NationStates Jolt Archive

The End of Tolerance?

"Farewell, multiculturalism. A cartoon backlash is pushing Europe to insist upon its values."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11569485/site/newsweek/

Well, what do you guys think. I mean, if this is causing the low countries, who are notorious, or loved depending on your point of view, for being uber liberal, are doing this, do you think think is setting a trend for a new Europian attitude?

These guys seem to think so.

Somehow the world will keep on spinnin'.

Somehow the world will keep on spinnin'.

Yeah but did you read the article?

Even if you dont agree with what it says its interesting as hell.

I hardly consider the Netherlands a major multi-cultural nation anyways

considering 91% of the nation is of western background

I hardly consider the Netherlands a major multi-cultural nation anyways

considering 91% of the nation is of western background

The Netherlands has been having lots of problems with arab immigrants who are ever increasing. I would say the Netherlands IS a major multi cultural nation, but regardless, it has been their liberal views that the article talks about.

It depends upon how it's done, but generally I view it as a positive: nations and religions that fundamentally respect human rights are better than those that don't. In a democratic system, people need to be acculturated with that basic fact in mind, and if they come from other nations, then they need to incorporate such a mindset into their worldview.

The question then, of course, is how such policies are enacted. A policy of isolating and depriving Muslims will only alienate Muslims in general and backfire, driving young Muslims into the ranks of what is in effect the Black Panther movement of Islam. If they are given the means to succeed in society while still retaining some of their identity, they are far more likely to become integrated into larger society.

The Netherlands has been having lots of problems with arab immigrants who are ever increasing. I would say the Netherlands IS a major multi cultural nation, but regardless, it has been their liberal views that the article talks about.

Perhaps in Europe, yes

but no where compared to the USA/Canada(the "kings" of multi-culturalism)

It depends upon how it's done, but generally I view it as a positive: nations and religions that fundamentally respect human rights are better than those that don't. In a democratic system, people need to be acculturated with that basic fact in mind, and if they come from other nations, then they need to incorporate such a mindset into their worldview.

The question then, of course, is how such policies are enacted. A policy of isolating and depriving Muslims will only alienate Muslims in general and backfire, driving young Muslims into the ranks of what is in effect the Black Panther movement of Islam. If they are given the means to succeed in society while still retaining some of their identity, they are far more likely to become integrated into larger society.

That makes very good sense. Pure logic, congrats.

Perhaps in Europe, yes

but no where compared to the USA/Canada(the "kings" of multi-culturalism)

Perhaps, but, and I dont know about Canada, America isnt doing so well for being the "king" of multi culturalism. But, seriously this thread is more about a new attitude in Europe than in North America. :)

Perhaps in Europe, yes

but no where compared to the USA/Canada(the "kings" of multi-culturalism)

The Netherlands has a much longer history of tolerating various disliked groups, while the US has a rather long history of disliking groups. The problem Netherlands and the rest of Europe are having now is that they can't assume they're the cultural neutral point any more, which is what allowed them to be tolerant. Most European countries are busy searching for some sort of identity to lead them into the modern world, and many of such are rather nationalistic, even in the Netherlands. The EU is probably making them feel especially vulnerable.

Wait a minute, it says their gonna insist on their values ...

Isn't tolerance and acceptance one of the values they're known for ....?

Chaa? What's chaa?

Yah, this article basically sounds a lot like the purported FT article posted a few weeks ago. It would be interesting if someone pulled that one up - I don't remember who posted it - for a comparison.

Even though this comes from newsweek, I question the extent to which it accurately reflects the general attitude in Europe. In other words I think it is a very slanted piece.

This is an extremely interesting challenge for Europe.

1. The EU is challenging European identity by lessening the importance of national boundaries, currencies, etc., which Europeans formerly used to identify themselves. This leaves them with questions like: What is a European, and what are we -- Dutch/French/Spanish/etc. or European?

