You might have a point if it wasn't for the fact that the same thing is being repeated all over Europe.
These "cultures" were, and are, all characteristics within the Canadian culture. Thus you could speak with a person from Quebec or Newfoundland and still recognize their "Canadianness". Thats true of people within any established nation. If you were to travel to Finland or India you might see some differences but there would be no denying their shared culture in each of these countries.
But what the Canadian government tried to do, and other governments tried the same during similar times, was to ignore Canadianess. In fact one Minister said that Canada had no culture and then sought out ways to destroy it.
Myths of Immigration
You are confusing an overall culture with facets within that culture, and they might be many. But culture necessarily includes a bond among the people of a nation, multiculturalism does not..
In the example you gave of husbands forcing women into mummy suits, the LIBERAL viewpoint would be to assail it as an abrogation of individual rights. The multiculturalist approach, however, is to look the other way as long as the woman, herself, has accepted the practice of her own degradation due to the ingraned practice thereof as part and parcel of the culture in which she has been indoctrinated.
Multiculturalism, in this case, is clearly at odds with true liberalism.
No, it is not working iin Canada, Orion and I'm Canadian also. Unless Canada's policies towards Immigration soon change dramatically, or we fail to stick to the traditional rights we inherited from our forefathers, then we'll have the same problems as Europe. As evidence we can already see curtailments in place regarding free speech, a free press, and assembly.
Or anyone with functioning powers of observation.
Democracies have always accepted immigrants but it is part of the immigrants responsibility to adapt somewhat to their host country's culture, traditions and laws. Saying it is all the fault of the hosts is silly. It's wise to follow the "when in Rome" adage or resentments, and worse, tend to follow.
In the example you gave of husbands forcing women into mummy suits, the LIBERAL viewpoint would be to assail it as an abrogation of individual rights. The multiculturalist approach, however, is to look the other way as long as the woman, herself, has accepted the practice of her own degradation due to the ingraned practice thereof as part and parcel of the culture in which she has been indoctrinated.
Multiculturalism, in this case, is clearly at odds with true liberalism.
Bullz. Everyone knows them Québécois aren't real Canadianz.
We're not losing those rights because of immigration
but for the same reason the U.S. is losing them:
statist government and expansion of the powers of the aristocracy. The corporate socialism in Canada is just as bad if not worse than in the United States. Neo-liberal economic philosophy and big business are overriding individual rights, and it is mostly the neo-cons who are at the helm of that. Immigration is actually increasing at the hands of the right wing even though they simultaneously decry it. The only main difference between liberal and conservative philosophy is how the immigrants are treated after they arrive and what sorts of help they get, but honestly the differences are not that large.
This is just a trite way of saying you think you're right and I'm wrong.
No, the tradition of democracies has been to exploit immigrants.
People often attack the southern U.S. for having had slaves but places like New York were judging the admission of people like the Irish (who were called "white niggers") and the Poles based on their physical ability to do hard labour. For example the Poles were judged on shoulder width and were sent to the mines. (The word slave comes from Slav, the ethnicity.) Many immigrants in NYC lived in conditions worse than slaves in the south, i.e. having no heat in the winter. And this is all the way up to the 1890's, we're not talking proto-America here. I mention NYC because the same sorts of behaviours happened in Canada when places like Toronto were under construction.
.Our cities were built on immigration
People opposed to multicultural policy usually only do so based on racial grounds, even if they don't know it.
We bring them into our nations to exploit them as we always have because we need them, but then we simultaneously limit their social mobility because we want them to do the dirty work and we don't want them to have our privilege.
Tell me, within Germany, how many first generation Germans are in political office? How many wield any power of any kind? It's no wonder then that they form enclaves and start to hate the status quo.
If the right wing is trying to seem anti-multicultural now it's only because there are social tensions that they can play off of to get public support; but make no mistake, they fully supported the loosening of immigration policies in order to bring in fresh blood for the lower class work force.
