Finally - PM states multiculturalism has failed

[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?

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/Transna..._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/Transna..._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?fuse...etails&id=1008

http://archive.frontpagemag.com/read...px?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.

[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.