‘Diversity’ Never Includes Those Not Keen on ‘Diversity’

This is an attempt to be exact about something going on everywhere. There is a standard move made by the Far-Left-Centrist-Mainstream-Establishment, in fact, by everyone: academics, journalists, politicians. I have mentioned it before in articles for the Daily Sceptic. But it deserves exact specification and emphasis, as it is very important. This move is to allege that there is a problem with the ‘far Right’ or ‘extremists’ while, at the same time, replicating – without saying so – exactly what they are doing.

It is a pot-kettle-black scenario, but a subtle version of it: and, alas, it is sufficiently subtle that many in the thoughtless regime and its intelligentsia repeat the move without being conscious of what they are doing.

Let me offer as an exhibit, Sadiq Khan. If I had the patience I could show you this in Keir Starmer, the Guardian, Mary Beard und so weiter. But one example will be clear, to get the point across.

On October 13th Sadiq Khan wrote a comment in the Guardian under the headline ‘All beliefs are welcome in London – we cannot allow extremists to divide us‘. It was a defence of peace and harmony. That part of it was unobjectionable. No one wants violence. But it was also a defence of diversity that used diversity as a way of excluding those who are against diversity. Look at the headline. It is a frank contradiction. The irony of this contradiction seemed to escape Khan.

I don’t see my faith as something that sets me apart from my fellow Londoners, because I believe our different beliefs can bring us closer. As some seek to score cheap political points by weaponising a series of appalling events to turn us against one another, we can find an antidote to hatred in the sense of purpose we share in our churches, mosques and synagogues, our mandirs, temples and gurdwaras.

Sadly, some politicians and commentators seem unwilling to defend this common humanity, choosing instead to exacerbate tensions by appealing to our worst instincts. This is reckless and wrong, revealing callous disregard for the safety of the people they are supposed to serve. Now, more than ever, we must resist the forces of division and unite to build stronger, kinder communities where we can live together in peace.

I am going to speak directly to Sadiq Khan. Your argument is illegitimate. Not because you talk of peace. But because you think that by claiming to be on the side of ‘diversity’ you have won all arguments and can condemn your opponents. In fact, you blame your opponents for trying to ostracise others, when you are ostracising them. They are against inclusion: so you exclude them. By resisting the forces of division you are, necessarily, engaging in division.

“Different beliefs can bring us closer,” he says. I ask Sadiq Khan to think about this, rather than just saying it without thinking about it. If he thinks about it, then he will have to admit he is either lying or being extremely naïve. No one in the entire history of the world has ever supposed that different beliefs bring us closer together. Unless, as is likely, we don’t believe in those beliefs.

I want to summarise this paradoxical pot-kettle-black politics so it can be seen clearly. The logic of the contemporary regime and its intelligentsia is:

• I have a position.
• It is true, good, right etc.
• This is because it is in favour of diversity and inclusion.
• My opponents oppose it.
• [Intermission for refreshments.]
• Therefore, they are divisive.
• Therefore, I shall condemn them.
• [Intermission for another drink, so I can sleep through to the end and ignore the logic.]
• Therefore, I, too, as a matter of logic, am against diversity and inclusion.

Can you see the paradox? They say that we are engaging in exclusion, scapegoating, enemising, God knows what. And this very fact justifies them, therefore – some ‘therefore’ this – in excluding, condemning, scapegoating, enemising us.

The logic of this has always existed. As René Girard wisely said, we are, by and large, a scapegoating species. But it took liberalism to bring it to something like its apotheosis: by exhibiting it, while denying it, and scapegoating others in the most hypocritical way so far achieved by a bewildered humanity. Anyone who fails to understand this logic fails to understand the paradox of our politics.

But I want to emphasise that many of the people who dominate our political discourse act as if they are unaware of this paradox. To them the rightness of diversity is something like a divine revelation, an absolute truth, a winner of all arguments. And it is absolutely necessary to point out to them that they are in error. They have not won the argument. They are simply surfing the zeitgeist. They are genuflecting, signalling their virtue, and meanwhile engaging in the usual push-and-shove of politics. They are intellectually lazy, and, what is worse, duplicitously engaged both in loftily ascending to the high ground and in kicking up a storm and building little gulags on the low ground. And I, for one, find every repetition of this boring, tricky little move tedious.

The established order sometimes expresses annoyance or bewilderment that anyone is finally complaining about this, as we are more and more nowadays. Well, we are not the first. There were people in the 20th century who noticed it. But it has only become something like a broad recognition with political edge in the 21st century. And that is a good thing. For the moment, our opponents are trying to strike down dissent with words like ‘fascism’. And the only really effective way to counter them is to drag them to the slough of their own logic and make them see it for what it is.

James Alexander is a Professor in the Department of Political Science at Bilkent University in Turkey.