• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

UK PM: Multiculturalism has failed

One doesn't need to refute modern day British Multiculturalist dogma point by point, as the hypocritical double standards upon which it is predicated are indefensable if one simply adopts the position that all people should be treated equally and with the same expectations for behavior.

I find it odd that in other threads you have championed the need for establishing consitant values when regarding the way we look at different countries, but you are unwilling to extend such notions to those living within a country.

Who has even doubted it? Please quote back to me where I have advocated applying different standards to people or have shown myself willing to accept different standards of behaviour from people according to their ethnicity. It would make your argument so easy were this the case. I'm kind of guessing you're not going to find anything. The kind of 'example' RoP likes to trot out is, as I've demonstrated above, laughably easy to refute.

Okay Gardener. Here's a much better idea, sparked by that other thread on the positions of your opponents, for the next day or two, I'll take your position and will argue that Multi-culturalism in modern Britain is out of control and threatening to undermine social cohesion. You argue that there is nothing to fear from multi-culturalism, and that far from damaging Britain, it has created the stable, cohesive, peaceful Britain we can all see. What do you say? Multi-cultural Freaky Monday.
 
Who has even doubted it? Please quote back to me where I have advocated applying different standards to people or have shown myself willing to accept different standards of behaviour from people according to their ethnicity. It would make your argument so easy were this the case. I'm kind of guessing you're not going to find anything. The kind of 'example' RoP likes to trot out is, as I've demonstrated above, laughably easy to refute.

Okay Gardener. Here's a much better idea, sparked by that other thread on the positions of your opponents, for the next day or two, I'll take your position and will argue that Multi-culturalism in modern Britain is out of control and threatening to undermine social cohesion. You argue that there is nothing to fear from multi-culturalism, and that far from damaging Britain, it has created the stable, cohesive, peaceful Britain we can all see. What do you say? Multi-cultural Freaky Monday.

That's a little too freaky for me, my friend. I've never been one for devils advocacy.

Since multiculturalism is predicated upon preserving cultural differences rather than forming social cohesion, there is really no possible way to argue FOR it given the parameters you have listed.
 
That's a little too freaky for me, my friend. I've never been one for devils advocacy.

Since multiculturalism is predicated upon preserving cultural differences rather than forming social cohesion, there is really no possible way to argue FOR it given the parameters you have listed.

What parameters would you place on it? I'm willing to argue your position, despite the fact that I believe that the assimilationist approach is cultural imperialism and creates a society of Stepford Wives pledging alleigance to something that means nothing. Why don't you have a go at arguing mine?
 
What parameters would you place on it? I'm willing to argue your position, despite the fact that I believe that the assimilationist approach is cultural imperialism and creates a society of Stepford Wives pledging alleigance to something that means nothing. Why don't you have a go at arguing mine?

I base my positions on a consistant value system, and arguing for multiculturalism would place me in the position of defending double standards.

I would not feel right about myself doing that.
 
http://www.debatepolitics.com/europe/91870-uk-pm-multiculturalism-has-failed-40.html#post1059298783


There are other places to live, I suspect you and Britain would both be much happier with an amicable divorce. I suspect Alaska might suit you well.

There's the real Lib-Left totalitarianism coming out, in which it's 'treason' to criticise politically-correct MultiCulturalism and that expulsion from the country for such 'revisionism' is apt. I've had it said to me before and really shows up the inability of the opposition to properly handle debate on a level they haven't scripted for.



For the articles, on which I do appreciate the replies, the first actually states that racial dogma is the catalyst for picking and choosing jobs, something which the howler monkeys would scream the likes of the Prison Service right through the courts for if it was any other race we were talking about. And 'positive discrimination' is the de-facto PC policy when it comes to massaging the people who actually still have a job in Britain.

If 'educated' is code for 'wrong colour', then I suppose that's explicable.



And there is indeed a policy barring whites from adopting: Adoption: 'We don't need white couples' - Telegraph

Not enough kids requiring adoption? Plenty enough to be run through the social engineering mill I notice!
 
Last edited:
There's the real Lib-Left totalitarianism coming out, in which it's 'treason' to criticise politically-correct MultiCulturalism and that expulsion from the country for such 'revisionism' is apt. I've had it said to me before and really shows up the inability of the opposition to properly handle debate on a level they haven't scripted for.

I know that playing the persecuted martyr is your favourite game RoP, but really...:lamo
Even you must be able to see the irony in playing the victim here. Who mentioned expulsion? Think of it as friendly advice. If you want to stay in Britain and suffer those constant slings and arrows, go ahead! For someone so good at dishing out insults, you're VERY thin-skinned.
 
I base my positions on a consistant value system, and arguing for multiculturalism would place me in the position of defending double standards.

I would not feel right about myself doing that.

That seems a little po-faced, if you don't mind me saying, but so be it. It wasn't the kind of suggestion I'd have made to RoP or Grant, because I think they'd be incapable of it. I thought you might be more open-minded. Not to worry.
 