2. The Muslim backlash against the cartoons is a direct challenge to civil rights that most Europeans say are part of their common cultural heritage but which they probably never really took time to think about in detail (much like Americans).

3. It's interesting the way Europeans are banding together to protect these rights under pressure. I'm a big liberal, but my beef against multiculturalism is that it doesn't require cultural sensitivity to be reciprocal. Respect and tolerance are two-way streets.

But it makes me wonder: Are the Europeans standing up for their tradition of civil rights because they believe in it, or because the challengers are outsiders? Are they defining themselves as Europeans, or are they dodging this issue by focusing on an outside enemy?

I think the most important issue the article brings up is the religious double standard. The way that goes I think will answer my questions.

Yah, this article basically sounds a lot like the purported FT article posted a few weeks ago. It would be interesting if someone pulled that one up - I don't remember who posted it - for a comparison.

Even though this comes from newsweek, I question the extent to which it accurately reflects the general attitude in Europe. In other words I think it is a very slanted piece.

Slanted? Maybe slanted to the left, slightly, but the the only conservative news is Fox.

Wait a minute, it says their gonna insist on their values ...

Isn't tolerance and acceptance one of the values they're known for ....?

Maybe they mean European Christian values as opposed to Middle Eastern and North African muslim values?

Maybe they mean European Christian values as opposed to Middle Eastern and North African muslim values?

Christian Europe is dead. Secular Europe is where it's at.

What 'values' are we talking about?

In the UK I have gone into Arab/Asian owned take-aways and ordered pizzas with ham. And you know what, they have ham. Most of the time it's on the big board, this one place looked a lot more conservative, but when I ordered on reflex, guess what, turned out they kept a tub of it in a cooler.

I had many Muslim friends who prayed 5 times a day and were not nutcases. At 6th Form college the Islamic Society shared their lunchtime prayer room with the Christian Union 50/50 without any difficulty. Both societies even tidied it up for whoever was using it next. And even at university the more conservative types I spoke to were merely forced on the defensive with regards to their culture after increasingly unwelcome attention from the rest of society. The BNP fascists stirring things up in a number of communities, didn't help. Every now and then there was a protest from some real Islamic fundamentalists, but they were very few in number and always isolated, frankly the Jewish society managed to sound far more xenophobic.

This talk of a dangerous incompatibility between cultures is bullshit. I have lived right next to, and among the Muslim community in urban Britain, and I haven't seen anything that the pundits talk about. All this stuff we hear in the media is outside of my experience, and that compels me to call bullshit on all of it.

I AM living in the Netherlands and i haven't even heard about some of these things ... hmm... Did that 'speaking dutch in public' thing actaully come through??? i thought everyone (including part of the government) thought it was way too much... If that's the case, i better watch out seeing as i normally speak english to most of the people I know :D

interesting poll results

interesting poll results
Mmmhmm...seems Americans disagree with Europeans about the direction of the European social model. :rolleyes:

interesting poll resultsIndeed. It seems that the people who live here and see what's going on are more likely to disregard the article than those that have to rely on the media to tell them what's going on.

And what do all the Aussies or others vote on the poll?

I think if this article is true it's frightening. They mention that the minister gave a hard time to a Muslim religious leader for not shaking his hand. That has balls to do with tolerance and it's certainly not an attempt to simply worry about the major cultural sticking points (like equal rights and whatnot). The minister might as well spit in the face of Muslims or basically anyone else that doesn't do things exactly like the Dutch.

Dutch Integration Minister Rita Verdonk, one of several top politicians under death threats from Islamists, plans courses for imams to train in citizenship and Western values. She demonstrated what that might mean in front of press cameras in January, telling an imam who refused to shake her hand because of "religious rules" that he had better learn Western customs. "Next year I expect to speak to you in Dutch," she said through an interpreter.

If Europe is going to fight assualts on freedom by throwing freedom of religion out the window (not saying it will, simply addressing the article) then it's sending the message that all freedoms are up for grabs under the proper assault.

The End of Tolerance?

