The Inevitable Failure of the Multicultural Experiment

Silent Kone
5 min readJan 31, 2022


How ought a man live, and why?

It is oft said that politics is downstream of culture. While this is certainly true, it also doesn’t tell the entire story. Because culture doesn’t just spawn into existence and it is certainly not an end unto itself. In other words, it’s not the genesis of the stream. If one were to continue with the analogy of the river, it would be more accurately characterized as: politics is downstream of philosophy, and culture is the current by which ideas and systems flow, congealing into social order. But what exactly does one mean by philosophy? If one was to strip away the pomp and frills, Philosophy can be simply described as man aiming towards the laws of nature in search of the answer to one, singular question: how ought a man live, and why? This is the fundamental question of existence.

Through this analogy, one gains a picture of the entire history of man as civilized being, from Athens to Philadelphia. The history of mankind is a series of experiments, each with a different answer to that fundamental question that functions as the hypothesis. From this answer, come specific ideas, specific moral and hierarchical systems, and different understandings about the nature of reality. These are the elements of culture, the substance of civilization, the ‘current’ by which nations and people groups flow.

If the history of mankind is, indeed, a series of experiments, then it’s a series of failed ones. Athenian democracy didn’t survive Alexander; the Roman Empire buckled underneath its own weight; neither the First or the Second British Empire could withstand the winds of change. Each and every one of these experiments (i.e., civilizations), though radically different in philosophy and culture, shared the same aim: to find the correct answer.

So, we come back to the question: how ought a man live, and why? An incorrect answer to this question, a bad philosophy, is akin to a rotten foundation. It means certain collapse at all levels, the person, the nation, the culture, reality itself. To return to the river analogy, if the philosophy of a people is wrong, misguided, or evil, it poisons the water source and the current (i.e., culture) becomes toxic and erodes the barriers of the river until there is nothing left.

It’s under the weight of this reality that the myth of cultural relativism is crippled. While it’s certainly true that different cultures have different answers to the fundamental question, under no circumstances are they all equally valid or true, in fact, it is necessarily the opposite. Martin Heidegger’s answer in Being and Time is not compatible with Aristotle’s answer in the Nicomachean Ethics. In layman’s terms, the Nazi Experiment is not equal to the American Experiment. Not only are they fundamentally unequal, they are necessarily incompatible.

Herein lies the failure of every great experiment in human history, from Greece to Britain. None could find an answer to the fundamental question that could sustain itself and a culture, until the best of all of these failed experiments was molded into a new one in a new land: America. Yet, America now stands in a strikingly similar place to that of the late Roman Republic and not for dissimilar reasons. The uniquely American answer to the fundamental question, laid out in the founding documents of the country, have been discarded, and American culture has been substituted with a new experiment, that of Multiculturalism.

There are many examples of the effect of multiculturalism found throughout the pages of history, the Red Scare, the American Civil War, the Russian Revolution, and on and on. The lesson is clear, there can be no compatibility between two or more individuals or groups that have opposed answers to the fundamental question. It is from Philosophy that Culture is born, and from Culture comes the Nation. So, then, a Nation with multiple cultures is no Nation at all, but instead many nations. Therefore, in a multicultural nation — a nation in name alone — there will necessarily be intense conflict, because there are multiple parties fighting for control of one system. There’s no recourse or hope for reconciliation amongst the parties because they share no values and no common understanding of the truth. Most importantly, there can be no winner in the eventual conflict, only the destruction of the entire system, the erosion of the river’s barriers until nothing remains.

This idea of cultural diversity (note that this is not synonymous with racial diversity; multi-racial and multi-cultural are often conflated, but they don’t mean the same thing; this is philosophical issue, not a racial one) has become the crux of the agenda of the elites and corporate media actors. It’s an experiment doomed from the start and its advocates are keenly aware of this fact. They know there is no benefit which can come to the nation from the forced co-habitation of multiple different groups which share nothing. But there is a benefit for them: power. So, they strive to import, indoctrinate, and then pit the citizenry against each other, so they can retain their grasp on the controls of a dying nation. Power over something that will undoubtedly come crashing down on us all swiftly and suddenly. They’re captains of a sinking ship. Kings of rubble. Look on their works ye mighty and despair

There can be, then, no question of the failure of the multicultural experiment. It is, in all cases, inevitable. So, the concern becomes, what the fate of the American Experiment will be in the coming decades, if it has not already been irreversibly abandoned. In this vein, there has been much talk of a national divorce in the recent years, and the reasoning is seemingly sound. The two (in a broad sense) warring cultural groups, each with radically different views, values, and answers to the fundamental question, have reached an impasse. There is no mutual trust or understanding; there are no more shared truths.

Many, however, scoff at this notion, and a hesitation to take such a drastic course of action is understandable. It is my opinion that the United States should remain just that, united. But in the face of ever-increasing division and mounting strain, burying one’s head in the sand and pretending it’s 1985 is just not a viable option. There must be some action taken to reverse the erosion of the state.

All of this is not to say that national divorce is the solution, that there is an easy solution, or that there is a solution at all. But, the failure of the Multicultural Experiment is written. A breaking point will come, the river will continue to erode, and the system will collapse in on itself. There is no alternative. The only question is, will America be brought down with it?



Silent Kone

Electoral and Cultural Analysis & Editorial