Tradition holds that Homer was blind, and various Ionian cities claim to be his birthplace, but otherwise there is not much known about Homer's life. There is no convincing evidence to show that Homer was a real person and doubts thus persist as to whether he was the author of both the Iliad and the Odyssey, if either.

"Words empty as the wind are best left unsaid," Homer was reputed to have written in the seventh or eighth century BC. Whether "Homer" could see, or ever existed, never has a phrase found so much relevance as today when Europe, notably in the face of Islamist terrorism, chews over the social plan that has come to be known as "multiculturalism".

Chiefly in the 19th century, it was nationalist ideology which transformed the way Europeans thought about the state. States already in existence were often split apart and new states formed: in the associated fighting, millions of Europeans and others perished. New states were formed around the principles that the state should be able to uphold its own sovereignty; it should be able to safeguard its own cultural and historical past and reflect its uniqueness. Concord and unity are paramount under such principles - of language, sometimes religion, of culture and origin.

It was the economic boom of the 1950s which threatened mono-cultural unity. For the boom resulted in a demand for labour migration - a migration process started which changed the face of the European nation state. These new immigrants were thought to be a temporary measure - men and women who would return to their home country in their lifetime. But these guest workers would not go home and Europe eventually realized its nation-states - to varying degrees - had gained new and permanent minorities. Thus the introduction of multiculturalism in Western Europe had occurred as if by chance.

So, what has multiculturalism become in Europe today?

Technically, Multiculturalism is an ideology advocating that society should consist of, or at least allow and include, distinct cultural groups, with equal status. Multiculturalism contrasts with "monoculturalism" which was historically the norm in the nation-state. Importantly - and here's the cut - the word multiculturalism is today almost always applied to distinct cultures of immigrant groups in developed countries, not to the presence of indigenous peoples.

Multiculturalism as a social policy was officially born in Canada in 1971. It was swiftly taken up by most European Union member states as official policy, and formed a European social consensus where none other existed. Only recently have some European states, notably the Netherlands and Denmark, turned the consensus on its head, and returned to a national policy of monoculturalism. The multiculturalism debate in Europe is presently very lively - with the anti multiculturalism lobby in Britain and Germany particularly vociferous.

It is true to say that Multiculturalism is no longer the accepted norm in Europe.

On the one hand some European citizens see multiculturalism as a good state of affairs reflecting equality of cultures and correctly preserving human rights. Furthermore this camp believes multiculturalism brings about the high ideal of interculturalism - where those from other cultures cross-fertilise existing indigenous culture, ranging from art, music, food, philosophy to science - for the better of the nation.

On the other hand, some European citizens see multiculturalism as a threat - theft of their own culture through the back door. They fear it leads to ghettos which chip away at national unity from the inside - multiculturalism weakening national identity. Allowing unwanted groups - here most mentioned are the Islamists - to get a foothold in society, where they can use and abuse it.

Both sides of the argument have valid points and therein lies the problem with the term multicultural. In Britain, for example, the most popular take-out restaurants by far are curry houses (mostly Bengali run) and some of Britain's best-loved TV personalities are from the 1950's migration period - the newscaster Sir Trevor McDonald one of many. Yet, meanwhile, groups of immigrants like Al Mujahiroun refuse to work and instead aim to "suck the British non-believer state dry" by living off state benefits, refusing to integrate into society and refusing to comply with even basic laws (which make the state richer) like buying car insurance or paying road tax.

It is no coincidence that the Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) in Britain is currently at the centre of a major "multicultural" storm. Its popular and eloquent chief, Sir Trevor Phillips, said recently the term "multiculturalism" was of another era as the term suggested "separateness" and was no longer useful in present-day Britain. "We are not funding any organisation which reinforces separatism. We will not encourage the emergence of isolationist groups," another CRE official, called Khurshid Ahmed, went on to clarify. The London Mayor, Ken Livingstone, accused Phillips, who is of Caribbean descent, of being so right-wing that he would 'soon be joining the British National Party' (the closest we have in Britain - save the extremist Islamists - to Nazis).

The same week as the CRE storm brewed I happened to meet up with some friends in Pimlico, near Victoria in London, to watch a mid-week European Champions' League soccer match. We met at my friend Christian's place, drank a few beers, jumped around rather a lot and savaged a few pizzas.

Only on hearing of the CRE kafuffle a few days after the soccer, it occurred to me that I'd watched the game with a collection of individuals about as "multicultural" as possible. For Christian is a white French Catholic, his wife Christine is a black Senegalese Muslim, Viresh is a Malaysian Indian Hindu, James is a Hong Kong Chinese Buddhist, Richard is a second generation Polish Jew, I'm a white Englishman and the pizza man was an Iraqi who - company policy perhaps - called himself Fabio.