"Farewell, multiculturalism. A cartoon backlash is pushing Europe to insist upon its values."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11569485/site/newsweek/

Well, what do you guys think. I mean, if this is causing the low countries, who are notorious, or loved depending on your point of view, for being uber liberal, are doing this, do you think think is setting a trend for a new Europian attitude?

These guys seem to think so.
What do I think? I think that the article is a shining example of hypocrisy!!

Whether it's the Netherlands' rediscovery of Dutch communal values, or the universal affirmations of free speech (to mock religion, or anything else), Europe is everywhere on the defensive.
Alright then "freedom of speech" it is? Maybe not?

Dutch Integration Minister Rita Verdonk, one of several top politicians under death threats from Islamists, plans courses for imams to train in citizenship and Western values. She demonstrated what that might mean in front of press cameras in January, telling an imam who refused to shake her hand because of "religious rules" that he had better learn Western customs. "Next year I expect to speak to you in Dutch," she said through an interpreter.
So then "freedom of speech" to this woman really means "freedom of speech", but only IF you speak Dutch. Why defend "freedom of speech" if you really don't believe in it?

Educated and tolerant European society? The part below suggests not.

But if Europeans aim to build multiethnic societies that play by their rules, they'll also have to get their heads around the fact that this new world will be multireligious, too—a fact that poses awkward challenges. Over much of Europe, for example, established Christian churches enjoy special state privileges and subsidies. Most mosques, by contrast, are hidden in converted shops or tenement apartments. In Copenhagen, a 15-year plan —to build a national mosque has become mired in red tape and local opposition. A German state recently passed a law banning a hijab in schools—but not yarmulkes or nun's habits.

The best part of the article:

Until such double standards can be abolished and a new equality established, Europe's new toughness will feel like forced integration. "It's a form of creating a second-class citizenship," says Tariq Modood, director of the Center for the Study of Ethnicity and Citizenship in Bristol. "All the burden of change is placed on the immigrant." And if that's not to be the case, then Europeans will almost certainly have to accord Muslim faiths the same status accorded Christianity—including, perhaps, a media that voluntarily refrains from publishing needlessly offensive images of the Prophet, not under duress from abroad but out of greater respect for local religious sensibilities.
Now that is what tolerance is supposed to be like.

If anything, it heralds an end to forced integration. 'Bout damn time.

What do I think? I think that the article is a shining example of hypocrisy!!


Alright then "freedom of speech" it is? Maybe not?


So then "freedom of speech" to this woman really means "freedom of speech", but only IF you speak Dutch. Why defend "freedom of speech" if you really don't believe in it?

Educated and tolerant European society? The part below suggests not.



The best part of the article:


Now that is what tolerance is supposed to be like.

The world is clearly ending. You and I agree and Europe is becoming a shining example of intolerance. What's next? Corny and Steph getting married?

The world is clearly ending. You and I agree and Europe is becoming a shining example of intolerance. What's next? Corny and Steph getting married?
It actually is not as bad as the artical suggests. Sure our secretary of integration is a bigot bitch, but there was an outrage over this and she had to make amends for it.

Hmmm, I see no problem with making them send their Daughters to school and stopping the conservative Muslims from making teenage brides to be their slaves anymore. Sure the forcing them to speak only dutch outside isn't really fair though. But it's their house their rules. Those maniacs waving signs saying 'Kill Freedom' are the ones to blame. Looks like their little protest backfired, those fundmentalists.

Hmmm, I see no problem with making them send their Daughters to school and stopping the conservative Muslims from making teenage brides to be their slaves anymore. Sure the forcing them to speak only dutch outside isn't really fair though. But it's their house their rules. Those maniacs waving signs saying 'Kill Freedom' are the ones to blame. Looks like their little protest backfired, those fundmentalists.
Indeed.