Bwahahahah!! You're kidding! You're using far-right American propaganda to attack Britain? That strikes me as vaguely treasonable. You really must hate modern Britain that much that you'd rather listen to Pat Robertson than real commentators.

Is there anything in that video, or anything the commentators say, that is untrue?

That's the whole point of debate, isn't it? Whether or not the comments are true?

It seems that self censorship by the European leftists, against the fear of a some "right wing" bogeyman, will continue. You've moved from moral cowardice into another area of whimpering appeasement altogether, which allows the murders and violence against women to continue apace as well as completing the destruction of everything that Britain once proudly stood for.

Britain is moving away from multiculturalism, all right. and towards a single culture.And it looks like that single culture will be Islamic.
 
That seems a little po-faced, if you don't mind me saying, but so be it. It wasn't the kind of suggestion I'd have made to RoP or Grant, because I think they'd be incapable of it. I thought you might be more open-minded. Not to worry.

Strange isn't it that one type of person on here could easily make the argument for the opposite side and in many cases actually make a better argument whilst the other side can barely countenance it. Who has the truly open mind?
 
Think of it as friendly advice. If you want to stay in Britain and suffer those constant slings and arrows, go ahead!

Friendly advice? It's either that or having my windows put through I suppose!

And who says I'm thin-skinned? I'm having a wonderful time. After all I'm still here, especially as I see my question hasn't yet been answered.

(Though I will say I was thinner skinned and clumsier on my feet when I was first here in 2006. PeteEU used to give me a right old drubbing back then. But I've learned a bit since I returned in 2009.)
 
Last edited:
And who says I'm thin-skinned? I'm having a wonderful time.
Then why all the crying? This sounds a lot like whining to me:
There's the real Lib-Left totalitarianism coming out, in which it's 'treason' to criticise politically-correct MultiCulturalism and that expulsion from the country for such 'revisionism' is apt.
And then...
I see my question hasn't yet been answered.
What question? You mean this one?
Why's all that the coke for the fire of a failed Multi-Cultural Society?
It's probably gone unanswered because it sounds a lot like a rhetorical question to me. You're certainly not interested in any answer I could give you.
 
Then why all the crying?

If I was crying I'd have cried off ages ago. I think you're the whiner. Indeed, calling someone a traitor who should leave the country is far easier than answering a set question, regardless of context.


You're certainly not interested in any answer I could give you.

Try me. Indeed, what justification could there possibly be for denouncing a schoolboy to the race gestapo or locking up a schoolgirl? Or indeed any other of the myriad points raised by the data linked-to.
 
If I was crying I'd have cried off ages ago. I think you're the whiner. Indeed, calling someone a traitor who should leave the country is far easier than answering a set question, regardless of context.
Because calling someone a traitorous, treasonous swine is something only a cowardly lefty would do...

Try me. Indeed, what justification could there possibly be for denouncing a schoolboy to the race gestapo or locking up a schoolgirl? Or indeed any other of the myriad points raised by the data linked-to.
The day you link to simple data, as opposed to far-right propaganda sites, is the day I'll start pandering to your agenda. I've refuted quite enough of your propaganda links for one night.
 
Because calling someone a traitorous, treasonous swine is something only a cowardly lefty would do...

Since when were people like you interested in treason? Especially when you have no sense of patriotism and fancy the idea of British sovereignty and territories being signed away, with even British subjects expelled from their own soil.

Very Multi Cultural.



I've refuted quite enough of your propaganda links for one night.

I never noticed you started. And considering you consider mainstream conservative newspapers as far-right 'enemies of modern Britain', no wonder there's a struggle with that handicap.

I'm not surprised you told me you thought the question was rhetorical. Because there is no justification for the things mentioned. Though I suppose the next logical question is to ask why places like Pakistan or Zimbabwe are 'hideously brown' and to wonder when the appropriate race quotas and diversity training courses will sort that.....
 
Since when were people like you interested in treason? Especially when you have no sense of patriotism and fancy the idea of British sovereignty and territories being signed away, with even British subjects expelled from their own soil.
It kind of depends what you are being loyal or, conversely, traitorous towards. I don't have much loyalty to a nation state, it's true. They are artificial constructs of some 2-400 years vintage and not really worth much in and of themselves. Even the language their supporters use, "British subjects" suggests a state of semi-enslavement which doesn't sit well with me.

I never noticed you started. And considering you consider mainstream conservative newspapers as far-right 'enemies of modern Britain', no wonder there's a struggle with that handicap.
Oh, I think I dismissed a couple of your Lord Haw-haw tracts a few pages on this very thread. And quite easily too.

I'm not surprised you told me you thought the question was rhetorical. Because there is no justification for the things mentioned. Though I suppose the next logical question is to ask why places like Pakistan or Zimbabwe are 'hideously brown' and to wonder when the appropriate race quotas and diversity training courses will sort that...
Oops! Sorry! I missed that. The part where we were meant to accept that Pakistan and Zimbabwe were operating superior political cultures to Britain's. You're saying, quite clearly and vociferously, that their intransigent and discriminatory attitude to diversity is the one Britain should be following, that Britain is doing something wrong in accepting and even celebrating diversity, while these paragons of functional politics - Pakistan and Zimbabwe, lest we forget - are the models for how we SHOULD behave.

Now who is appeasing the Islamist agenda?
 
Last edited:
And considering you consider mainstream conservative newspapers as far-right 'enemies of modern Britain', no wonder there's a struggle with that handicap.

that would be this paper
The Daily Mail's front page of 8 July 1934, featured the headline "Hurrah for the Blackshirts".[51] The Mail also referred to Hitler's "sturdy young Nazis"

Daily Mail - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anyway I think you need to chill out a bit so a song for you

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eBT6OSr1TI
 
It kind of depends what you are being loyal or, conversely, traitorous towards.

OK. Which country are you loyal to and how?



Oh, I think I dismissed a couple of your Lord Haw-haw tracts a few pages on this very thread. And quite easily too.

I agree that you thought so. Probably best to agree to differ then.



Oops! Sorry! I missed that. The part where we were meant to accept that Pakistan and Zimbabwe were operating superior political cultures to Britain's.

You mean these cultures aren't of equal worth after all? What a blow that will be to the Pakistani Muslim Community.

I'm just asking whether Zimbabwe or Pakistan will be told to 'celebrate diversity' in the same ham-fisted way we're supposed to enjoy. I wouldn't for one moment dream of telling them they're too 'over-represented' in their own homelands and thus need to be curbed. Nor do I think the same's acceptable here.



that would be this paper

High words for a communist sympathiser and part-time apologist for Islam. Next time they glorify a Nazi in this day and age I'll be sure to let you know.

Interesting song though. Only a few hundred views before it hits the million.
 
Because calling someone a traitorous, treasonous swine is something only a cowardly lefty would do...



The day you link to simple data, as opposed to far-right propaganda sites, is the day I'll start pandering to your agenda. I've refuted quite enough of your propaganda links for one night.

Islam is an ideology dominated by a corrupt moral code that is unable to come to grips with itself and is unable to bear responsibility for the barbaric actions of its members, much less temper their impulses.
 
Islam is an ideology dominated by a corrupt moral code that is unable to come to grips with itself and is unable to bear responsibility for the barbaric actions of its members, much less temper their impulses.

Are you suggesting you are not a student or representative of far right propaganda?
 
Now who is appeasing the Islamist agenda?

Austria for one.

Austrian Court Upholds Islam

Denmark for another.

Lars Man Standing - By Mark Steyn - The Corner - National Review Online

Holland for yet another.

Gates of Vienna: Wilders Is Charged Yet Again

And, of course, the UN.

http://bible-matters.com/further-efforts-by-the-u-n-to-ban-criticizing-islam/

While charging people with heresy was thought to have gone out of fashion in Europe centuries ago, the Left has revived it with an upbeat enthusiasm they haven't felt since the fall of the Berlin Wall sent them into the doldrums over two decades ago. Here, finally, is another cause that they can support, a cause that they can wear proudly on their brown shirt sleeves.
 
Last edited:
Moderator's Warning:
Knock off the personal attacks.
 
That seems a little po-faced, if you don't mind me saying, but so be it. It wasn't the kind of suggestion I'd have made to RoP or Grant, because I think they'd be incapable of it. I thought you might be more open-minded. Not to worry.

I don't know if I'd say it was due to a lack of open mindedness so much as it is a certain sense of self-knowledge leading me to have more than a little doubt I could carry it out witout trying to make a parody of it. I can see myself reducing the entire exercize to a farce.
 
The American Spectator : Multiculturalism Has Failed
By R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. on 2.17.11
[........]
So how did the Europeans end up with multiculturalism, a multiculturalism that seems to favor Islam over other cultures? The Germans have outlawed Nazi culture. The Italians are not particularly hospitable to fascism, and as I have already pointed out the French are appalled at cannibalism and do not even have a good word for McDonald's or Kentucky Fried Chicken. I think it started with the way they teach their history. Militarism, colonialism, and racism are all prominent ingredients of European history books, particularly British history. For that matter, American history stresses these ingredients also. I have been reading American college history texts and they present an alarmingly ugly view of the Western past.

By presenting the West as repugnant and the other civilizations as our prey, particularly during colonial days but also in modern times, we encourage such social pathologies as jihadism. President Sarkozy says he is not going to tolerate the kind of fundamentalism in France that leads ultimately to jihadism. How is he going to achieve this without calling for a fundamental reform in how French history is taught?

Then there is another matter. All the aforementioned statesmen and women are democrats and espouse democratic values, but there are fashions of thought in the West that do not like democratic values. For want of a better term, they are fashions of thought that follow political correctness. The politically correct do not like free speech. For that matter, the adherents to political correctness do not like many of the values of the West. What are Mr. Sarkozy and Mr. Cameron going to do about them? They are going to be even trickier to deal with than the practitioners of jihad.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom