The lie of multiculturalism

a reply to: Lipton

What does any of that have to do with multiculturalism? Illegal immigration is not the only way culture is spread, and most definitely not the most invasive way. I'm not labeling you anything, I'm just wondering why you went on a tirade about illegal immigration on a thread about multiculturalism? If the two are intrinsically connected, please explain.

I, also, do agree illegal immigration can have some very negative consequences. But I just don't see how illegal immigration is going to lead to some type of "borg" society - the illegal emigrates all have varying cultures that differ town to town, neighborhood to neighborhood.

a reply to: Lipton

Cool. I love you okay?





BT dubs homie, it wasn't me that alerted your post, I don't know who it was by I know DTOM has been monitoring this thread and rightly so.

Deuces!

originally posted by: Syyth007
a reply to: Lipton

What does any of that have to do with multiculturalism? Illegal immigration is not the only way culture is spread, and most definitely not the most invasive way. I'm not labeling you anything, I'm just wondering why you went on a tirade about illegal immigration on a thread about multiculturalism? If the two are intrinsically connected, please explain.

I, also, do agree illegal immigration can have some very negative consequences. But I just don't see how illegal immigration is going to lead to some type of "borg" society - the illegal emigrates all have varying cultures that differ town to town, neighborhood to neighborhood.

That's just it, multiculturalism and illegal immigration can be looked at as either separate, or tightly intertwined issues depending on what angle you're looking to exploit, mainly because people cannot, or choose not to differentiate between culture and race.

For example my little family is black and white. I'm white, the wife is black and the kid is whatever is the currently politically expedient term. Does that mean my family is 'multicultural' or 'multiracial'?

Maybe that just makes my family American, because we all happen to be from the same place.

...all have varying cultures that differ town to town, neighborhood to neighborhood

For the most part I disagree with this part (I know I cut off the immigrants part). Americans are American. Somalis are Somali. Chinese are Chinese. Even though I'm from a small town in the Midwest I have more in common with someone from California, and to a lesser extent with the UK and to a lesser extent Eastern Europe than I do the farther I get culturally. REGARDLESS OF RACE

For the sake of simplicity we'll totally ignore the existence of counter-cultures (for example gang-cultures in the inner-cites of the US, which 99% of the population don't identify with)

What we have is the inability of incoming cultures to accept their host nation's culture as their own and the use of racism/xenophobia as a guise to blur the lines between the two. Integration happens at a smoother and more accelerated pace when you don't flood the host nation with too many of one culture at one time.

www.youtube.com...

Always worth thinking about

originally posted by: Bicent76
We all become the same culture...= we find a way to assimilate

You seem to be arguing against yourself.

The question that no one is asking is why do we need immigration?

In the US we still have issues with unemployment.... So why import people by the millions when we can't employ the people who already live here.

Also, if we are to have immigration why don't we look for the best and brightest? The solution to me is to do away with social services ( welfare, food stamps etc) until a person is an actual citizen.

I'm not against immigration I just don't want poor uneducated people who cannot make a legal living moving here

originally posted by: Syyth007
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

I'm not quite what you are actually on about, but to claim that the fall of the roman empire, and Babylon (which was really a city, then a city state, no where near the standing of the roman empire) was solely due to multiculturalism is to be completely ignorant of actual history. Babylon was pretty much ALWAYS ruled by foreigners, not like they ever had some type of golden age with some type of "pure" culture - they pretty much invented modern society - one of the first cities where people of diverse backgrounds intermingled -

The Roman empire collapsed for a number of reasons, and it can be argued it never really went away, it's just adapted, the Roman Catholic Church still holds much sway in the world, and it is a Roman institution. To say multiculturalism was the cause of their collapse, I disagree, I think it was very much the reason they exploded in growth - the ability to absorb their neighbors, through diplomacy or force, and make them "Roman". I will agree they overextended their borders, and made a great many enemy, but if they weren't able to assimilate their neighbors, they would of never been an empire.

I would agree to some extent, but it was forced assimilation through slavery. However, the Romans later (AD) practiced a more liberal "open slavery" where a slave, once educated or providing a skilled trade, reached 30 yrs old, they could be freed by their owners (quite different from early US slavery which was a closed slavery system). As more slaves were released from diverse countries and cultural backgrounds, it appears the Roman Empire lost social cohesion and began being pulled in many directions simultaneously (which would be a major part of the multicultural aspect). Around 40% of the population of the central part of the Roman Empire was foreign around 225-250 AD from what I can find quickly. It only took another 140-165 years to the sacking of Rome in 390AD (after the RCC "head office" was moved to Byzantium and renamed Constantinople). The actual final overthrowing of Rome I think took place in 485 AD.

So a rough estimate could be anywhere from 140 - 165 years before the Roman Empire was weak enough to be sacked and ruined to some degree. I would agree that there are many mitigating factors in the decline and fall of the Roman Empire, however, a cohesive society may or may not become a world power, but they tend to last. Rome lasted about 500 years, but if we look at places like India, which seems a fairly cohesive society (regardless of their rather odd "cast" structure), although not really a world power until recently, they have lasted thousands of years. The same can be said about China and Japan which both actively discourage multiculturalism.

Cheers - Dave

originally posted by: Wildbob77
Also, if we are to have immigration why don't we look for the best and brightest?

Maybe because the best and the brightest aren't lining up to do the work that needs to be done.

originally posted by: Syyth007
a reply to: bobs_uruncle
How exactly would a majority population consensus fix governmental corruption, and what, exactly, would that consensus be, in your opinion, to "fix" this problem?

I would think you would have to have cohesion, unity of purpose. In a situation where there are many interest groups, none really get together with other interest groups because each group is out for what they can get for themselves. When a cultural group goes to the government with lobbyists, say the Pakistanis, do they at the end of the meeting say, "Can you give the Indians or the Arabs the same thing we just got?" No, they don't.

If there were cohesion and unity of purpose, we would not be looking at each other and trying to figure out how to grab the "gold ring" while walking over the bodies of others. I think we would be watching more what the government was doing. Multiculturalism works in the governments favour however, it makes smaller more manageable groups in which there can be no consensus between groups. This gives the government the ability to govern arbitrarily and not really include the major requirements of 50% or more of the population (a democracy) because they can make the excuse that they are trying to make the best fit due to the diversity of opinions and requirements.

But don't worry, the worst is yet to come. Democracy generally fails to either a dictatorship or worse ;-) And we are already deep in a semi-fascist oligarchy.

Cheers - Dave

a reply to: Wildbob77

„Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me:
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.“

You need to take some tools to the Statue of Liberty for removing that damn thing..

a reply to: ManFromEurope

The Statue of Liberty as envisioned by the French sculptor that designed it had nothing to do with immigration. Those words are blasphemy to Americans like myself. The Statue of Liberty was a symbol of freedom extending outward into the world.

Multiculturalism is just another divide and conquer tactic. Look how well it works, too. People are more concerned about Johnny Foreigner not being able to speak English than they are about the blatant corruption in the government. It's a sorry state of affairs, man.

Why is it when someone says multiculturalism isn't working in their area that the 'racist' type comments come out.

And btw, numerous country leaders have said its not working so could you please write to them and ask for figures etc..

Let me break it down a little, what I have seen through my 53 years of life on this planet is that it depends on who the immigrants are that has an effect on the population, I came to England from Belfast as a kid, I'd never met a person who was a different colour to me and I'd only seen them in B&W on TV, the difference for me was that I'd never been brought up to fear colour or distrust it, so when I came here it was just a matter of seeing these folks and either getting on individually or not, other kids were my friends or not, not my white or black friends, simply my friends.

I spent a great deal of my life in London in the borough of Hackney which has a high West Indian mix and never had a problem, people just got on.

But these days we are increasingly being inundated with folk who refuse to speak English, who live a culturally bad way and who want to maintain a barrier between them and the UK population. They don't consider themselves British in many cases and want to replace our values. Others simply come here to feed off the benefits system, live in ghetto's of their creation and refuse to work.

When I walk through Northolt where I live now you RARELY hear English being spoken, its mostly Arabic and Pakistani dialects, my wife and I as a mixed race couple get stared and commented at constantly but its by the Muslim men and women and the Asian men and women, the Muslim men mutter at us in Arabic totally unaware that my wife is Muslim as are my in laws who came here in the 50's and worked for their house etc.

I've watched the area start to have little no go area's where Somali gangs control the drug dealing across the estate, don't believe me, I'll supply you a name of the local Safer Neighbourhood hood team that I liaise with re the gangs on our estate. Most of my estate is made up of Muslim families who are new to the UK and very few of the ones I have met show any wish to communicate, smiles are met with stony faces.

The difference from my youth to now is that then families came here from outside the Uk and they worked, damn hard too, whether they liked it or not they HAD to integrate and they did, most still kept their home culture but they adopted the British culture too, now many simply loathe the British culture and as seen in France, Sweden etc create ghetto's and destroy the area's and attack any one who enters them.

So in that respect multiculturalism HAS failed, these newer immigrants simply refuse to be British, area's become sensitive to one or the other, for many Britain is just a place to take from while unwilling or unable to give anything back.

Until we start treating immigration as a business and not as a right thus making sure we allow people who have something to offer then this issue will simply increase beyond all and there will be a backlash one way or another, Anti British hatred is growing within these groups and that means Far right Anti immigrant groups will flourish which all leads to conflict with us in the middle..

originally posted by: akushla99
a reply to: 3n19m470


"But different cultures have different ways of dealing with this. The host nation rightfully expects to retain their culture, even knowing it will be changed in various ways they expect their most treasured parts of their culture to remain. This can be maintained by limiting immigration so the two cultures have time to acclimate. You do it gradually. A sudden influx of people who are not accustomed to the ways of the nation they are migrating to will cause all sorts of mayhem. That should be obvious." Quote 3n19m470

...or you could round 'em up and stick 'em in reservations...

Å99

Thats a great example of a mistake we should not repeat and one we should try to remedy as much as we can while being so many generations removed from the errors that were made... It seems like you agree with my gradual (if possible) approach then.

There is some friction when two different cultures meet, but if managed properly, I think it is a very rewarding experience for all involved. It can be very beneficial to be exposed to other ways of life and become a more complete more rounded, worldly person who can more easily identify with a number of different situations and ways of doing things. I really like how our culture here in America uses words from many different languages in our everyday life. A lot of times wothout even realizing it because there are so many words and phrases we have made our own, in a sense, so they do not seem foreign when we use them.

a reply to: akushla99

I think I get what you're saying, in some of your posts: Rich, affluent areas don't have any problems with multiculturalism, so that means it shouldn't be a problem anywhere, and therefore the ones who are having a problem with it are just a bunch of poor, stupid, racist rednecks. Is that right or did I misunderstand?

originally posted by: Syyth007
And for an on-topic post - how is multiculturalism a lie? Culture is ever evolving, ever changing - Hell, you will find many different unique subcultures among those who would consider themselves of the same "cultural" decent. Dominant cultures come and go, they absorb other cultures, adopt unique practices, etc. The more people there are, the more cultural diversity there will be. The culture in rich neighborhoods are also ever changing - The influx of of other cultures directly into their lives, as in neighbors (I have met plenty of affluent rich Spanish/West and East Asians/Europeans that live in affluent neighborhoods in the US who all still have unique cultural practices) workers, etc.

I grew up in a poor working class multicultural neighborhood - I don't believe I was any worse for wear for it. Just like all of the older cultures built off of the ones that preceded them, our own cultures will one day very soon be unrecognizable to us.

Yes, culture changes all the time just like language which is a natural process. It evolves or perhaps in some cases devolves, but that's all part of a 'natural movement', by lack of better words. There's a whole other thing going on at least or especially in Europe though where there is no such 'natural change' coming from within, or from a few immigrants ; there is a bombardment however of people who come from cultures which totally oppose ours in almost every thinkable way. And I don't know if it actually does change our culture; it puts tension on it, divides those of this culture but doesn't seem to really change it. It changes the countries though.

There is a huge difference between gradual change and development and a 'sudden' (given the amount in the time span of approximately 30-50 years, still ongoing) overload of peoples who just don't fit here at all and despite all the opportunities to integrate or learn the native European languages properly, just don't.

This discussion holds several 'false arguments' imo. There was migration coming to certain European countries in the past, yes, but mostly from other Europeans! And not in this huge overload. Besides, in many cases these people eventually turned out useful or became a part of the receiving culture because they didn't differ that much in the first place! And no, it wasn't a perfect history of perfect people, but at least as far as I know the culture differences never were that contradictory as we see today. There whole way of thinking is different! They have a completely other set of ways of dealing with things, have different morals, etc...

Generally speaking:
Many of the arguments some use seem an attempt at successfully comparing apples and oranges. Such as: but in society x in century y it was successful ==> but you left out 95% of the facts and context

originally posted by: MiddleClassWhiteBoy
a reply to: ManFromEurope

The Statue of Liberty as envisioned by the French sculptor that designed it had nothing to do with immigration. Those words are blasphemy to Americans like myself. The Statue of Liberty was a symbol of freedom extending outward into the world.

No, that sounds just unjust. Can you prove your very.. unlikely.. interpretation? The USA was an immigration-country since the beginning.

The trouble with multiculturism is simply that, when you import people into a broadly secular, western democracy with a culture of freedom of thought and action, respect for each other regardless of sex creed and race...BUT then allow them to practice their outdated, sexist, blinkered religious views as though they have as much worth as the native culture, then you ruin things for everyone.

People should be forced to respect the culture of their host nation. Respect the tolerance therein and leave their third world bigotry behind.
The fact that multiculturism teaches that ALL cultures should be equally valid clearly doesn't work and it's this turning a blind eye to the negatives in foreign culture that creates such a divide between certain groups.

Just look at how well people like Jamacans, Sikhs etc fit in. Or did, anyway. Wholly different to the trash that infects the streets of most British cities now and it's all due to not telling people that their misogyny, their racism, isn't acceptable.

So it's okay when we colonize countries and bring them our culture, and it's okay when we invade and bring them our wars and cause them to have to or want to flee that, and it's okay when we paint ourselves as the lands of opportunity and light and give them something to want or aspire to, but it's not okay when they land at our doors for those very reasons.

Interesting.

In my opinion we are all part of god, or you can say we are all part of the same supreame counsiousness. Reguardless of race the feelings you have for others are just reflections your casting upon yourselves.