Language ban in Slovakia

[Louis VI the Fat]

I'll take multicultural failure above zero-culture success of those who believe in mono-culture any day of the week.

Yes, but between France and Australia its the latter that is by far the more monocultural country.

France has twice the number of non-Westerners. France's white immigrant population is far more diverse than Australia's too, owing to more diverse immigration. And the French of French stock are among the most diverse of Europe too.

It always seems to come as a surprise to people, but France has been a major immigration country for two centuries now. White French are more easily compared to a diverse population like the US than to countries that were mostly etnically homogenous up until around 1970, like Denmark, Portugal or Australia. The people that lived in France in 1800 are a minority nowadays.


In Australia, your mixed marriage is an exception. Consider this:

Brenus - English spouse
TristusKhan - Egyptian girlfriend
Meneldil - native American Canadian girlfriend, who mercilessly bosses him around
Louis - Spanish soon-to-be-girlfriend

See?

[Louis VI the Fat]

There are some notable differences, based on historical experience and political outlook, between France and the Germanic world. (Usually 'Germany' is mentioned, but I think it can be expanded to describe entire Northern Europe and its colonial off-shoots):

French nationalism: not the race, but the language and the Republican values are the focal point.
Germanic: the Volk is central. Race is the focal point.

France: linguistic and legal equality is seen as a progressive force, against the particularism of old. In the Germanic world, the demand for uniformity is reactionary.

French unification is inclusive. As the famous example goes, in Senegal, the children would read in history class: 'our ancestors, the Gauls...'
Germanic unification is exclusive.


There is a third Western world: Eastern Europe. The Slovakian measures fit in neither scheme above. They must be regarded in the context of Hungarian / Slovakian difficulties, and ferocious nationalism.

[Furunculus]

There are some notable differences, based on historical experience and political outlook, between France and the Germanic world. (Usually 'Germany' is mentioned, but I think it can be expanded to describe entire Northern Europe and its colonial off-shoots):

French nationalism: not the race, but the language and the Republican values are the focal point.
Germanic: the Volk is central. Race is the focal point.

France: linguistic and legal equality is seen as a progressive force, against the particularism of old. In the Germanic world, the demand for uniformity is reactionary.

French unification is inclusive. As the famous example goes, in Senegal, the children would read in history class: 'our ancestors, the Gauls...'
Germanic unification is exclusive.


There is a third Western world: Eastern Europe. The Slovakian measures fit in neither scheme above. They must be regarded in the context of Hungarian / Slovakian difficulties, and ferocious nationalism.

how broad is your definition of germanic, arguably anglo-saxon britain might be included, but i wouldn't say britain was charachterised by ethnic nationalism, civic nationalism would be closer to the mark.

which definition of particularism are you branding countries with?

[Adrian II]

It always seems to come as a surprise to people, but France has been a major immigration country for two centuries now.

I keep repeating the same thing about the Netherlands, referring to the influx of Germans, Italians, Spaniards, Sephardim, French Huguenots, Scottish Puritans in the seventeenth century and to the (historically) recent influx of over three million immigrants from all over the world.

In my lifetime I count 300.000 immigrants from the former Indonesia, 370.000 from the former colony of Surinam, 372.000 Turks, 325.000 Moroccans, 183.000 Africans, 110.000 Latino's, to name but a few major groups.

Together, recent immigrants make up almost one-fifth of the Dutch population.

Yet we have no major riots, no explosive banlieus, no urban guerillas.

We're a team. We're doing fine, comparatively.

Oops, sorry. Wrong rhetoric. We stink to high heaven, of course. We're the beachhead of Eurabia! Our streets are teaming with gangs that speak a thousand languages, whole cities have been taken over by foreign forces, we keep our women and children in the home and barricade our doors at night. Soon the last living Dutchman will turn our the lights and emigrate to Canada.

[Rhyfelwyr]

They should Czech their posts more carefully.

Brilliant.

Scottish Puritans

You mean Scottish Presbyterians!

[Louis VI the Fat]

Furunculus, yes, I meant for the UK to be in the Northern Europe camp on this one. What with those dreams of populating the earth with members of the Anglosaxon race and all that.

