Multiculturalsim
Discussion
After watching this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3bPpksOzN4&t=...
the simple question is - has it failed in the UK? (I can't see an option to set this as a poll).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3bPpksOzN4&t=...
the simple question is - has it failed in the UK? (I can't see an option to set this as a poll).
Eric Mc said:
I eat Indian food. It works for me.
...because of course it was impossible to eat Indian food in Britain prior to the pursuit of multiculturalism becoming a "progressive" dogma.The goal of multiculturalism is essentially fewer white people. No non-white countries are encouraged to become "diverse". Think about it.
Combining mass immigration with a welfare state is a disastrous combination. I am all for immigration of skilled professionals (even though there is a fairly sound moral argument against this) who require no welfare. However, the fact of the matter is that there is very high welfare dependence among certain immigrant groups. They are a net drain and thus there is zero objective reason for them to be here.
The fact that we already have significant welfare dependency in our native population is of course a problem, but I fail to see the logic in needlessly adding to a problem. The welfare system is a trap for many people but serves as a useful vote-buying measure for the left.
In short, multiculturalism has failed. It will be some years before we realise the true extent of our folly though.
Eric Mc said:
I eat Indian food. It works for me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qB0ZOu_EZ2M#t=1m20...PWeston said:
...because of course it was impossible to eat Indian food in Britain prior to the pursuit of multiculturalism becoming a "progressive" dogma.
The goal of multiculturalism is essentially fewer white people. No non-white countries are encouraged to become "diverse". Think about it.
Combining mass immigration with a welfare state is a disastrous combination. I am all for immigration of skilled professionals (even though there is a fairly sound moral argument against this) who require no welfare. However, the fact of the matter is that there is very high welfare dependence among certain immigrant groups. They are a net drain and thus there is zero objective reason for them to be here.
The fact that we already have significant welfare dependency in our native population is of course a problem, but I fail to see the logic in needlessly adding to a problem. The welfare system is a trap for many people but serves as a useful vote-buying measure for the left.
In short, multiculturalism has failed. It will be some years before we realise the true extent of our folly though.
Eating Indian (and other cuisines from other countries) is pretty much a major aspect of multiculturism.The goal of multiculturalism is essentially fewer white people. No non-white countries are encouraged to become "diverse". Think about it.
Combining mass immigration with a welfare state is a disastrous combination. I am all for immigration of skilled professionals (even though there is a fairly sound moral argument against this) who require no welfare. However, the fact of the matter is that there is very high welfare dependence among certain immigrant groups. They are a net drain and thus there is zero objective reason for them to be here.
The fact that we already have significant welfare dependency in our native population is of course a problem, but I fail to see the logic in needlessly adding to a problem. The welfare system is a trap for many people but serves as a useful vote-buying measure for the left.
In short, multiculturalism has failed. It will be some years before we realise the true extent of our folly though.
I love it - all of it.
I'm from a different culture for a start so there.
I believe multiculturalism is a good thing. Our country has been greatly enriched because of influences brought in from outside (music, food, art, culture etc).
However - I don't like the way things seem to be heading, especially all the 'cultural appropriation' crap.
If the aim is to integrate, accept and appreciate other cultures and influences - I can't see how the increasing number of accusations of 'cultural appropriation' possibly help.
However - I don't like the way things seem to be heading, especially all the 'cultural appropriation' crap.
If the aim is to integrate, accept and appreciate other cultures and influences - I can't see how the increasing number of accusations of 'cultural appropriation' possibly help.
nelly1 said:
Eric Mc said:
I eat Indian food. It works for me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qB0ZOu_EZ2M#t=1m20...Monty Python said:
the simple question is - has it failed in the UK? (I can't see an option to set this as a poll).
It has partly failed. Bringing in low educated workers from 3rd work countries on mass and letting them settle in their own neighbourhoods meant that whilst many have integrated and strived to improve themselves, other had no need to and have stayed as they were. Social mobility overall being so low in the UK didn't help.The UK also takes its time addressing any cultural practices that are not appropriate here.
PWeston said:
I am all for immigration of skilled professionals (even though there is a fairly sound moral argument against this) who require no welfare.
And yet we are told it is for the lack of young British kids who are willing to work in fields or do manual work that we need immigrants to keep our economy running.In 1967 there was a film released called Guess Who's Coming To Dinner. Spencer Tracey and Katherine Hepburn played a middle class, liberal white couple who's daughter brings home her black boyfriend, Sydney Poitier, to meet them. Poitier is a very good looking doctor, immaculately dressed in a very expensive suit, with impeccable etiqutte and charm. The parents' professed liberal outlook is, of course, challenged by the need to accept their daughter might actually be intending to marry a black man. A comedy of manners ensues.
This film was selected by the Library Of Congress for preservation because of its social significance. It was one of the first times a relationship across the races had been treated this way in American cinema. But I was appalled by it. What the film seemed to be saying to me was that if you are young, good looking, well off, charming and professionally qualified, you might just be able to cut it amongst America's middle classes as a black man. What if the daughter had brought home a black bus driver, who didn't know which knife to use for the fish course?
To say that we can accept immigrants if they measure up to certain social or employment criteria is plain wrong. People of all classes and backgrounds can contribute to our society in their own ways. Aren't we all supposed to be sympathising with the Windrush immigrants presently? They were invited here to do menial jobs, not to be engineers or surgeons.
My own Grandfather arrived here in this country in 1906, a Jewish refugee from Russia, after absconding from the army. He couldn't speak a word of English, and never learned to read or write it, but he was willing to work. He brought up eight children and nineteen grandchildren, all of whom I think have contributed to this society, in a multicultural sort of way.
It is wrong to distinguish between the ones you are prepared to tolerate, and those you write off as drains on society. I am not sure what you mean by there being strong moral grounds against your view that immigration should be selective. I am hoping that it runs along the lines I have just described.
Mark300zx said:
Multiculturalism is just a way for capitalism to sell it to the liberals and they have lapped it up, yes it serves capitalism, cheap labour in an oversupply and gets the liberals do-gooders to keep it in check by waving the stick of racism when anyone challenges it.
I'd prefer to be a liberal "do -gooder" than a non-liberal "do-badder".PWeston said:
The goal of multiculturalism is essentially fewer white people.
If that were true, its definately failed. The UK is 87% white after literally centuries of introducing new cultures.But fortunately you're wrong. Multiculturalism is about improving culture by permitting different ideas and different practices. Its an opposition to a monoculture and not divided on racial lines. The UK has never been a monoculture because it's comprised of vastly different cultures, first you have Scots, Welsh, Irish and English, then you have subdivisions between Northern and Southern English, Then you have even more subdivision between Yorkshire and Geordie cultures... despite all of these people being majority white.
Unfortunately there are some people who hate change and cant accept anyone different to themselves. People like the EDL, Britain First and other groups who want to turn it into a racial conflict. Does anyone honestly think if they got rid of all the blacks and asians they wont start on the foreign white cultures they don't like, then the local white cultures they don't like?
Multiculturalism hasn't failed... On the contrary its been a massive success in the west given we have such diverse groups and no racial, ethnic or religious conflicts but that's the problem some people have with it.
I just can't believe that we're here in 2018 in one of the richest, luckiest countries on Earth and yet there are still people who think other human beings are somehow inferior simply by dint of the colour of their skin or the country in which they were born or raised.
I can understand, to a very limited degree, why some very uneducated people might think that way. But this is a car forum - likely with well-above average wealth and intelligence - yet still there are the same arguments from some.
I can understand, to a very limited degree, why some very uneducated people might think that way. But this is a car forum - likely with well-above average wealth and intelligence - yet still there are the same arguments from some.
PWeston said:
The goal of multiculturalism is essentially fewer white people. No non-white countries are encouraged to become "diverse". Think about it.
Wrong. Firstly, race and culture are very different things.
Secondly; the goal of multiculturalism is the mutual co-existence of many cultures within a geographic area.
Thirdly; you make it seem like there is some supra-national authority that is telling 'white countries' to become diverse. Absurd.
Fourthly; 'non-white countries' is basically everything outside Europe. While places like the U.S., Canada, Australia etc are now majority white, the first peoples of those countries were not 'white'. European empires assimilated other cultures. In Britain after world war two, lack of manpower required mass immigration in order to aid the recovery; these immigrants came mostly from our empire.
PWeston said:
In short, multiculturalism has failed. It will be some years before we realise the true extent of our folly though.
So absolute? Would you descibe the United States multi-cultural efforts as a failure, or a success? The vast majority of their population are descended from immigrants that migrated (voluntary or not!) from almost every country in the world. Undoubtedly they have some big cultural tensions and issues; but could you define the multi-cultural USA a failure?Its worth remembering that Britain has long been a multicultural country: From the Celtics, Anglo-Saxons, Romans, Normans, and more. We already practice multiculturalism and have for many years; again like America with mostly success, but not without tensions; or are the (Northern) Irish, Scots, Welsh and English not distinct cultures?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff