Finally - PM states multiculturalism has failed

[rory_20_uk]

Linkey (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12371994)

Sadly, he appears to be going off on a tangent against Muslim Extremism, but the point is valid more generally.

Nothing bar the rhetoric so far, but it's a start.

~:smoking:

[HoreTore]

More nonsense from a conservative. I'm not surprised.

Does this mean he will disband the union and renounce his rule over Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland?

[rory_20_uk]

You are aware what constitutes the UK, right?

~:smoking:

[Fragony]

Where was he the rest of the time, can't really take the newfound insights of Camaron and that plumb eastblock workhorse Merkel very seriously. But it's a start at least agreed

[Furunculus]

More nonsense from a conservative. I'm not surprised.

Does this mean he will disband the union and renounce his rule over Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland?

or in reality, it is a damned good idea that should have been implemented decades ago.

a healthy and vibrant nation thrives or dies by the its sense of family and that necessitates a certain degree of shared and common values.

and excellent article by charles moore is here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/charlesmoore/8275020/It-was-selfish-and-wrong-of-Lady-Warsi-to-give-that-speech.html


Within Government – among ministers, Coalition partners, officials and agencies – there is an endless battle on this matter. It is a fight between those who think that the way to win is to empower nasty people to control even nastier ones, and those who believe that the best way to deal with extremism is to confront it and reward only those who reject it. It is an argument between those who think that only violence need concern us, and those who believe that it is from bad ideas that bad actions spring.

The former view, held by Charles Farr, the MI6 man who is now the head of the Government's Office of Security and Counter-Terrorism, is essentially the old imperialist one – do a deal with the bloodthirsty natives (the Mau-Mau, Makarios, the IRA are well-known examples) to buy a quiet life. The latter view believes that Britain cannot treat its own inhabitants colonially: we can only be a free nation if we live by common values, and we must exclude those who reject those values. Mr Cameron is in this latter camp; it is part of his idea that "we're all in this together".

The battle will be visible, on Wednesday, in the result of the counter-terrorism and security powers review. Control orders, to make life easier for Nick Clegg, will be done away with by name, but not in fact. The curfews so much attacked by the civil liberties lobby will be replaced by "compulsory overnight stays". It isn't easy to see the difference between the two.

The fight continues, also, in the current review of Prevent, the set of government programmes which seeks to tackle the social causes of Islamist radicalisation. Prevent has too often used partners and advisers who are themselves extremist. Such people exploit the status government has conferred on them to argue that there would be no trouble if only public policy addressed the "grievances" which Islamists feel – foreign policy, police surveillance, mixed bathing, whatever. The worst fault of Lady Warsi's speech was that it helped nurture Muslim grievance instead of prompting Muslim self-examination.

This refusal to confront bad ideas means, for example, that the public authorities have shied away from having a look at what is preached at university Islamic societies. The security services do not investigate and combat subversion, as they did in the Cold War. Yet we know, from cases like that of the "Underpants Bomber", that students are often recruited for extremism by contacts at their universities. It is a pity Lady Warsi said none of this to her university audience.

Similarly, the Government's independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Lord Carlile, has been pointing out for years that Islamic charities in this country are often subverted (or even invented) for extreme political purposes, but no one knows how to investigate them. Again, as free schools extend their scope, more Muslim schools, like Church or Jewish ones, will wish to set up. As I have discovered from the research done by Policy Exchange, the think tank that I chair, few in authority know enough about the backgrounds of the people involved. A unit for "due diligence" is needed, so that power and public money do not go to fanatics and scoundrels.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Does this mean he will disband the union and renounce his rule over Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland?

Britain is one nation one culture one people!

Scottish/Irish/Welsh nationalists are mostly just communists.

[Fragony]

For teh lefties, what we have here is pubicly admitting that multiculteralism was always ideoligy, Middle class now sees change they don't believe in all that much

[a completely inoffensive name]

Personally I don't see what is wrong with the different European countries trying to maintain their culture. Multiculturalism is good for a nation that never really had a solid "type" of culture in the first place.

I don't want to sound pompous here, but the US is really the only country that really should be following a policy of "multicultural" we are a country of immigrants from all type. Europeans have their origins and their history, it should be preserved and flourish.

But knowing the extreme right, if they had the opportunity they would go the exact opposite and persecute and segregate those of different cultures. Europe just needs to have cultural qualifications for people to become a citizen. Learn the language, know the history, obey and adhere to western law, etc...

[Fragony]

Personally I don't see what is wrong with the different European countries trying to maintain their culture. Multiculturalism is good for a nation that never really had a solid "type" of culture in the first place.

I don't want to sound pompous here, but the US is really the only country that really should be following a policy of "multicultural" we are a country of immigrants from all type. Europeans have their origins and their history, it should be preserved and flourish.

But knowing the extreme right, if they had the opportunity they would go the exact opposite and persecute and segregate those of different cultures. Europe just needs to have cultural qualifications for people to become a citizen. Learn the language, know the history, obey and adhere to western law, etc...

The extreme right has as much power as a lame dick. The extreme left on the other hand

[Beskar]

Multicultural has and is always a very bad thing. It is one of the most stupidest things I ever heard.

On the otherhand, a Open Culture is a very good thing. This is a strong dominant culture which is open to new ideas and influences. An Open Culture acts like the 'borg', as it were, it assimilates all that is good from a culture while disregarding/ignoring the inferior aspects. An Open Society also has set ideals such as Democracy and Liberty, which are always maintained within in.

