It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Multiculturalism is the result of Liberty

page: 1
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 08:09 PM
link   
So I've noticed a rise in anti-multicultural threads and advocates over the years, evidently because of the increase in globalization and immigration. Many of the advocates against multiculturalism have made good points such as the need to strengthen the borders and the issue with forcing individuals and private businesses to accept multiculturalism. While these are good points, there is this incorrect argument connecting them directly with multiculturalism when they are not mutually exclusive.

The argument that has hit a nerve with me is this notion that "multiculturalism has failed". What is it meant by the failiure of multiculturalism? Since when was multiculturalism a test? Since when was anybody forced to accept it? When people argue that multiculturalism has failed, I really question their agenda behind this statement:


David Cameron has criticised "state multiculturalism" in his first speech as prime minister on radicalisation and the causes of terrorism.

www.bbc.co.uk...

Since when was multiculturalism mutually exclusive with terrorism or radicalization? Since when was it mutually exclusive with fascism? People are very quick to forget that the United States, Canada, Australia and many countries were built upon multiculturalism. Multiculuralism doesn't have to be universally "accepted" to exist and suceed, it does not even require people to fully integrate. All multiculturalism requires the liberty and freedom, the freedom to be whoever you want. The failiure of people to accept the right of muslims to build a mosque has nothing to do with multiculturalism failing in anyway, what it requires is the right of those muslims to establish their own private place of worship, and that is exactly what happened. Multiculturalism does not require your acceptance.

If you have an issue with a mosque being built in your city, or foreign speaking people on your streets, or that immigrant who now occupies the office across from you, that is your deal and your business. It should not have to be anybody elses issue and those people have the right to practice what they believe in as legal citizens. Now if people want to go on about illegal immigration and radical muslims, by all means go ahead, but to link it with multiculturalism overall is a generalization. Your personal problem with multiculturalism should not be justification to attack on the freedom of others. Multiculturalism has been around for more than a millenia, it ain't going anywhere and people will just have to live it if they are to live in a democratical and constitutional society.




posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


I've really been waiting for some one to write about this! People just dont get it, imagine a country without multicultralism, the population would be very small, and that would make the country prone to invasion and war. Multicultralism is not bad, it spreads diversity , introduces you to diffrent cultures and food, yes , remember? pizza...kebab...ceasar salad... all the yummy stuff



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 08:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mentalistbee
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


I've really been waiting for some one to write about this! People just dont get it, imagine a country without multicultralism, the population would be very small, and that would make the country prone to invasion and war. Multicultralism is not bad, it spreads diversity , introduces you to diffrent cultures and food, yes , remember? pizza...kebab...ceasar salad... all the yummy stuff


There are homogeneous countries that are successful, Sweden being one of them (although sweden is heavily socialized so try running that through conservatives). My point is, multiculturalism requires freedom and liberty exist, it's so much as the advantages of having a multicultural society as is what's required.

If people don't accept multiculturalism, thats their deal, but to call for an end of it is asking that we strip the rights away from people to freely practice what they want. Some folks have called for us to end immigration, as if this will end multiculturalism in itself, its a joke. The UK, Australia and the US are already diverse to the point that restricting immigration is pointless.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 08:37 PM
link   
Ask the Native Americans what happens when a culture is faced with an overwhelming and unchecked tide of immigration.

I have no problem with multiculturalism in the USA since its already a fact and cant be reversed, however I do have a serious issue with seeing Europe swallowed up by waves of people that traditionally were fought as invaders and never regarded as anything but enemies.

It's a shame to see hundreds, even thousands of years of historical precedence trampled into the dirt within just a couple of generations.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 08:40 PM
link   
The difference to me has been between natural emi and immigration versus incentivized and planned emi and immigration.

Nature already has an order. Things change and people change. When some authoritative body decides to play equality matchmaking games it fosters distrust, bigotry, defensiveness and wreaks havoc with economies.

When intolerance fades and dies as a matter of societal shift it sticks. When somebody decides to fight intolerance head on they just create more intolerance.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 08:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Count Chocula
Ask the Native Americans what happens when a culture is faced with an overwhelming and unchecked tide of immigration.


