Bill Collier- The first ideal of upadarianism I gained undertsanding of was unity in diversity. In fact, what is now called the Upadarian Cross was originally called "the unity in diversity cross." The idea of deliberately combatting all forms of intolerance, racism, and bigotry has always been a strong conponent of my vision for a Christian nation.
Seen above, this symbol, the Upadarian Cross, represents all four UPDR Ideals, but was originally designed to represent Unity in diversity. The UPDR Ideals are Unity in diversity, Popular sovereignty, Democratic equality, and Rule of law. The two lines forming the cross are slightly different, denoting diversity, while the diamond enclosing them represents unity. The four points represent the UPDR Ideals.
Today, more than ever, this vision is needed. When I speak of a color-blind society of equals in dignity and inherent worth, I of course don't mean I don't see and appreciate cultural and ancestral diversity. My first explanation of unity in diversity was that we needed to find a way so that "black kids can be who they are and white kids can be who they are, and yet still feel like they are part of the same people." I was responding to a situation around me in which black and white kids were fighting over issues related to how they talked, how they dressed, and the kind of music they listened to.
I became firmly convinced that tolerance and respect was something I owed to others, regardless of how I was treated. I realized even then, in 1977 when I was 9, that especially my black friends had far fewer opportunities and faced far more artificial limits than I ever would. I didn't feel sorry for them, I felt they could overcome this, but I was determined to do two things: to show them respect and dignity and to stand up for them whenever anyone else didn't do so.
This has translated to other groups of people, especially to people with whom I disagree. You see, one doesn't make peace except with an enemy, and one doesn't need to be open-minded and show tolerance except toward this one disagrees with. So I became a sort of champion of the kids around me who felt unwelcome. For this reason I've always gotten on well with foreigners, because I endeavor to make them feel welcome, to learn a few words of their language, and to understand their culture.
Today, words like tolerance are used as a bludgeon to force conformity and to show intolerance toward the majority in this country, to make them feel guilty about their own identity and to force them to discard their own values and convictions lest they face being called a bigot. The reaction to attacking and vilifying white identity, for instance, is an increased "white consciousness" and a visceral reaction against any appeal to show tolerance.
There has been an imposition of a new definition of tolerance in which the targets, be they white males or traditional Christians, are compelled to accept values or beliefs they have rejected for fear of being shunned and shamed. The reaction is actual intolerance and bigotry by some of the targets against the new protected groups.
But how we behave and how we treat other people is always and only a reflection on who we are. It cannot be blamed on other people or how they act. And this will remain a strong component of the Upadarian national identity, which people can intentionally adopt regardless of their citizenship, ancestry, class, or inherited nationality. And it will always dictate our approach to people and groups with whom we disagree.
The approach to take is not to be against other people, but to be positively for who and what you are as well as for what you believe and value and to show tolerance and respect for others. It is certainly right to refuse to accept intolerance directed at yourself. I can say, my advice toward people enduring intolerance has always been know who and what you are, know your own values, stick with people who respect you, reject people who disrespect you, and push back when anyone deems you "lesser than" for reasons other than wrongs you have done.
Tolerance is an unconditional value. We have to remain tolerant and open-minded no matter what. This is a reflection of who we are.
This is not virtue signalling. To be honest, because we live in a world-as-spoil society while espousing moral and ethical values as received by the ancients, we can expect to be called names. The fact we positively stand for our own Christian lifestytle and governance discipline, for instance, will earn us the strong disapproval of people who feel threatened unless the whole world conforms to their libertine collectivist ways.
We will face intolerancr as an intentional Christian people. Some of us may have the weird reverse racism of anti-white bigotry, others among us will face bigotry against black people or immigrants or foreigners. What is likely is that our Christian cryptonation will likely attract and defend people of diverse ancestries and sociocultural backgrounds who face sone form of intolerance for reasons that have no connection to their individual merit.
If the white male in some Western societies feels put off by the incessant anti-white bigotry of the left, so too the African who faces a barrage of anti-black bigotry from Westerners who think nothing good can come from Africa. And, to be totally real, the African faces more socioeconomic obstacles than the white man currenly endures. Bigotry toward either group is unacceptable, of course, but some forms of bigotry have far more consequences than others.
We cannot stop being committed to tolerance, even if we face intolerance. While tolerance should be a two-way street, how we act toward others is always and only a reflection of ourselves.