E Pluribus Unum
Post-911.

Mr. Clegg is general counsel at the Center for Equal Opportunity.
October 10, 2001 1:30 p.m.

olipsism is only human, and we can all be forgiven for asking sooner or later, "What does September 11 — and the war it began — mean for me and my business?" I am no different, but perhaps the war's impact on the business of the Center for Equal Opportunity will be of some broader interest.

CEO opposes discrimination on the basis of race and ethnicity, and favors assimilation. This gives us a conservative agenda in most respects (opposing racial and ethnic preferences — a.k.a. affirmative action — and bilingual education), but liberal in some others (generally opposing racial profiling and favoring relatively liberal immigration policies). Being anti-discrimination but pro-assimilation may seem at first to create some tension, but in fact our view has always been that the two are not only consistent, but mutually reinforcing — and, indeed, the events of September 11 and their aftermath show why.

If human beings are to treat one another well, they need to recognize their common bonds. One can certainly believe that such bonds exist simply because we are all human, but as a practical matter it's better if there's more than that. We will feel closer to our family than to those of alien cultures a half-world away. That can't be helped.

A promising bond, especially for purposes of nondiscrimination, is patriotism. But for it to be effective, it has to mean more than simply being born here or having once parroted a few words before a magistrate somewhere. We must share a common commitment to certain political and moral principles, a common tongue, and a common loyalty. Toleration is much likelier when we know that the other fellow shares some bedrock set of beliefs, can be communicated with, and is willing to salute — even die for — one flag above all others. This is not to say that Americans should view monarchists, non-English-speakers, or aliens as subhuman, but it is harder to convince us that such people are our countrymen and are entitled to be treated as such. At a minimum, we want to know that our toleration will be reciprocated: that our beliefs won't provoke a death sentence. All of this is especially true when our country is at war.

We can be, should be, and are a multiethnic and pluralistic country — but America ought not to be multicultural. There are, as I've suggested before on National Review Online, ten basic principles to which all Americans must subscribe. They are not outrageous, but they are irreducible: Don't disparage anyone else's race or ethnicity; respect women; learn to speak English; be polite; don't break the law; don't have children out of wedlock; don't demand anything because of your race, ethnicity, or sex; don't view working and studying hard as "acting white"; don't hold historical grudges; and be proud of being an American.

September 11 brought home to us the fact that we live in a world where many would like to destroy our country and kill our citizens. That is a problem our military and diplomats must deal with abroad, and they are. But, meanwhile, Americans in their own country should not have to live with either the reality, or even a reasonable fear, that their neighbors are anything less than steadfast in their opposition to the evil fanatics who have already murdered thousands of us.

Does this mean that Islamic Arab Americans should be singled out for abuse? To the contrary: Loyalty is a two-way street, and if these citizens are to be expected to put America ahead of all other, competing loyalties, then America cannot abuse them. The government must protect them from bigots and reaffirm that they are Americans and welcome ones, too. But, again, loyalty is a two-way street, and so these Americans must acknowledge that they can maintain neither ties to nor sympathy with our enemies. It was entirely appropriate, then, that many Arab Americans went out of their way to condemn terrorists and affirm their patriotism, and that President Bush went out of his way to condemn bigotry and affirm the American-ness of Muslims and Arab Americans.

It will be more difficult, I am sure, for Americans of Middle Eastern background or appearance to be patient when the government refuses — as it must — to turn a blind eye to the fact that a clear and present danger to America is presented by some Islamic Arabs, and so unfortunately people with those characteristics (among others) must be scrutinized especially carefully. This is not bigotry, and the spokesmen who assert that it is do their "constituents" no favor. We are talking not about internment camps, but about closer checks in airport security, and being more likely to get a call from law-enforcement agents as they comb flight lists and pursue other leads. Putting up with some polite but undeniably heightened scrutiny is not an unreasonable request, and should be cheerfully acceded to.

I don't like racial profiling, as NRO readers know. I hate that it might be necessary — principally because of the discrimination it entails, of course, but also because I know that the Left will take this as proof of America's racism. Still, I like mass murder even less. I'd like to assert that government consideration of ethnicity is never, ever permissible, period. But I can't, because if the stakes are high enough, it is.

Finally, our country will be much less secure if it is a patchwork of ethnic communities that don't speak the same language, and that identify more with their race or country of origin than with America. This reaffirms the correctness of the Center for Equal Opportunity's message: Assimilation is essential, and people should not be encouraged to assert that they are entitled to special treatment in college admissions, government contracting, public-school assignments, employment, or redistricting because of their skin color or ancestry. It's both ironic and lucky that Arab Americans are the only non-European ethnic minority that is typically not granted preferential treatment — lucky, because it would otherwise aggravate tensions that already exist. America will not be united when it most needs to be if, on a day-to-day basis, we are at each others' throats, nursing historical grievances and refusing to be held to common standards.