WHY Are Multicultural Efforts on the Part of States Failing?

I found a provocative article online, that asks:

Why is Sweden becoming so polarized about its new immigrants?

Part of the answer: Sweden is sensitive ONLY to the culture of its immigrants, not the natives.

From the point of view of immigrants, therefore, the Swedish state is warm and generous, but Swedish society is cold and distant. The more Sweden spends on “integrationspolitik,” the worse things appear to become. Sweden takes in more immigrants than almost any other country, but immigrants do not feel welcome here. In response to failed integration, the establishment has redoubled its efforts to push multiculturalism down Sweden’s throat, blaming the Swedish people for the failure of integrationist policies.

Keep in mind that Sweden was never an easy country to integrate into culturally. Swedes tend to be reticent, solitary, and reserved. Theirs is a complex culture, full of subtle rules and opaque codes of conduct. Lutheran Sweden is defined by strong behavioral norms enforced through social pressure. Swedes are conformist and quite intolerant of deviation from group norms, whether it’s immigrants or Swedes who break with protocol. Immigrants who do not conform to expected behaviors are looked down upon and often sense low-level hostility in their private encounters with Swedes. Icy Scandinavia was never a particularly well-chosen testing ground for the multiculturalist experiment.

The Multi-Culti Elites CANNOT, WILL NOT accept that the native culture has ANYTHING of value to transfer to the immigrants. In an Elite's thinking, their country is DEEPLY flawed, irretrievably racist, and, frankly, should meekly bow down to anyone who is willing to supplant the inhabitants, and replace their LACK of a culture with a rich, deeply meaningful ethnic culture. Which, of course, EVERYBODY except the locals have.

What a croc!

It's the typical Elitist "I have a passport and have traveled widely" snobbism that considers their having hit the hot spots for college-aged, moneyed gentry to be evidence of their superiority and fitness for leadership. Think of it as the John Kerry syndrome. The more "primitive" (although, don't you DARE use that word!) the culture, the better.

Don't think that they plan to let "those people" exercise their autonomy - the JK types plan to be the one, gently guiding the "superior culture" towards a political end that best benefits the JKs.