How about immigration be this:
-The immigrant be forced to be able to speak the country's language
-Be able to contribute to it's economy
-Be invited by a native of the country, be they employer/individual etc, who will provide their accommodation and employment and so on, and who takes full risk for all their actions. Immigration by invitation, just like free trade is acceptance of goods by invititation. No more entry of welfare leeches.

It actually is not as bad as the artical suggests. Sure our secretary of integration is a bigot bitch, but there was an outrage over this and she had to make amends for it.

However, it's not just one secretary. The very laws are evidence of a problem. Also, one could point to the intolerance of disallowing head scarfs and yamulkas in public schools. Head scarfs are not religious, they are cultural. I met a woman here in America that is the head of her family. She enjoys all of the freedoms of being an American woman, but she chooses to wear a head scarf because she considers it modest. To her, being denied the right to cover her hair is like telling her that she may not wear a shirt. But France has no issue telling women they must walk around in a way that to them is similar to being forced to be topless.

Pfft, I guess spending my life in Europe and spending years living in the middle of one of the UK's largest Muslim communities has merely mislead me about the Threat the Others pose to Our Way of Life, which we must Defend, by force on the streets if necessary. :rolleyes:

It's bullshit. Politicians like to act tough for the camera. They also like to act sensitive for the camera. They can do both the same week if their PR department tells them. The rhetoric is one thing, the reality on the ground is another. We're talking about an "unintegated" Muslim community which drives riced cars, sells hashish, sells pork products and has its own music stores (take a drive down the A34 Rusholme and tell me Islamic fundamentalism is leading a backclash against music and video).

This article is a classic example of something written to satisfy a target audience - manufacturing the news some group wants to hear. :rolleyes:

Hmmm, I see no problem with making them send their Daughters to school and stopping the conservative Muslims from making teenage brides to be their slaves anymore. Sure the forcing them to speak only dutch outside isn't really fair though. But it's their house their rules. Those maniacs waving signs saying 'Kill Freedom' are the ones to blame. Looks like their little protest backfired, those fundmentalists.

Hmmm... and this only affects people who protested? I think not. It's unfortunate that the exposed bigotry of some of the people who makes such ludicrous claims doesn't backfire and their rights are not the ones that are lost.

The world is clearly ending. You and I agree and Europe is becoming a shining example of intolerance. What's next? Corny and Steph getting married?
:eek: Too funny!! Well if Steph and Corny ever got married, I assume that the only way that she would agree to such an unholy alliance would be for her to take on the characteristics of a black widow spider. :D

The End of Tolerance?

I would consider the insistence on free speech to be a victory for tolerance rather than the end of it!

Perhaps, but, and I dont know about Canada, America isnt doing so well for being the "king" of multi culturalism. But, seriously this thread is more about a new attitude in Europe than in North America. :)
America has never used multiculturalism, preferring the melting pot model. This seems to have created a society with few religious or ethnic confrontations, but with more homogenity than I would like.

I'm a big liberal, but my beef against multiculturalism is that it doesn't require cultural sensitivity to be reciprocal.
I think it does, in theory.

But it makes me wonder: Are the Europeans standing up for their tradition of civil rights because they believe in it, or because the challengers are outsiders?
Bit of both, but more of the former. We believe in civil rights, and don't look kindly on either Muslims or European Christians who don't agree. We tolerate them, but their viewpoints are equally unpopular.

Slanted? Maybe slanted to the left, slightly, but the the only conservative news is Fox.
How exactly do you define a left/right slant on a piece like this?

Maybe they mean European Christian values as opposed to Middle Eastern and North African muslim values?
Hahaha. No, more like European secular values. Why bother with Christianity when it's almost the same as Islam anyway?

So then "freedom of speech" to this woman really means "freedom of speech", but only IF you speak Dutch. Why defend "freedom of speech" if you really don't believe in it?
I think that it's important in a society, especially in small country, that people are able to communicate with each other. That way, groups don't become isolated and insular. Thus, in the Netherlands, everyone should be able to understand Dutch (the majority language).

