Page 1 of 2 1 2 Last

What are your opinions on multiculturism and how nations should handle foreign immigrants?

My opinion,

I always have had no problem with foreign immigrants becoming citizens of the country they wish to move to. However, I have alwys been a supporter of integration into the community. For example, language. Everyone should be able to speak their choice of language at home, however, in a nation where a language is either the national language or needed to succeed, the immigrant should be taught at least a basic fluency to get by. A basic knowledge in the history of their nation should be taught, in order to give them a familiarization to their new home. The teachings of civil liberties, especially when it comes to people from areas where these are not either accepted nor followed, and Western values.

A person should always be able to keep their culture and language with them, but they need to adapt to the nation they move to.

1) You need to be able to speak at least one official language of the nation before you can get a permanent residence permit, no question.
2) Some traditions need to be kept by the immigrant, and some need to be assimilated. For example, culinary tradition adds a lot to the existing culture. A radical Islamist treating his women like he does in Saudi Arabia, not so much.
3) You came here because you preferred here to your old country. Remember that.

Assimilate to the host nation or get out.

I am pretty much against multiculturalism.

Sweden is probably the country in the world that has accepted the most immigrants.

Crime has gone up a LOT, and we now have ghettos (this was unheard of before).

In my oppinion, a country should ONLY accept as many foreigners as they can assimilate, and have harsh rules about assimilation.

Of course, it goes both ways... The state has an obligation to help immigrants gets settled in, and the immigrants have a obligation to get settled in.

If you don not wish to participate in the culture that you move to, you should stay where you are. In my oppinion.

As previosly stated, I have moved from sweden to austria.

I would not DREAM about celebrating midsummer, watching donald duck at christmas eve or any of the other swedish traditions.

I am in Austria now, I try to master the german language and I do my best to learn the Austrian traditions.

Oh, and Crampus is by far a cooler tradition than anything Sweden have anyway;)

Okay first off let me put in the disclaimer, that multiculturalism will never go away until we're in Star Trek and every nation has caught up in the tech and wealth and standard of living race, and we have some kind of perfectly functioning moneyless socialism or something. There really is no way to get out of it unless you want to talk about ending capitalism pretty much, because as long as some guy with skinny kids is thinking, you know, I make $5 a day here and I could make $5 an hour right over that imaginary line, there will be sufficient motivation for immigration, both legal and illegal.

That being said, I am not sure about how some of the "ideals for accomodating multiculturalism" are plausible. I mean, how are you going to enforce someone "assimilating", unless you do what the U.S. did with natives and abduct their kids and send them to schools where they get hit on the tongue with a ruler if they speak anything other than English or don't read the prayers in church? A lot of this comes down to Sociology 101. People tend to think the immigration concerns of today are always different than in the past, and very rarely is this ever true. You can go back to the 1800's and read quotes by Teddy Roosevelt and others talking about how the immigrants of today (meaning, their day) were not as good or qualified to become good Americans as the hearty immigrant stock of the past. In fact you could find many quotes from America's past about immigration of that day and just substitute "Irish" or "Italian" or "Chinese" with "Mexican" and it would sound a lot like today.

Couple things we can learn from basic Soc:

1) First generation immigrants NEVER completely lose the primary native tongue as a primary language. They may, to varying degrees, become proficient in the new home language. But they never do so unless totally forced. This is why you tend to see newly arrived immigrant groups form cohesive communities where services and businesses conduct all kinds of services in multiple languages, such as areas of Los Angeles where you can get by with nothing but Spanish and parts of downtown Los Angeles where you can find accountants, travel agents, hotels, restaurants and doctors who all speak Japanese.

2) By the third generation in a new country, all immigrant groups are close to complete loss of the original language. This is true whether you're talking about Jews in 1800's New England or Mexicans in 2007 Arizona. But people somehow always think groups are just worse than they used to be, and refusing to learn the language. Complete transition to English doesn't occur in any group until the third generation, second generation usually is bilingual (but frequently illiterate in the parents' native tongue, only conversational.)

3) Cultural assimilation occurs just like language, over generations. First generation immigrants pretty much only "lose" their native culture if forced to, say for instance they are the only members of their ethnic group within 200 miles, and there is no sort of network with which to observe home traditions like holidays or celebrations. But by the third generation, the strongest cultural link to the original culture is food, with most other traditions lost or watered down.

Learn the new country's primary language, to an extent that you can function in society.

Abide by the new country's system of laws. ALL OF THEM.

That is all.

amen!
where i live in the US, there are a lot of illigal mexicans around us, and im pretty much forced to learn spanish b/c those people are too lazy (but not lazy enough to mow my lawn ) to learn english!

Koga, what you say is true. However, some examples from sweden:

1. A woman working in the service industry claimed the right to wear "burkha" (covering her face, only the eyes are barely visible). She got fired by her boss, who did not think covering your face worked very well with giving guests good service (smiles, anyone?).

I believe the boss was right to fire her, however, she sued him and won.


2. Swedish school kids from muslim countrys claim the right to celebrate their own hollidays, such as Ramadan.

The swedish school has days off during the traditional christian days, eastern, christmas and so on... however, these kids (and their parents) claim that they have a RIGHT to not be in school on their holy days, and the right to BE in school during christian ones.




Now, these are just 2 examples of idiocy that happens when immigration gets out of control.

I'd say, welcome to Sweden, but you would better be prepared to adapt.

And where is that exactly? Those damned Mexicans over here are mainly citizens, through birth or legal means, speak both Spanish and English, and are very hard workers, compared to those who say "THEY TOOK OUR JERBS!"

Well uh if you read my post, it has nothing to do with laziness. It's a basic concept in sociology that first gen immigrants only learn as much as they have to to get by. Unless your ancestors come from an English speaking country I can near guarantee that at home, they didn't use English.

yes but many are too lazy, or dont have the means, to learn english. its fact.

Many white Americans are too lazy to get jobs, what's your point?

Bolded the part that was an actual point instead of a slur. :) And I would add, "don't have cause to." Because first gen immigrants frequently form thier own communities where their own language is spoken in business.

Of course, it takes time to integrate into your new country, therefore, many first generation immigrants tend to seek out familiar kinds of people, and form communities. My problem is with his "Oh, they're too lazy to do anything but MOW MY LAWN". We need to encourage further integration with the population, but comments like those are unneccesary and racist.

Kinda shocking too. I mean here we are talking about people who work more hours at harder physical jobs at lower wages than Americans will take, and we're calling them lazy?

Ignorance is bliss.

It is Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt

Without divulging too much personal information, I beg to differ.

The exception more than the rule. Not to mention you emigrated from a first world country with financial security did you not?

There is always going to be a few exceptions to any general rule. I didn't say everyone, I said near guarantee, from all the studies done on various immigrant groups.

My opinion on multiculturalism and immigrants?

By all means, bring aspects of your culture into your new country (i love curry and sushi!) but remember - you moved here to get a better life, not to bring Derkaderkastan to a new part of the world. If you don't like the way they operate, pack your bags and go home. We have the decency to abide by your customs and traditions in your countries (mainly because we're terrified of being stoned to death), have the decency to do the same.

A very good example would be after the Muhammed cartoons, those people in London who were protesting at the ridiculous freedoms they were allowed. Back home they'd have been beaten by the police and the ringleaders never seen again. Ungrateful 's...

I wasn't talking about myself specifically, but of relatives who moved from the Eastern Bloc (East Germany/Communities in Soviet Union).



Courtesy of Fragony

Because every Arab is like that.

Besides, that cartoon leaves out the part where they made Mohammad's turban look like a bomb, right?

either way, free press is a two way street.

Of course not. Just these guys:










At any rate, cartoons usually take some form of hyperbole.

Make a cartoon of Jesus holding the bloody head of a Palestinian child and see how the Christians in our own fair, freedom-loving country react.

As I recall, it was more the face of Mohammed than the bomb that set people off, no pun intended.

And the fact you can be fined and/or jailed for denying the Holocaust. I always thought freedom of expression should work both ways.

it would stay up. There would be no riots or violence.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 Last