A Study In Welfare,Liberal Ideology, Racism & Diversity

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

I fail to understand how people can articulate the idea that multiculturalism is failing or can fail. The entire existence of the United States has been a 241 year long exercise in multiculturalism.

Krazy - I'm usually in agreement with you. I think semantics is coming into play here. "Multiculturalism" in this usage means segmented, not integrated cultures. Not mixing together or integrating, but remaining "separate" - not a part of or component of the larger community.

As an example, my great grandparents arrived in the US right around 1900, from Germany, Poland, Armenia and Persia. None of their children could even speak their parents' native tongues. It was a rush to integrate into the larger society as quickly as possible. Maybe it doesn't have to be quite so much - retaining some degree of one's native culture is a good thing, but not so much that it keeps ethnic groups essentially separate nations within the nation.

a reply to: dogstar23

but not so much that it keeps ethnic groups essentially separate nations within the nation.

Good thing this only happens in conservatives' nightmares and strawmen.

By the way, I'm not sure how telling me the definition of multiculturalism is a valid response to what I wrote there. It certainly doesn't change the fact we've been a multicultural country since we started.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I'm not denying that nor am I in a position to see for myself and nor is this op about what I think. This is not an opinion piece a such just observations based on the essays findings studies of other people far cleverer than myself. The very existence of self segregation proves the theory regarding social cohesion. Self segregation happens in many places from University dining halls to neighbourhoods. In fact many Universities practice diversification purposefully by their student housing policy, by forcing individuals from varying backgrounds to share accommodation, which can lead to conflict for the very reasons of trust as I stated in the op. Self segregation is as bad as forced segregation when it comes to erasing ethnic differences and racism. Having large areas specific to one race or ethnicity leads to isolationism and feelings of superiority/inferiority and in general means a lack of contact between varying ethnic groups.

a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

Well you cannot make self-segregation illegal for the same reasons you can't make forced segregation legal. All you can do is attempt to educate to a better way; but that is why I said that assimilation takes generations and doesn't just happen a few years after an immigrant moves to a new country.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I don't disagree that assmimilation can take many years or even generations but integration is a different matter. However, if the immigrant doesn't want to integrate in the first place, if their culture is so dissimilar to that of the host country, if the immigrant insists on moving only to an area where similar immigrants live, then there can be no cohesion, no social connections and the mistrust amongst all sides will grow and ultimately result in "racism".

My point in this op is to highlight the fact that true racism is quite rare and trust issues and differences in culture are more likely to be the root cause of "racism" due to the way humans interact with each other.

Assimilation appears to reduce the "racism" as people can then see that the immigrant has the same core values

originally posted by: PhyllidaDavenport
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I don't disagree that assmimilation can take many years or even generations but integration is a different matter. However, if the immigrant doesn't want to integrate in the first place, if their culture is so dissimilar to that of the host country, if the immigrant insists on moving only to an area where similar immigrants live, then there can be no cohesion, no social connections and the mistrust amongst all sides will grow and ultimately result in "racism".

You sound hypocritical when you first say you accept that assimilation takes generations then talk about the immigrant level.

Also, self-segregation for immigrants has benefits for the immigrants. It gives them access to people who can help them navigate the new country easier as well as provide friends who they can relate their troubles to. But there is no such thing as TRUE self-segregation in the city. You are ALWAYS mixing with people from all backgrounds whenever you leave your area. Self-segregation only works like you said if you do it in the country, but most immigrants move to the city. Because that is where the jobs are. Living in the city FORCES you to accept others' differences in ways that living in the country cannot even compare.

That is really where the disconnect comes between Nationalism and Globalism. Most of the Nationalists live in the country or in small towns through out America's heartland and don't go to the cities as often. So they read about them in the conservative news and come away with bad opinions about them.

Let me explain how things REALLY work outside of conservative fear propaganda. The immigrant's children will go to school with other American children and befriend them. They will there pick up American habits and mannerisms. They will value their parents' original culture less as they aren't as exposed to it as long. When those kids grow up and have kids, the original culture's importance is diluted again. This keeps happening with each new generation.

In fact. I have an example. I'm a third generation immigrant from Poland (mom's side) and Germany (dad's side). I literally have zero values from Catholic Poland and feel no camaraderie with Germany. My dad does though. I'm American through and through.

