Visual and linguistic integration

In a previous post, I said:

Diversity leads to youth feeling betrayed. Diversity is sensory assault: all things foreign (sights, sounds, smells) hit the subconscious with unease and shock - only the hardy label this a celebration. The youth have no respect for adults who dump them into melting pots and say "celebrate Johnny".
Here are my views on integration. The immigration debate rightly talks about crime, terror, religion, etc. But it should also talk more about visual and linguistic integration, because in reality that's what most of us have to deal with on a daily basis, and it is the tension on which further conflict builds ...

'All things foreign (sights, sounds, smells) hit the subconscious with unease and shock' - this is dependent on the degree of difference, obviously some types are more visually similar than others. And I'm sure that being an Anglo myself, my appearance may register as nauseating to others. It's not about hate, better or worse, superior or inferior, it's simply about your brain's visual norms firing off your nervous system. No amount of conditioning or PC propaganda is going to change that (with the exception, perhaps, of the condition that some isolated immigrants succumb to: hating their own appearance).

It is noted that some foreigners are attractive enough to negate this effect - because your brain is merrily distracted in admiration of their beauty. But it is nonetheless true for the masses of ordinary foreigners. And the effect is magnified by diverse and unattractive foreigners.

And it is noted that, on a personal level, friendships with foreigners can also negate this effect - because your brain recognises all that encompasses an individual.

What I am talking about is at the macro level, the sea of foreign faces, and the unease that causes. This is part of what causes the turtle effect, I believe. Only the hardy survive, and the elderly and sick are the first to withdraw from the "celebration". It's not my idea of a healthy community.

This is why visual compatibility should be a major component of immigration and assimilation programs. No matter how good or bad an immigrant is, if there is unease caused by visual incompatibility then the relationship is off on the wrong foot before it has even started. This is why I support a ban on hijabs, turbans, religious dress, foreign language, etc. And this is why I oppose African immigration. If you then add multiculturalism, and a lack of dominant culture, on top of this visual tension - then don't be surprised when it flares up.

The elites want the ordinary folk to "get over" such attitudes. But typically, the elites don't live in diverse areas, they live more comfortable lives, or they are successful because they are endowed with abundant energy levels - on all these counts they're completely out of touch with the ordinary folk's tolerance levels. Those tolerance levels were stretched with Euro and Asian immigrants, and even some liberal fashions. And, for many, their tolerance has snapped with Muslim, Middle Eastern and African immigrants - and with the fact that sometimes your brain can't even register what race you're dealing with because there are so many here now.

It is worth noting the Middle Eastern language is particularly foreign. The sounds are guttural which, to me anyway, evoke sounds of vomiting. It causes much discomfort. And I'm sure the Aussie language probably sounds equally nauseating to them. Again, it's the degree of difference that matters. The Indian language isn't one of my favourites either, again, because it's so different.

And another source of tension is the Middle Eastern difficulty with smiling. OK, I admit its been a while since I had Lebanese neighbours so I'm a bit out of touch. But the men particularly seem to have a genetic/cultural resistance to smiling. What's with that? As an Aussie, it's natural to take the piss and laugh at ourselves. This is another area of visual incompatibility: the smile. Ain't no citizenship test for that folks. To us, they look like they've got permanent scowls on their faces. Although, they are not unique there: thanks to the rap culture. What must the Middle Easterners think of us smiling?

And just for consistency in the visual incompatibilty stakes you can throw fundamentalist Jews with their sideburn perms, Indians with their lids, and even the tattoo fashion which is spreading to the face and hands these days.

Linguistic integration: I avoid public transport in cities like the plague. Say no more.

These are the basics of compatibility: appearance, language, and smells. The elites will overlook the basics and go off on their scholastic journeys in denial, until they finally arrive at the fascist policies of "ok, let's beat them into submission". Some things simply don't mix.

With visual uniformity there are less definable sub-cultures in which diverse behaviours and beliefs can take root. That said, it has been said that if Islam exists in any latent form, it can spring up and turn radical at any moment - so invisible Islam is no long-term protection. But visual conformity would help integrate other races/cultures. Disparate groups, though, would be better kept separated, rather than mixed.

If you don't respect your environment in all facets (visual, auditory, smell) then don't be surprised if the prevailing attitude out there is "nobody cares about my feelings, so why should I care about anyone else's?". Get the basics right.

Update: this post originally had a confronting picture of a man with a tattooed face. But, true to my argument, the image was at variance with my visual norms to the degree that it caused unease. Hence now the fluffy ducks.


Anonymous said...

This is true. I had the feeling in Europe that the place was so over run with foreignors that even the indigenous didn't respect anything or anyone anymore. Its like a tragedy of the commons. No more community. Why should I care if the bus is graffitied and there is rubbish in the streets type of thing.

KG said...

Great post! And absolutely spot-on.

Abandon Skip said...

"tragedy of the commons". Sounds spot-on:

Aristotle: "that which is common to the greatest number has the least care bestowed upon it."

thanks anon and KG.