience itself. You have to, by law.

The reason that there is so much momentum behind this engineering of man’s societies is that a one-world government looms on the horizon. Like it or not, it is an inescapable fact that has been prophesied in the Bible for thousands of years. It is coming. When this one-world government gains power no real liberty will exist for an individual to remain faithful to the voice of his conscience. Freedom of choice will be removed. Global government cannot allow the nations to have their own independence or sovereignty. A worldwide Gestapo system will take its place, a planetary police state. It will of course be more “humanitarian,” not dressed in uniform. The Gestapo are plainclothesmen.

In order to enforce this tyranny, people must be coerced to abandon the God-given boundaries of race, culture, and morality. Man must be taught to ignore his instinctive desire to live with those of like mind, to congregate in neighborhoods with those of the same race and ethnic origin. He must be taught to swallow his natural loathing of perverse and immoral people, and he is learning his lesson well.

Any nation or culture with high moral values will be strong and independent, and this is contrary to the coming one-world government. With no moral conviction to make a culture outstanding, the job is done. This has been the highly successful role Hollywood and the public schools have played in destroying the moral integrity of Americans. A whole generation is trapped in the cage of political correctness.

There is an old saying, “Birds of a feather flock together.” Yet multiculturalism is birds of different feathers caged together and forbidden to squawk. It’s an artificial scheme, a “world vision” crammed down the throats of a humanity that would rather live in its own neighborhoods if it could.

There is hardly any institution that gets better treatment in modern schoolbooks than the United Nations. In its beginning, many rich and famous people like Eleanor Roosevelt made it their cause, as some media figures like Ted Turner do today. Anyone who doubts the importance of uniting the nations as a means of ending war and saving the planet is considered a destructive, backwards agent in society.

Yet the ancient story of the Tower of Babel stands in stark contrast to the popular wisdom of today. The confusion of languages ought to serve as a warning, a proverbial lesson like Sodom and Gomorrah, about the dangers of men getting together as one great, global force. If that were to happen, the Bible warns, men would be able to do whatever was in their heart to do:

And the Lord said, “Behold, they are one people, and they all have the same language. And this is what they began to do, and now nothing which they purpose to do will be impossible for them.” ¹Genesis 11:6

Once men feared such a day, knowing that power corrupts. As a wise man once said, “Absolute power corrupts absolutely.”²The entire quote from Lord Acton is, in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton in 1887, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” This was written in reference to Acton’s futile struggle against Rome’s 1870 pronouncement of papal infallibility. Acton concluded his thought to Creighton with the words, “Great men are almost always bad men.” Were the whole earth under one authority, the corruption would be complete, unbearable, and unending. What other power on earth could end it? Would the Creator intervene again to frustrate their efforts, or would He leave men to their own devices this time? This is a chilling thought. It is appealing to some to think that a united mankind would use his combined creative genius for the common good, but history does not support that assumption very well. As Lord Acton also said, “And remember, where you have a concentration of power in a few hands, all too frequently men with the mentality of gangsters get control. History has proven that. All power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.”³ Wikipedia article, “John Dalberg-Acton, 1st Baron Acton”

The simple fact is that the Creator divided man for his own good. Men once respected what was in the Bible and appreciated the distinctions among races and nations, understanding at some deep level that the Creator’s purpose for this age was the Divided Nations, not the United Nations.

Now these are the records of the generations of Shem, Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah; and sons were born to them after the flood… From these the coastlands of the nations were separated into their lands, every one according to his language, according to their families, into their nations… These were the families of the sons of Noah… and from these the nations were divided on the earth after the flood. ⁴Genesis 10:1,5,32

So at that time our Creator segregated men according to their languages, their lands, and the three races of man that sprang from Noah’s sons. He knew this was their best opportunity to live according to their consciences, in places where each person knew who they were among their own people. The massive alienation that characterizes modern society was unknown in the not-too-distant past. Everyone, whether they chose to live by it or not, had a clear standard of right and wrong in the context of their culture. This was the kind intention of their Creator:

He made from one man [Adam] every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation, that they would seek their Creator, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us. ⁵Acts 17:26-27

Multiculturalism is erasing the boundaries and cultural identities everyone once had. It is really “No Culture” — an increasingly bland and uniform society in which most people are without identity, not knowing who they are or why they are on the earth. The emerging One World Order will attempt through genetic engineering to master life, defeat death, and rewrite the instinctive knowledge that men have lived by for thousands of years. But there is one thing no one will be able to do under that system.

They will not be able to find their Creator.