Is multiculturism good?

[XAOTL]

As it was asked of in another debate thread.

Here you are able to debate weather you belive if Multiculturism is benificial to a country in anyway. But seeing how (potentially) volitile this thread can be. I would ask that no one would use ANY Racist terms.

[PokeTrance]

Alright, first of all I too want to make sure this thread won't turn into a racist thread. It's useless and insulting when talking racist sh*t.

OT: (I'll focus on Europe)
A history lesson first.
It's 1946. Europe is nearly blown to pieces and the world is being divided into influence spheres between the communists and capitalists. (Soviet Union&allies vs USA, UK, France & allies)
Before WWII, Europe was mostly homocultural. What I mean is that every county in Europe had a people living in it with their own specific culture.
However, as we've seen now is that one of the reasons WWII started was homoculturalism, represented by nationalist movements in several European countries. (but, outside Europe too, like Japan)
Examples of European Nationalist powers: Nazi-Germany, Fascist Italy, Fascist Spain, Soviet-Union(arguable).

After WWII, this political idea of 'one people, one nation being superior to others' was considered dangerous and therefore amongst other (extreme)nationalist ideas banned from the political business. (NSDAP dissolved, NSB dissolved [Dutch nationalist movement] etc.)
Now where did multiculturalism started? European nations' industry was mostly destroyed and depended highly on either the USA, Soviet-Union or their colonies. While the nations were building their industries again, we saw that a huge amount of refugees went to Canada, USA, Australia and several countries in South America to search for their luck there. At that time, it was understandable.
There wasn't enough work in Europe, so governments promoted this.

Sidenote: the UN and ECSC were founed.

However, the early 60ies were times of booming economies, and the industrialised countries needed more workers. (industrialised countires were the north/west european countries)
They attracted workers from the south of europe, like Spaniards, Italians and Greeks. This was the start of multiculturalism. It is well known that some of these people were discriminated, underpaid and not recognised as 'real' citizens.
The booming economy kept booming and the amount of extra workers from said countries wasn't enough. The result? Liberals demanded open borders for non-european workers (workers from eastern-europe couldn't enter western-europe because of the 'Iron Curtain'/Cold War)

While eventually, the South-European workers returned to their home countires, the workers from outside Europe did not. And here's where we've come to the core of this post.
The latest years, we've seen a revival of right wing ideas throughout the whole of Europe. Le Pen in France, Berlusconi in Italy and Wilders in my own country.
Also in the UK, but I think most of you can talk about that better than me... I can only judge from the looks of it, like last election results in London; socialists lost and Conservatives won etc.

Anyway, this revival of rightwingers is disputed by some, cheered by others. But most of the people now acknowledge that there are problems that the political left haven't done anything against, the big issue of them being cultural changes.

I believe that too many cultural differences aren't good. The one thing that binds a people, is namely their culture. And that's what is being dismantled, or even rejected.
===
This post focussed on Europe, feel free to comment and argue me. I'll say this again, this is a discussion, nothing else.

[Wolfofdoom]

I will say yes it is good. But then again I have a multicultural background as do most people these days so I am going to be a little biast

[XAOTL]

You make a good argument altough Europe is now ndoubtedly mostly mtlicultural. There are problems that arise from it, bt also many positives. The EU has enforced the idea of 'one Europe' with free movement within the EU. Foreigners bring in valuble skills, new ideas, work ethos. And for the less skilled workers, they do the jobs that the 'natives' feel to high to do them selvs.

p.s. the only reason the Conservatives are coming to power is due to the current economic crisis, wich Labour hasn't been sorted out all that well.

[PokeTrance]

May 19, 2008 18:48:25 GMT 12 XAOTL said:

You make a good argument

Thanks.

altough Europe is now ndoubtedly mostly mtlicultural. There are problems that arise from it, bt also many positives.

Some positives, but I think there are a lot more negatives than positives.

The EU has enforced the idea of 'one Europe' with free movement within the EU.

Cool, worth a thread of it's own.
I think the EU in the way it is now, is not the wa it should be. We are headed to One European State. It's something I really reject. I agree that the common market was profitable for most of all EU countries, (especially my own) but I don't see why this Union had to be made political too.

Foreigners bring in valuble skills, new ideas, work ethos. And for the less skilled workers, they do the jobs that the 'natives' feel to high to do them selvs.

I heard this argument many times before. But there have been some reports about that, and here in the Netherlands it was proven that unlike some people believed (and still believe) the costs of maintaining foreigners and refugees were much higher then the profits. It basically crushes this argument.
About the work 'that 'natives' don't want to do: I agree that the current labour ethos isn't in favour of jobs in the lower ranks. (if you know what I mean)
This is something our government has to stimulate and restore the appreciation of this work.

p.s. the only reason the Conservatives are coming to power is due to the current economic crisis, wich Labour hasn't been sorted out all that well.

Thanks for this info.

[XAOTL]

We can't really make a one europe thread cause there won't be many people to discuss it. Seeing as we seem to be the only ones talking about it for now.

I think the EU in the way it is now, is not the wa it should be. We are headed to One European State. It's something I really reject. I agree that the common market was profitable for most of all EU countries, (especially my own) but I don't see why this Union had to be made political too.

Because all around it enforces that one ideal. 'the European dream'. Europe is growing, and with the political and economic binds we are the greatest economy in the world. The European dream is bieing forged, and growing in strength (allbeit rather slowly) and the 'one Europe' is becoming a place where big businesses globally want a piece of.
The EU dose something that has never been done before. Creating one state where all of its members maintain their individuality, yet remain secure within the commnity.

I'm personally dissapointed of how the U.K. hasn't accepted the ideal, and the result is the effect of the credit crunch, turning out to be quite harsh here, in comparison.

in the U.K. you don't go for Fish and Chips. You're lucky if you find one place that sells the stuff. You go for a kebab. Get a curry. All things only bought on by Multiculturism. There is no such thing as British identity as the only one identity there, and the thought of immigrants taking all our 'jerbs' any more, we got over that in the 90's. Personally i think that this problem is old here, seeing as we (u.k.) are members of the Commonwealth, and the free movement ideal was already enforced for us and other former Birtish colonies.

When you say 'costs' I would like to know what costs they are exactly. Other than the social costs that I can not deny.

[PokeTrance]

May 20, 2008 8:33:21 GMT 12 XAOTL said:

We can't really make a one europe thread cause there won't be many people to discuss it. Seeing as we seem to be the only ones talking about it for now.

I think you're right.

[...]

Because all around it enforces that one ideal. 'the European dream'. Europe is growing, and with the political and economic binds we are the greatest economy in the world. The European dream is bieing forged, and growing in strength (allbeit rather slowly) and the 'one Europe' is becoming a place where big businesses globally want a piece of.

You've just summed up some of the things why 'Europe' isn't popular amongst most people throughout Europe.
It's mainly the 'elite' that want this to happen. Together with 'big business', politicians and elites are the ones profiting directly from a politically unified Europe. It is them who are, as you said, forcing the common people to 'accept' that a political unified Europe is inevitable.
On a sidenote: this may be one of the reasons for the upcoming nationalism from the latest years too.
Further, the reason why Europe is that much enforced by politicians is different for each party/ideology. Take liberals for example. The only reason they want an unified Europe is because of the cheap labour in Eastern Europe, and yes it is a noble goal to want the Poles, Hungarians, Romanians and what else become more wealthy, but I think it's a bit naive to think that's one of the reasons for letting them join the EU. (as I said before, cheap labour)
Politicians should do the best for their own people first, what big business wants is usually only good for them and their shareholders.

The EU dose something that has never been done before. Creating one state where all of its members maintain their individuality, yet remain secure within the commnity.

The new constitution which is most likely to be at force within a few months (when Ireland accepts it) speaks of one constitution(well, it's renamed, but basically the same), one flag, one anthem etc.
These are all signs of trying to create 'Europeans' from all of us. But it's, when looking on our common history, likely that this attempt will fail. There is no such thing that binds us 'Europeans'.
Several countries have tried to unify Europe. Do I need to mention them?

I'm personally dissapointed of how the U.K. hasn't accepted the ideal, and the result is the effect of the credit crunch, turning out to be quite harsh here, in comparison.

Really, you should feel lucky. Clearly, the only reason for you to support the EU is for economical benefit? Isn't that a bit selfish? Then again: why do we need a political unified Europe?

in the U.K. you don't go for Fish and Chips. You're lucky if you find one place that sells the stuff. You go for a kebab. Get a curry. All things only bought on by Multiculturism. There is no such thing as British identity as the only one identity there, and the thought of immigrants taking all our 'jerbs' any more, we got over that in the 90's. Personally i think that this problem is old here, seeing as we (u.k.) are members of the Commonwealth, and the free movement ideal was already enforced for us and other former Birtish colonies.

Well, the UK may be a different case because of the Commonwealth you mentioned.
Coming to the point: why is it that the only argument for multiculturalism is more variety in the kitchen? I rather think that's the effect of globalisation.
Multiculture is, in my opinion, the huge amount of Pakistanis, Marocs, Turks and what you can mention who import their culture into our countries. That's the one thing I think is a failure, people who come here for work and a better future are welcome, but accept that you are to live in a Western country, with it's liberal ideas (like freedom of speech, equalty of men and women etc.) and respect our culture.
If I were to live in, let's say Algeria, I would accept that my wife won't be able to be treated equally as me, that I can't find a Church or be able to buy an 18+ magazine...

When you say 'costs' I would like to know what costs they are exactly. Other than the social costs that I can not deny.

Well, we agree on those social costs then.
There are various other costs too. political refugees need a place to stay, fraud with marriages arranged in their home countries, and more stuff like that.

[XAOTL]

Really, you should feel lucky. Clearly, the only reason for you to support the EU is for economical benefit? Isn't that a bit selfish? Then again: why do we need a political unified Europe?

Well with that we now have had our house prises soar three fold compared to the two fold in america. Whilst the rest of Europe are closer to other trading markets such as the curently booming China, which can help them get out of this crisis. We remain stranded. We've not gained much favour across the Atlantic, and the countries that we should be close to havn't fully accepted us.

why is it that the only argument for multiculturalism is more variety in the kitchen? I rather think that's the effect of globalisation.

Globalisation comes from the effect of large businesses. The reason i chose food is becase these foods are usually bought on by smaller retailers, who are usually foreign. The people who cook in a resteraunt come from that country, with knowledge of their dishes, and would not be bought forth only by Globalisation, wich is the expansion of larger businesses.

Globalisation is more in the way of Microsoft, or starbucks. But when you go to the kebab place, it was only bought on the that persons culture (it's not like he came from Florida), and its business booms from the publics acceptance of said culture. With acceptance comes knowledge, one of the reasons why rash actions against race are not widely accepted around of Europe. From the knowledge of such things. In comparison to the rather narrow minded view that Europe used to have when it was homogenous, as you said. and other cultures were regarded as barbaric, and inferior. Things which we all know bought on the slave trade.

One of the down sides that are known of are when there is high unemployment in such an area.

In my opinion Multiculturism is the existance of many cultures within one area. Maintaining their own personal identity, whilst accepting where they are, and the place they live.

Down sides would include single race areas, where one race is predominant, over others, without a balanced mix of people.

As they say you gotta take the good with the bad.

But the good includes greater choice, and a wider world to choose from, instead from a narrow one religion one colour morality.

There are various other costs too. political refugees need a place to stay, fraud with marriages arranged in their home countries, and more stuff like that.

But they won't really be all that big for countrys that would gain great working revenue. as well as greater international reputation.

There is no such thing that binds us 'Europeans'.

That's the e.u. Countries creating an allience not by military victory, or triumphs. But to ensure that the horrors of the past would never come again. The reason why many countries in Europe chose to negotiate rather than fight. why many held back before going ot Iraq. and for those that did... well what did they get?
There is nothing that binds us as one country. Never. But the E.u. is a way to move forward as a group.

[PokeTrance]

First of all, I want to say I think it's been an interesting debate so far... Keep it up.

May 21, 2008 1:45:01 GMT 12 XAOTL said:

[...]

Well with that we now have had our house prises soar three fold compared to the two fold in america. Whilst the rest of Europe are closer to other trading markets such as the curently booming China, which can help them get out of this crisis. We remain stranded. We've not gained much favour across the Atlantic, and the countries that we should be close to havn't fully accepted us.

But this problem as you name it, isn't from the latest years. The last century, the UK lost most of it's power, both economically and military. (in comparison with before) IMHO the UK is still looking for a new balance between the glorious past and the uncertain future. These problems are for the most part created or passed on by your earlier leaders.

Globalisation comes from the effect of large businesses. The reason i chose food is becase these foods are usually bought on by smaller retailers, who are usually foreign. The people who cook in a resteraunt come from that country, with knowledge of their dishes, and would not be bought forth only by Globalisation, wich is the expansion of larger businesses.

Globalisation is more in the way of Microsoft, or starbucks. But when you go to the kebab place, it was only bought on the that persons culture (it's not like he came from Florida), and its business booms from the publics acceptance of said culture. With acceptance comes knowledge, one of the reasons why rash actions against race are not widely accepted around of Europe. From the knowledge of such things.

That is incorrect. I will refer to wikipedia for this:
Globalisation
As you can read there, globalisation is more than just business expansion. It's present in our daily life on much more occasions, and the new things we can buy in kebab stores and whatever are also part of it.
But multiculturalism is something different, although it is true that this is also a side effect that takes place when glabalisation takes place.
Globalisation and multiculturalism go hand in hand, actually.

In comparison to the rather narrow minded view that Europe used to have when it was homogenous, as you said. and other cultures were regarded as barbaric, and inferior. Things which we all know bought on the slave trade.

I think that point you make here is rather insulting... Please, have a better look on global history...
You do know that slavery is something that existed since the early beginning of so called 'civilisation'?
So it's a false argument.
edit: I want to add that slavery was abolished by all European nations by 1900.

One of the down sides that are known of are when there is high unemployment in such an area.

Yes, and it's disgusting that we tolerate that. Why import more people while we have that many unemployed within our borders? Most of those unemployed people are drawing social benefits too.
We should work on this unemployment problem first, before thinking of something else.

In my opinion Multiculturism is the existance of many cultures within one area. Maintaining their own personal identity, whilst accepting where they are, and the place they live.

Having a personal identity is good, but accepting that there are other cultures that can exist next to our own, is naive. And it shouldn't be a goal too, because you reject your own culture indirectly.

Down sides would include single race areas, where one race is predominant, over others, without a balanced mix of people.

As they say you gotta take the good with the bad.

I won't take that 'bad' thing. I think it's bad for all of us when getto's are being formed. And I know how hard it is to live in it. Here in Holland, some huge cities 'foreigners' rate is over 50%. When you are walking through such neighbourhoods, tears get into your eyes. Like the Schilderswijk in Den Haag. (used to live there)
The only solution to social isolation, which is an effect of gettoforming, is to spread foreigners across the land and 'mix' 'em with 'natives'. That way they'll assimilate and learn how to behave to Dutch people, talk like Dutch people and eventually become a Dutch citizen that can't be distinguished from any other citizen.

But the good includes greater choice, and a wider world to choose from, instead from a narrow one religion one colour morality.

How is respecting your own culture 'narrowminded'? I think it's narrowminded to think like that...
Some people aren't aware anymore of their common history... it's a pity. Multiculturalism destroys everything that makes the UK the UK, Germany Germany etc.

But they won't really be all that big for countrys that would gain great working revenue. as well as greater international reputation.

If people want to stay here, there should be one rule: 'accept that you're a guest in this country, behave like it'.
Like I explained above somewhere.
And well, if we gain 'prestige' by destoying our culture... then no. By the way, this prestige you speak of... it's not as if we can't get prestige by any other way. Not to mention if we really need that sort of 'prestige' anyway.

[...]

That's the e.u. Countries creating an allience not by military victory, or triumphs. But to ensure that the horrors of the past would never come again. The reason why many countries in Europe chose to negotiate rather than fight. why many held back before going ot Iraq. and for those that did... well what did they get?
There is nothing that binds us as one country. Never. But the E.u. is a way to move forward as a group.

Well, it seems we think in completely different ways.
I mentioned it earlier in this thread, but one of the things that binds people in a country is culture. And I see you are rejecting yours... It's your choise, but I think it's a pity.

The ECSC was founded for that purpose, yes. And now it's called the EU. The difference is the political unity. We were an unified Europe economically, because of the reasons you mentioned. At that time they didn't thought about a political union at all. Because it wasn't necessary.
NATO was founded, WEU founded, etc. There was and is no need for a politically unified Europe because of these organisations.

[XAOTL]

First of all, I want to say I think it's been an interesting debate so far... Keep it up.

Definately. Best debate I've seen yet ^^

Globalisation and multiculturalism go hand in hand, actually.

I'll go with that

think that point you make here is rather insulting... Please, have a better look on global history...
You do know that slavery is something that existed since the early beginning of so called 'civilisation'?

I apoligise if what I said sounds insulting in any way I've just had an English 2h exam when I posted this, and had a bit of stress on my mind.Altough I must say that, There is also the belief that used to exist about how Black people were considered racially inferior in comparison to White people. As well as the studies that went hand in hand by scientists to support these clames.
People do not have knowledge of other cultures until they are exposed to them. That would count for just about everyone. Regardless of country, as my science teacher has said 'I had no idea about people from India. I hadn't ever seen one. I didn't even know if they could talk.'
The Australian priminister is seeing if he can sue Amedabadgi...(Iraninan Priminister) on the grounds of his language towards Jewish people.

Yes, and it's disgusting that we tolerate that. Why import more people while we have that many unemployed within our borders? Most of those unemployed people are drawing social benefits too.

I'm speaking of more extreme curcumstances such as those in South Africa. In comparison the curcumstances in Europe are subtle.

Having a personal identity is good, but accepting that there are other cultures that can exist next to our own, is naive. And it shouldn't be a goal too, because you reject your own culture indirectly.

Well, it seems we think in completely different ways.
I mentioned it earlier in this thread, but one of the things that binds people in a country is culture. And I see you are rejecting yours... It's your choise, but I think it's a pity.

But that's my curcumstance.
I have family that are Christian, Sikh, Hindu, Athist. Freinds who are Buddist, Muslim,Agnostic and all the religions above.

The world is mixing, We can't stop it. I'm not rejecting bieing British by any means. But I'm not rejecting how I'm surrounded by people of all faiths, with many views, that are radically different to one another. Yet it all seems to work very well, without any great hitches.

When you go to the school field or the city Center you can see people chatting regardless of each others cultural background.

So that would be the reason I support it. As seeing something that has worked well go to waste just would not work in my eyes.

Altough on the subject of the EU once more:
'Europeans are beginning to adopt a new global consciousness that extends beyond, and below, the borders of their nation-states, deeply embedding them in an increasingly interconnected world.'

The European dream:
'To be free is to have access to many interdependent relationships. The more communities one has access to, the more options one has for living a full and meaningful life. It is inclusivity that brings security -- belonging, not belongings.'

Some people aren't aware anymore of their common history... it's a pity. Multiculturalism destroys everything that makes the UK the UK, Germany Germany etc. If people want to stay here, there should be one rule: 'accept that you're a guest in this country, behave like it'.

That would work, if we had the guts to deport those who would chose to come and just make trouble. Altough for the people who come as honest people looking to make an honest living, they wouldn't have a problem.

[PokeTrance]

May 21, 2008 5:15:58 GMT 12 XAOTL said:

I apoligise if what I said sounds insulting in any way I've just had an English 2h exam when I posted this, and had a bit of stress on my mind.

No need to apologise... I know what kind of situation you're in, I understand. (I'm having my final examinations too)

Altough I must say that, There is also the belief that used to exist about how Black people were considered racially inferior in comparison to White people. As well as the studies that went hand in hand by scientists to support these clames.

Correct. This is called the race-theory I believe. It's a racist theory and I don't support it in any way.
The only thing I would like to point out that we can explain why people thought like that. 'White man's burden', white supremacy and that kind of stuff were a result of the industrialisation which gave us (people in the West) a huge advantage over other people and countries.
That it's dumb to think that technology gives your race a moral superiour right of existance didn't come to their minds...

People do not have knowledge of other cultures until they are exposed to them. That would count for just about everyone. Regardless of country, as my science teacher has said 'I had no idea about people from India. I hadn't ever seen one. I didn't even know if they could talk.'
The Australian priminister is seeing if he can sue Amedabadgi...(Iraninan Priminister) on the grounds of his language towards Jewish people.

So your teacher actually thought that Indians were 'untermenschen'? ('lesser people')
Point being: I disagree with you that people can't have knowledge about other cultures without being exposed to them. It is more likely that when other cultures are present, the cultures will eventually form a new one. I like the following quote about multiculturalism because of this:
'The Diversity Theorem: Groups of people from anywhere in the world, mixed together in any numbers and proportions whatsoever, will eventually settle down as a harmonious society, appreciating—nay, celebrating!—their differences... which will of course soon disappear entirely.' - John Derbyshire.

I'm speaking of more extreme curcumstances such as those in South Africa. In comparison the curcumstances in Europe are subtle.

Yeah, that's true and I can't deny that.
But, if I may add, we've seen ghettoforming in Europe too lately. With the best example of all being the riots in France some time ago.

But that's my curcumstance.
I have family that are Christian, Sikh, Hindu, Athist. Freinds who are Buddist, Muslim,Agnostic and all the religions above.

The world is mixing, We can't stop it. I'm not rejecting bieing British by any means. But I'm not rejecting how I'm surrounded by people of all faiths, with many views, that are radically different to one another. Yet it all seems to work very well, without any great hitches.

When you go to the school field or the city Center you can see people chatting regardless of each others cultural background.

So that would be the reason I support it. As seeing something that has worked well go to waste just would not work in my eyes.

I see.
I'd like to say though, that multiculturalism is much more then just people having different faiths and believes. I think it's great to see that many religions and people of different believes come together and be happy. But faith is something that belongs in your private sphere. (like you just explained very well)
The point where multiculturalism is becoming fault, is when several cultures are trying to change things in society. Then a 'clash of civilisations' will take place, and that's where the British, Dutch or any other culture will be attacked.
In Holland, due to political correctness and so called 'socialists', it was encouraged to speak not in the Dutch language, but in the language of the home country. So when Marocs came to work here, rules, agreements and various other stuff were translated into Arabic or Berber. It's giving up a part of your own culture voluntary, in favour of the 'other', in this case Maroccan. Luckely this has now changed, and people are to learn Dutch before they may stay here, but there are still signs of these kind of cultural changes. Example: serving 'halal' food at schools only, because else muslim children aren't able to eat according to their faith.

Altough on the subject of the EU once more:
'Europeans are beginning to adopt a new global consciousness that extends beyond, and below, the borders of their nation-states, deeply embedding them in an increasingly interconnected world.'

The European dream:
'To be free is to have access to many interdependent relationships. The more communities one has access to, the more options one has for living a full and meaningful life. It is inclusivity that brings security -- belonging, not belongings.'

Well yea, these are very nice one-liners and all. But this can't be debated that well. I think lots of people will like these thoughts, the point is where these quotes speak in favour of a political unified Europe.
I don't see it, honestly.

[...]

That would work, if we had the guts to deport those who would chose to come and just make trouble. Altough for the people who come as honest people looking to make an honest living, they wouldn't have a problem.

True. And that's why we should monitor this. Ofcourse we would like people to come here if they can add anything to society, have a job and integrate properly.
The only thing that worries alot of people is that those who want an 'honest living' as you describe it, don't do anything against their fellow immigrants. They don't stand up and condemn those people. I'm very sorry to them, but I can understand why 'natives' are beginning to think that a huge part of these people actually accept and tolerate this behaviour.

[XAOTL]

In Holland, due to political correctness and so called 'socialists', it was encouraged to speak not in the Dutch language, but in the language of the home country. So when Marocs came to work here, rules, agreements and various other stuff were translated into Arabic or Berber.

Just to ask What idiot made that rule?
It's not bieing offensive in any way if you would think that immigrants should learn the native language if they want to work. IT's just plain dangerous if someone is working in a highly dangerous trade to have two working languages. And how will Foreign shop owners gain any business if they don't bother to learn the local language.

It's not Multiculturism. It's a joke.

I'm not saying that they should be forced, to learn or only speak the local language. But anybody with a brain should know that if oyu want to be sucessful in a place that speaks a different language you have to learn that language. It's common sense.

serving 'halal' food at schools only, because else muslim children aren't able to eat according to their faith.

Altough this I can understand. Especially in places like Schools but a halal 'option' would be a lot more practical than forcing halal for all, that's taking things to the extreme. You know making a few halal options that are clear to see. But forcing it on all is not right.

So your teacher actually thought that Indians were 'untermenschen'? ('lesser people')

Not lesser people, just didn't understand.

Point being: I disagree with you that people can't have knowledge about other cultures without being exposed to them.

Usually it is not the case, as seeing and hearing are two completely different things.

I personally ambeggining think that we have different views on multiculturism.

Yours appears to be quite more hard line, with no options for personal individuality. where my one-liners come in.

'To be free is to have access to many interdependent relationships

Multiculturism works, but not when the 'foreign' aspect dose not accept where they are and that they too have to be leniant in some ways. Not needing to break their culture, just to aknowledge that the other culture exists. But when political correctness comes in the way, and asks you to break your own culture to strengthen a foreign culture, is waht I wouild call 'EPIC LOSS'

The examples that you have given are more in the way that multiculturism means that locals have to sacrifice their culture to protect that of forigners. In my view so far.

---
It's RED VS BLUE tonight!!!!

CHAMPIONS LEAGUE.

MAN UTD 4 EVA

[Elite4James]

It's beneficial for me, since I am half white and half asian.
If it weren't for multiculturalism I wouldn't exist.

[PokeTrance]

Wow, I think I can agree with everything you said.
Yes, it is clear to me that we have different views on multiculturalism, and that is not something to worry about or something. Instead, it's good to hear and know about other views, so one can learn from it...

Just to ask What idiot made that rule?
It's not bieing offensive in any way if you would think that immigrants should learn the native language if they want to work. IT's just plain dangerous if someone is working in a highly dangerous trade to have two working languages. And how will Foreign shop owners gain any business if they don't bother to learn the local language.

It's not Multiculturism. It's a joke.

I'm not saying that they should be forced, to learn or only speak the local language. But anybody with a brain should know that if oyu want to be sucessful in a place that speaks a different language you have to learn that language. It's common sense.

Well, the general look on this particular subject was for about 30 years the one I explained to you. It were our socialists and liberals who thought that this would be the best for all of us.
Ofcourse, I disagree completely. It were these kind of rules that made Dutch people mad... but we weren't allowed to speak about it until mr. Pim Fortuyn entered politics...
Maybe you know him. He was the one who said for the first time in our parliament that these rules were ridiculous and only isolated the immigrants from society. And you know what? He was called a racist by our media for it. The politicians (most of them are socialists, or liberals) didn't go that far (unwritten rule), but they demonized him instead.
It was a shock for those politicians that he gained that much support... And then he was assasinated. Ridiculed, demonised and hated by the political left, the (leftist) media and parts of our people...
I'd like to show you two parts of a documentary of his life: (you won't understand what is said, it's Dutch. But to give you an impression of how much support he had, please view these vids)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXRPtatQZT0&feature=related (part 6/9 days of the assassination and after)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zocw5Q6BU9E&feature=related (part 7/9 day of his funeral)

He inspired people, he made it possible to talk about these problems... And I'm very grateful for that.

May 23, 2008 3:26:54 GMT 12 Elite4James said:

It's beneficial for me, since I am half white and half asian.
If it weren't for multiculturalism I wouldn't exist.

That's good to hear. I didn't want you not to exist, not at all.
It's not the point of this discussion though.

[Elite4James]

May 23, 2008 3:49:51 GMT 12 PokeTrance said:

May 23, 2008 3:26:54 GMT 12 Elite4James said:

It's beneficial for me, since I am half white and half asian.
If it weren't for multiculturalism I wouldn't exist.

That's good to hear. I didn't want you not to exist, not at all.
It's not the point of this discussion though.

So what?