We are losing our traditional rights in Canada because of 'militant immigration', to coin a phrase. Thus we have recently arrived immigrants saying what may or may not be published in Canadian media and the media, and individuals, are having to pay many thousands of dollars to defend their right to free speech. And of course this free speech system seems only to be working in one direction in Canada, which is against that of traditional Canadian freedoms.
can we avoid the European trap and not mention the United States when the debate does obviously not involve them?
Can't you come up with some fresh ideas of your own without regurgitating this sort of claptrap nonsense?
I'll say it any way you want. But to be taken seriously you'll first need some fresh ideas of your own based on your own experience and not that of some magazine article you happened to read while sitting in a waiting room.
Democracies, at least in North America, have been formed by immigrants. This makes no sense.
If the subject is Canada let's stay there.
Right. Our country was too. It is a nation of immigrants wanting a new life, and opportunities and freedoms they lacked elsewhere.
Ahh, but you being wiser than most, know it.
Has this been your experience or have you read this in a textbook of some kind? It's gibberish.
How many first generations anywhere hold political office? Are recent arrivals expected to hold political office solely because they just got there? Is that's all that's necessary? The question is whether or not they're being denied political office, or any other rights that other Canadians hold.
Perhaps you can name names and some specific policies here rather than just hurling empty phrases into the dark..
OK, let's say it's so.It's always cons or neo-cons who say it doesn't work.
According to the study highlighted in the article, 73 percent of Swedes see integration and immigration as a problem in the country
Swedes cite integration issues as a 'problem' - The Local
You would think the visitors would seek to integrate, especially their offspring, but it seems this hasn't happened. It's not like these guest workers arrived a few weeks ago; they've been in these countries for at least a generation, and usually for generations.Probably because Germany made little effort to accept them. They were just "guest" workers and cheap labour :roll:
I hope that Germany isn't waking up too late and will not allow themselves be intimidated by claims of intolerance and inevitable name calling. We past laws saying that separate but equal based on race is illegal so as an American I still believe we are a melting pot and as such we all blend together to make a better more solid outcome than if we were to remain separate.
We still have enclaves where some ethnic groups concentrate, and other than being a great place to by ethnic or eve exotic foods they contribute little to the over all fabric of the Nation. Locally I'm sure they contribute some but they also are the source of ethnic and gang violence.
I say Good for Merkel for having the guts to say it. The solution is another very tough question, I would have to give very serious thought to.
-- You would think the visitors would seek to integrate, especially their offspring, but it seems this hasn't happened. It's not like these guest workers arrived a few weeks ago; they've been in these countries for at least a generation, and usually for generations--
You would think the visitors would seek to integrate, especially their offspring, but it seems this hasn't happened. It's not like these guest workers arrived a few weeks ago; they've been in these countries for at least a generation, and usually for generations.
Second and third generation and they haven't integrated. Sorry, not buying it. Neither are the Swedes.No, those "guests" were seen as only that by the German's. They were not seen as Germans. That is the problem.
How can one expect a Immigrant to integrate into society when they are told they are not German? At least in US, Immigrants can claim the name of American when they are sufficently integrated. That is not possible in Germany and other countries.
1. These guest workers were never forced to go anywhere, and they came because the money was pretty good and work was plentiful.Germany allowed all those Turks and other groups in as "guest workers" to help rebuild it after the ruins of WWII because they were cheap bastards and wanted cheap labour, and then made the arrogant assumption that as soon as it was done they would eventually leave. They wanted to have their cake and eat it. When it was clear that they would not as there are now generations who live there, the government is scrambling to deal with the concept of multiculturalism in the first place ... :roll:
2. I don't know if it's an arrogant assumption... it's what government "planned" for, and once again... government failed. I'm sure the guest workers were told before what the score was; could be wrong. Don't know the original law that brought them in; do you?
3. Cake and eat it? And you claim they "would not" leave... so why not integrate then? Especially after several generations? Want to talk about having your cake and eat it???!!!
.
