"we are a multiracial country, not a multicultural country", says someone whose culture obviously excludes all the cultures they're criticizing..

So, THEIR culture is the presumed "only valid" culture, then, of course..

Gaslighters gonna gaslight.

In England, classes are distinct cultures.

Nobody who's ignoring that has any validity in claiming that England isn't multi-cultural: it's multi-cultural vertically, & nobody with any intellectual-integrity would dispute that.

Horizontally, it's multi-cultural, too, as simply walking 'round in England will prove.

In England, different cultures definintely are not homogenous ( dad was Anglo-Indian, from India, & I lived in England back in the 1970's, & cultural-segregation was quite significant then: my English relatives were English, and not of Indian culture.

Even though dad was 1/2 & 1/2..

the prejudice among the Anglo-Indians was sufficient to keep Indian culture out from them, it seems..

we learn MUCH more in-relationship than we do in insularity, per day, right?

The same is true between cultures. )

False-framing doing its best to highjack another country..

This is why bottom-up is the most-accurate framing, & top-down ideological-framing the least-accurate.

This is why top-down machiavellianism invariably wrests control of countries from the people.

Always the "party" defining everything in ways that enforce conformity/homogeneousness, among what it "accepts" as "valid".

I think it was a German who told us Lemmites of the Americas that we either needed to get rid of parties or get LOTS more parties, & deal-with coalitions more..

I think they were right, now.

The few-parties paradigm just won't tolerate integrity to have any place in the political "market".

_ /\ _