[Fragony]

Multicultural has and is always a very bad thing. It is one of the most stupidest things I ever heard

Oh really, what's the change of heart. It kinda annoys me, for years the dangers of multiculteralism have been pretty obvious. And now you always thought it was a bad idea? At least admit it when you have been wrong.

[Beskar]

Oh really, what's the change of heart. It kinda annoys me, for years the dangers of multiculteralism have been pretty obvious. And now you always thought it was a bad idea? At least admit it when you have been wrong.

Erm... where have I said I been pro-multiculturalism?

I have always argued for an Open Society in every thread similar to this vein.

However, I have never argued for 'indiscriminate hating' of Muslims. Those who oppose that are not Multiculturists.

[Greyblades]

Interesting, you people say america is the only place where multiculturalism works yet to become a citizen you have to speak english and have a understanding -if brief- of american history. Kinda funny that the worlds melting pot, who should be more accepting of other culures in theory, has a "you are an american first an englishman/frenchman/whatever second policy" and we dont.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Kinda funny that the worlds melting pot, who should be more accepting of other culures in theory, has a "you are an american first an englishman/frenchman/whatever second policy" and we dont.

It's because being British/French/German etc is about blood. They're ethnic identities. Some people might contest that but that's how they've been seen for the most part historically.

There's no such ethnicity as American, its an identity based on beliefs/values.

[Furunculus]

It's because being British/French/German etc is about blood. They're ethnic identities. Some people might contest that but that's how they've been seen for the most part historically.

There's no such ethnicity as American, its an identity based on beliefs/values.

i would violently disagree with you there.

British Nationalism is pretty much the definition of Civic Nationalism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism
Please don't make the mistake of assuming that the BNP defines British Nationalism.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Both France and the UK have a strong component of “well it doesn't matter what dump you come from, you're still one for the Empire/Republic” to their nationalism. Germany is simply content to beat the others at just about all other pursuits, that's their source of pride. ~;)

[rory_20_uk]

i would violently disagree with you there.

British Nationalism is pretty much the definition of Civic Nationalism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism
Please don't make the mistake of assuming that the BNP defines British Nationalism.

I heartily agree. One is British if one thinks of oneself as British. My colleague at work might have ancestry in Shri-Lanka, but she was born in Britain, she speaks English - she is British as she thinks she is British.

~:smoking:

[The Stranger]

Interesting, you people say america is the only place where multiculturalism works yet to become a citizen you have to speak english and have a understanding -if brief- of american history. Kinda funny that the worlds melting pot, who should be more accepting of other culures in theory, has a "you are an american first an englishman/frenchman/whatever second policy" and we dont.

which is not weird. multiculturalism does also include the american culture which again includes american language and history. thus it is reasonable that the immigrant should speak the language and have atleast decent knowledge of customs and history. this should however not mean that he has to forsake his own roots.

and you should be an american first and whatever it was that u were before u came to that country second, because now you are a citizen of that state and loyal to that state as long as that state provides for you as a citizen equal among all other citizens.

personally i prefer a different system but since at least now what i prefer isnt yet possible i think the philosophy of america is a good one, though the practical implementation often fails. but hey, communism is a good idea on paper :P

[Furunculus]

My colleague at work might have ancestry in Shri-Lanka, but she was born in Britain, she speaks English - she is British as she thinks she is British.

~:smoking:

absolutely correct.

[Rhyfelwyr]

i would violently disagree with you there.

British Nationalism is pretty much the definition of Civic Nationalism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism
Please don't make the mistake of assuming that the BNP defines British Nationalism.

Civic nationalism is a pretty modern phenomenon, I did say "historically". To say nationalism is about civic rather than ethnic identity seems like backtracking to me, a bit like a poster in a recent thread that muddied racist comments by talking about culture.

The rightists realise that the public will no longer tolerate openly racist nationalistic sentiments, so nowadays rather than talking about the British race they'll talk about British values or such.

It's the first step in them admitting that they are losing ground, and that the path to national borders and nationalism in general becoming obsolete is pretty much inevitable.

[rory_20_uk]

Since before the Romans there has been influxes of people to the UK. Bar the mentally challenged, everyone knows that there is no "race" in the UK, it is a mix of many.

~:smoking:

[Furunculus]

Civic nationalism is a pretty modern phenomenon, I did say "historically". To say nationalism is about civic rather than ethnic identity seems like backtracking to me, a bit like a poster in a recent thread that muddied racist comments by talking about culture.

The rightists realise that the public will no longer tolerate openly racist nationalistic sentiments, so nowadays rather than talking about the British race they'll talk about British values or such.

It's the first step in them admitting that they are losing ground, and that the path to national borders and nationalism in general becoming obsolete is pretty much inevitable.
disagreed.

there are always head-banging elements, but the concept of civic nationalism has been around just as long in the context of britain, sounds like you are trying to justify why you don't like something.

[Fragony]

Erm... where have I said I been pro-multiculturalism?

I have always argued for an Open Society in every thread similar to this vein.

However, I have never argued for 'indiscriminate hating' of Muslims. Those who oppose that are not Multiculturists.

Those who somehow instinctively read that absolutely are. Glad it's becomming a derogatory term though, the arrogant old left, or the leftist church have lost the high-ground. I'm a happy man, that's all I ever really wanted as a moderation-extremist

[Rhyfelwyr]

Since before the Romans there has been influxes of people to the UK. Bar the mentally challenged, everyone knows that there is no "race" in the UK, it is a mix of many.

~:smoking:

Which doesn't change the fact that for centuries nationalism was based on an the idea that there was a British/English/Irish/Scottish etc race.

