A Study In Welfare,Liberal Ideology, Racism & Diversity

a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

I wanted to respond to your OP, which was great, thanks, but I also wanted to respond to one of your more recent posts.

One of the recent developments in the US as a result of the failure of diversity/multiculturalism is the appearance of tribalism in the US. Please see:
www.salon.com...

This situation is becoming quite poignant in the US and I thought you might like to address it.
Thanks

a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

I didn't bring it up, it was falsemove.

You claim that liberals don't want individuality while pushing diversity. That is contradictory.

Being goth didn't stop you from being english so why assume that others can't keep their ethnicity and also be part of their host country?

It isn't a strength or a weakness, it just a fact of life, in some places.

a reply to: daskakik

My apologies for the error

Anyone can keep their ethnicity or their individuality but once you succumb to the liberal ideology then that doesn't work. Keeping your ethnicity does not mean multiculturalism, it only means diversity. We all need identity a sense of belonging which is why self segregation is occurring in large cities. I haven't assumed...I am merely quoting established facts and articles, books etc that I have read, I threw open this thread to start discussion, I'm attempting not to base anything on my own opinion but when I do I will say so. I hope that people will read the links & sources and find more themselves

a reply to: TonyS

The rise in tribalism goes back to earlier in this thread when I advised that social cohesion was being eroded by multiculturalism and diversity due, in part, to self segregation and the need for a national identity. This is how the separatist groups grow

Way back when hunter gatherers were in fashion lol, they needed tribalism to create a cohesive social order and awareness for defence against other tribes, to defend their territory, and also to pull together in times of national crisis such as drought famine etc. This need for social cohesion has never left us, it has just been misdirected and now is seeing a resurgence due to the fear and differences of the many different ethnicities that are migrating to various countries. As it says in the article quoted a single Europe seemed achievable not so long ago, but now the inbuilt need for a national identity is surfacing and making such a utopian dream impossible. That is why liberalism will always fail. Liberalism is a social experiment, a theory, and whilst working well on paper, can never factor in the human condition including emotion and sub conscious need for belonging.

I will look more into this matter and check if there are any other factors contributing to the tribal uprising! thanks for the question

a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

Thanks for looking into this. I look forward to hearing more from you on the subject.

The effects on US society are profound and alarming. There are now entire regions of the country many feel uncomfortable even visiting. Geographic and social mobility are being constrained and I have even heard anecdotal reports of people being fired from their jobs for being part of the wrong "political" tribe.

Look at conservative countries, they're almost all horrible. Africa, the middle East parts of Southeast Asia.
The best countries are all liberal in comparison.

Of course you can go too far with anything, and extremism is bad whether it's far left or far right.

a reply to: CB328

I would never have thought of classing Africa Saudi Arabia etc as conservative but I suppose any country that's averse to change could be classed as conservative, but of the extreme type

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: burdman30ott6

No what you just said was a bunch of bull.

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

And anti-immigrant sentiment like yours isn't new. Ever see Gangs of New York? That is about anti-immigrant gangs fighting immigrant gangs in turn of the century NYC.

The Statue had nothing to do with immigration. It was about freedom. The French honored us with the Statue to celebrate the friendship between our countries. We were the first nation ever to make the rulers of their country aware that freedom and liberty was possible. The sonnet, "The New Colossus", engraved at the base, was written by the Jewish poet Emma Lazarus as part of a fund raising campaign. She wrote as a way of honoring those Jews suffering from anti-semitism who wanted to flee from their host countries. The original manuscript is held by the American Jewish Historical Society. The sonnet played no significant part in the celebration of the opening of the statue in 1883 and was all but forgotten. 20 years later the text of the poem was put on the inner wall of the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty. And that's how the poem ended up on a Statue that was specifically created to honor freedom and originally inscribed only with the adoption date of the Declaration of Independence (JULY IV MDCCLXXVI). And that's why we call it the Statue of Liberty and not the Statue of Immigration.

Today the true story of the Statue of Liberty is disingenuously used by people like you for political purposes to paint a gauzy picture of those happy times when we weren't so picky about who was allowed to immigrate to our country. In fact it was just the opposite, the US had (like the rest of the world had, and still has) a merit based immigration policy. Potential immigrants had to stop on the island and pass a rigorous inspection before being allowed to set foot on the mainland. If you didn't have enough money with you, if you had no job skills, or if you had a criminal record, you were rejected. If you passed that phase you were sent to the medical inspection line and uniformed military surgeons quickly culled out those with minor medical conditions. Even a case of glaucoma could cause you to be rejected. The doctors would observe the immigrants as they climbed the stairs leaving the baggage area. If you had difficulty with those stairs, that could cause you to be rejected. Ellis Island was sometimes known as "The Island of Tears" or "Heartbreak Island" because of the immigrants that were turned away.

originally posted by: PhyllidaDavenport
Anyone can keep their ethnicity or their individuality but once you succumb to the liberal ideology then that doesn't work.

Why not? They are the ones who say people should not have to integrate.

It is the conservatives that want others to adapt. Always surprised how that is overlooked.

We all need identity a sense of belonging which is why self segregation is occurring in large cities. I haven't assumed...I am merely quoting established facts and articles, books etc that I have read

It happens everywhere. Even in populations as small as a school you have different groups.

It is just a fact of life.

a reply to: daskakik

Integration does not mean losing your ethnicity or indviduality, assimilation does but even then you can keep it to a degree if you want to by keeping your culture and customs within the home environment, by passing it down to children, but it doesn't mean taking it to work, demonstrating in the streets.

