All I can say about Will Wilkinson’s claim, made in his New York Times column, that America’s national character is “unalterably multiracial, multicultural” is that it is ahistorical. Anyone who has read John Dewey is aware that the public school systems in the United States was founded on the principle of acculturating the children of immigrants from their parents’ native culture and inculcating in them a single, national culture. That was largely successful for most of the last century. It wasn’t until a conscious decision was made to teach multiculturalism that the strategy began to fray at the edges. In other words the single American culture was unalterable until it was altered.
I believe that we can be a peaceful, more egalitarian multi-racial society. If we accept multiculturalism it will be neither peaceful nor egalitarian. We can be confident of that because multiculturalism isn’t egalitarian anywhere in the world. The French, to their credit, are steadfast in their attachment to French culture. They recognize that it is inherent for their pursuit of liberté, égalité, et fraternité
“is “unalterably multiracial, multicultural†is that it is ahistorical.”
Not sure I would completely agree. The Italians claimed Columbus Day as their own and started parades going at least back to 1866. St Patrick’s Day parades, a tribute to the Irish go back to at least 1762. The Amish and Pennsylvania Dutch maintained their own identities, and languages, for many years. Jewish communities maintained their separation. Cubans maintained their own communities in Florida, and NYC. Chinatown mean anything to you?
Historically accurate to me seems like new groups accepted and blended into our broader culture, but many of those cultures retained strong ties and celebrated their roots, and for the most part the rest of us used to not be that worried about it. It was often fraught with conflict (sure you remember NIA) but it has mostly worked.
Steve