This point was already mentioned in the OP. You are linking illegal immigration directly with multiculturalism, the two are not mutually exclusive. Multiculturalism doe not require an invasion or an illegal settlement to exist, it never has as history demonstrates.


I have no problem with multiculturalism in the USA since its already a fact and cant be reversed, however I do have a serious issue with seeing Europe swallowed up by waves of people that traditionally were fought as invaders and never regarded as anything but enemies.


Why should a arabic person or an asian individual be judged on their merits based on the fact their nation or cultural was an enemy of the state before? This is the same notion of hating white people because of slavery committed over a century ago.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


You have a point.

Multiculturalism hasn't failed. Fascists are using it as another excuse to justify their veiled nationalist ambitions.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Nature already has an order. Things change and people change. When some authoritative body decides to play equality matchmaking games it fosters distrust, bigotry, defensiveness and wreaks havoc with economies.


When government or any body makes it a requirement to accept diversity, it is a problem, but again, this does not automatically equate to an issue with multiculturalism or a requirement to its existence.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Southern Guardian


Why should a arabic person or an asian individual be judged on their merits based on the fact their nation or cultural was an enemy of the state before? This is the same notion of hating white people because of slavery committed over a century ago.


Well in anthropological terms it's exceedingly rare for two distinct cultures to co-exist side by side without constant turmoil. Furthermore, either by war or simply out breeding, one culture will eventually supplant the other. I don't think any rational person could argue which way that is going in Western Europe now.

Besides if by stating that its a democratic and constitutional ideal then why not let the Legal citizens of European countries vote and see what the results are. Every poll I've seen shows overwhelming support for stopping illegal and severely limiting legal immigration.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 09:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Count Chocula
 


Again, this is being confused, we're not talking about immigration, we're talking about multicultralism.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 09:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Mentalistbee
 


If you read my post above it states my position i.e. two different cultures cannot inhabit the same small piece of land and live in harmony. One will eventually dominate the other and enforce its will, thereby eliminating multiculturalism.

In effect multiculturalism should be known as transitionalism, since that is what is really taking place as one culture replaces the other. Obviously that couldn't take place without uncontrolled immigration or genocidal warfare.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Count Chocula
Besides if by stating that its a democratic and constitutional ideal then why not let the Legal citizens of European countries vote and see what the results are.


The is assuming western nations are ruled by mob rule, they are not. Take the United states for example, it is essentially a republic, rights are granted by the constitution. Looking towards countries like Britain or Australia, while their systems are less republican, their laws do grant rights that cannot be changed vai mob rule. Womans rights for example as well as healthcare in these countries are considered a right, they cannot be removed by mob rule.

If Europeans and Americans were to work upon this system where due to support multiculturalism became forbidden (in some unforseeable way) they would cease to be free countries no? Because it would require force upon the beliefs and practices of private individuals. Surely you could have understood this before right?


Every poll I've seen shows overwhelming support for stopping illegal and severely limiting legal immigration.


This was already stated in the OP. Illegal immigration and multiculturalism are not mutually exclusive. Niether will ending immigration remove multiculturalism from western nations for the forseeable future considering the amount of legal new citizens already in those countries and the extent of integration.



posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 07:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Count Chocula
 


I can understand that, but at the same time, part of living in a multicultural society is tolerance, and i think this is the big issue, no one has tolerance or understanding for the other.

People are laying down their own rules, it's kind of like this ''we came here first, it means that how we dress. act and talk, is the right way''. When in fact, that is the point of multiculturalism , every one is equal, and free to dress how they want, and practice what they believe. But alas, people are one sided, they expect to practice their culture, but not allow others to practice their cultures.

Live and let live I say.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 04:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by Mentalistbee
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


I've really been waiting for some one to write about this! People just dont get it, imagine a country without multicultralism, the population would be very small, and that would make the country prone to invasion and war. Multicultralism is not bad, it spreads diversity , introduces you to diffrent cultures and food, yes , remember? pizza...kebab...ceasar salad... all the yummy stuff


There are homogeneous countries that are successful, Sweden being one of them (although sweden is heavily socialized so try running that through conservatives). My point is, multiculturalism requires freedom and liberty exist, it's so much as the advantages of having a multicultural society as is what's required.

If people don't accept multiculturalism, thats their deal, but to call for an end of it is asking that we strip the rights away from people to freely practice what they want. Some folks have called for us to end immigration, as if this will end multiculturalism in itself, its a joke. The UK, Australia and the US are already diverse to the point that restricting immigration is pointless.


Multiculturalism only leads to tyranny. Besides forcing multiculturalism on a nation is a form of genocide and subjugation. The only ones who think multiculturalism brings liberty is globalist's. Because multiculturalism is the number one way to destroy nationalism.

This is about self rule and an inherent right to self determination. By forcing multiculturalism your forcing people to be ruled by others with a different culture/ethnicity. Like I said, it is a form of genocide as genocide is recognized in the Geneva convention. By advocating multiculturalism your advocating genocide.

P.S
How much liberty did the multicultural Roman Empire have? Or what about the multicultural Persian Empire? Or the Multicultural Assyrian Empire? Or the Multicultural Soviet Union?



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 04:45 AM
link   
If multiculturalism is a result of liberty, well then there goes my freedom.
Multiculturalism was meant for people to meld and mold together as one.
But this no longer seems to be the case.
Many races are immigrating to many places today, yet so many will not learn the language of their new home or even try to adapt or adopt their new countries ideals or respect their ways.
Multiculturalism means several of different cultures combining.
Some of these immigrants( and i say that with a bitter taste on my tongue) Will never respect or blend into their new home.Some will never respect our ways as long as their religion tells them so.




edit on 22-3-2011 by meathed because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-3-2011 by meathed because: My computer is crap



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 09:56 PM
link   
In my view, there can be "soft" and "hard" transition to multiculturalism. Obviously, people freak out about "hard" transition and that's to be expected. To me, that's when large waves of immigrants move in quickly, noticeably, and are judged to be taking something away from "natives" because the aspects of transition are so visible. We live in fast times.

"Soft" transition would be a very slow change where there does not appear to be a takeover of one culture by another because it is so gradual. Before the change can be noticed, the observers are part of the product of the transition ... so they're not offended.

In either instance, the result is the same. A different culture replaces a prior culture. And it's how the world has always been. Our grandchildren won't be so bothered by Hispanics or Moslems or Asians or darker skin tones or what have you because many of them will be Hispanic or Moslem or Asian or have darker skin tones. They won't necessarily be better people for this because they will still find the next reason to create conflict.

And the beat will go on.



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 12:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Mentalistbee
 


The myth that racial diversity is a good thing is simply an emotion based thought process, not backed up by any fact whatsoever.

Since when does being a racially homogeneous equate to having a small population?



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 12:27 AM
link   
I think it's important I contribute to this thread as a year or so ago I was vehemently opposed to multiculturalism, so much so that I had betrayed the person I thought I was and turned into someone who I did NOT want to be. Needless to say I was given a serious wake up call when I actually interacted with different cultures and saw something infinately better than what I was living like and how I felt at that time, even then it took a while before I realised that the more I tried to find fault with other peoples the more I started to hate myself.
As I've said in another thread like this I think it's time people abandon this idea of a single monolithic culture dominating everyone it comes into contact with.


Most critics of multiculturalism (like myself before it made me a better person) tend to be afraid of change and unable to accept that we as humans rely on our differences to distinguish us from every other species. To borrow a quote from the Holy Quran

- 'O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you.' - Surat Al-Hujurat [49:13]

Theist or Atheist, who can argue with that quote? Tribes and nations are a means for cooperation not conflict, they are there to expand our experience of humanity, not to scare us into isolation.

Stop being afraid of others. Instead of chastising people for not speaking English (or the language of your country wherever you may be) make an effort to learn another language so that you may help them. Instead of being angry at another religious community building a place of worship in your area, engage with them and make them feel welcome, if you're a member of a church etc then work with their community so that you both may learn something new about each other and bring your faiths closer together.

