A Different Perspective on What's Dividing Us
Culture differences explain some things better than racial differences do...
I don’t have the time to do a lot of reading, so am quite selective. One publication I like and usually read cover-to-cover is the quarterly Academic Questions (AQ) a journal from the National Association of Scholars (NAS). FYI, NAS is involved with other good efforts — like promoting Critical Thinking in K-12 schools — so check them out.
As you know, societal discord is well on its way to tear America apart. I found one essay in the Winter 2023 Edition of AQ particularly insightful, in that it emphasizes a different perspective from what we are ordinarily presented: Whites against minorities. This is an article by Dr. Lawrence M Mead. You can read the whole thing here, but here is an extraction (with minor edits — like I put some text in bold):
In a recent book (Burdens of Freedom), I argued that America is culturally divided. Most Americans who descend from Europe display an individualist temperament. That is, they chiefly seek their own goals but are also restrained by moralistic notions of right and wrong that they internalize in childhood.
Minority groups, however, all descend from the more cautious non-West, where most people adjust to their environment rather than seeking change, and right and wrong are shaped more by the expectations of other people than by internalized standards. Many scholars of world cultural differences have said this.
That might seem like a merely academic idea, but the establishment reacted to my book with little short of panic. I had written several earlier books on poverty and welfare, all of which easily found publishers and reviewers. But all my former publishers declined Burdens of Freedom, as did several other prominent houses. Fortunately, Encounter Books accepted it. But then, in the four years since the book came out, it received only three reviews—all favorable—and no university or think tank has allowed me so much as to give a public talk about it.
What is so frightening about cultural difference? In this paper I will try to explain. Cultural difference does arouse political objections, but above all it questions something never before doubted in American commentary—that the United States is a universal nation that is open to anyone, from anywhere, who seeks a life of freedom. That vision, it turns out, presumes an individualist culture, which is found only in the West. We have never admitted the problems that non-Western peoples pose for us, as they also do for Europe. We think our problem is only racism. But culture, not race, is the true limitation to the American vision.
Rejecting Racism
Burdens’ most immediate offense was that it redefined our social problems in terms of culture rather than race. In the orthodox view, America suffers from poverty and inequality mainly because whites refuse to treat non-whites as equals, especially blacks. On the evidence, however, the great majority of whites gave up racism decades ago. They no longer view blacks as inferior. Their objection today is far more to cultural difference: many minorities do not function well in an individualist society. Many fail to get ahead, and many display unusually high levels of crime and other social problems, so they do not inspire the same trust as whites. Nor is cultural difference merely a euphemism for race. Scholars of world cultures make quite clear that culture has no necessary connection to race. This great problem would remain even if whites suddenly became completely colorblind about race, or if all blacks became white. The solution is for blacks to assimilate to mainstream society.
The antiracism movement blames all black problems entirely on white racism. White elites do not dispute that idea, but few can really believe it. The hard truth is that minorities must adopt an individualist way of life if integration is ever to succeed. That is far tougher than to harass our white upper class over racism.
Rejecting Sameness
Besides redefining race as a cultural problem, Burdens called for limits on immigration. In this connection, as with race, the establishment refuses to discuss cultural difference. Rather, it trumpets sameness—the conviction that newcomers from anywhere in the world are no different from the native born and should be accepted as such. Thus, we should have no fear of opening our borders to the multitudes now fleeing collapsing countries in the Middle East, Latin America, etc..
A cultural analysis, however, calls for caution. The vast influx of immigrants during the Progressive era, a century ago, is fondly remembered as having assimilated well. The difference was that the earlier waves nearly all came from Europe, many from countries that today are nearly as modern as America. So these newcomers were largely attuned to individualism coming in. Today’s immigrants, however, nearly all come from the non-West, where countries of origin are far poorer and less developed. Migrants come here mainly to escape adversity, not to seek freedom and its obligations (and those demands often defeat them).
Without cutting immigration sharply, America would inevitably become a non-Western country. It would lose the dynamic and civic qualities that come from an individualist culture, and which have empowered it to lead the world…
I think that this perspective has a lot of merit — so why isn’t it being widely discussed? Yes, cultural differences do not explain everything (and neither do racial differences), but shouldn't we be considering this when trying to work things out?
Evidently, the culture part is not discussed because the anti-American cabal feels that the racism narrative will give them more leverage to impose draconian measures on Americans. Note that the racial focus also subtly shifts the responsibility (and blame) about any divide to white Americans, as vs minorities.
I encourage you to support NAS and subscribe to AQ, as there are other thought-provoking commentaries.
Here are other materials from this scientist that you might find interesting:
My Substack Commentaries for 2023 (arranged by topic)
Check out the chronological Archives of my entire Critical Thinking substack.
WiseEnergy.org: discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.
C19Science.info: covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.
Election-Integrity.info: multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.
Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from COVID to climate, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2023 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time - but why would you?
Thanks for reading Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues! Please pass a link to this article on to other associates who might benefit. They can subscribe for FREE to receive new posts (typically about once a week).
To Readers: I asked Dr. Mead to respond to the several good comments here, as it was his article that readers are addressing. Regretfully, after thanking me for publishing his exerpt, he declined.
The invaders (many are criminals) are the execution of the Cloward-Piven strategy driven by Soro and the UN. Combine this deliberate swamping of the US with Soros buying up DAs around the country who refuse to prosecute most crimes and who are emptying the prisons, and you have a recipe for cataclysm. Once the invaders fall off the welfare wagon and can no longer occupy hotels, they will be coming for our resources.
John, more on this here: https://tritorch.com/soros