Another view
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Punjab_killings
You are not the only one to pull out isolated examples of anyone to try and prove anything
Last edited by: Zero on Sun 22 Feb 15 at 15:21
|
|
Didn't happen out of the blue Z. There's a long history of inter ethnic conflict in Punjab. Three way stuff between Sikh, Hindu and Muslim groups
|
|
Nothing happens out of the blue. The Sikh thing you can blame on the brits. Merely demonstrating the ability to thoughtlessly quote something to try and prove a point.
|
|
There doesn't appear to be much of a problem in finding examples of where multi-culturalism isn't working terribly well.
|
>> There doesn't appear to be much of a problem in finding examples of where multi-culturalism
>> isn't working terribly well.
The problem in Punjab and Burma is a lack of multiculturalism, that's why they fight one another.
|
"The problem in Punjab and Burma is a lack of multiculturalism, that's why they fight one another."
By gum, Bromo, you do come up with some tripe! Mind you, you were right about Marathon Plus tyres - but that was a year ago!
|
|
Multiculturalism is one of those words that change meaning according to who is using it. I'm taking the liberal and non pejorative sense of tolerance including commercial and social intermingling.
|
" I'm taking the liberal and non pejorative sense"
'When I use a word', Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less'.
|
>> 'When I use a word', Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means
>> just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less'.
You can mock all you like but the de facto position is that multiculturalism means different things to different people.
What's your definition?
|
>>Multiculturalism is one of those words that change meaning according to who is using it. I'm taking the liberal and non pejorative sense of tolerance including commercial and social intermingling.
It is far more important than that from the point of view of public policy. It is integration rather than just intermingling which should be sought. Allowing separate development only makes internecine strife more likely.
|
Allowing separate development?
How do you not allow separate development? How do you stop people living lives as they wish? And why is it a one way street? There are plenty of white British people who live their whole lives in a narrow community and who have no interest in other cultures and communities. It may be regrettable but in a free country you can't really organise people's lives.
|
>> Allowing separate development?
The only way you can do that is to forcibly relocate people round the country every 3 years.
|
>> The only way you can do that is to forcibly relocate people round the country
>> every 3 years.
>>
Bit of a bonus for house removal companies.
|
|
Enforced relocation of all Surrey residents to Middlesborough, Scunthorpe, Hull or Grimsby would be phase 1.
|
>> Enforced relocation of all Surrey residents to Middlesborough, Scunthorpe, Hull or Grimsby would be phase
>> 1.
And the residents of Corby to Norwich.
|
>>
>> And the residents of Corby to Norwich.
>>
There are parts of Norwich, like the Mile Cross Estate, that they would find a bit downmarket
|
>> Enforced relocation of all Surrey residents to Middlesborough, Scunthorpe, Hull or Grimsby would be phase 1.
>>
Then that Scunthorpe joke would really come in to it's own:-0)
|
>> Multiculturalism is one of those words that change meaning according to who is using it.
>> I'm taking the liberal and non pejorative sense of tolerance including commercial and social intermingling.
>>
>>
As Enoch Powell said, there would be no problem if the different races in Britain inter-married and the differences became blurred and irrelevant over the years. The problems arise because in the main they don't.
That said, I did read somewhere recently that increasingly inter-marriage is becoming common, and that "creoleism" will be the norm of the future, not "multiculteralism".
In fact, this article suggested, the largest single racial minority group is, or will be shortly, mixed race, and that enthusists for multiculteralism are being willfully slow to appreciate that.
|
>> >> There doesn't appear to be much of a problem in finding examples of where
>> multi-culturalism
>> >> isn't working terribly well.
>>
>> The problem in Punjab and Burma is a lack of multiculturalism, that's why they fight
>> one another.
Shirley the problem could be said to be because of multiculturalism, not the absence of it?
The distinction implied to me by the word is that different cultures continue to co-exist. That's fine while it's confined to having traditional foods and going to a different church but can be difficult when it goes beyond that.
The polar opposite of multiculturalism is integration presumably. Then everybody can lose their traditional identity and we can all be equally unhappy, or we can just accept that nothing stays the same and just get on with it.
|
>> Shirley the problem could be said to be because of multiculturalism, not the absence of it?
In Punjab or Burma the issue is about competing indigenous cultures. With exception of Northern Ireland (not an encouraging example) that's a different issue to that faced in the UK.
The first paragraph of this wiki article addresses the differing definitions/usages of the word multiculturalism:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiculturalism#United_Kingdom
Integration may come but only over time. Until then we're going to have to make the o-existence route work.
The other issue with integration is than in practice, for the minority, it means assimilation. Their culture is lost while that of the majority pretty much continues as it was.
|
The other point illustrated by the OP article is extent to which the 'safety net' for the poor and destitute is solely in hands of charities - predominantly those of a religious inclination. Most of the food banks in Northampton are as is night shelter provision.
One of the biggest is the Jesus Army, and outfit with a reputation for proselytising and cultish tendencies.
Don't know what the alternative is but I'm left feeling uncomfortable.
|
OFFS, these things find their own level, or don't, no one cares much except the very few directly affected.
Only racists faff on and on about multicultaralism, how it doesn't work, what it is or isn't, and so on and so on until one wants to throw up. Honestly it's boring and a rubbish thing to do which doesn't enlighten anyone.
|
>>polar opposite of multiculturalism is integration presumably. Then everybody can lose their traditional identity and we can all be equally unhappy...
While separate development is a translation of apartheid, integration implies adoption of the local system but without any implication of abandoning the immigrant's culture. Jews and Chinese are brilliant at this and do it all over most of the world, while punching above their weight for the benefit of the adopted nation.
|
Thank you ambo; I was being a droll, not very successfully.
AC's right. Discussions on this go round and round because the language isn't up to it. We just have to get on with it, if we are sensible. There's no prescription that works, that I am aware of.
|
>> There's no prescription that works, that I am aware of.
>>
Tell that to ISIS will you.
|
Another view - Zero
