Multiculturalism is dead

[al Roumi]

"valuing diversity"

Perhaps I owe you a more substantive response, but I do think you are missing the point in railing against "diversity".

"Some immigrant groups have nothing but admirable qualities. They should be admired for their admirable qualities. We should say "they are objectively good people". But when you 'value diversity" you aren't doing that. And the flipside is that when they aren't admirable, you are still "valuing diversity". It's wrong both ways. It's a phrase that's terribly weak in praise, and lacks the capacity for criticism.

"Diversity", and valuing it is precisely not about productivity or worth and is certainly not a scoring chart for integration. It's just about not being a homogenous blob of society and taking pleasure in that.

[Furunculus]

it is not the governments job to enforce diversity on its citizens, which is what has happened in towns and cities up and down the land.

[al Roumi]

it is not the governments job to enforce diversity on its citizens, which is what has happened in towns and cities up and down the land.

Indeed not, how is it that the (presumably past) government has enforced diversity?

[Fragony]

Indeed not, how is it that the (presumably past) government has enforced diversity?

They even admitted that it was active policy 'rubbing diversity in the noses of the right', exact words, googlydo

[Furunculus]

Indeed not, how is it that the (presumably past) government has enforced diversity?

by uncontrolled immigration leading to the ghettoisation of our immigrant populations, and the crowding out of marginal groups among the native population.

if you want to create a more cohesive and happy society, which ought to be the goal of any government, then uncontrolled immigration is exactly the wrong way to go about it.

i realise you are happy eating your cous-cous salad in the local somalian restaurant, well guess what, so am i, but there are a lot of working class people who feel marginalised in their own society and squeezed out of their own community.

that does not make a cohesive and happy society, it is that simple. end of!

[al Roumi]

by uncontrolled immigration leading to the ghettoisation of our immigrant populations, and the crowding out of marginal groups among the native population.

if you want to create a more cohesive and happy society, which ought to be the goal of any government, then unconctrolled immigration is exactly the wrong way to go about it.

While I might quibble on what the assumed alternative is to uncontrolled immigration (but not here), I agree that it was wishfull thinking, verging on negligence, to assume that everyone would just get along fine.

i realise you are happy eating your cous-cous salad in the local somalian restaurant, well guess what, so am i

[rory_20_uk]

I have always thought that the purpose of immigration should be to try to improve the populace of the country - to gain those with the most to give in terms of skills etc, not to take in all and sundry who view it as a better option than where they currently come from by means legal or otherwise.

Coupled with the utter fear of implicit or explicit integration one ends up where we currently are.

[Furunculus]

While I might quibble on what the assumed alternative is to uncontrolled immigration (but not here), I agree that it was wishfull thinking, verging on negligence, to assume that everyone would just get along fine.

just so long as you don't lose sight of the most important part of what i said, the bit you forgot to quote:

but there are a lot of working class people who feel marginalised in their own society and squeezed out of their own community.

[Fragony]

Not just those, it's kinda ironic but my anti-immigration blond Mozart would be nothing without immigrants. He gets a considerable amount of votes from non-ethnic Dutch

edit @ furuncules, and yay to SK

[al Roumi]

just so long as you don't lose sight of the most important part of what i said, the bit you forgot to quote:

...but there are a lot of working class people who feel marginalised in their own society and squeezed out of their own community.

Their marginalisation is a massive issue, but not one I would blame on or tie to immigration. I concede that the public eye has perhaps strayed from their plight to that of more recent arrivals to the UK, but again -that does not mean that immigrants or immigration are the cause or root of the UK's poor and their condition.

I still don't quite get it though.

Are you not interested in the world and understanding the people and things around you? I know how trite that sounds but if I'm totally honest, that's about the most basic level of "valuing diversity".

Have you ever travelled outside of the US? We can stop this conversation right here if you never have and have no interest in doing so, but that would (IMO) be a pretty sad indictement on your view of the world.

It's perfectly understandle that one might prefer familliar things, but familliar things are only so by dint of er, familliarity -built up over time. Don't you get bored of them either? On the most basic level, are you never tempted to try a different beer, just to mix things up a bit (maybe the one in the odd bottle with the strange writing)?

You don't have to take "valuing diversity" to the level of anthropology (or turning the world into a cultural zoo) but, for my part I find it fascinating to understand how and why people live in differnt ways -precisely because they are and have been affected by such a range of circumstances.

Neither do I think valuing diversity is turning one's back on one's "mother culture", to drop another cliche, you appreciate things more when you come back to them. Having a strong grounding in one's own culture also helps to contextualise another -it also gives you more to share (i.e. not just the dope or LSD I'm clearly taking to get this - far out, man).

[Fragony]

Perhaps I owe you a more substantive response, but I do think you are missing the point in railing against "diversity".



"Diversity", and valuing it is precisely not about productivity or worth and is certainly not a scoring chart for integration. It's just about not being a homogenous blob of society and taking pleasure in that.

When done right, but 'wanting' diversity is a form of racism, the 'how good of you!' kind. Equality should be a given, a policy of diversity rules that out. People feel best when treated with respect.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

"Diversity", and valuing it is precisely not about productivity or worth and is certainly not a scoring chart for integration. It's just about not being a homogenous blob of society and taking pleasure in that.

I still don't quite get it though.

The sport I like is football. Other people in the world watch cricket and nascar and baseball etc. But I don't take pleasure in the fact that football isn't the only sport that everyone watches. I watch the olympics and the world cup, and I'm glad they exist because they are fun to watch. But there's never a moment when my happiness comes from being glad that there's diversity. Same with food, music, art...so I don't understand where that pleasure comes from for you. I like what I like, other people like what they like. There's also lots of cultural practices that I think we'd be better off if they died out. Generally people are always striving to change their own culture for the better. I don't think it's different for other cultures. If drinking too much soda is a negative aspect of american culture, then it's a negative aspect of mexican culture too.

I don't think any culture is a homogeneous blob either. There's many different kinds of people in the world.

Thirdly (I think), it seems to me that culture is something that comes into existence in response to a certain situation (like how companies will work to create a certain company culture). So non-western cultures becoming westernized seems perfectly natural.

And I think it goes without saying that it would be nice if society was a homogeneous blog regarding things like the equality of women.