Multicultulerism and diversity...why ?

a reply to: Kali74

That isn't the case historically or in modern times.

Political ideology is very much mixed into these situations even more so currently then usual.

When mass immigration works it was countries like Germany who planned ahead and knew there would be issues in the first Turkish migration in the 70's.

Not planning is a disaster.

Is a secular school in France obligated to make special rules for muslims? When they don't do it for any other religeon? It's illegal for Christians to pray in the "streets" do they make Muslim exceptions?

I good society has good leaders who are gifted at finding solutions.

A bad one let's disaster happen and then creates boogeymen for everyone to be mad at.

a reply to: Kali74

Umm... The Muslim violence against Women and others is based of their culture and religion. Cutting heads off in the name of Allah is based of culture and religion. Look at modern "thug culture" and all the ills it causes.

Culture plays a big part, as well as intelligence. Is it a coincidence that the races on the bottom of the IQ chart cannot assimilate as a whole, but the races at the top get along fine for the most part? Use some critical thinking.

originally posted by: iTruthSeeker
a reply to: Kali74

Umm... The Muslim violence against Women and others is based of their culture and religion. Cutting heads off in the name of Allah is based of culture and religion. Look at modern "thug culture" and all the ills it causes.

Culture plays a big part, as well as intelligence. Is it a coincidence that the races on the bottom of the IQ chart cannot assimilate as a whole, but the races at the top get along fine for the most part? Use some critical thinking.

Race has very little to do with anything your speaking about.

Sufis and Christians in say Syria are the same race as some radical versions of Islam. But none of the behaviour patterns are equal.

Culture does. For sure. But bad leadership is usually the king of the party.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

What do you...as a person that grew up in a western society with western values, have as an advantage...in adopting Islamic culture into your own communities ? What's the real upside in this policy for the natives...how do we benefit specifically concerning Islam ?

There isn't any benefit. We don't have a need for the additional population and if we ever need to make up for a population deficit it would make more sense to choose from people that are more culturally similar to the majority of Americans than Muslims are.

The more culturally diverse a population is, the harder it is to govern effectively and to the satisfaction of all the governed. The United States is already over culturally diversified and that's part of the discontent we're seeing now.

a reply to: imwilliam

There are benifits. Majid Newass, Ayaan Hirs Ali
And reformists are able to survive without persecution and then teach their culture without persecution.

Helping reformists should be a priority since the people of the conflicted areas are the only solutions to the problem. You can't cut the head off the snake when it grows back but you can stop feeding it

There is nothing wrong with people following the laws of a country to come there and live and then adopting the cultural norms of that culture while retaining their own heritage.

There is plenty wrong with the idea that we need not expect people who come here to adopt our cultural norms enough to assimilate to our society instead allowing them to fully retain the norms of their own culture. THAT is multiculturalism. It is a product of relativism which holds that nothing is objectively superior to another.

The problem with it is that societies form around a coherent culture. The society we have is dependent upon our culture. You cannot dilute that or destroy it by inviting people to NOT adopt it when they come here and expect our society to maintain its present form, and in fact, we do see our society eroding and degrading.

The danger of allowing in large groups who are retaining their own culture instead of assimilating to ours is that we risk the wholesale adoption of their culture should any of those cultures be retained with more vigor than our own. And then we look at the societies those cultures have produced in their native places. Are there any we really want?

Part of the strength of the American melting pot model was that we our culture was based on the idea that there would always be an influx of foreign peoples and cultures who would adopt the American way but retain large parts of their native cultures. These portions of their native cultures would adapt over time and affect the whole without changing it wholesale to that native culture. The change would be gradual. We see that with the American adoption and celebrations of St. Patrick's Day and Cinco de Mayo just to name two gross example.

a reply to: luthier

There are benifits. Majid Newass, Ayaan Hirs Ali And reformists are able to survive without persecution and then teach their culture without persecution.