When I thought further, it occurred to me that - there in Christian's lounge - we had been (loudly) supporting an "English" team against "Spanish" opposition. But that the "English" team included an Italian, a Portuguese, a Ukrainian, a Moroccan, a Dutchman, a Cameroonian, a man from the Ivory Coast, a black Englishman and three white Englishmen. The "Spanish" team's best player by far is a Brazilian and their goal was scored by a man from Portugal. The English team's coach was Portuguese and the Spanish team's coach a black Dutchman. Two of the best club sides in Europe - comprised of myriad nationalities united as one by a common goal.

Millions in Britain watched the game - tens of millions across the continent. Millions across Europe live and work side by side with "immigrants" without even noticing. The only "immigrants" they notice are the likes of the aforementioned Al Mujahiroun or other divisive "immigrant" forces.

Why on earth do we need to have a Commission for Racial Equality in Britain today, let alone a discussion about multiculturalism here in Europe? The Commission should no longer have any taxpayers' hard-earned money to hand out. It should not be in a position to decide which groups discourage or encourage "separatism". It is an unnecessary obstacle in a river which is flowing along nicely by itself.

Likewise the Mayor of London should be focusing on getting the London Tube working or preparing the city for the London 2012 Olympics, not getting into discussions about racial equality. We as European citizens should be left alone to get on with our own lives without talking heads compartmentalising us so as to unwittingly highlight divisions which we can get on perfectly well without. The multicultural argument is an argument too far - like children arguing about whether pink or white candyfloss is better tasting.

It doesn't take the Brain of Britain to work out that the tide of immigrants into the country since the 1950's are here to stay - just as it takes those of the most meagre levels of grey matter to recognise that Israel is not going anywhere since it was established in 1948. Let us just get on with life - living amongst facts and realities our sanity and desire to get on allow us to register and deal with - rather than the powers that be tending to over-classify with excess straws on camels' backs.

"Multiculturalism" is a terrible term which, in an attempt to bind, points out fault lines which actually hardly exist now in most European member states. If we are to talk about any kind of society, let's talk about the "Lasting" society - where my son will perhaps one day in the future be able to sit down with even one of radical Al Mujahiroun Syrian cleric Omar Bakri's sons (British born and bred) and scream simultaneously at a penalty miss or find unity of humanity in some other way - without having someone tap them on the shoulders to classify their natural bonding.

While there is no doubt that the likes of Al Qaeda are desperate for fault lines to emerge between Muslims and the rest - instead of the current canyon which exists between Al Qaeda and the rest of the planet - we must never allow such demarcation to happen. Best not to discuss it - let the very idea of it die in the dustbin of ideas never realised, with the weights of irrelevance and psychosis holding it down in that dustbin forever.

The CRE is a dinosaur and a waste of money - a group now isolationist and separatist in its own right which should be abolished without discussion. The way to beat isolationism and separatism in Modern Britain is to send the worst isolationists and separatists - the likes of extreme Islamists Hizb ut Tahrir and extreme right wingers the British Nationalist Party - into immediate rage and powerlessness by scrapping their platform for divisive discussion, by hugging a mate (ethnic background or not) when the opposition go down 2-1 to a stunning curler of a free kick, by continuing to live open-minded and free, and to laugh at their preposterousness rather than take them seriously (of course, prosecute them and proscribe them where necessary). Bodies like the CRE are a step too far - their do-good usefulness (yes, they were relevant in the days of race riots) has expired.

Cut off the isolationists' oxygen and scrap the unnecessary words now used daily - such as multiculturalism - which they use as wedges in an attempt to hackney with empty divisions a society perfectly capable of getting on left to its own devices. If political correctness is here to stay - it seems built into so much legislation - what is the point of over-defining it with empty, divisive words which allow extremists to get a foot hold in national debate (and, scarily, to limit police effectiveness) when otherwise they would be the first thrown off society's spinning wheel?

Few really care whether Homer existed or not. Both the Iliad and the Odyssey have left millions spellbound and have united men and women of all creeds and races with their intrigue. Who really cares whether Homer was blind? If his words are these, then, in this debate, they are nothing short of visionary and worth this repeat:

"Words empty as the wind are best left unsaid."

Dominic Whiteman is spokesperson for the London-based VIGIL anti-terrorist organization - an international network of terror trackers, including former intelligence officers, military personnel and experts ranging from linguistic to banking experts.

---

Bookmark with: