Merkel says German multicultural society has failed
Previous 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 Next
sandorski @ Tue Oct 19, 2010 4:52 pm
Demian_164 Demian_164:
CommanderSock CommanderSock:
$1:
and the thing with multiculturalism is that it is also completely unnatural. it can only exist in a regime which forces it upon its people. you like to say europeans are just racist and xenophobic...well most countries are smart enough to just not have any immigration at all, like china, japan, korea etc.
Europeans presented the largest movement of humans from one region of the world, to another (Europe, to the Americas, past 400 years). Immigration doesn't work? I beg to differ!
Multiculturalism will naturally occur when a certain group feels it wants to retain its identity. The Jews in Europe for the past 2000 years are a great example. Blacks in the USA another. They basically carved out their own culture within the nation and now have enough power to move whole elections in whichever direction they feel is beneficial to them.
So this "multiculturalism" is unnatural? Bullshit. It's totally natural and occurs very often throughout history.
Even within the USA and Canada there are different forms of multiculturalism that arise. We have rural culture, (white, Christian, conservative etc), and the urbanite culture (liberal leaning, multiethnic, multilingual, etc). And quite often these two cultures are at each other's throats.
I don't support multiculturalism that champions 3rd world traditions, but many comments here are simply oozing xenophobia. Too many posters are unwilling, or unable to differentiate culture and ethnicity and simply go on anti European people rants (even if implied and subtle).
you are so completely wrong. multi-ethnic states do nothing but disentegrate. look at any empire in human history. soviet union, balkans, austria hungary etc etc etc etc. it almost always ends in bloodshed (as it did with the jews in europe). blacks were brough to the united states as slaves and remained as 2nd class citizens. race in the united states has ALWAYS been one of the countries most divisive issues. a country with only one ethnic group will escape all of this race baiting automatically!
blacks and jews were tolerated to the point where they would never constitute a majority, unable to work in certain fields, forced to separate etc.
and you have proven my point quite nicely. yes, europeans came here in great numbers, and it worked out great! for THEM!! what about the host culture that was here first? almost completely obliterated!! i wouldnt call their culture anything close to dominant, if even on the radar at all. thats what unrelenting mass immigration did to them. everything else was merely a consequence of foreign migration.
if you have any examples of succesful multi-ethnic states, i would love to hear about them. the only one i can think of is switzerland. which leads me to believe this is the exception, not the rule.
/facepalm
sandorski @ Tue Oct 19, 2010 5:01 pm
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
desertdude desertdude:
FN ? Whats that
FN = 'First Nations'. It's the politically correct way the Canadians refer to their aboriginals who frequently just call themselves 'Indians'.
It's just more accurate and precise. Especially when one of our fastest growing populations are immigrants from India, the place Columbus was actually trying to sail too.
BartSimpson @ Wed Oct 20, 2010 1:43 pm
sandorski sandorski:
It's just more accurate and precise. Especially when one of our fastest growing populations are immigrants from India, the place Columbus was actually trying to sail too.
I've long noticed that some of your compatriots refer to folk from India as "wogs". I imagine that helps lessen any potential for confusion.
Mustang1 @ Wed Oct 20, 2010 3:25 pm
sandorski sandorski:
/facepalm
Agree. Austria-Hungary was destroyed primarily by multiple ethnicities? Really? And that caused the fall of the Soviet Empire too? I'd love to see the cause and effect, but i think this will be a dumb and run.
GreenTiger @ Wed Oct 20, 2010 7:25 pm
andyt andyt:
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
desertdude desertdude:
FN ? Whats that
FN = 'First Nations'. It's the politically correct way the Canadians refer to their aboriginals who frequently just call themselves 'Indians' but get pissed if white people call them that. Kinda like African Americans/Niggers in the US.
Canadian Indians get tick off when they are called "Indians"?
I supposed Tonto would be out as well.
GreenTiger @ Wed Oct 20, 2010 7:30 pm
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
sandorski sandorski:
It's just more accurate and precise. Especially when one of our fastest growing populations are immigrants from India, the place Columbus was actually trying to sail too.
I've long noticed that some of your compatriots refer to folk from India as "wogs". I imagine that helps lessen any potential for confusion.
Calling them wongs might eliminate confusion but I don't think the
PC crowd would go for it.
GreenTiger @ Wed Oct 20, 2010 7:33 pm
Any individual that is an immigrant to any country should have the common decency to assilimilate into that nations culture. You can hold on to your religion as that is between you and God and the state shouldn't be involved as; outside of that learn the language, the customs and follow it or you are insultinmg your host nation.
Curtman @ Wed Oct 20, 2010 7:37 pm
GreenTiger GreenTiger:
Any individual that is an immigrant to any country should have the common decency to assilimilate into that nations culture. You can hold on to your religion as that is between you and God and the state shouldn't be involved as; outside of that learn the language, the customs and follow it or you are insultinmg your host nation.
And that's why we speak Cree.
Tman1 @ Wed Oct 20, 2010 7:48 pm
GreenTiger GreenTiger:
Canadian Indians get tick off when they are called "Indians"?
I supposed Tonto would be out as well.
I supposed Tonto would be out as well.
In Saskatchewan they are called the Saskatchewan Federation of Indian Nations. Go figure.
Gunnair @ Wed Oct 20, 2010 9:05 pm
Curtman Curtman:
GreenTiger GreenTiger:
Any individual that is an immigrant to any country should have the common decency to assilimilate into that nations culture. You can hold on to your religion as that is between you and God and the state shouldn't be involved as; outside of that learn the language, the customs and follow it or you are insultinmg your host nation.
And that's why we speak Cree.
Zing...
Demian_164 @ Wed Oct 20, 2010 9:36 pm
Mustang1 Mustang1:
sandorski sandorski:
/facepalm
Agree. Austria-Hungary was destroyed primarily by multiple ethnicities? Really? And that caused the fall of the Soviet Empire too? I'd love to see the cause and effect, but i think this will be a dumb and run.
no where did i say "austria hungary was destroyed primarily by multiple ethnicities? what is wrong with you? i didnt write that once. i wrote they are held together by an iron first. of course its not so simple as to why the soviet union fell as inter-ethnic conflict. but you cannot deny that after it fell apart...people wanted to and did separate along ethnic lines.
Mustang1 @ Thu Oct 21, 2010 3:32 am
Demian_164 Demian_164:
Mustang1 Mustang1:
sandorski sandorski:
/facepalm
Agree. Austria-Hungary was destroyed primarily by multiple ethnicities? Really? And that caused the fall of the Soviet Empire too? I'd love to see the cause and effect, but i think this will be a dumb and run.
no where did i say "austria hungary was destroyed primarily by multiple ethnicities? what is wrong with you? i didnt write that once. i wrote they are held together by an iron first. of course its not so simple as to why the soviet union fell as inter-ethnic conflict. but you cannot deny that after it fell apart...people wanted to and did separate along ethnic lines.
You wrote, "multi-ethnic states do nothing but disentegrate. look at any empire in human history. soviet union, balkans, austria hungary etc etc etc etc. it almost always ends in bloodshed (as it did with the jews in europe)" in the context of this thread. How about we dumb it down a bit - why did Austria-Hungary disintegrate? Unless it was primarily due to multiple ethnic groups, why did you include it?!? The same applies to the USSR. And if it's merely a coincidence that they happened to be a multi-ethnic state AND collapsed, then you offered up bad illustrations.
Gunnair @ Thu Oct 21, 2010 6:29 am
The fall out of collapse of multi-ethnic states may certainly include ethnic infighting once central power is lost, however, these same multi-ethnic states have often existed for decades if not centuries without the different ethnicities exploding into violence with each other. What we saw in the Balkans and parts of the USSR had as much to do with ethnic infighting once communist control was removed as it did with religious persecution. I suspect we'd see something in China tomorrow if the central control collapsed which would allow for the different ethnic groups to then jockey for power. Until then, China's multi-ethnic community is remaining damned strong.
EyeBrock @ Thu Oct 21, 2010 6:34 am
As others have said, historical multi-ethnic states have usually been kept in check by the power and force of a dominant group within that state. As in, the biggest/most powerful group bullies the rest into submission.
This happened in pre-contact Canada with various native nations conquering/killing/enslaving weaker ones. It was the same in pre-contact Africa or anywhere else.
Whitey wasn't the first ethnicity to go around beating on weaker neighbours, contrary to the multi-cult high priests current versions of ‘history’.
ShepherdsDog @ Thu Oct 21, 2010 6:44 am
Yugoslavia is one of the best examples of this. A state comprised of Moslem, Catholic and Orthodox slavs held together by the Serbs, who really weren't pleased to lose their confederation.
Previous 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 Next