The only way humanity is going to progress is if people ignore these false barriers that many like to pretend divide us, we should embrace our differences and the diversity within our own borders instead of trying to anhialate them. Why do you think modern people are so astounded when one of these uncontacted tribes is shown on TV or we get a glimpse into the lives of tribal peoples who are ready to accept anyone as a brother? Look at any TV documentary where some westerner goes to a jungle and lives with the natives. Almost everytime they accept him as a family member or as kin, knowing nothing about him, knowing he doesn't understand them or their customs.

It's the 21st century, there should be no more barriers between the people of earth.



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Count Chocula
Ask the Native Americans what happens when a culture is faced with an overwhelming and unchecked tide of immigration.


Hi there. I'm card-carrying Choctaw, and I've engaged in long study of my and my cousins' history. So let me break this down for you.

Immigration is a very different thing from a systemic government-organized genocide.

Let me say that again. Native Americans were the victims of intentional genocide, not immigration.

Native Americans had two strikes against them; vulnerability to the plagues brought by Europeans (and to a lesser extent, African slaves) and the intent of the invaders to massacre and eradicate the Indians. Had it simply been immigration, the colonies woudl have never been formed; rather, communities of Europeans would have been absorbed and integrated into largely welcoming communities of Native Americans, who greatly outnumbered the incomers.


I have no problem with multiculturalism in the USA since its already a fact and cant be reversed, however I do have a serious issue with seeing Europe swallowed up by waves of people that traditionally were fought as invaders and never regarded as anything but enemies.


You shouldn't. Europe is made of successive waves of conquerers who came from "somewhere else" - all were, in their time, regarded as completely alien and barbarous. From the Celts to the Romans to the Magyars to the Scandinavians to the Soviets. Some of the immigrant groups to Europe actually have a longer history in Europe than many European nations do (for example, Germany and Italy)

If you want some sort of sacred and pristine pure white "homeland," tough. Welcome to humanity. We move, and we screw. This is completely counter-productive to ethnic or ideological "purity."


It's a shame to see hundreds, even thousands of years of historical precedence trampled into the dirt within just a couple of generations.


No it's not. History moves forward. It never stops. Some silly people - such as the government of France - really, honestly think they can stop this progress, and lock themselves in a certain era forever. it doesn't happen like that. Countires and cultures fade, are altered, are renewed, die, are born, grow, and shrink. Think of a country. Any country. Someday, it'll be in the history book, just like Sumer and the Mexica Empire. it's an inevitability.



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 12:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by ViperChili
reply to post by Mentalistbee
 


The myth that racial diversity is a good thing is simply an emotion based thought process, not backed up by any fact whatsoever.

Since when does being a racially homogeneous equate to having a small population?


Since when is there such a thing as "racial homogeneity?" Honest question. There has never been any place in the world, except perhaps Polynesia, that has ever been racially or ethnically homogeneous. I'm afraid the one caught up in emotional ignorance is you.


Originally posted by meathed
If multiculturalism is a result of liberty, well then there goes my freedom.
Multiculturalism was meant for people to meld and mold together as one.
But this no longer seems to be the case.
Many races are immigrating to many places today, yet so many will not learn the language of their new home or even try to adapt or adopt their new countries ideals or respect their ways.
Multiculturalism means several of different cultures combining.
Some of these immigrants( and i say that with a bitter taste on my tongue) Will never respect or blend into their new home.Some will never respect our ways as long as their religion tells them so.


You're contradicting yourself. You can't say that multiculturalism is "melding and molding together as one" and then complain because people aren't bending knee to absolute ruleof whatever your particular culture is. That's stupid.

It's a two-way street. You really can't expect immigrants to abandon everything about themselves and become seamless acquisitions of your definition of your culture. it doesn't work that way. it's NEVER worked that way. And it never will work that way. So if that's your bugbear, you're just going ot be making yourself sick over some concept you have that does not mesh with reality.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join