The MultiCultural Society

[Norpheus]

I would like to make a thread were we can discuss the multicultural society. These societys are created when folks from different cultures ends up in the same country/society.

Lately ive been thinking alot about the positive and the bad sides of this. The best example of a multicultural society is prbobably the USA, the worlds only superpower. For example It was In USA that almost all modern music was created, The black culture's Blues became RockNRoll with the Whites, Rock became pop and so on to the music we have today, originally created by multiculture.
Would this happen if Usa wouldn't have imported Slaves, Mexicans, Chinese people etc? Probably not. And this is just one example of all the things that errupt when cultures mix into one big multiculural society.
Hamburgers was for example originally German, but In USA ... well Mcdonalds came.

On the other side, we got the bad side. Multicultural societys does come with alot of problems, usually violence between the cultures. For example, In Norway 2/3 immigrants are rapists so they have started an education program for making Immigrants not to rape!
In Sweden, we find that suprisingly many people that is caught for organized crime in Stockholm happens to be an Immigrant from the balkans, usually more than originall Sweden. 50% of all rapists are Immigrants from the outside of Europe and more than 50% of all those are from Muslim countries.

But still these immigrants have still brought alot of good thinks, new ways of thinking, new food, music etc. For example now when I see all these girls wearing headscrafs, looking like clothhangers Ive really learned to appritiate the way the "originall Swedish" girls dress. However Ive also learned how easy "our girls" separate their legs compared to these ones, this I find very respectable.
Simply, Sweden is starting to become a little USA of its own.

Now finally do you think that Multiculture is positive or negative? Do you think you live in a Multicultural society?

[Bovril]

All states are multicultural and allways have been. A couple of hundred years ago in the UK, for example, people from different parts of England had trouble even communicating due to different dialects. What's more, within individual communities, class based cultural differences still existed and were very pronounced in many cases. Cultural difference and group membership are inevitable aspects of human society. The idea of multi-culturalism is the result of the break down of hegemonic cultural narratives by people transposed from places which have different ones which immigrant communities either still cling to, or lose without (fully) accepting the native one.

[Norpheus]

All states are multicultural and allways have been. A couple of hundred years ago in the UK, for example, people from different parts of England had trouble even communicating due to different dialects. What's more, within individual communities, class based cultural differences still existed and were very pronounced in many cases. Cultural difference and group membership are inevitable aspects of human society. The idea of multi-culturalism is the result of the break down of hegemonic cultural narratives by people transposed from places which have different ones which immigrant communities either still cling to, or lose without (fully) accepting the native one.

Yes but you forget that Multuculture have different scale. Imagine those people from England if suddenly a fleet of arabian immigrants would land at the port!

[Ummon]

Multiculturalism is, on the contrary, the result of lack of understanding of cultural narratives. It is the breakdown of the process of social solidarity in countless irrelevant streams of isolated nonsense, the affirmation of personal egoism on the metaphysical, and not only material level.

The danger of multiculturalism and interculture is not in its supposed meaning, but in its underlying causes.

[Bovril]

Multiculturalism is, on the contrary, the result of lack of understanding of cultural narratives. It is the breakdown of the process of social solidarity in countless irrelevant streams of isolated nonsense, the affirmation of personal egoism on the metaphysical, and not only material level.

I think we are reffering to different things when we talk of multi-culturalism. I am talking about the word as used by newpaper opinion writers and politicians. You, perhaps, are using it to refer to a general break down in the coherancy of cultural understanding and inter-relatedness in the west. I imagine your multi-culturalism could theoretically exist even in a nation with no immigration.

Yes but you forget that Multuculture have different scale. Imagine those people from England if suddenly a fleet of arabian immigrants would land at the port!

I considered mentioning scale, but I didn't because it is largley impossible to judge, and will lead to anachronistic comparisons. But your example does illustrate my point rather nicely. The problem of the Arabians fleet arriving is one of an opposing hegemonic narrative. The Arabian fleet does not buy into the institutions and norms of the dominant sectors of society, so they create a crisis in those things by their presence.

[Ummon]

Immigration is merely an epiphenomenon of the disruption of social coherence itself. Of course when in a social body everyone tries to increase his/her social standing, this produces an overflow of candidates for socially recognized means of improvement. The easier the path, the higher the possible reward, the more numerous the amount of takers, regardless of the probability of success. This makes a society rapidly anomic, because what is a socially mandated method for a minority, is a collective disturbance in the system's functioning when abused.

Through the collective attempt at increasing social stance, there arises the need to replenish the lower layers of society with unskilled labourers, and anyone who doesn't want to engage in the pursuit of fashionable careers. Immigrants make perfect underlings, as long as they do not replace the previous population.

But already in the breakdown of the previous tradition, lies the cause of immigration.

[Bovril]

Immigration is merely an epiphenomenon of the disruption of social coherence itself.

Or at least of an unsustainable social logic. Denmark is the only western European country where the birth rates of native born people are sustainable. If we equate coherance with sustainability and self-sufficiency, I agree.

Maybe a symbol for part of the problem is the renaming of personnel departments 'human resources'.

[Tiwaz]

Or at least of an unsustainable social logic. Denmark is the only western European country where the birth rates of native born people are sustainable. If we equate coherance with sustainability and self-sufficiency, I agree.

Maybe a symbol for part of the problem is the renaming of personnel departments 'human resources'.

Does that mean such birth rate is constant?
It is for now dropping, but could alter next year to large surplus.

Biggest issue on this is that there is change on how people create security for old age. In past it was children, today it is pension funds.

Children today are just economically less viable. But if governments took action to promote and support child raising, it would have effect on birthrates.

There is no reason to import immigrants, who by and large do not answer to need of employment, to ensure population growth.


You have to separate concepts like immigration and need of workers. Immigrants do not answer to need of workers because they often do not have SKILLS to fulfill those tasks. If Denmark needs IT-specialist, no matter how many 3d world uneducated immigrant you import they do not turn into single IT-specialist.
Specially when we look at amount of unemployed.



By nature, multicultural, and in this case I mean one where there are multiple different cultures instead of multiple subcultures, are unstable. Cultures define our values, principles and ideals. They build our identity.

And as cultures are different, some more and some less, so are the desired things of groups who belong to them. And when everyone wants to have their preferred surroundings we have conflict.
By extent, I am immigrant in where I now live as I originate from area known as Savo and now reside in Häme. These areas have different dialects and tribal past. So my "culture" is bit different. But difference between me and native of this area is extremely insiginifant. We can communicate fluently between one another, all differences are extremely minute when you take guy from Sweden and compare us to them. And then differences with Swede are diminished as we take someone from Greece for comparison. Who in turn looks really similar when we compare to someone from Saudi Arabia.

What is essential in speaking of multiculturalism is to acknowledge that it only works when cultural differences are small. There comes point when things we have in common just lose to things which are not common.

USA, when it got into top, was not actually multicultural in many ways. It was "Ye American way or the Highway". Today, when USA tries to be PC and multicultural, it is in decline. Same with UK, France and Germany.

Why? Because they have to waste increasing amount of resources to maintaining some stability in society. To battle and fix problems caused by disruption of social unity and harmony. Those things are only achievable if everyone, or rather huge, huge majority, of people accept single cultural framework to be one that they all obey.

Thus, multicultural society is failure. It fails to create stable system because it promotes divisions and fractures in society.

[Ummon]

Reason is a wonderful tool, but often a cruel master.

[Aldgarkalaughskel]

All societies have a predominant culture, because all societies have a predominant ethno-cultural core, denying this fact would be ignorance. In so-called "multicultural" societies the predominant culture (penetrated by liberal ideology) enables the cohabitation of different groups of people bringing their different kinds of cultures from other countries (or coexisting within the same country, like stateless minorities). This could also cause problems, namely social tensions between said groups. There is a certain limit to multiculturalism in my opinion: immigrants and minorities have to learn and respect the predominant culture (basic rules, traditions, customs, language) in order to have the right to live there. This is just common sense thinking. For example, if I would go to the USA, I wouldn't start demanding the introduction of a theocratic monarchy (not that I would want), because I would be a guest there for at least a few years. If you are a guest at someone's house you don't go around demanding that the house owner should change the curtains, because you don't like the colors. If Muslims would started demanding the banishment of alcohol in Europe or the introduction of sharia in certain European countries, they may very well find another place to live. Likewise, if Europeans would go to Iran and started demanding the free consumption of alcohol or that women should have equal rights to men, they may very well find another place to live, because that country wasn't built by them and their ancestors, and respecting the customs, laws and traditions is the least one could do as a guest.

