Marc Glendening (London NW8)
Sir,
It is commonly assumed that the sinister ideology of multiculturalism, to which John O'Sullivan draws attention (article March 8), has its origins in the American New Left.
There are, however, also disturbing similarities to be drawn with European corporatist thought. Given initial concrete political expression by Italian Fascism in the 1920s, corporatism also analysed society in terms of collectivities based on arbitrary characteristics. Individuals were allocated to one-dimensional groups (or "guilds") on the basis of occupation, whose officially approved leaderships would "represent" them nationally.
The state was responsible for then imposing the collective interest, by centrally determining the allocation of resources and privileges between the various interests. Needless to say, individuals were not allowed to break with the plan or interact with each other on the basis of voluntary agreement. This world view is still adhered to today by European Christian Democrats, albeit in a less obviously authoritarian manner.
Multiculturalists similarly seek to impose a new, centrally determined distribution of power: government will dictate to (ostensibly) private employees who they may and may not employ, and in what numbers. Relations between the different ethnic and other groups (including, now, animals) will be regulated to a minute degree. If the Macpherson report is implemented, it will even be illegal to make "racist" comments in private.
The aim is to render the boundary between the private and the public completely obsolete. The individual will be completely subordinated to the Third-Way state. Why does no significant politician in this country have the courage to speak out against the new PC corporatism and in favour of liberal values?