And it doesn't lend any support to civic nationalism either. What is an actual 'British' value? Usually people say things like democracy, or tolerance. Hardly anything that sets apart the British nation from any other western liberal democracy.

Civic nationalism is no more real than ethnic nationalism. Heck, its really just an attempt to mask the prejudices of the old ethnic nationalism, but ends up failing in its purpose anyway, because it is as I said meaningless.

It might provide nice propaganda to tell immigrants they are 'British' so they feel like they're part of the group identity and don't look to their roots instead and end up blowing themselves up, but its just rhetoric.

[Fragony]

Nationalism is kinda 19th century, if you say centuries there are too many of them.

[The Stranger]

dont forget 20th century. different kind of nationalism or patriotism exist tho. the french revolution gave rise to the modern form, though the american revolution may have proceeded it, both root in the same philosophy. nationalism isnt much different from religious fanatism and one could argue that the crusades, however only maybe for a limited group of nobles, was also patriotic, though more to the kingdom of god than to any earthly domain.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Nationalism is kinda 19th century, if you say centuries there are too many of them.

Fascism has it roots in the 19th century, it was basically a nationalist reaction to class struggle. Nationalism more generally has been around since the medieval kingdoms started to centralise, hardly surprising that the top two at the head of the game in that respect (England and Frenchland) should also have been the first to have strong national identities.

Look at 17th century rhetoric in England... it's all about birthrights, the rights of their ancestors etc. Do you really think they would ever accept a Sri Lankan as an Englishman/woman?

Most of the political theorists these days will say that civic nationalism is a result of an identity through shared institutions eg the welfare state, and since these have only been around since after WWII, civic nationalism couldn't have existed before then. You can't read it back into history.

[Fragony]

No idea what they are talking about then. Nationalism came from liberalism not the other way around, it's also admitting other people right to have a place of their own. They are welcome, but there are boundaries. The multicultists wanted to destroy them. For what, I don't get them

[gaelic cowboy]

delete

[gaelic cowboy]

No idea what they are talking about then. Nationalism came from liberalism not the other way around, it's also admitting other people right to have a place of their own. They are welcome, but there are boundaries. The multicultists wanted to destroy them. For what, I don't get them

Liberalism = 18 century
Nationalism = since the Stone Age

[The Stranger]

No idea what they are talking about then. Nationalism came from liberalism not the other way around, it's also admitting other people right to have a place of their own. They are welcome, but there are boundaries. The multicultists wanted to destroy them. For what, I don't get them

which liberalism? i dont know the how they call it, but (modern) nationalism is often seen as a reaction to the french idea of the universal citizen. so if u mean the liberalism that was the founding philosophy behind the american and french revolution then i guess ur right.

[The Stranger]

Liberalism = 18 century
Nationalism = since the Stone Age

the specific term "Nationalism" and what it refers to is a late 18th century phenomenon. however ofcourse since whenever people have gathered they have shared strong sentiments and have had things that bound them together. however 18th century nationalism is definitly alot different than that of the middle ages and before. because if 1) not so many big and strong centralised nations existed, there were more clan, city state type organised. and yes these within these clans there wouldve been fierce loyalty to the clan but this is not entirely the same because clans were much smaller and you would know most if not all the people in it. to be bound to a man that you have never seen solely because he is from the same nation as you is something rather different. 2) most likely anything that resembled 18th century nationalism in earlier ages wouldve shared only by a small group of nobles and not by the common peasant on the fields and most definitly not by the slaves.

what wouldve come closest to this type of nationalism wouldve been the roman empire i think but then again, the roman empire was much more open to foreign influences than your typical nation. how much would the spanish peasant care wether he would be ruled by carthage or rome or by his iberian warlord surely if conditions would remain the same under all rules he would chose the one closest to him, but if the romans were to offer better terms and more safety, would he turn the romans down only because they are not of the same nation?

to make a long story short patriotism, religious fanatism, community bonding have been around for ages, nationalism in this specific content the term refers to has been around since the 18th century. if you believe otherwise surely this can be debated but you will have to do alot better than


Liberalism = 18 century
Nationalism = since the Stone Age

[Fragony]

which liberalism? i dont know the how they call it, but (modern) nationalism is often seen as a reaction to the french idea of the universal citizen. so if u mean the liberalism that was the founding philosophy behind the american and french revolution then i guess ur right.

Naturally comes in many flavours, but let's not forget that it was the real force behind the most prolonged period of European peace. The problem with multiculturalis is that they will paint the whole thing grey, and will never admit it looks very boring

[Megas Methuselah]

Lol. I love how the concept of multiculturalism is such a new and highly-debated topic over there. Ridiculous, man.

PS: Btw, do Muslim girls wearing headscarves put out? Or am I just wasting my time?

[a completely inoffensive name]

Interesting, you people say america is the only place where multiculturalism works yet to become a citizen you have to speak english and have a understanding -if brief- of american history. Kinda funny that the worlds melting pot, who should be more accepting of other culures in theory, has a "you are an american first an englishman/frenchman/whatever second policy" and we dont.

I never said that America is the only place multiculturalism works. I said that America is the only place multiculturalism should be practiced.

Also, even though you need to speak english to become a formal citizen, in practice it is much different. Head to the south west and marvel at how much is translated into Spanish for immigrant's convenience. Hell, even the ballots are translated into spanish when you vote.

1. The concept of the melting pot is somewhat obsolete. A melting pot has all the ingredients become homogenized. I have heard from people that a more accurate term is a stir fry. In all major cities you have blocks of ethnic areas (china town, little italy etc..).