My point in this op is to highlight the fact that true racism is quite rare and trust issues and differences in culture are more likely to be the root cause of "racism" due to the way humans interact with each other.

Assimilation appears to reduce the "racism" as people can then see that the immigrant has the same core values

Racism ALWAYS comes from a position of ignorance. Trust issues birth ignorance about the other culture. Racism is born from that.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Sorry I'm not with you when you say "immigrant level"?

Assimilation can take generations yes integration should not

originally posted by: PhyllidaDavenport
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Sorry I'm not with you when you say "immigrant level"?

Assimilation can take generations yes integration should not

Why not? If you can work, pay taxes, and live your day-to-day life in the country isn't that enough? Do you really need to start loving football and hotdogs or any other thing that is known as American? No. That is a fallacy.

a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

Very well written, I agree completely. S&F, thank you for your words

a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

Very well written, I agree completely. S&F, thank you for your words

a reply to: Krazysh0t

That is your view and of course you are entitled to it. But you are I think possibly missing the point regarding various scholars assertions that diversity erodes social cohesion and causes mistrust. If you have an immigrant that speaks only his own language, wears his ex-countries national dress, does not mix socially on any level and holds a completely different set of beliefs and moral code to your own, that creates the racism. If those in the host nation are unable to mix and mingle with the immigrants, they become suspicious, if they are unable to walk safely through an immigrant neighbourhood, they become fearful. The only way I can see to combat this and thus take some steps forward to eradicating racism, is for migrants to integrate and hopefully eventually assimilate.

Emigrating and taking your country with you is not emigration, if you choose to emigrate you are choosing that country's ideals values and lifestyle (that's opinion btw )

a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

I don't care about your scholars. I can find scholars of my own that will say the exact opposite. Their words are just words. I see these things every day. I study them too. I work with many immigrants. I work with many Muslims too. I see their struggles and what they want MUCH clearer than the jackholes telling us that multiculturalism has failed just because they don't like immigrants. Hell, I end up seeing first hand how a lot of these claims around anti-immigration or Muslims turn out to be lies. This topic is important to me, because I have friends unsure of their future or their familiy's future because a jackass with terrible hair thinks Nationalism is a winning idea.

You should go live a few years in a major American city then come back and talk about people not integrating. You brought up Chicago. Start with that one. Go understand it first hand if you are truly curious.

Fun fact: Nationalism is why China was so far behind the rest of the world back in the 90's.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I apologise but you seem to be discussing this on an emotional level instead of a logical one and bringing my entire Op down to a very simplistic level as well as politics into the discussion, whilst not specifically addressing either any of the points in the Op or otherwise.

We will agree to disagree if that's ok with yourself?

a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

No I am not emotional. But way to deflect my point.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I am not deflecting your point as I am not sure what your point is exactly? You have given me plenty of personal opinions and the like but honestly I'm not sure on the point of it all

But its fine we can't all agree all the time and I wouldn't ever think to try and change someone's mind, I merely wanted to inform and discuss the findings

a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

No. You just aren't trying. If you truly are confused, then just ask me to elucidate the parts that confuse you better. But my point is clear. Multiculturalism works and the very rhetoric that says it doesn't is lies.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Ok

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Fun fact: Nationalism is why China was so far behind the rest of the world back in the 90's.

Your theory isn't a fact. China lagged behind the west because their industrial revolution occurred well after it was completed in the west. This was simply due to the fact that China was not only massively populated, but was also under iron fisted communist rule. The industrial revolution was spearheaded in the west by a combination of rising wages and declining productivity, machines were the answer to both. China had no need for that, controlling both the wage rates and the mandates for production expectations.

In short Communism was why China was so far behind the rest of the world back in the 90's.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

So that must be why now that they've embraced globalism they are doing so much better while still remaining a Communist country, right?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

You can't possibly be suggesting that China today isn't a hybrid between communism and capitalism.

History isn't behind you here, man. During the industrial revolution, China was a psuedo socialist state with an emperor and a sequence of regional warlords that kept the country on the brink of civil unrest. Nationalism didn't exist in China then, so you can't blame it for their failures. If anything they've played catch up over the past 50 years WHILE enjoying some of the fiercest nationalism on the planet. (now, it can certainly be argued that said nationalism was the product of a "Cheer China or die in a Chinese gulag" policy of force, but that's beside the point.)

Nationalism is good for nations, it receives angst and venom because it is bad for the imaginary "benefits" of globalism.