The culturally pluralistic kafir who believe removing pork from menus is inclusive of Muslims are sanitizing Western culture for the sake of a religious ideology. When this happens in public schools it contradicts the Establishment Clause. The text of the First Amendment is explicit—Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. But if you need a translation, it means that the government cannot establish an official religion or favor one religion over another. The First Amendment applies to federal, state, and local governments and agencies.
What about serving alternative meals for Muslims without pork? I guess, but that’s a slippery slope. How many religions have dietary restrictions? Buddhists generally avoid meat and meat-based foods. Hindus avoid foods believed to retard spiritual development, which include garlic and onion. Etcetera. With respect to Islam, Muslims forbid meat that is dead before butchering. You heard that right: the animal must be conscious and alive when the slaughtering takes place.
Inclusivity as conceptualized by woke progressivism has an anti-working class origin. Cultural pluralism is a transnationalist project. It was initiated by progressives early in the development of their movement. See for example the early twentieth century writings of Horace Kallen (you can find his 1915 Nation piece online without much trouble). Cultural pluralism, or what today we call multiculturalism, is designed to undermine assimilation and instead keep ethnic and racial groups in their boxes and subservient to the corporate elites.
Cultural pluralism is analogous to the story of the Tower of Babel in the Bible where Yahweh, the Hebrew deity, confuses the speech of the masses to keep them from building a tower to get to heaven. In Genesis 11, we learn that the people had one language and a common speech. The deity came down to see the tower the people were building and said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.” In the real world, organic intellectuals of the industrial class like Kallen colonized the administrative apparatus and established law and policy that disorganized the masses to keep them from developing class consciousness and politically organizing to achieve their right. (See An Architect of Transnationalism: Horace Kallen and the Fetish for Diversity and Inclusion.)
The transnationalists have been so successful that, today, assimilationism is portrayed as racist because it robs immigrants of their culture. Of course this is a false portrayal, but those conditioned to accept the explanations from the woke progressive ideologue feel it in their bones to be true. At the same time, robbing the indigenous peoples of Europeans of their culture (and livelihood) is not portrayed as racist. Quite the contrary—it’s portrayed as reparations and social justice. Indeed, Europeans themselves are portrayed as racist for celebrating and striving to preserve their culture, which the multiculturalist portrays as white supremacist.
This is why it’s so important to examine the motives of those who presume to tell you about justice. Who do they speak for? What is their ulterior motive? Well, look around you. What are the effects? Those with the most power produce the most profound effects. You don’t need smoking guns. You just need to understand cause and effect. When public policy is the cause, it’s not hard to determine why the policy looks like it does. Public policy doesn’t write and enforce itself. It’s written and enforced by people with power.
* * *
A related note on woke.
Without the social justice blacks used the term to refer to awareness of social and political issues affecting starting around the 1930s. The slogan was often “Stay woke.” It strictly meant an awareness of issues affecting black people. That was a useful exercise before the mid-1960s. What woke means today is radically different from this original meaning. Today it is the belief that there is a de facto hierarchy of oppression invented by various postmodernist epistemics (critical race theory, queer theory, postcolonial studies) in which white straight people and adjacents (such as Asians and Jews) are the oppressors and all the rest of the people—black, brown, trans—are the oppressed.
In this warped view of the world, oppressors are said to use individualism, free speech, perfectionism, rational thinking, timeliness, etc., as tools to keep down the oppressed. The oppressed therefore must wield group power based on identity (imagined communities) and feelings and confront reason and speech with suppression and violence. The woke are successful in this endeavor because the corporate elite have found woke ideology to be a powerful means for undermining political consciousness and class solidarity. The ruling class used to use racism to divide the people. They still do, but have flipped the hierarchy and added a growing number of other identity groups to the mix. It’s the way kings have maintained control of territories for millennia. It’s a very old model updated for our times.
As such, woke is antithetical to the democratic-republican and classical liberal foundation of the American Republic, which is based on individual, free conscience, speech, publishing, privacy and many other wonderful things. We see the perversity of woke in its atavistic, primitive, and tribalist notions of collective and intergenerational guilt and responsibility.
freedom and reason 