2. The point of being an American first is to have a common unifying identity that takes precedent over your background. It is not supposed to be one at the others expense as you are describing it. You are an Italian-American, Chinese-American etc.. You are an American first who is proud of his/her background contributing your uniqueness to the higher goal/ideal of "America".

3. The fact that America has been the most hypocritical when it comes to living up to these ideals compared to European nations doesn't really negate the fact that we really should be the only ones who should follow the goal of multiculturalism.

[HoreTore]

You are aware what constitutes the UK, right?

~:smoking:

Yes, I do. The UK consists of at least four different major cultures: the english, the welsh, the scots and the irish. And then there's a number of colonial cultures incorporated into the kingdom/empire.

And it has worked brilliantly, and propelled the british into a position as the worlds mowt powerful empire for a few centuries. While the French ruled by the motto of one culture, that the colonies should strive towards becomming French, the Brits did the opposite and encouraged the colonies to maintain and develop their own culture. And as history has shown, this was the best way yo do it, as the Brits surpassed the French.


Britain is the shining example of how powerful a multicultural state is compared to a monocultural state.

But tthen the brits started copying the errors the rest of europe did and renounced the multiculture that made them strong, and lo and behold, they lost their position as number one to another state that has embraced multiculturalism, the USA.

[Fragony]

Excuse me, out of all countries America did best, in 50 years from a ms Rose to a President Obama.

[HoreTore]

Excuse me, out of all countries America did best, in 50 years from a ms Rose to a President Obama.

Yes indeedy, the US did do best during the years they started embracing multiculturalism. And they are still number one because they still embrace multiculturalism.

[Rhyfelwyr]

But tthen the brits started copying the errors the rest of europe did and renounced the multiculture that made them strong, and lo and behold, they lost their position as number one to another state that has embraced multiculturalism, the USA.

No!

Britain was strong when it was one nation. When the Union Flag flew proudly from London, to Glasgow, to Belfast, to Cardiff. At the height of Empire, Scottish nationalism was the preserve of a few rich romanticists that thought the Highland culture was nice (well, once they kicked all the peasants off their land so they could enjoy the bleak and rugged scenery). 99% of people in Scotland would tell you they were British.

But with the collapse of the Empire this British identity is falling apart. To be replaced by 'civic' nationalists in Scotland and Wales, while Norn Iron has its own issues. Not only are they liberals, they also lean far to the left, and their idea of independence seems to be making their respective 'nations' into EU protectorates.

Bah!

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Yes, I do. The UK consists of at least four different major cultures: the english, the welsh, the scots and the irish. And then there's a number of colonial cultures incorporated into the kingdom/empire.

And it has worked brilliantly, and propelled the british into a position as the worlds mowt powerful empire for a few centuries. While the French ruled by the motto of one culture, that the colonies should strive towards becomming French, the Brits did the opposite and encouraged the colonies to maintain and develop their own culture. And as history has shown, this was the best way yo do it, as the Brits surpassed the French.


Britain is the shining example of how powerful a multicultural state is compared to a monocultural state.

But tthen the brits started copying the errors the rest of europe did and renounced the multiculture that made them strong, and lo and behold, they lost their position as number one to another state that has embraced multiculturalism, the USA.

Britain has never been multi-cultural, your Imperial pipe-dream is just that. the reality is that British Civil Servants were put in place to oversee the "civilising" of the natives, this is why politicians in South Africa and India wear suits and speak English as, at the least, a second language. The difference between Briain and France was that the British were willing to bide their time and allow superior British technology and a better way of living do the civilising for them.

Go to India and ask "what have the British done for us" and you'll get a rehash of the Monty Python sketch.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I would just like to correct myself after talking to Miotas who pointed out that Australia's history is conducive to multiculturalism. I was unaware of the large part of australian identity that came from past immigrants (that were not from the UK).

So make that Australia and the United States. I am sure someone else will PM me informing me of some other country's history I am ignorant about. Please do.

[Megas Methuselah]

I would just like to correct myself after talking to Miotas who pointed out that Australia's history is conducive to multiculturalism. I was unaware of the large part of australian identity that came from past immigrants (that were not from the UK).

So make that Australia and the United States. I am sure someone else will PM me informing me of some other country's history I am ignorant about. Please do.

WTF MAN?! Lol.

[Fragony]

Yes indeedy, the US did do best during the years they started embracing multiculturalism. And they are still number one because they still embrace multiculturalism.

I disagree, they never embraced multiculturalism, it's just not that much of an issue where you are from. I wish Euro lefties would start collecting Pokemon to keep them busy instead enforcing quota because everything should reflect society, must have taken a walk in NY and never really left. Can't engineer society. Multiculteralism is engineering society

[a completely inoffensive name]

Can't engineer society.

Civil Rights Act.

[Fragony]

Civil Rights Act.

You don't really understand multiculturalism, the idea was to fight nationalism by making people culturally homeless, as it will prevent wars, it isn't just mindless stupidity there's a real idea behind it. A really daft one if you ask me.

[a completely inoffensive name]

You don't really understand multiculturalism, the idea was to fight nationalism by making people culturally homeless, as it will prevent wars, it isn't just mindless stupidity there's a real idea behind it. A really daft one if you ask me.

Wait, not following you here. How do you make people culturally homeless by being more accepting of their culture?

[The Stranger]

You don't really understand multiculturalism, the idea was to fight nationalism by making people culturally homeless, as it will prevent wars, it isn't just mindless stupidity there's a real idea behind it. A really daft one if you ask me.

you forgot to mention it were the old stupid leftists who came up with it, or is it common knowledge by now??? yay blamegame!!! dont hate the game, hate the player!