Helping reformists should be a priority since the people of the conflicted areas are the only solutions to the problem. You can't cut the head off the snake when it grows back but you can stop feeding it

One could also argue that a Muslim community in the US gives US intelligence agencies a pool of valuable recruits. So allow me to clarify, there aren't any net benefits. And even If one concedes that the reform agenda is to benefit of the United States, that doesn't equate to mass immigration being beneficial/desirable

It's about priorities and risk. It does the people of the United States no good if we "solve" the Middle East problem and destroy our country in the process. And allowing mass immigration of Muslims, given the potential security issues is simply just to risky.

The benefits don't out weigh the risks.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

Its not about guilt at all, its about American values. I can't think of anything more cowardly than denying others the same right to a happy life that I have, because of fear for my own safety.

The people who wrote that thing called the constitution that everyone likes to wave around so much roll in there graves and vomit every time Trump and Co open their mouths on immigration.

a reply to: imwilliam

I disagree. If you bother to learn about the Muslim culture it's easy enough to screen for families and people with education and skills first. You can't save everybody in this case it's unreasonable to assume you can. However if you avoid certain known subcultures all together and profile you can create a subculture much more likely to succeed and to spread ideology that benefits the host country.

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

Its not about guilt at all, its about American values. I can't think of anything more cowardly than denying others the same right to a happy life that I have, because of fear for my own safety.

The people who wrote that thing called the constitution that everyone likes to wave around so much roll in there graves and vomit every time Trump and Co open their mouths on immigration.

I would like everyone to have a wonderful like too, and then I drive around a see all the Americans already here who do not have that life and wonder why we are so busy taking in so many more when we cannot take care of our own.

a reply to: iTruthSeeker

Go back to Daily Stormer with that nonsense.

a reply to: luthier

Secular schools, if public can accommodate, why not? Are Muslims praying in the streets in France?

originally posted by: iTruthSeeker
a reply to: Kali74

Umm... The Muslim violence against Women and others is based of their culture and religion. Cutting heads off in the name of Allah is based of culture and religion. Look at modern "thug culture" and all the ills it causes.

Culture plays a big part, as well as intelligence. Is it a coincidence that the races on the bottom of the IQ chart cannot assimilate as a whole, but the races at the top get along fine for the most part? Use some critical thinking.

Wow. Then people like you complain when we call you racists, bigots, and the such.

I guess the "white on white" crime and "Christian on Christian" crime that happens every single day is just a coincidence, right?

How many women do you know that have been raped or in an abusive relationship? Chances are, they were raped or abused by someone in their own racial and religious demographic; yet people like you ignore that in order to scapegoat others. Violence, misogyny, crime, etc are global problems that affect every demographic. If you're stupid enough to blame a religion or ethnic group for them, then you need to blame every religion and ethnic group since offenders come from all of them.

And for the record, "thug culture" exists in every country in the world. Or are you conveniently forgetting about the Mafioso, Camorra, Latin American cartels, Yakuza, assassination squads, smuggling rings, regional street gangs, regional organized crime families, hate groups like the Aryan Nation, etc? Or do they have to have specific melanin levels for it to count to you?

Besides, this country loves thug culture. LOL Last time I checked, "The Sopranos", "The Godfather" series, Tony Montana and other fictional gangsters were loved here. And the same goes for Bonnie and Clyde, Billy the Kid, Al Capone and the other American gangsters. So you can kindly take your race baiting BS elsewhere.

WHY? Maybe, (just thinking out loud here) because the elite want us to wake up one day and see that everyone looks the same, acts the same, etc... So, why not just form a One World Government, so we can be governed the same, too. I guess they are starting with the White, ooops I meant "Western" nations, for some reason... oh except Israel. They don't count, for some reason...

originally posted by: spacedog1973
Might want to ask the native Americans about that. I have no idea how many are on this forum, but they are the only views worth listening to regarding this subject.

Excellent. I'll answer.

Survival of the fittest. My ancestors were doing okay until another group of people with greater technology came along.

We didn't have the power to stop them, ad even if we did there was no unified front nor any type of immigration policy.

So, in they came. And back we went.

Don't make the same mistake. Only this time, it's the cultural and political weakness that will cause the problem.

*shrug*

originally posted by: burgerbuddy
Some people are under the misguided assumption that all cultures are equal.