By your very statement "it happens everywhere......just a fact of life" then you are in essence agreeing that multiculturalism does not work as intended regardless of diversity

originally posted by: PhyllidaDavenport
Integration does not mean losing your ethnicity or indviduality, assimilation does but even then you can keep it to a degree if you want to by keeping your culture and customs within the home environment, by passing it down to children, but it doesn't mean taking it to work, demonstrating in the streets.

That was a clear shift in goalposts.

By your very statement "it happens everywhere......just a fact of life" then you are in essence agreeing that multiculturalism does not work as intended regardless of diversity

No, I'm saying that people form groups even within the same culture so it shouldn't be seen as a failure of multiculturalism.

It is only presented that way by those pushing that agenda.

It seems that the possible surge in tribalism and/or nationalism relates once again to the identity and sense of belonging. It also relates to fear, threat and competition. Robert Putnam of Harvard University studied diversity & nationalism in depth together with the future of multiculturalism. He was surprised by his findings to the extent that he had to delay publication of his study until he had found solutions to the negative aspects of diversity, not something he expected to find. The core message of his research revealed as follows

"in the presence of diversity, we hunker down", he said. "We act like turtles. The effect of diversity is worse than had been imagined. And it's not just that we don't trust people who are not like us. In diverse communities, we don't trust people who do look like us."

We regress to tribalism because on a subconscious level we fear competition whether it be for food jobs or women, we hunker down when we feel threatened and we come together as a distinct "tribe" or as others like to call it a "socio-ethnic group". We are suspicious of strangers, outsiders and we turn to self preservation. This is rarely a conscious decision but a survival instinct whether justified or not.

British Home Office research has also discovered this truth. It is this hunkering down, which is now being labelled as tribalism, that is misinterpreted very often as racism, except for the glaringly obvious truth that all sides hunker down lack social contact and trust in a diverse city or situation. This self preservation instinct can easily override morality and reason.
Take a look at the years of football violence in the UK & Europe, groups of tribes (supporters) with one thing in common their team normally with a leader or two (agitators) battling against the opposing tribe. These people had only one thing in common their love of a certain football team but if was enough to bring many games to a standstill, give a terrible impression of football and supporters and cause many teams to be banned from playing in other countries. Tribalism - group identity

Now whilst I disagree with a lot Putman has to say and discovered, he does make some salient points regarding diversity and its inability to work as a multicultural society.

Further reading on tribalism & nationalism
Robert Putnam

How Tribalism Makes a Risky World

Tribal Allegiances

a reply to: daskakik

Sorry I don't see any goalpost movement.

The meaning and the utopian view of multiculturalism is NOT to form groups but for everyone regardless of culture ethnicity and belief to co-exist and INTER ACT with one another. It was an experiment, a theory which is not working

Of course people congregate in groups I didn't say otherwise, particularly within the same culture as I have already explained we gravitate to and form relationships with those that are closest to our own core values. This is just my opinion based on recent reading

originally posted by: PhyllidaDavenport
Sorry I don't see any goalpost movement.

You went from full integration being required to riots in the street not being acceptable.

The meaning and the utopian view of multiculturalism is NOT to form groups but for everyone regardless of culture ethnicity and belief to co-exist and INTER ACT with one another. It was an experiment, a theory which is not working

Who said anything about utopia?

Of course people congregate in groups I didn't say otherwise, particularly within the same culture as I have already explained we gravitate to and form relationships with those that are closest to our own core values. This is just my opinion based on recent reading

People of the same culture split into groups as well. That can't be multiculturalism failing so it must be something else but that same thing is pointed out and hyped as multiculturalism failing because it helps some peoples arguments.

a reply to: daskakik

Sorry again but you're being specifically selective in your statements and I cannot remember where I said full integration is required nor anything about riots. I don't think you've read my posts in the entirety nor in context but not sure. Multiculturalism was touted as an ideal and hoped by many to be the Utopia they all dreamt of but it isn't and hasn't turned out anywhere near that way in reality. In fact more people are turning inwards than outwards, as you will see from the posts above and the sources & links for further reading, many countries are seeing a surge in nationalism and indeed tribalism.

a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport
Here you go:

One of the reasons for the failure of multiculturalism and "diversity" is the eagerness to appear tolerant and liberal minded, allowing huge immigration whilst not tackling integration.

if you want to by keeping your culture and customs within the home environment, by passing it down to children, but it doesn't mean taking it to work, demonstrating in the streets.

Although the need for immigrants to integrate is more of a specific idea of nationalists and not you particularly saying it in this thread.

My main point is that nationalists (conservatives) want immigrants to change but you are saying that it is the liberals doing that.

The other point is that people even within a same culture split into groups. It is just something that happens and it doesn't mean that they are not loyal to the nation they live in.

Like the post above about football teams fighting. Same culture and even the same love for the sport and still they are fighting each other. It's normal. It isn't because of multiculturalism.

a reply to: daskakik

But alas it seems that is exactly why multiculturalism will fail no matter how many experiments they run

a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

It would be the same situation even in nationalism or anything else so, is it really a failure of multiculturalism or is it just life?

What I see is a group of people calling multiculturalism a failure when in fact it is the probably about the same as it has ever been and maybe a little better.

a reply to: daskakik

Just life isn't exactly scientific lol but again, if it were just life, this wasn't factored into the experiment 40yrs ago otherwise we wouldn't be in the position we're in now

originally posted by: PhyllidaDavenport
Just life isn't exactly scientific lol but again, if it were just life, this wasn't factored into the experiment 40yrs ago otherwise we wouldn't be in the position we're in now

It doesn't need to be scientific.

The position you think "we" are in now is subjective.