Multiculturalism has become the absence of culture. As a young boy, I had begun to notice the rampant acceleration in the adoption of modern multicultural practices within my community, among my friends and neighbors. It reminded me of the tales my mom would tell of my immigrant grandfather. When coming to the US, he refused to ever speak his native tongue again. He would not even let my mother learn a foreign language. "You are an American. Be American." That is the simple quote that I had heard time and time again, as my mother reiterated his words in confusion at citizens adopting the language, accents, and customs of foreign nations. Thusly, my curiosity was sparked into the seemingly sudden expansion of this Multiculturalism.

Now, I have come to the realization that Multiculturalism is the absence of culture, a successful Critical Practice that has eaten away at the foundation of many western nations and created a rubric for other Critical Theories to enter mainstream adoption. Here's how it works:

1) Reframing and redefining terms with positive connotations.

Multiculturalism, historically, could be defined as a collection of individuals with a diverse array of backgrounds coming together to form a single union. This can be seen in the historic American context of being multicultural, wherein persons had come together from across the globe to build our nation. Many became one. In more recent times, the term Multicultural has been colloquially redefined to represent a union of persons who all engage with society in a way foreign to the whole of the union. In other words, rather than bringing people together, multiculturalism now is a term that divides people apart and self-segregates parts of a union from one another.

2) Promoting the most idealistic version of courteous practices as moral virtues.

The big one here is Tolerance. Also subject to redefinition, Tolerance has been transformed. Previously Tolerance was the acknowledgement that there will be people, opinions, and practices that one dislikes within a union, but the union will accept those differences and maintain the value of the whole over any personal biases. Presently, Tolerance has been transformed into a moral principle that is required by all to hold within the union to hold and has the expectation that the ultimate level of tolerance must be actively engaged in, to where one is not simply acknowledging the acts of those who would normally be ostracized by society, but they must also engage with and appreciate the activities, beliefs, or characteristics of said "other". In the event of a failure to conform to this principle will result in your own removal from the benefits of the principle, ergo those who follow the newly defined Tolerance will not tolerate any who does not live up to the most idealized form of this ideal in all the beliefs, acts, and promotion thereof.

3) Amplifying the superficial and the private, diminishing the significant and expressive.

Crossing over with many Critical Theories, Multiculturalism has succeeded in presenting to people the concepts that there are groups, these groups are defined and unique, and yet presenting them as though they are all equal in every relevant fashion beyond the superficial that is used to define the groups. Looking at history, we can see the factors that distinguished people were a combination of factors extending beyond simple gender, sexuality, race, etc. Heritage was often localized to specific countries of origin, and even regions of said countries when looked at with a more keen eye. There was a focus on things like foods, professions, athletics, and more. The active parts of individuals lives that they chose to do as an expression of their culture. Presently, the definitions fall onto the surface level knowledge that can be determined based on the physical attributes of others. However, there is a simultaneous focus on the aspects of individuals that would traditionally be considered "private matters". These non-public beliefs, acts, and engagements, alongside the broadest of physical depicters are the modern determination of Multicultural groups. In this way, it becomes impossible to cross cultural lines with your neighbors should they appear different than you or have different private lifestyles than you. This blurs the lines of actual content of character and diminishes all understanding of differences to the superficial, and creates a perspective of irrelevance of content beyond the immutable or intimate. And, following step 2, the intimate aspects of all persons must be accepted, appreciated, and, at the minimum, willingly considered for engagement with, in order to prove ones worthiness of receiving Tolerance.

I can keep going, but I believe that these steps and characteristics are enough to show how Critical Practices can be convincingly implemented within societies. They focus on transforming societal ideals into absolute values, diminish relevant factors that should be considered for analysis and understanding while promoting more vague or extreme examples that will convince the good citizens of their inadequacy to uphold the institutionalized value and make it increasingly difficult for them to determine what is essential and good, and they slide the definitions of basic concepts to lead individuals into conflating the values they hold with the ones that the Critical Practitioner is promoting.

Multiculturalism is not a general value, it is a Critical Practice, a strategic system with the purpose of deconstructing the society in which it is implemented. At the very least, Multiculturalism has become this type of system. This is why Multiculturalism is actually Anti-Culturalism, as it destroys the unifying culture of any union of peoples via the promotion of separate cultures which shall all be considered as equals and accepted as equals, lest you be removed from the union of peoples.