They are not.

All Cultures must Strive to Dominate or be the Victims of Social Darwinism and become Extinct . Case in Point , Native Americans , and those Cultures of South America .

a reply to: 3n19m470

Wait, you don't know that "Westernization" is happening in other countries? Look at various Asian countries where Western beauty standards, Western clothing styles, Western pop culture, Western diets, Western sports, etc are aggressively replacing their traditions. And did you know that English is one of the official languages for more than 20 African countries? Why? Not to mention, most people in "Latin" America speak European languages and follow the European version of a Middle Eastern religion (aka "Catholicism"). As if South America has anything to do with the Latins.

Why is it that people here never have a problem with multiculturalism when its Western culture being pushed onto other cultures? It only becomes a "problem" when the people from those cultures come here.

originally posted by: iTruthSeeker
a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

Diversity creates conflict. (not always) Throw a cat into a dog pen for an example.

Diversity in genes benefits survival, or otherwise breeding with your own family is regressive. We witnessed this when masses of native americans died from diseases brought by europeans. Surprisingly, europeans had developed immunity because the opposite was true: they were more diverse. Yes I'm sure it may create conflict sometimes, like mixing two chemicals which explode.

www.todayifoundout.com - Why Native Americans Didn’t Wipe Out Europeans With Diseases...

However, I've read about Vicariance, a term in evolution science from what I understand. It's essentially a separation or barrier in gene flow or dispersal. Whole biota might be isolated. Isolation led to more diverse evolution. Geographically, the separation is an ocean or imposing mountain range--perhaps. The breakup of Pangea is an example. If it had remained as one continent, the argument is diversity might have fallen and it might have led to the eventual extinction (or stagnation?) of whichever species were existing.

en.wikipedia.org - Vicariance...

Once a species has been split by vicariance into multiple populations with little to no genetic exchange, the populations begin to drift independently. Thus vicariance is a necessary precursor to allopatric speciation.

What's allopatric speciation? Primarily, from what I can tell, it's one of the factors for speciation. It contributes to new species forming.

The very idea barriers between (gene) exchange might somehow benefit diversity is so outrageously contradictory, at least to me it was when I first discovered this. It doesn't lend itself to a "We're united!" sort of philosophy.

But have to remember it's a mistake to confuse this term with multiculturalism. It's a science term and it's tied to speciation over thousands and millions of years. I just brought it up to highlight how, in a very generic way, barriers are not always bad. For example, our homes have walls and doors, right? They're there for a reason. Spacecraft have hulls to protect them from outside. We wear clothes to give warmth in the cold. And so on. The Earth itself is shielded from cosmic radiation by a magnetic field and of course the "dense" atmosphere regularly breaks up incoming meteoroid. Barriers abound.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: 3n19m470

Wait, you don't know that "Westernization" is happening in other countries? Look at various Asian countries where Western beauty standards, Western clothing styles, Western pop culture, Western diets, Western sports, etc are aggressively replacing their traditions. And did you know that English is one of the official languages for more than 20 African countries? Why? Not to mention, most people in "Latin" America speak European languages and follow the European version of a Middle Eastern religion (aka "Catholicism"). As if South America has anything to do with the Latins.

Why is it that people here never have a problem with multiculturalism when its Western culture being pushed onto other cultures? It only becomes a "problem" when the people from those cultures come here.

What am I supposed to do about it? Is Western culture pushing out their cultures because Americans are wholesale moving to those countries and refusing to adopt the native cultures or are natives of those cultures adopting Western ways? If it's the second, then the problem isn't analogous and it's something else.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

My personal opinion is the Left wanted to open the doors to all to create some type of Utopia but their vision of this Utopia has backfired dramatically. I think the Lefts outlook was to see all children getting along together... the generation which will make this Utopia!

But with separate Religions it will never work.

The only way it would work is if all the children were of one Religion or no Religion at all.

Having said this, there was at one time believed to be GODS living among us.... those Ancient GODS. Now if they were still around, we could see once and for all... the truth but seeing as none of these Ancient GODS are around, it's made things difficult.