This is called the melting pot theory of which multiculturalism is the opposing force. The purpose of multiculturalism is to divide nations and break them down, by dividing people along issues that can't be changed. You can't change the race of a person, so you make this the wedge issue.[
No, it is not working iin Canada, Orion and I'm Canadian also. Unless Canada's policies towards Immigration soon change dramatically, or we fail to stick to the traditional rights we inherited from our forefathers, then we'll have the same problems as Europe. As evidence we can already see curtailments in place regarding free speech, a free press, and assembly.
Or anyone with functioning powers of observation.
I guess we have them in Canada too, folks.
Democracies have always accepted immigrants but it is part of the immigrants responsibility to adapt somewhat to their host country's culture, traditions and laws. Saying it is all the fault of the hosts is silly. It's wise to follow the "when in Rome" adage or resentments, and worse, tend to follow.
I don't agree. The reason why liberals are against forcing women to remove their burkas has its roots in feminism. We think that by forcing them to take it off that we are freeing them, but if it is not their empowered choice to do so it is actually moving against their freedom to choose, which is the entire basis of being in the free world in the first place. It is essentially a contradiction of our own western notions of individual rights.
How can you integrate into a society that tries to keep you separate?
In exactly the same way that the continuation of slavery in this country in the 19th century would have represented civil rights. You see, since so many house slaves expressed satisfaction with their lot, then supporting slavery was really the way to show your support for the empowerment of African Americans to make that choice! After all, slavery was the entire basis of the free world in the first place!
The hatred for Muslims in the western world is higher than it has been in more than a century and so this new found concern for women who wear burkas is based on that and not much else. Suddenly everyone is an 'expert' on Islam and what is good for these women but it's just a bunch of mainstream BS.
Second and third generation and they haven't integrated. Sorry, not buying it. Neither are the Swedes.
1. These guest workers were never forced to go anywhere, and they came because the money was pretty good and work was plentiful.
2. I don't know if it's an arrogant assumption... it's what government "planned" for, and once again... government failed. I'm sure the guest workers were told before what the score was; could be wrong. Don't know the original law that brought them in; do you?
3. Cake and eat it? And you claim they "would not" leave... so why not integrate then? Especially after several generations? Want to talk about having your cake and eat it???!!!
You ignore the most important part of his post:
So....
A right wing german claims says that Multiculturalism has failed. That immigrants are "not welcome"...
And some of you in this thread are having a bukkake session over this, claiming that she's absolutely right...
Since when did
A: The conservatives who support her claims in this thread, start listening to right wing germans.
B; The conservatives who support her claims in this thread, start listening to the leader of a "socialist" nation
So....
A right wing german claims says that Multiculturalism has failed. That immigrants are "not welcome"...
And some of you in this thread are having a bukkake session over this, claiming that she's absolutely right...
Since when did
A: The conservatives who support her claims in this thread, start listening to right wing germans.
B; The conservatives who support her claims in this thread, start listening to the leader of a "socialist" nation
That's what multiculturalism IS -- preserving the distinctness of different cultures rather than encouraging assimilation.
In exactly the same way that the continuation of slavery in this country in the 19th century would have represented civil rights. You see, since so many house slaves expressed satisfaction with their lot, then supporting slavery was really the way to show your support for the empowerment of African Americans to make that choice! After all, slavery was the entire basis of the free world in the first place!
Yep -- let's use the fact that some have been beaten down so thoroughly as to accept their own second class status to support an entire system of degradation and then claim we are actually supporting the opposite of what we are supporting.
Hey, look, Orion -- I found a few gay people who think gay people are mentally ill and should be institutionalized. To show my support, I'm going to put you in a straight jacket and lock you away.
What all of you self-proclaimed study has failed to show you is that your support for the most regressive elements within a population hurts most those you have convinced yourself that you are somehow supporting. I'm reminded of those who support the corrupt Mullahs in Iran under the misapprehension they are somehow supporting Muslims in that all you are hurting are those people struggling for rights. You can toot your own horn and brag all you want about your education, but the repetition of hackneyed dogma does not an intellectual make. It is the ability to see through the sophistry and offer something original that is the true mark of an intellect you are so eager to claim for yourself.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?