We have reached the fourth article in the series on General Vannacci’s book! Today’s theme is that of the fourth chapter of the work: “The multicultural and multiethnic society”.
Multiculturalism: a condition we should not aspire to
The author states right from the start that the existence and formation of multicultural and multiethnic societies can be traced back to necessity and not to spontaneous phenomena. Migrants would migrate forced by poor living conditions and not because they have little to do during the day.
However, the evidence establishes that monocultural and monoethnic societies are less problematic due to the community union that characterizes them and their greater stability, due to a controlled number of individuals. Therefore, catalyzing the creation of multicultural and multiethnic communities would be masochistic.
The general conceptualizes, giving historical and current examples, that in societies where minority groups and ethnic majority groups coexist, difficulties (up to clashes) are almost inevitable. The ideology of multiculturalism, in fact, as it is processed, is unable to coagulate.
Leveling cultures is not a solution
In light of what has been written, to mitigate the hardships of multiculturalism afflicting some European states, action should be taken on two fronts: making coexistence between different civilizations more peaceful and discouraging non-EU immigration.
Regarding pacification, Vannacci writes: “The coexistence of multiple civilizations is all the more peaceful the more there is domination of one civilization over the others, or the more the state organization rigorously enforces a single, univocal and unshakable code of conduct”. While globalists preach that the laws of a state must adapt to the culture of those hosted, anti-globalists preach the opposite: that is, that those hosted must adapt to the culture and rules of the host country. The writer himself is of the opinion that respecting local values and principles should be an obligation for those welcomed.
A foreign culture could be exported to the extent that it did not require particular rules to express itself and did not cause inconvenience to anyone. If the Italian Constitution provides, for security reasons, that no one can cover their face in public, then no woman, of whatever ethnicity, should be legitimized to wear the burqa (case example reported in the book).
Everyone should be able to express their cultural habits but within the limits that everyone recognizes, not within specially defined limits. It would then be desirable for the foreigner welcomed and served free of charge, the bearer of many rights, to respect the duty to integrate, doing the best possible to approximate the type of education he encounters.
Inter-European immigration: some measures to contain it
As I wrote, the author also questioned the duty to reduce non-EU immigration towards the European community, given that this could contribute to the social imbalance of states already “spoiled” by multiculturalism.
Vannacci for this reason writes: “We will have to ensure that the ‘slope’ that pushes the flows of desperate people decreases by acting in two directions: by ensuring that the perceived advantages in reaching Europe are always lower (so as not to stimulate the departures) and increasing the level of living conditions in the countries of origin, in order to encourage people to stay”.
Nothing abstruse, nothing particularly elaborate. The basic thought is that, if the EU countries (especially those of first landing) remain the best reachable destination for a long time, they will be invaded by ever-increasing migratory flows and, over time, will become worse places: losing their original culture (rendered in favor of other people’s culture), giving up a lot in economic-demographic stability and sacrificing just as much in security. Reviewing the European legislative systems would also be necessary to put every nation in the same conditions: imposing welcome, equally, on everyone.
The sentence about Paola Egonu: a simple argumentative example
I wrote this paragraph for the sake of justice and not so much for thematic value. The very decisive – not indelicate – way in which the general developed the overall topic earned him much criticism. Above all, what caused a sensation was a finely cut phrase reported by some media regarding the volleyball player Paola Egonuri reported by some media regarding the volleyball player Paola Egonu.
You may have already read the segment: “Even if Paola Egonu has Italian citizenship, it is clear that her facial features do not represent her Italian nature”. Well, these words, in the original context of the book, don’t mean anything racist. Just as, in truth, they are not worth racist propaganda even if separated from the larger whole. However, in the paragraph of the work these statements really express:
Even if today’s Italian citizens present physical characteristics that are not traditionally Italian (dark skin in the example of Egonu), we must not forget who we originally were. We must not forget our primordial aspect. Which is why, in naming the sportswoman, Vannacci did not announce anything xenophobic, unlike what someone who has read just five lines of the book may have reported.
And with this last specification I leave you, hoping to have condensed the contents of this chapter well and to find you again, here again, in a few days, for the analysis of the next one. It will be the turn of number five: “Security and legitimate defense”.
Gabriele Nostro, 8 September 2023
