The Disuniting of America: Reflections on a Multicultural Society

Arthur Schlesinger takes the issues of a new PC nation and puts them into real perspective. He is both pro-culture and pro-heritage, but he stands against the idea that cultural identity means a seperation of the American People. Taking on a myriad of topics, Schlesinger explains with great simplicity, straight-forwardness, and honesty how multi-culturalism can be taken too far, taken to absurd conclusions. Essentially, Schlesinger is letting us know that not everything is best when it is presented through the eyes of multi-culturalism.

I read the book in a single sitting. Once I started to read, I was drawn in more and more. Even if you don't agree with his premise, Schlesinger writes in such a way that there is no ambiguity to what he is saying. Knowing Schlesinger's politics for some may make this all the more shocking, but I have to ask those who oppose the message of this book whether they are upset that he is saying these things in general, or if they are upset because a "liberal" is saying these things.

In my opinion this book is of critical importance to understand the second half of the 20th century in America.


Worship the Myth and Ignore the Reality   August 12, 2000
Joel Roache (Salisbury, MD United States)
23 out of 37 found this review helpful

This brilliant, if sometimes disingenuous polemic begins with several pages documenting the history of the melting pot ideal, then adds a few brief paragraphs on our failure to realize the ideal. This is Schlesinger's approach throughout the book: a fanatic zeal to maintain the myth coupled with a singular indifference to its failure for black people, Native Americans, etc. He also has an idealized notion of the history of those groups who have been "assimilated." He has nothing to say about all the immigrants who did not survive in the The Promised Land, or who survived only in utter squalor: miners, textile workers, etc. Championing the ideal is all. Realizing it is an afterthought. One is also disappointed in so reputable a scholar by the way he uses his sources. He quotes Crevecoeur and DeToqueville on the melting pot, but does not mention their acknowledgement of the lasting menace of slavery. He presents Afrocentrist Leonard Jeffries as the boogeyman of multiculturalism without mentioning that Jeffries is OPPOSED to multiculturalism, calling it "mental genocide" against black children. And Schlesinger knows less than nothing about the "Ebonics" movement. Another writer whom he quotes out of context is Andrew Hacker, whose work is a good antidote to this display of establishment myopia. This book should be read as an example of why so many black people distrust mainstream intellectuals: Abstractions that have worked so well for white people are central; the realities of the black experience are peripheral. Malcolm X once suggested that someone needed to teach nonviolence to white folks. Schlesinger should be similarly advised to teach inclusiveness to the same people. It is they who are the threat to the "unum" that is supposed to come out of our "pluribus."


Courageous   May 4, 2003
Brett Williams (Dallas, TX)
18 out of 21 found this review helpful

Schlesinger served the Kennedy administration, heavily involved in advancing Civil Rights. Any memory of pre-1960s America justifies his passion. Even lynching of Blacks was not illegal until Truman made it so in 1948 and images of fire hose and German Shepard attacks on peaceful Black protestors or their White supporters remains a stark memory. His book, however, is an alert to those of reason regardless of affiliation that the movement has run off its tracks. But that hasn't stopped its wreckage from continuing to plow a path of ruin through its original intent. As Schlesinger puts it, "A culture of ethnicity has arisen to denounce the idea of a melting pot, to protect and perpetuate separate ethnic and racial communities." Its underlying philosophy is that America is not a nation of individuals but a nation of groups, he says; ethnicity is the defining experience; division into ethnic communities establishes the structure of American society and the fundamental meaning of American history. "Multiethnic dogma abandons historic purposes, replacing assimilation by fragmentation, integration by separation." Our modern movements succeed where the Klan failed.

Referencing multiculturalism he asks if it is the school's function to teach racial pride? When does obsession with difference threaten identity? Since this 1993 book this obsession has become an educational standard. Our calendar is split into months for one race pride or another (except white and European). It starts early - believing the purpose of history is therapeutic. He notes, "Once ethnic pride and self-esteem become the criterion for teaching history then certain things cannot be taught." Schlesinger asks the question, "Why does anyone suppose that pride and inspiration are available only from people of the same ethnicity?" One wonders.

Schlesinger's core warning is the same as that of the Founders, that "the virus of tribalism lies dormant, flaring up to destroy entire nations." But that has not stopped the derailment of Civil Rights. As Schlesinger notes, Black America's valid leaders - like so much from the Left that began for the right reasons - have been hijacked for the benefits of opposition, not unification.


Astute analysis from an icon.   November 25, 2001
Dave Huber (Delaware, United States)
16 out of 18 found this review helpful

Schlesinger isn't just "another conservative" lamenting the onslaught of multiculturalism. He genuinely believes in the now out-of-vogue "melting pot" vision of America, which obviously infuriates many modern liberals. After all, "melting pot" implies "white" and "male." Heaven forbid. Arguably, the most important aspect of the melting pot vision is the governmental and legal system of the United States. Modern liberals and various interest groups are trying to change this presently (which is their right, of course), but disturbingly trying to also rewrite its history. For instance, as Schlesinger writes, the New York State curriculum has mandated that study of the American Founding include reference to the "Haudenosaunee political system" -- in effect, the Iroquois Confederation. Schlesinger correctly notes that this "influence" on the Constitution's Framers was "marginal," and on European intellectuals it was non-existent. (After all, wasn't it virtually only Ben Franklin's quote, after visiting the Iroquois, that said essentially, "If they can do [create a confederation], why can't we?") But, no other state has as effective an Iroquois lobby as New York.


Eminently Important for Our Time   June 13, 2000
Joshua D. Hamilton (Santa Monica, California)
14 out of 19 found this review helpful

I read this book twice just it mine out every once of gold it contained. The author debunks much of the hyper-multicultural political correctness that plagued our universities for much of the early 1990's (It has since subsided since its initial outbreak, but remains a constant problem), but makes his point without sounding reactionary or afraid of change. Instead, he assiduously disseminates the separtist anti-American sentiments of radical multiculturalism while reminding americans of the value of a cultural pluralistic society that honors the traditions and cultures of our ancestors while not forgetting the common bonds of Americanism that unite us all. To that point, he reminds the reader what Americanism truley is; it is not a homogenenous white monoculture that looks and acts like a bad 1950's sitcom. Rather, Americanism is expressed in the democratic values that have allowed all groups to participate in civic life.

His book is a seminal work, important for all, especially whites, such as myself, whose culture has defined the dominant culture in America for 200 years. Change and inclusion are good things. The road to a united America falls on both the natives to accept newcomers and the newcomers to accept the democratic American principles and not form antagonistic enclaves separate from the whole.