[Fragony]

Wait, not following you here. How do you make people culturally homeless by being more accepting of their culture?

Because it's the national culture that needs to be replaced, it's a social engineers theory. No bad intentions, post WW2 thingie, but incredibly stupid.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Wait, not following you here. How do you make people culturally homeless by being more accepting of their culture?

The idea is that ethno-Nationalism caused WWII, and Germany was so dangerous because it had a homogenous population that could bge steered easiliy in one direction (Jew hating). Multiculturalism is a kind of cultural-relativism that divorces identity from place and feelings of national pride/self esteem. In theory it makes the idea of a "Master Race" litterally inconcieable.

In practice it has consisted of the state trying to supress the historically dominat culture, to the detriment of the general population and not to the benefit of immigrants.

[Furunculus]

The idea is that ethno-Nationalism caused WWII, and Germany was so dangerous because it had a homogenous population that could bge steered easiliy in one direction (Jew hating). Multiculturalism is a kind of cultural-relativism that divorces identity from place and feelings of national pride/self esteem. In theory it makes the idea of a "Master Race" litterally inconcieable.

In practice it has consisted of the state trying to supress the historically dominat culture, to the detriment of the general population and not to the benefit of immigrants.

so true, and it remains the stupidest and most dangerous ideology yet to be devised:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transnational_progressivism

The fascination with using proportionalism in defence of ‘victim’ groups, the institutionalisation of multitudinous identities, and the end of majority rule in favour of power sharing, all of these serve to break the network of trust that binds the citizen to their state, to be replaced with endless waltz of realignments as you ceaselessly redefine your identity, and a serf-like deference to a supra-national authority. You are too busy to care about the previous loyalty, and anyway, wasn’t it replaced by something ‘higher’?

At least that's the theory, reality hasn't really worked out too well for TP, common sense keeps sticking its unwanted nose in.

[Beskar]

so true, and it remains the stupidest and most dangerous ideology yet to be devised:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transnational_progressivism

Out of curiosity, I read that, and I bet you would love to know my reaction to it as well.


Transnational progressivism is a term coined to describe an ideology that endorses a concept of postnational global citizenship and promotes the authority of international institutions over the sovereignty of individual nation-states

That sounds good, the destruction of nation states to free the population in disrupts between lines of pieces of paper, to help ensure a constructive future where we are all equal partners. I have no issues with that at all. I am starting to like this "Transnational Progressivism" ... Lets read more about it.


Advocating the goals of an identity group rather than individual: "The key political unit is not the individual citizen...but the ascriptive group (racial, ethnic, or gender) into which one is born."

An oppressor/victim dichotomy: "Transnational ideologists have incorporated the essentially Hegelian Marxist "privileged vs. marginalized" dichotomy," with "immigrant groups designated as victims."

Proportional representation by group: "Transnational progressivism assumes that "victim" groups should be represented in all professions roughly proportionate to their percentage of the population. If not, there is a problem of "underrepresentation."

Change in institutional values: "the distinct worldviews of ethnic, gender, and linguistic minorities must be represented" within dominant social and political institutions.[2][3]

Change in the assimilation paradigm: "The traditional paradigm based on the assimilation of immigrants into an existing American civic culture is obsolete and must be changed to a framework that promotes "diversity," defined as group proportionalism."

Redefinition of democracy: "Changing the system of majority rule among equal citizens to one of power sharing among ethnic groups composed of both citizens and non-citizens.

Oh what the heck?! Burn Transnational progressivism in a holy-fire! What on earth is this nonsense? "Identity groups" "ethnic groups" "denying the individual liberty". What is this, a global racist part democracy, where your political parties are the Nazi's, Al Queda, the Black Panthers, Klu Klux Klan, Chinese Supremacy and Glenn Beck?

[Furunculus]

hehe, are you having a bad day? :)

[Beskar]

hehe, are you having a bad day? :)

Nah, just saying how should one can say a good idea then totally screw it up in ways unimaginable by associating it with unrelated things.

[Furunculus]

Nah, just saying how should one can say a good idea then totally screw it up in ways unimaginable by associating it with unrelated things.

don't limit yourself to wikipedia, there are greater tracts within which the full debilitating madness is exposed:

http://www.hudson.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=publication_details&id=1008

http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=35209

[a completely inoffensive name]

The idea is that ethno-Nationalism caused WWII, and Germany was so dangerous because it had a homogenous population that could bge steered easiliy in one direction (Jew hating). Multiculturalism is a kind of cultural-relativism that divorces identity from place and feelings of national pride/self esteem. In theory it makes the idea of a "Master Race" litterally inconcieable.

In practice it has consisted of the state trying to supress the historically dominat culture, to the detriment of the general population and not to the benefit of immigrants.

Oh, well that is stupid.

You guys made it seem like it is some leftist plot or something. Just call it for what it is, an overreaction to the nationalist fervor of Hitler.

[HoreTore]

Oh, well that is stupid.

You guys made it seem like it is some leftist plot or something. Just call it for what it is, an overreaction to the nationalist fervor of Hitler.

What it is?

Irrational fears of the unknown from people who deep down believe that they are better than foreign people. They're all afraid of simple change, that the world now looks different than it did yesterday is interpreted in their defunct brain as bad by default.

That is what the opposition to multiculturalism is.

Conservatives are in general unable to Come up with new ideas, which is why their political platform consists of replicating what has been done before.

[rory_20_uk]

No it's not. There may be some who want society to be ossified, but many, many accept the influx of ideas to the culture. I'd estimate that the vast majority don't want society to be ossified.

The difference is in for example, Shakespeare's time many words were added to the English language to enrich English. The Empire has also brought back ideas and words. I like a iced G&T - the tonic helps the gin - I don't need the quinine. A curry is always good.

Come here, add to our culture, enrich our culture. If you don't want to do so then go elsewhere.

But it's a lot easier to argue against the ridiculous parody you paint, rather than the truth.

~:smoking:

[Furunculus]

Irrational fears of the unknown from people who deep down believe that they are better than foreign people. They're all afraid of simple change, that the world now looks different than it did yesterday is interpreted in their defunct brain as bad by default.

That is what the opposition to multiculturalism is.

Conservatives are in general unable to Come up with new ideas, which is why their political platform consists of replicating what has been done before.
even if you were right, it is the will of the people who are you to advocate enforcement of multiculturalism regardless of that will?

no, opposition is a recognition of said human behaviour, and an understanding that you actually create increased civil and social tension under multi-culturalism.

you misunderstand what a Conservative is, which has nothing to do with radical solutions and everything to do with require unequivocal evidence that a problem exists and a solution is effective before bringing down institutions that apparently function very well.

[HoreTore]

The fundamental issue is that there are a lot of people in our part of the world who cannt stand to see other people act in ways they thenselves would not, and especially not if they're also capable of being happy while they live in outside what is considered normal. There is a deep hatred towards anyone and everything that deviates from a set standard of living(ie. the way "normal people" live), be it goth kids, skaters or foreigners. Anyone who behaves outside the norm must be made to see the light or made to go away. "We know what's best for you" and "Conform! Conform! Conform!" is the conservative slogans.

Everything diffrent is a threat, every independent thought is opposition that must be crushed, preferably as early as possible. Children must play with toys deemed appropriate, school children must be forced to wear uniforms so as to squash any rebellion early and completely erradicate the youth's sense of personal identity, which in turn fuels the desperate need for a group identity. This group identity must be protected against deviant behaviour of course, and then we are back at the beginning of is circle.

Damn 'em all to hell.

[Greyblades]

Oh what the heck?! Burn Transnational progressivism in a holy-fire! What on earth is this nonsense? "Identity groups" "ethnic groups" "denying the individual liberty". What is this, a global racist part democracy, where your political parties are the Nazi's, Al Queda, the Black Panthers, Klu Klux Klan, North Korea Best Korea and Glenn Beck?
You missed out BNP.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The fundamental issue is that there are a lot of people in our part of the world who cannt stand to see other people act in ways they thenselves would not, and especially not if they're also capable of being happy while they live in outside what is considered normal. There is a deep hatred towards anyone and everything that deviates from a set standard of living(ie. the way "normal people" live), be it goth kids, skaters or foreigners. Anyone who behaves outside the norm must be made to see the light or made to go away. "We know what's best for you" and "Conform! Conform! Conform!" is the conservative slogans.

Everything diffrent is a threat, every independent thought is opposition that must be crushed, preferably as early as possible. Children must play with toys deemed appropriate, school children must be forced to wear uniforms so as to squash any rebellion early and completely erradicate the youth's sense of personal identity, which in turn fuels the desperate need for a group identity. This group identity must be protected against deviant behaviour of course, and then we are back at the beginning of is circle.

Damn 'em all to hell.

You have got to be kidding.

You just have to be.

This is just drivel, "conform" has always been the clarion cry of the Left, not the Right.

[HoreTore]

You have got to be kidding.

You just have to be.

This is just drivel, "conform" has always been the clarion cry of the Left, not the Right.

Yes, of course. Everything bad is the other sides fault and anyone not conforming to your political stance must be either kidding or insane.

The old geezer telling goth kids to stop their nonsense and start acting like normal people is obviously a flaming hippie leftie.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Yes, of course. Everything bad is the other sides fault and anyone not conforming to your political stance must be either kidding or insane.

Because you absolutely did not do that yourself in your rant that PVC quoted...

[HoreTore]

Because you absolutely did not do that yourself in your rant that PVC quoted...

I only talked of one issue, that of opposition to multiculturalism. And since the left is accused of being in favour of multiculturalism, it seems fitting that oppositon to it is a thing conservatives do.

But I do know that there are oppnents to multiculture within what is called "the left", and what I said applies to them as well.

[Furunculus]

The fundamental issue is that there are a lot of people in our part of the world who cannt stand to see other people act in ways they thenselves would not, and especially not if they're also capable of being happy while they live in outside what is considered normal. There is a deep hatred towards anyone and everything that deviates from a set standard of living(ie. the way "normal people" live), be it goth kids, skaters or foreigners. Anyone who behaves outside the norm must be made to see the light or made to go away. "We know what's best for you" and "Conform! Conform! Conform!" is the conservative slogans.

Everything different is a threat, every independent thought is opposition that must be crushed, preferably as early as possible. Children must play with toys deemed appropriate, school children must be forced to wear uniforms so as to squash any rebellion early and completely eradicate the youth's sense of personal identity, which in turn fuels the desperate need for a group identity. This group identity must be protected against deviant behaviour of course, and then we are back at the beginning of is circle.

Damn 'em all to hell.

i absolutely recognise what you describe, and believe it or not i find it loathsome too.

i don't know how well multi-culturalism, or the backlash against it, translates from culture to culture but i have always found it to be pernicious in the british sense because it has historically come combined with mass immigration which encourages a minority to call for changes from broader society to accomodate their needs.

why does this matter? because one of the very definitions of britishness is the words of Mrs Patrick Campbell:

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mrs_Patrick_Campbell


Does it really matter what these affectionate people do — so long as they don’t do it in the streets and frighten the horses!

this is inherently a tolerant viewpoint, which is why it is perceived as deeply offensive when minorities call for alien concepts such as sharia, or abuse soldiers returning from warzones, because the tolerance is not being reciprocated, it is being abused.

but, where you get stupid people who believe that islam has no place in britain, or brown people should get back to where they came from, you will find me arguing against them.

when you get outraged people who say that political islam has no place in britain, or any essentially alien orthodoxy that a minority is trying to push down the throats of the 'natives', i have some sympathy.

i will likewise argue against those who advocate policy that deliberately seeks to bring divisions between people, by promoting their racial, ethnic, cultural difference, because all that matters to me is that someone is british, and considers them-self british. this is essentially what transnational progressivism is!

civic/liberal nationalism.

p.s. it's not even because i like to sing the national anthem (never have), or meet the queen (never will), or fly a union jack (never wanted to), it is merely because i recognise that attempting to contort people from their identity, national or otherwise, is a pernicious activity that only increases civil/social tension, which isn't good for anybody in britain.

p.p.s. i do have a flag in my house, it is pinned to the ceiling above my bed (my man room avec PC, not the room i sleep in), as it has for years several now............... it is a french flag given to me by friends in 'honour' of my Huguenot heritage. :)

[HoreTore]

Breaking news:

Furunculus and HoreTore reaches agreement - Satan struggles to stop ongoing snowball wars.

[Greyblades]

I was wondering why my tea had frozen in the kettle.

[a completely inoffensive name]

You have got to be kidding.

You just have to be.

This is just drivel, "conform" has always been the clarion cry of the Left, not the Right.

Conform has been the clarion call of all radicals. You got Marxists on the left wanting us all to give up this material possession and that for the great good blah blah blah, and you got modern day tea party rightists talking about America being a Christian country and how "if you don't love it then leave it".

[HoreTore]

I too have a flag in my apartment. In my living room, on the wall next to my TV. It's one of these:

http://www.sjappa.net/skjerf-flagg/flagg_1#variation=67226

Though an older version of it...

[Furunculus]

Breaking news:

Furunculus and HoreTore reaches agreement - Satan struggles to stop ongoing snowball wars.

*hugs*

very nice flag, but what does it mean?

[HoreTore]

"Vålerenga" is the name of the team.

"Ære være" means something along the lines of "honour upon". It translates really, really badly... The one I have says "Pride of Oslo" instead.

[Fragony]

I only talked of one issue, that of opposition to multiculturalism. And since the left is accused of being in favour of multiculturalism, it seems fitting that oppositon to it is a thing conservatives do.

Nothing more conservative than the left, not open to any critisism whatsoever. A gutmensch will always solemny declare they want open debate but even a shred of doubt about them knowing better makes them really unpleasant. Sometimes I wonder if it's simply about class status to be ignorant of the concerns of the less fortunate, even a touch of sadism I don't rule out.

[Strike For The South]

So are we kicking teh brown people out?

Can the mocha ones stay?

[rory_20_uk]

So are we kicking teh brown people out?

Can the mocha ones stay?

Please find exibit 1 - a fantastic example of what happens when earlier posts are skimmed over...

~:smoking:

[Furunculus]

Please find exibit 1 - a fantastic example of what happens when earlier posts are skimmed over...

~:smoking:

lol, strikes moral outrage leaps ahead of his reading speed. :D

[Fragony]

So are we kicking teh brown people out?

Can the mocha ones stay?

Que. I understand you can't write all that well but the hardships of limitation don't seem to end there. No we are not kicking 'the brownies' out because of a failed concept. The worst racism there is, the patronising kind, from people who live in 100% white neighbourhoods and put their children on 100% white schools, has outstayed it's welcome though. Multiculturalism is dead. Not the open society, it's alive and doing mostly well. People who live in 100% white neighbourhoods and put their children on 100% white schools and get a stroke when seing one of these brownies becomming their neighbours will still claw at your eyes if you bring up that everything isn't 100% ok, but they are a dying breed.

[The Stranger]

Nothing more conservative than the left, not open to any critisism whatsoever. A gutmensch will always solemny declare they want open debate but even a shred of doubt about them knowing better makes them really unpleasant. Sometimes I wonder if it's simply about class status to be ignorant of the concerns of the less fortunate, even a touch of sadism I don't rule out.

=_=

[a completely inoffensive name]

Nothing more conservative than the left, not open to any critisism whatsoever. A gutmensch will always solemny declare they want open debate but even a shred of doubt about them knowing better makes them really unpleasant. Sometimes I wonder if it's simply about class status to be ignorant of the concerns of the less fortunate, even a touch of sadism I don't rule out.

I like to think I have been open to criticism...

[Fragony]

I like to think I have been open to criticism...

