When conformity becomes dangerous

Subject: When conformity becomes dangerous.

As anticipated there were grumbles from the usual quarters about my last blog on the incidence of apparent supremacy of people with a black skin over those with a white skin in the field of athletics. What the hell has skin colour got to do with it. How dare I promote racial stereotyping when as human beings skin colour is as irrelevant as people with large noses or being right or left handed. 
Much of what we notice and therefore grabs our attention is the visual characteristics of our surroundings. There are other signals which indicate a change or a realisation that we are in the comfort of our comfort zone, a face we recognise, the recognition of our surroundings, the streets and buildings, the countryside, the walks and the scenery in general. It's a form of symbiosis, a long term mutual interaction, it's the reason why football fans wear their club shirts on match day to identify their allegiance both to the club and more importantly their allegiance to each other. When we are abroad we hear the sound of languages that we don't understand and when we get home we find pleasure in being able to relax amongst conversations we do understand, its what makes up that 'sense field', where we feel we are in our place and secure, where our inner radar is tuned to a set of frequencies which we know are the ones we expect to hear, the radio stations, the tv shows we watch which identify us and our surroundings.
Growing up in the cul-de-sac of island living, an island which doesn't have a flow of people passing through it, where customs become entrenched, especially the customs of familiarity. If that familiarity is interrupted by a sudden influx of people from a foreign land, speaking a foreign tongue and observing foreign customs then the reaction is to express some reticence, to ask why has this happened. Is it to my advantage or disadvantage, are the reasons it has happened out of my control and finally has the change been brought about  to benefit to someone else and if so does this lead us to resent the change.  Unfortunately the brunt of any disaffection is born by the person coming in and disturbing the fine tuned equilibrium of our sense of normality. 
The loudly proclaimed horror of the mulbtilatirist, multiculturalist or multiethnic favouring person is that we must defeat any prejudice we may have and fall into line with current thinking. We must  sweep aside our preferences for a multifaceted approach, what ever it's consequence.
Multi is in and Uni is out. To match the diversity of our world we have to become diverse and accept whatever change lands on our doorstep. Not to do so, it is claimed, is blatantly antisocial, specifically as the society becomes more and more complex, with all sorts of claimants to individual, cultural and religious rights.  On the troubling issue of our 'right to differ' and, if not differ, at least question where all this takes us.
For some, even to ask the question is sacrilege,  it's become a new religion, a new constraining surety, like the word of god which was used to bring us into line for our own good.
And yet when we see other, more rigid cultures and religions thrive on this richly cultivated soil of democratic rights, democratic rights sadly missing in the countries from where the newly imported cultural and religious norms originate, I feel that we are the ones in danger of being exploited. In our binding association of ideals, ideas and customs, we have little or no protection from the ideological persuasiveness of the outside influences which rely on tight uniformity and overarching rules which bind the adherent in a tight ideological and religious knot. 
Our own loose, even handiness is soft pickings for the religious and political ideologue. Our naivety and innocence is the result of being brought up as an island community, unaccustomed to the trauma of dictatorial influence it leaves us very vulnerable.