Iread with interest the opinion/ editorial “America Needs Uniculturalism, Not Multiculturalism,” (July 15) by Jim Fitzmaurice, trying to understand his position, as the writing seemed erudite and the thinking serious. Eventually, however, it became clear that under the rhetoric is simple bombast. Evidently, the man suffering from “a paucity of melanin,” the man from Rumson, is feeling discriminated against. In fact, he is a “victim” of discrimination, though he heroically refuses victim status. It’s evidently tough to be a white man in one of the most socio-economically advantaged communities in the state, even in the nation. To top it off, he allies himself with Martin Luther King Jr. and the struggle against institutionalized racism. Such double speak would simply be humorous if it weren’t downright dangerous.

“Multiculturalism” is problematic only when it excuses us from making tough judgments about cultural practices that may impinge on our Enlightenment ideals. When a cultural practice impinges on someone’s freedom or human rights, then such practices should not be shielded from honest and open debate. In most cases, however, the need to understand and respect different cultures (and races, which is what the writer was really talking about) is more than just ethically just; it’s also economically wise. The backlash against President Obama represents a deep-seated fear among some whites (and men in particular) that their halcyon days are over, and they are probably right. But this is not because whites are being discriminated against; it’s because in the global marketplace, in this economic environment, given changing demographics, white men and women will find the competition tougher, and many whom they will be competing against will be black, Hispanic, Asian and Indian.

The letter writer’s plea for “uniculturalism” is dangerous because it is more than faintly fascist. The writer yearns for a Norman Rockwell past, when what we need to do is prepare for a Jackson Pollock future. There is a great deal of change coming, but if anyone wants to see “unfair,” then all they have to do is spend an afternoon in downtown Long Branch and then the next day in Rumson; then we can discuss what needs to change in our supposedly great democracy.
Michael Broek
Little Silver