[Faramir D'Andunie]

By nature, multicultural, and in this case I mean one where there are multiple different cultures instead of multiple subcultures, are unstable. Cultures define our values, principles and ideals. They build our identity.

What is essential in speaking of multiculturalism is to acknowledge that it only works when cultural differences are small. There comes point when things we have in common just lose to things which are not common.

Thus, multicultural society is failure. It fails to create stable system because it promotes divisions and fractures in society.

Pretty much sums up my opinion regarding multicultural societies. They tend to prove unstable and in times of crisis even cause conflicts and unrest between the various cultures of that said society.

[Burnum]

Multiculturalism Vs. Assimilation? No contest.

Tell me how are going too make them give up their Identity? The only way is by force, you'll be forcing them too abandoned their culture because the majority wants them too. Assimilation has always been about what the majority of citizens want, let's be honest here, it's usually what the majority of white people want, the policy of Assimilation is no different in Europe then it is in Australia. You think the societal divisions are bad now? Wait until the government starts enacting the policy.

[wilting]

Culture is a construct. There is no such thing as a homogenous culture. All socieities are MultiCultural.

[Ummon]

Culture is a construct. There is no such thing as a homogenous culture. All socieities are MultiCultural.

1) whatever you possibly meant to say with that: are constructs less important than inherited traits?
2) nobody here is implying there is such thing as a homogeneous culture, but there are certainly less than completely anarchic amalgamas of different cultures.

I'll say positive seeing as I'm not racist/xenophobic.

Because there is a causal nexus between not liking multiculturalism and being racist/xenophobic?

Do I like ice-cream because I am not diabetic? Who knows.

[Helm]

.


Because there is a causal nexus between not liking multiculturalism and being racist/xenophobic?

Do I like ice-cream because I am not diabetic? Who knows.

You wouldn't eat ice-cream if you were diabetic though.

[Tiwaz]

Multiculturalism Vs. Assimilation? No contest.

Tell me how are going too make them give up their Identity? The only way is by force, you'll be forcing them too abandoned their culture because the majority wants them too. Assimilation has always been about what the majority of citizens want, let's be honest here, it's usually what the majority of white people want, the policy of Assimilation is no different in Europe then it is in Australia. You think the societal divisions are bad now? Wait until the government starts enacting the policy.

Who makes the country go forward?

The MAJORITY.

What do you think happens when minorities start dictating terms and forcing their ways upon majority?

I'll tell you. Rwanda. There minority oppressed majority until majority snapped. Result? Bloodshed.
Do you think majority natives will just sit quietly forever and watch immigrants turn their home into something they cannot recognize?

Integration to society on terms of society is duty of every immigrant.

[rusina]

Who makes the country go forward?

The MAJORITY.

What do you think happens when minorities start dictating terms and forcing their ways upon majority?

I'll tell you. Rwanda. There minority oppressed majority until majority snapped. Result? Bloodshed.
Do you think majority natives will just sit quietly forever and watch immigrants turn their home into something they cannot recognize?

Integration to society on terms of society is duty of every immigrant.

[Tiberios]

Who makes the country go forward?

The MAJORITY.

What do you think happens when minorities start dictating terms and forcing their ways upon majority?

I'll tell you. Rwanda. There minority oppressed majority until majority snapped. Result? Bloodshed.
Do you think majority natives will just sit quietly forever and watch immigrants turn their home into something they cannot recognize?

Integration to society on terms of society is duty of every immigrant.

Good point.

[Helm]

I'll say positive seeing as I'm not racist/xenophobic.

[Lord Tomyris]

I'll say positive seeing as I'm not racist/xenophobic.

So Trevor Phillips is racist/ xenophobic for warning against the multicultural community? Then again, it could be possible... Ken Livingstone did accuse him of being so far right he would soon join the BNP...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trevor_Phillips