reply to post by buster2010
That post must require a lot of cognitive dissonance to write. I don't think you understand how a melting pot society works.
Pro Tip: It doesn't mean a person's native language/culture/outlook/economics/ethnicity/religion trumps the host society's, regardless of how
patchwork that host society's formula is.
People discussing the subversiveness of a media broadcast that was watched by so many is anything but petty. The media has been one of the prime
drivers of societal change in the last 50 years, almost without compare.
Putting it in a smaller context always makes the situation more apparent.
Example of a melting pot society that doesn't work that many people seem to think what's right. Get a group of 20 people. Each one speaks a
different language from a different country with a different culture. Get them to work together on a project. Have them compete against a group of
20 other people all from the same country with the same language and culture to achieve an objective. The "multiculti" group, if and when it achieves
the objective, will be well behind the cohesive group. Because of their different perspectives, their solution or approach may be more creative, but
fraught with problems.
Example of a melting pot society that does work that many people seem to think is racist, or insular, or "petty". Get a group of 20 people, each one
speaks a different language from a different country with a different culture. Get them all to learn one language and agree to a contract that they
think suits them so they have the same general outlook as to what they expect in the future from one another and themselves. Now have them compete
against a group of 20 people with the same language from the same country the same culture to achieve an objective. The multicultural group will be
very close if not right there with the homogenous one, and their solution or approach will still be more creative if not better.
Now, get both groups to add a single new person. This single person speaks a different language, has a different culture, is from a different country
than all the other ones. What do the two groups do? Let them just hang out and speak their different language and have their different culture that
may run perpendicular to the groups already agreed upon expectations? The new person would be dead weight if that happened. The multicultural group
gets into negotiations with the new member, group expectations are changed, individual expectations are changed, and compromise takes place to where
all parties are satisfied. In the homogenous group, the new individual must assimilate or become dead weight, which is basically what is happening in
Europe. Most immigrants claim some kind of assistance/pension/asylum stipend and are in their 2nd or even 3rd generation status with no meaningful
contribution to the society all the while living in self imposed ghettos. Multiculturalism has failed in Europe. It didn't really need it in the
Multiculturalism that works is about comparable to homogeneity that works. Both have their pluses and minuses. The US happens to be the former.
I think the reason Americans are getting upset over the ad is they feel it is pushing for the acceptance of the melting pot example that doesn't work.
Whether or not that's what the ad conveyed is neither here not there, but that's how a lot of people took it and defenders of the ad have certainly
been defending it with the non-working example of "melting pot", which in the eyes of those offended by the ad, only confirms their suspicions.
edit on 5-2-2014 by Galvatron because: (no reason given)