Don't feel adressed when you do. The funniest part is that the immigrants are starting to notice it as well. When the former minister of integration, a classical case, visited one of the more troubled area's the Maroccan and Turkish complained about her not being even willing to talk with the native Dutch. They are starting to realise they are no more than a pet in a private zoo.

edit: Without further comment we all know what we mean http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/qed/2011/01/on-muslim-integration

[Strike For The South]

Fragony that's a personal attack! I'm hurt :sad:

You Europeans are so protective over your precious culture, it's always the muslims this and the muslims that and the muslims raped my daughter and cut off my sons head

When it boils down to it many of you cant get over the fact that these people don't act exactly like you or hold the exact same values, so you get your panties in a bunch and blame all of your ills on them which doesn't exactly endear them toward you

They will assimalate, no one wants to wallow in there own sexually repressed filth forever. Wait it out. You could start rescinding some of the redic social handouts you give and start having actual poor people again but thats just me

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Fragony that's a personal attack! I'm hurt :sad:

You Europeans are so protective over your precious culture, it's always the muslims this and the muslims that and the muslims raped my daughter and cut off my sons head

When it boils down to it many of you cant get over the fact that these people don't act exactly like you or hold the exact same values, so you get your panties in a bunch and blame all of your ills on them which doesn't exactly endear them toward you

They will assimalate, no one wants to wallow in there own sexually repressed filth forever. Wait it out. You could start rescinding some of the redic social handouts you give and start having actual poor people again but thats just me

*Shrug*

They can assimilate now or leave, they are currently far more trouble than they're worth. I have no truck a culture that allows a man to divorce his wife in three breaths.

[InsaneApache]

I am a bit uneasy about this. I am planning to leave Britain to seek asylum. It is not that I don’t like our way of life, but I want to do it somewhere else, and that creates some difficulty because, you see, the indigenous population might object to some of the changes that must necessarily be made to their culture in order to embrace my Englishness, which, I am sure you will agree, is my human right.

I am minded to move over to France in order to be closer to Raccoon Operational HQ. France has always appealed to me as a man because they know how to treat their women. Plus, it is a lot warmer out there and there are still places you can light a fag. So ok, the downside is that their cars fall to pieces, but at least they still make cars, albeit with the steering wheel on the wrong side.

But I have a few qualms. I am still English. Naturally, I will enlist the support of my fellow expats in pushing for a few changes in French Society. Cuisine: (even the word gives me the shudders). First, I shall demand that restaurants provide all menus with an English translation. Next they should serve only well done steak and chips will be served with salt and vinegar, not some white slimy stuff. Stinky cheese with added Listeria will be right out. As an Englishman, the smell offends me and there are documented health issues. I find the term rosbif deeply abusive and obviously racist. It will be banned because I shall join the local council, whatever they call it, and campaign for legislation, not only on language reform but that people who still eat ortolans and frogs legs be beheaded. Since they already have a device for doing the job cleanly and quickly, this should not pose major logistical problems.

Then there is the question of clothing and deportment. English women prefer to be dowdy; they wear knickers, not lingerie and then they must be coloured grey (eventually). Even the term BCBG is implicitly nationalistic and, I think you will agree, marginalises us English. I shall accordingly seek to introduce a law that requires all French women to wear dull, uncoordinated clothes. The wearing in public of a Hermès scarf, casually draped around the neck against a black Lagerfeld top will be at first discouraged, then banned.

Yes, I think I shall enjoy my escape to a place where I can feel more at home, but there are going to have to be some changes. Of course, if the French offer me a cash bonus and some Galeries Lafayette vouchers, I may consider meeting them half way. (nb. The majority of Englishmen are law abiding citizens).

http://www.annaraccoon.com/politics/noblesse-oblige/

:laugh4:

[Furunculus]

roflmao!:laugh4:

[Fragony]

The typical nonsense, it's the other way around, it aren't muslims that annoy but the islamphilae of the left. Example. A brainfart from the scientific buro of naturally labour. BIG PROBLEM muslims don't go to parks. Wonder if they ever saw a park because they do, but the decision was final they. don't. go. to. parks. Something MUST be done and fast. Like putting North-Africa herbs, they know muslims like picking herbs. No idea why they know that but they. like. that. Dogs should naturally be banned, and footbaths should be installed everywhere because all muslims wash their feet 5 times a day. All of them. Doesn't really matter that they don't but hey they are the scientists. All. do. Of course the park should be patrolled to let people know they are behaving in an indecent way and correct them.

Voila the nitwits very progressively want to recreate Iran. Nobody ever asked for it but of course, the parks are packed with muslims guess they never go to parks. But ES MUSS SEIN. Islamphilae.

[Idaho]

Well done everyone. The whole issue in a microcosm. Basic definitions of 'Multiculturalism' that everyone assumes they all share, yet all see completely differently - in some cases at polar opposites to everyone else. On top of which a total confusion about what the 'end' of this amorphous beast would mean.

This debate is total nonsense.

[Idaho]

The typical nonsense, it's the other way around, it aren't muslims that annoy but the islamphilae of the left. Example. A brainfart from the scientific buro of naturally labour. BIG PROBLEM muslims don't go to parks. Wonder if they ever saw a park because they do, but the decision was final they. don't. go. to. parks. Something MUST be done and fast. Like putting North-Africa herbs, they know muslims like picking herbs. No idea why they know that but they. like. that. Dogs should naturally be banned, and footbaths should be installed everywhere because all muslims wash their feet 5 times a day. All of them. Doesn't really matter that they don't but hey they are the scientists. All. do. Of course the park should be patrolled to let people know they are behaving in an indecent way and correct them.

Voila the nitwits very progressively want to recreate Iran. Nobody ever asked for it but of course, the parks are packed with muslims guess they never go to parks. But ES MUSS SEIN. Islamphilae.

Well if anyone can understand that brain fart, I congratulate them :laugh4:

[Fragony]

Well if anyone can understand that brain fart, I congratulate them :laugh4:

It wouldn't be crazy if it maked any sense

[Furunculus]

daniel hannan explains camerons speech to an american audience via newsweek:

http://www.newsweek.com/2011/02/13/cameron-s-crusade.html