If you have taken the red pill and spent enough time following the dialogue in mainstream media, you may have noticed the existence of a particular double standard with regard to diversity. Though the benefits of multiculturalism are advertised aggressively in western societies inhabited predominantly by Europeans, there does not seem to be quite as much urgency in the push to spread multiculturalism to many of the other relatively ethnically homogenous nations elsewhere on Earth. This double standard is the product of a few factors: historical reality, white guilt, and economic necessity.
Western Europeans, in the process of conquering most of the planet, created the most diverse and globalized polities man had ever seen. They brought most of the non-European world under their dominion: Western European religion spread across several continents (thanks to eager missionaries and aggressive evangelizing foreign policies), Western European languages were soon spoken on every inhabited continent, Western European laws were followed on every continent, and—thanks to the prolific activities of adventurous Western European men—Western European blood has spread through non-European populations on many continents and is quite extensive in certain parts (e.g.: the existence of hundreds of millions of mulattoes and mestizos across Latin America, the 20-25% European admixture present in the African-American population, etc).
None of this was the result of mere happenstance: Western European powers insisted on bringing the rest of the world closer to their own, and took that mission seriously enough to label it a mission, or a “burden.”
This political, social, and biological influence is key in discussing why so many feel it’s natural for Africans, Asians, Mulattoes and Mestizos to migrate to Western European lands en-masse, but not to places like Japan, Belarus, Bulgaria or South Korea. West Africans (to use on example) speak Western European languages (generally French or English), worship Western European gods (most are Christian), abide by Western European legal systems and often carry Western European names. This is why people often assume that they could “belong” in France or the UK, as opposed to Japan. The same goes for East Indians, Filipinos, and many other migrant groups. That cultural link is crucial to promoting the greater feasibility of “diversity” in Western Europe relative to other places, helping to drive the double standard.
Long story short, Western Europe took over the world and some bad things happened in the process. Many Western Europeans who understand the history of their expansion are aware of these bad things, and feel very guilty about it. Many of those who possess this guilt are in positions of influence and power (the elite are often the guiltiest), hence the tendency for white guilt to manifest itself in the policies and broader mainstream norms of societies dominated by said Western Europeans. This also is crucial to the promotion of diversity in European dominated lands relative to others.
None of this is meant to dispute the notion that non-Western Europeans may be capable of some of the very same historical activities that modern white guilt is based on. At the end of the day, however, it is Europe that succeeded in carrying out these activities on a massive global scale, one that simply isn’t matched by any other group. Nobody in recent history has come close.
Had other population groups (say, West Africans) been put in the same position of power that Western Europe has been in for the past 500 years or so (near complete and total dominance of the globe and all of the people on it), would they have been any more benevolent? Probably not. The reality, however, is that none of those population groups have been in that position of power. All of them have instead been largely subordinate to Western Europeans, the only humans who have been in that position of strength.
This is why white-guilt (and much of the political correctness and assumption of the “white man’s burden” that goes with it) is an issue for many Western Europeans, but not for Africans, East Asians, Native Americans or Eastern Europeans. The Western Europeans who feel ashamed of their history may understand on some logical level that serious atrocities, imperialist or otherwise, have been committed everywhere by everyone, but at the end of the day it was their far more expansive conquest that stands out and, thus, makes them feel a bit more uneasy. The much greater extent of their dominance across the planet relative to others has led to a greater sense of responsibility relative to others for the ills and misfortunes felt across the world. That is what helps to further drive the double standard.
Globalization and the mass importation of cheap foreigners benefits the economic elite. By encouraging the notion that their nations need the “diversity” provided by these foreigners, one can ensure a steady supply of this cheap labor and the higher profit margins it can help guarantee. Western Europeans pioneered the concept of globalization and Western European-dominated nations are the most common among the global economic elite, hence the tendency for this idea to be more prominent in Western Europe than it is elsewhere. That being said, they’re not alone in this (Arabs and East Asians are also known to import laborers, and Eastern Europeans, Latinos and black Caribbeans do it occasionally as well).
These are the realities that have helped create a double standard in which the achievement of a goal that everyone should ostensibly strive for (diversity and multiculturalism) is instead treated primarily as a another form of “White Man’s Burden”. These same realities will also ensure that said double standard endures for a long time to come, for better or worse.
Read Next: Demographic Ruin Is Upon Us