I definitely disagree with the religious double standards. If they're going to ban burquas they should ban the habits and the Jewish stuff too.

The burden of change should be on the immigrants, because it is not their country (until they assimilate). Why is forced intergration bad?

I have to say though that I agree with some of these things. It's bullshit to ask everyone to only speak Dutch in public, and it's bullshit to stop or slow down immigration, but it's a step in the right direction to force people to send their kids to school (although I've never witnessed it myself, it's not the first time I hear about some ultra-conservatives not sending daughters to school) and to stop people getting wives from some desolate East-Turkish village and never letting them leave the house (which I have seen once, and heard about many more times).

So, yes, there are some communities for which the current model has not worked. Germany in particular with regards to education has failed immigrants majorly. Something needs to be done - but at all times it should be remembered that we do this to allow immigrants a better life, not to protect ourselves from them. They are not a threat, never have been, and never will be.

I would consider the insistence on free speech to be a victory for tolerance rather than the end of it!


America has never used multiculturalism, preferring the melting pot model. This seems to have created a society with few religious or ethnic confrontations, but with more homogenity than I would like.


I think it does, in theory.


Bit of both, but more of the former. We believe in civil rights, and don't look kindly on either Muslims or European Christians who don't agree. We tolerate them, but their viewpoints are equally unpopular.


How exactly do you define a left/right slant on a piece like this?


Hahaha. No, more like European secular values. Why bother with Christianity when it's almost the same as Islam anyway?


I think that it's important in a society, especially in small country, that people are able to communicate with each other. That way, groups don't become isolated and insular. Thus, in the Netherlands, everyone should be able to understand Dutch (the majority language).

I definitely disagree with the religious double standards. If they're going to ban burquas they should ban the habits and the Jewish stuff too.

I find it sad that while championing free speech you admit you agree with stifling free expression (if it's religious in nature). I find it sad that you pretend as if your goal is tolerance while posting something so obviously intolerant of anyone who does not think as you do. You've adequately demonstrated the hypocrisy and the problem. Thank you for being such a grand example of your inability to see past your own nose.

The burden of change should be on the immigrants, because it is not their country (until they assimilate). Why is forced intergration bad?
Because you cannot force people to give up their traditions and nor can you force them to like each other. It simply is wrong to force anyone to do anything.

I have to say though that I agree with some of these things. It's bullshit to ask everyone to only speak Dutch in public, and it's bullshit to stop or slow down immigration, but it's a step in the right direction to force people to send their kids to school (although I've never witnessed it myself, it's not the first time I hear about some ultra-conservatives not sending daughters to school) and to stop people getting wives from some desolate East-Turkish village and never letting them leave the house (which I have seen once, and heard about many more times).
Agreed. It might prevent the ghetto-isation of certain societies.

So, yes, there are some communities for which the current model has not worked. Germany in particular with regards to education has failed immigrants majorly. Something needs to be done - but at all times it should be remembered that we do this to allow immigrants a better life, not to protect ourselves from them. They are not a threat, never have been, and never will be.[/QUOTE]
If they contribute to the wellbeing of the nation, then no, they aren't.

If they contribute to the wellbeing of the nation, then no, they aren't.
There is no such thing as the "wellbeing of the nation", other than economically. And I have yet to see the immigration that actually hurt an economy. It simply doesn't happen.

There is no such thing as the "wellbeing of the nation", other than economically. And I have yet to see the immigration that actually hurt an economy. It simply doesn't happen.
If people come into a nation just to benefit from welfare, without contributing, then it does.

I find it sad that while championing free speech you admit you agree with stifling free expression (if it's religious in nature).
I didn't say I was in favour of banning burquas, habits, etc.

It simply is wrong to force anyone to do anything.
If that is true, then all government is wrong, and all business is wrong too.

If people come into a nation just to benefit from welfare, without contributing, then it does.
Show me. Show me the person who comes here just for welfare.

It's a myth.

If that is true, then all government is wrong, and all business is wrong too.
A lot of it is wrong. Government I mean. Especially when it acts in ways that people sought to limit it from. I am for leaner, more minimal states.

Show me. Show me the person who comes here just for welfare.

It's a myth.
Would you not move to a country with higher wages? Or one which offers high remuneration in the case of not being able to find employment?

Either way, it should be a strict stipulation that a person entering a country is economically active and willing to find employment. It would be even better if this could be done in advance.

Show me. Show me the person who comes here just for welfare.

It's a myth.
Well not entirely. You have lazy fucks everywhere, so it would surprise me there weren't a few of them that were immigrants. But in general you're right.

Would you not move to a country with higher wages? Or one which offers high remuneration in the case of not being able to find employment?

Either way, it should be a strict stipulation that a person entering a country is economically active and willing to find employment. It would be even better if this could be done in advance.

I agree.

I think we need to set up immigrants with jobs IN ORDER to enter America, so we can be sure they atleast start off with a job and not on the streets of downtown Miami.

Well not entirely. You have lazy fucks everywhere, so it would surprise me there weren't a few of them that were immigrants. But in general you're right.

What if, instead of having all these problems with immigration, we just stopped it...or greatly limited it and stuck some military on the border. Then, we could take all the tax money we would save on the illegal immigrants and use it to improve other country that people are immigrating from. I mean, there must be a reason people are leaving those countries, why not find the source of the problem and use America to fix it?

This doesnt seem like a very bad idea to me.

I agree.

I think we need to set up immigrants with jobs IN ORDER to enter America, so we can be sure they atleast start off with a job and not on the streets of downtown Miami.
Indeed. Even better if they are invited by a firm in the country to come and work.

Indeed. Even better if they are invited by a firm in the country to come and work.

Yes, that could work too.

Just wondering, do you take pride in your nationality/background/ethnicity?

If I was going to move to Thailand, I would expect to have to learn Thaiwanese and to learn and practice their customes were I to be able to function and be accepted into their culture. Its amazing that people don't feel it is necessary for immigrants to the US or Europe to do the same.


When I move to India is it cool if I have steak for dinner? :confused:

Would anyone here feelkinda funny if their dog was missing and you found out the Thais next door ate it? :confused:

Multiculturalism is doomed to failure. I'm all for allowing immigration and I'm all for people remembering their heritage and their roots, but if you're gonna live in the US you need to become an American. :)

Yes, that could work too.

Just wondering, do you take pride in your nationality/background/ethnicity?
I do take pride in Europe itself, yeah.

If I was going to move to Thailand, I would expect to have to learn Thaiwanese and to learn and practice their customes were I to be able to function and be accepted into their culture. Its amazing that people don't feel it is necessary for immigrants to the US or Europe to do the same.


When I move to India is it cool if I have steak for dinner? :confused:

Would anyone here feelkinda funny if their dog was missing and you found out the Thais next door ate it? :confused:

Multiculturalism is doomed to failure. I'm all for allowing immigration and I'm all for people remembering their heritage and their roots, but if you're gonna live in the US you need to become an American. :)

Agreed 110%. Post more, we need more logical people like you.

Plus I noticed your from L.A., I am too, though now I live in South Florida....we know the true effects of this so called 'salad bowl' multiculturalism. ;)

I do take pride in Europe itself, yeah.

Ok, so do you think it is wrong to take pride in your nationality, or in my case, American?

Ok, so do you think it is wrong to take pride in your nationality, or in my case, American?
If you are proud of what your nation achieves, of course not. I see Europe as my nation really.

Chaa? What's chaa?

Seconded.

I think the problem is that multiculturalism is sometimes taken too far; it makes absolutely no sense that an immigrant to a country should not be required to learn the language or a basic knowledge of the culture. Removing such requirements in the name of "multiculturalism" is going to lead to nothing but violence like that surrounding the cartoons.

It's entirely possible that immigrants can maintain their own culture while still assimilating at least somewhat in to the national culture and learning its language and values. However, when the culture of immigrants is in opposition to the values and institutions of the society they are entering, there needs to be some kind of action (preferably a legal one) to force these immigrants to assimilate in order to maintain those values. Otherwise, you get nothing but trouble from the immigrants and a violent, possibly deadly reactionary groundswell from the "natives" and other, assimilated immigrants.

The key is to maintain and encourage aspects of traditional culture while still requiring the new immigrants to assimilate in certain aspects to their new society. The purpose of immigration is to have a new opportunity, not to create a "colony" for your culture in another land.

If you are proud of what your nation achieves, of course not. I see Europe as my nation really.

Oh, I agree and I suppose Europe is becoming your nation more and more, with the EU and all.

No, I agree with you I just wanted to see your opinion...see the 8 ways to destroy America thread for my arguement with neu leonstein about it if you want.

If I was going to move to Thailand, I would expect to have to learn Thaiwanese and to learn and practice their customes were I to be able to function and be accepted into their culture.
They speak Thai, not Chinese in Thailand... ;)

Would you not move to a country with higher wages? Or one which offers high remuneration in the case of not being able to find employment?
I am a particular case because I am a global citizen who will soon have a professional job. I go wherever they offer me the conditions I want.

Well not entirely. You have lazy fucks everywhere, so it would surprise me there weren't a few of them that were immigrants. But in general you're right.
The point is that lazy fucks don't walk across the Sahara. Walk.

Which is what thousands and thousands of "illegal immigrants" from Africa do every year.

Seconded.

Its an American surfer saying.

Its like yah...but with a Ch-yahh in front of it. Try saying it, its fun...:p

I am a particular case because I am a global citizen who will soon have a professional job. I go wherever they offer me the conditions I want.
How would a country handle immigration en-masse though if it's welfare system is already heavily burdened?

I am a particular case because I am a global citizen who will soon have a professional job. I go wherever they offer me the conditions I want.


The point is that lazy fucks don't walk across the Sahara. Walk.

Which is what thousands and thousands of "illegal immigrants" from Africa do every year.
I was agreeing with you.

How would a country handle immigration en-masse though if it's welfare system is already heavily burdened?
Why would it matter for the welfare system? If the economy is doing okay, cheap labour is always appreciated, and that is what the immigrants are offering.

The only conceivable ways are either for the economy to suck, so that more immigrants would simply be extra unemployed, but that is not their fault and then they are the same as extra kids being born. And no one is advocating abortions as a way to keep unemployment down.

Or for there to be racism and discrimination, which can hardly be your justification for keeping people out.

Why would it matter for the welfare system? If the economy is doing okay, cheap labour is always appreciated, and that is what the immigrants are offering.

The only conceivable ways are either for the economy to suck, so that more immigrants would simply be extra unemployed, but that is not their fault and then they are the same as extra kids being born. And no one is advocating abortions as a way to keep unemployment down.

Or for there to be racism and discrimination, which can hardly be your justification for keeping people out.
Would it make sense for a country with high unemployment to allow a high flow of immigrants though in addition to birthrates? It would be aggravating a catastrophe.

Its an American surfer saying.

Its like yah...but with a Ch-yahh in front of it. Try saying it, its fun...:p

Ah, that'd be why I'd never heard it. Not many surfers here in Michigan :p

Oh, I agree and I suppose Europe is becoming your nation more and more, with the EU and all.

No, I agree with you I just wanted to see your opinion...see the 8 ways to destroy America thread for my arguement with neu leonstein about it if you want.
As long as the faith in your nation is not blind, I see no wrong in it.

Ah, that'd be why I'd never heard it. Not many surfers here in Michigan :p

Ah, well there you have it...lol.

Would it make sense for a country with high unemployment to allow a high flow of immigrants though in addition to birthrates? It would be aggravating a catastrophe.

It wouldnt. But his reasoning is why should this be taken out on the immigrants (illegal or not) since they have just as much a right to your country as you do, even if they are citizens of Malyasia. :rolleyes:

He is living in some fictitious global civilization that the rest of us are unaware of.

It wouldnt. But his reasoning is why should this be taken out on the immigrants (illegal or not) since they have just as much a right to your country as you do, even if they are citizens of Malyasia. :rolleyes:

He is living in some fictitious global civilization that the rest of us are unaware of.
I believe that immigration should only be allowed insofar as it benefits the country and will not burden it needlessly. Likewise, I am against excessive welfare and the like.

I believe that immigration should only be allowed insofar as it benefits the country and will not burden it needlessly. Likewise, I am against excessive welfare and the like.

Yes, and it doesnt help when my country makes policies like the one where we take more Africans with AIDS into our country just because they are Africans with AIDS over smart educated Russians who were trying to leave the Soviet Union.

And yes, my country really did do that.

If I was going to move to Thailand, I would expect to have to learn Thaiwanese

You should be learning Thai. :p


Multiculturalism is doomed to failure. I'm all for allowing immigration and I'm all for people remembering their heritage and their roots, but if you're gonna live in the US you need to become an American. :)

Who defines what it takes to be an American?

Personally, I would not force any group to conform to majority culture, because it will only lead to backlash and more alienation.

What I would force is a basic understanding of a citizens rights and responsibilities. Other than that, what do I care what language he speaks at home.

All this "they don't speak my language" is BS. Until I went to work in north India, I never learnt Hindi - the national language. Millions of people in India don't know hindi and are just fine. Many states have trilingual policies - Hindi, English and a local language. They get along just fine.

Coming from an incredibly culturally diverse country, I can never understand what's the fuss with multiculturalism.

There is no such thing as the "wellbeing of the nation", other than economically.
Yes there is. Countries can be healthy not only in economy, but also culturally and socially.

A lot of it is wrong. Government I mean. Especially when it acts in ways that people sought to limit it from. I am for leaner, more minimal states.
No, if your states principle is correct, then all government is wrong. Libertarian governments are just as authoritarian as socialist governments; just in different ways.

No, if your states principle is correct, then all government is wrong. Libertarian governments are just as authoritarian as socialist governments; just in different ways.
Until one can find out how to end Government for good, we have little option but to put up with it.

Yes there is. Countries can be healthy not only in economy, but also culturally and socially.
More to the point, it may well be impossible for a country to be healthy economically without being healthy socially and culturally. Vice versa, as well. Socrates said over 2000 years ago that the key to a stable society was a healthy middle class. Indeed, it was teh disappearence of the middle class in Rome that lead to the downfall of Roman democracy and the rise of Roman dictatorship.

Yes there is. Countries can be healthy not only in economy, but also culturally and socially.
Right...and is that something we can measure objectively? Or is that just some undefined gut-feeling that some have one way and others another?

Christian Europe is dead. Secular Europe is where it's at.

More's the pity. Christian Europe stood up for itself and ran about half the planet between the British, Spanish, Russians, etc. :D

Since when was every country, except America and the European ones, annihilated. Canada is still here! Give us a poll option!

Since when was every country, except America and the European ones, annihilated. Canada is still here! Give us a poll option!

We didn't buy you guys out yet? ;)

Besides, I'd rather have seen one for us ex-pats living in the US!

The End of Tolerance?

"Farewell, multiculturalism. A cartoon backlash is pushing Europe to insist upon its values."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11569485/site/newsweek/

Well, what do you guys think. I mean, if this is causing the low countries, who are notorious, or loved depending on your point of view, for being uber liberal, are doing this, do you think think is setting a trend for a new Europian attitude?

These guys seem to think so.
They got Wolfgang Schäuble's name wrong. And since the US is invading countries around the world trying to establish pro-American, American style democracies they have absolutley no right trying to tell Europe how to deal with the pains in our ass. The muslims. And yes. I do believe the idiocracy of mulicultarlism is losing more and more supporters every day. I see it all around me. :)