What is "a multicultural society"? Is such a society compatible with democracy and welfare provision?

Even the defenders of the project were unsure on this point. However, they never had to answer because no serious debate on the subject was ever held.

To Utopians the coming of multiculturism led to many changes in their society. Companies had to drop the requirement for staff to wear uniforms, schools and other institutions had to offer special food, new holidays were introduced to the Utopian calendar, border guards had to accept that women were allowed to hide under scarves in passport photos, dentist had to learn not to shake hands with customers with a foreign background, policemen had to learn Arabic, etc.

A multicultural society has no moral core or norms, by definition it lacks a common platform of values. People spoke - so to speak - differnt languages.

Child marriages, gender mutilation, polygamy, physical assaults on children and honour killings were relatively marginal culture differences. Of greater importance was the lack of common responsibility. If there existed any loyalty at all, it was most likely to be found within ones own ethnic group, not Utopian society as a whole.

When Enricher parents failed to take responsibility for their children attending school or for what they did during their spare time, it resulted in trouble, with gangs and criminality. An ever more Utopian-hostile environment was created. As a result the cities became unsafe in the evenings, especially for the Utopians.

Of no lesser importance were the economic consequences that followed due to a lack of common values. If some groups do not see the importance of obtaining an education and supporting themselves, if some groups see cheating benefits and taxes as acceptable, then the equation will no longer add up - expenses will rapidly outweigh income.

The economic consequences of forming a multicultural society had been raised earlier, the offical line being, "We are talking about humans", being a central slogan from the gatekeepers of the project. The offical line's meaning was simple - don't ask - no economic consequences were to be considered when it came to the reception of foreigners, budgets were allowed to crack.

But the consequence of this ambivalence attitude soon surfaced. Resources became scarce. Utopians experienced the new reality the hard way. When they became sick they discovered how far medical care had fallen in Utopia. They failed to be listed sick, relevant tests were not taken; correct procedures of care were not followed, despite the fact that the patient was obvious ill.

Utopia had traditionally been a high tax, high social care nation. The citizens were willing to pay, but they then counted on getting something in return when they needed it.

Honest, hard working Utopians felt they had been made use of and their willingness to pay the required taxes began to wane. The Utopian welfare state started to unravel.

A multicultural society and welfare state were, as Utopia proved, as incompatible as fire and water.