why did the west commit to multiculturalism?

[Papewaio]

How is it in any way relevant to talk about "Saxons, Normans, Celts etc" when talking about the the UK of 1707 onwards?

As for it being an oxymoron to call the "United Kingdom" homogenous, remember that these kingdoms were feudal creations and in that sense a bit of a blast from the past. The kingdoms of Scotland and England did not denote some sort of cultural or national divide, merely the bounds that various dynasties carved out for themselves.

Scottish nationalism originated as a sort of bourgeoisie romanticism (I'm feeling Marxist today) and has since been propagated as a result of mass Irish immigration which was a detestable assault upon the British nation.

There is one British people, one British nation, and no 'sub-nations' within it!.

I call your hand and raise it. For the record I'm half Welsh... kind of. Because there is Irish and Scottish going back a few generations. Add to that a Welsh great grandmother who was born in America... doesn't change her ethnicity, just geographic location of the touchdown.

My mum is very British, but never call her English.

Disregard the genes, look at some of the cultural differences to an atypical Englishman (which doesn't exist except in a census aggregate)... different language, geography and food are all in big enough variation to say that the average Welsh person is not the same culture as the average Englishman. That said neither is a Northern Englishman and a Southern one. There are cultures and micro cultures within Britain. I don't have to live there, I have an Eastender uncle whose rhyming slang clearly denotes that he has a different cultural heritage to someone from the same city.

British culture is a home grown multiculture. It is a combination of all those other vibrant communities.

As for failure of groups of immigrants to intergrate. Well look at the system. How well intergrated are those who have been born and bred on a council estate? Seems a failure of city planning resulting in systemic social issues.

Sydney has a few infamous equivalent areas. The ones that don't make media headlines are the areas that have government housing more thoroughly dispersed within a homeowner zone. Give kids rolemodels and they can succeed.

Some groups do come to new countries and fail to intergrate or have higher barriers. Typically those who don't move in general society become the least intergrated. Mums who stay at home and look after the kids, unemployed adults who don't mix with others and kids who go to schools of the same group without ever intergrating with mainstream kids.

I see the most important thing for schools is socialisation. Ethics and education are up to the parents.

So it comes to a shock to the insulated parents when their kids who go to school, uni and work in a multicultural society end up dating someone outside of their parents group.

Multiculturalism has it's highlights like foodcourts :) and it's lowlights like insularity. I don't want food that all tastes the same so I'm quite prepared to put up with cultural differences. A foodcourt is a laboratory of an ideal multicultural environment, the variety of foods still has to be prepared within the health and safety guidelines of the state. I also expect like a foodcourt that one can pick, choose and mix to ones content.

Back to Britain. I'm pretty sure Vindaloo's and tea don't orginate in Britain but are seen as very British.

Sometimes the best of things aren't home grown, they are home chosen.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I don't really disagree with you Pape, the only thing is (getting back to definitions here), I don't think geographic regional cultural variations are example of multiculturalism. They are not separate cultures, it is fairly petty examples of things like accent etc.

As for Britain adopting foreign things like vindaloos as part of national culture, again this is petty things like food. I don't contest the foreign influence in these things, what I don't like is foreign influence in terms of real values and having any social impact.

How can you compare having a curry with covering your wife in a burkha?

I feel there are many inappropriate comparisons and attempted parallels being flung about in this thread.

[Noncommunist]

How can you compare having a curry with covering your wife in a burkha?

One is a food fashion, the other is a clothing fashion. Doesn't seem too hard to compare them.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Disregard the genes, look at some of the cultural differences to an atypical Englishman (which doesn't exist except in a census aggregate)... different language, geography and food are all in big enough variation to say that the average Welsh person is not the same culture as the average Englishman. That said neither is a Northern Englishman and a Southern one. There are cultures and micro cultures within Britain. I don't have to live there, I have an Eastender uncle whose rhyming slang clearly denotes that he has a different cultural heritage to someone from the same city.

British culture is a home grown multiculture. It is a combination of all those other vibrant communities.

If your Mam's family are Welsh then surely you know Britian has not been multicultural until very recently, the way to get on was to be English and no one know this better than the Welsh, whose language and culture were brutalised in an attempt "civilise" them "for their own good".

Of course, that hasn't changed - except that now you have to be a different kind of English and it's more sneaky.

[Papewaio]

My mum speaks fluent Welsh and considers herself Welsh or British not English. Mum sees a clear difference in culture, heritage and the ability to use both languages. The very act of being bilingual in her eyes sets her in a different culture to the likes of my monolingual self. Multiculture isn't as dramatic as yin-yang.

[Fragony]

My mum speaks fluent Welsh and considers herself Welsh or British not English. Mum sees a clear difference in culture, heritage and the ability to use both languages. The very act of being bilingual in her eyes sets her in a different culture to the likes of my monolingual self. Multiculture isn't as dramatic as yin-yang.

Multiculturalism is an ideoligy, some posters here make the mistake of confusing it with multi-ethnic. It's true that culture has always been multi-ethnic, but that was a given not a goal. Multiculturalism is a modern day religion and religion accepts no faillure, that is all there is

[Papewaio]

First everyone can be of the same ethnic background but have a different culture. Just look at suburbanites vs country folk. Heck you can have the same family members living cultural diverse lifestyles.

Multiculturalism is allowing people to have keep their cultures within the law of the land. That is why I use a food court as an example. Many types of food and cooking styles but they have to maintain hygeine standards of the country they are in, not where they are from.

I'm fine with cultures having differences. However I'm against special laws for certain cultures or religions this includes priests not having to report a crime they have heard in confession. Everyone atheist, catholic, jew, buddhist, muslim, tin hat brigade should have the same expectations to be treated the same under the eyes of the law, both in being looked after and duties towards being a good citizen.

I do not see multiculturalism as a religion in Australia. One quarter of the population is born overseas. We have tangible benefits from it. It isn't an easy thing to implement, but in general the ROI is pretty good, but it does take 25 years plus to normally see the fruits come true.