Cecil Rhodes - there he is again-: 'Wouldn't it be a blessing to the world if those areas that are currently populated by the most wretched members of the human species were settled by members of the Anglo-Saxon race?'

Then two entire continents were genocided.

Together, recent immigrants make up almost one-fifth of the Dutch population.

Yet we have no major riots, no explosive banlieus, no urban guerillas.

We're a team. We're doing fine, comparatively.

That's great, Adrian!

You take a Switzerland. You let wanton mass immigration turn it into some sort of Brazil. And then you thumb your chest that you are not as completely run into the ground as South Africa yet.


Bless those rose-coloured multi-cultural sunglasses! Nothing to see here, move along!

[Adrian II]

That's great, Adrian!

You take a Switzerland. You let wanton mass immigration turn it into some sort of Brazil. And then you thumb your chest that you are not as completely run into the ground as South Africa yet.

I like the comparison. Swiss money, Brazilian style, Dutch courage. What's not to like, you jealous frog?

Seriously, why would you not recognize that we're doing well comparatively? Around the corner where I live some people speak languages that I have never heard of, yet when our national team play they wear orange caps and live inside their tv.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Together, recent immigrants make up almost one-fifth of the Dutch population.

Yet we have no major riots, no explosive banlieus, no urban guerillas.

No, you have Fragony.

[Adrian II]

No, you have Fragony.

He's from Czechoslovenia.

[Papewaio]

Yes, but between France and Australia its the latter that is by far the more monocultural country.

France has twice the number of non-Westerners. France's white immigrant population is far more diverse than Australia's too, owing to more diverse immigration. And the French of French stock are among the most diverse of Europe too.

It always seems to come as a surprise to people, but France has been a major immigration country for two centuries now. White French are more easily compared to a diverse population like the US than to countries that were mostly etnically homogenous up until around 1970, like Denmark, Portugal or Australia. The people that lived in France in 1800 are a minority nowadays.

Uphill battle for you.

25% of current Australians were born overseas (I'm Swedish/Welsh/English/Scottish/Irish/French born in Fiji).

Europeans didn't even settle within Australia until 1824. Only 2.6% of the Population is Aboriginal Australian or Torres Strait Island... that means since the 1800's 97% of the population is immigrant...

In Australia, your mixed marriage is an exception. Consider this:

Brenus - English spouse
TristusKhan - Egyptian girlfriend
Meneldil - native American Canadian girlfriend, who mercilessly bosses him around
Louis - Spanish soon-to-be-girlfriend

See?

I know the last part is a joke, but I love stats:
"Recent marriage patterns of overseas-born Australians There were 76,200 brides and 81,400 grooms born overseas in the three-year period 1996-98. Across all of these marriages, around 30 per cent, for both brides and grooms, were between partners in the same birthplace group. The other 70 per cent were mixed marriages, comprising about 30 per cent of marriages with long-time Australians and 40 per cent with other people from a different birthplace group. Overall, overseas-born brides were marginally more likely than overseas-born grooms to have married within their birthplace group."

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Recent marriage patterns of second-generation Australians There were more marriages of second-generation brides (88,100) and grooms (86,600) than there were of overseas-born people in the same three-year period. Marriage patterns among this group differed from those of overseas-born people. These differences were more marked for some birthplace groups than for others.
A larger proportion of these marriages (80 per cent each of brides and grooms) were mixed marriages than was the case for overseas- born people. These mixed marriages were evenly divided between those marrying long-time Australians and those marrying other people outside their birthplace group. For nearly every birthplace group listed, second-generation Australians had a greater propensity to marry long-time Australians than did overseas-born Australians. Exceptions were brides from the Philippines, where the proportion was much lower, and brides and grooms from New Zealand, where the proportions were slightly lower. For some birthplace groups, notably Viet Nam, China, the Federal Republic of Germany, India, Hong Kong, Poland, and the Former Yugoslav Republic, this difference was very marked. In addition, over half of second-generation brides and grooms with at least one parent born in New Zealand, Viet Nam, China, Philippines, India, Malaysia, Hong Kong or Poland, married someone from a different birthplace group other than a long-time Australian. For all of these birthplace groups the proportion doing so was much greater than for the corresponding group of overseas-born people.

http://www.entrenous.com.au/articles..._australia.pdf