Multiculturalism - has it failed?

For all its faults, is it any wonder that the ultra diverse USA thrives while the uni-cultural Bangladesh is a mess?

If you look at it from a global perspective, economically and socially, the country's which have taken immigrants and welcomed new cultures are the most successful. Those who have operated a closed door policy tend to lag..

 

No they're the best example. They have the one of the largest third world migrant populations in Europe and pride themselves on being a 'humanitarian superpower'.

You might not believe this but I really do hope you're right. Time will tell won't it? Things aren't looking good so far across the continent.

 

What like China, Japan and South Korea?

 

No, you don't. You're as blatantly anti-immigration as it comes on this forum.

When you talk about problems across the continent are you referring to immigrants or refugees? There's a definite issue with refugees at the moment (primarily down to the actions of western Governments in other parts of the world) but immigration has been happening for * decades, and will continue for as long as people populate the earth.

 

According to the Japanese immigration centre, the number of foreign residents in Japan has steadily increased, immigration to China has continually increased since the early 1970's, and immigration to South Korea is on the rise as well.

All three nations see the benefit of a diverse workforce, especially when they're suffering from an ageing population.

 

Because I believe it's detrimental to Western countries economically and socially. Btw I'll say it for the thousandth time... Immigration is a good thing if it's controlled, ordered and the people coming into your country will contribute positively to society.

Both. Aren't the lines between the two increasingly blurred?

The sheer volume of immigration from third world countries into America and Western Europe in recent years is unprecedented.

 

And that is because "we" are bombing them back to the stone age.

You reap what you sow.

Or should we level their country then tell them to * off when they come pleading for help?

 

Oh cmon

1% of Japan is made up of foreign born residents. Up to 500k of them are American troops stationed there, the rest are generally workers from other East Asian countries. It's not even slightly comparable.

 

It has been proven time & time again that the fiscal impact of immigration to nations such as the UK is minimal at most in the short-term, and beneficial in the long term.

And I'll say it for the thousandth time, the vast majority of immigrants to contribute positively to society. The problem is that you don't want to concentrate on that, do you?

Of course they're not. Most refugees arrive in the western world in a * up state due to the places they've had to flee from, with many of them being apart from family members, not knowing the language and so forth.

Also, they aren't allowed to work, which allows them to fit nicely with your stats of not contributing, I guess, but still.

 

You mention places like Lausanne and Geneva, but ignore other places with high immigration such as Bern, St Gallen, Lucerne and so on, who voted the other way. Also, I struggle to see how really diverse those immigrants are. Given that Switzerland speaks French and German in different parts of the country, and that France and Germany are neighboring countries and share a lot of history, culture and share the same cultural norms, I don't think it would apply to somewhere I live, which isn't subject to (as I live in England) large scale immigration from Scotland and Wales, where all that's really different is the accent.

It's becoming a part of the society of which you join, not creating a parallel community adjacent to the one you live by, which is seen in places across England, Germany, France, Sweden, Belgium and more. There needs to be a leitkultur in the parent country or else the society regresses, "When in Rome, do as Romans do"

I think the issue is seeing all cultures as equal. Cultures developed in different areas of the Earth, by different people, with a host of different elements shaping these different cultures, religion, certain figures, morals, etc. By this I mean in some cultures the stoning of a women for adultery is allowed. It's an extreme example and hasn't happened in the UK as of yet (as far as I know) but it just highlights the incompatibility of some cultures in the context of a western civilisation.

I don't think the correlation is there. The Western countries, which today take in the most immigrants, weren't lagging behind or level with other countries around the world until they started taking in immigrants. The reason the immigrants wanted to come here in the first place was due to, for the most part, western civilisation being far superior. I'm also not entirely opposed to immigration either, but in the way mass immigration is being implemented I think it's only fair to oppose it. I admire Japan's immigration policy, where I don't think there is any chance of their culture eroding any time soon.

Also, believe it or not, the most ethnically diverse region in the world is Africa.

 

When did the West bomb Mexico, Guatemala, Iran, Gambia, Ivory Coast, Mali, Nigeria, Ethiopia and Eritrea? Even Syria, for most of the civil war had little to no direct Western involvement.

It's easy to put all the blame on the doorstep of the West but it's slightly more complicated than that. Either way the people who make the decisions on who to invade and who to bomb won't be the ones who deal with the consequences. The real losers will be Nigel in London who has to wait 4 weeks for a Doctors appointment because they can't cope with demand or Sven in Stockholm who can't get a council house because they've been reserved for a Somalian family of 8.

 

I disagree completely. Scotland is still 95% white. Apart from the massive influx of Irish Catholics Scotland has remained pretty homogenous. And that should hardly be held up as a multicultural success story. Hence why I find it an immense leap of faith when people say Scotland is so much more tolerant than England: Immigration has significantly altered the make-up of their society, whereas in Scotland it has not.

A quick question on your last point. If third world countries hadn't been colonised what would they look like?

My personal opinion is quite clear: multiculturalism has failed, completely. The main reason being Multiculturalism preaches tolerance and not integration; separate communities and non-intermingling. Should you be a multiculturalist you believe each culture is equally as valid as any other culture and each culture should be allowed to practise their rituals without prejudice or interference. Nice enough on paper. But what if a community promotes unhealthy and discriminatory behaviours? What then? Would you say Saudi Arabian culture is As acceptable as Japanese culture? Obviously not. But there is a greater problem.

Across Europe we have seen that, left to their own command, cultures have spawned a generation of jihadis. They have not only been toxic but declared religious war on the host culture. Unedifying views of white women, misogyny with its natural end points of both physical and sexual violence are common. Story after story of underage grooming; Hijacked schools to pursue an agenda of religious indoctrination; and closed communities with hundreds of unregistered schools. That is dangerous.

To be fair multiculturalism was constructed in the 80s, a period where post colonial guilt was strong. Multiculturalism was also an important ideological imperative to globalisation; as business became global and the Europen market expanded we had to cast off our continental and global prejudices. Post 2008 we were more than happy to revive old dogmas. The fact that right-wing governments are on the march across central Europa demonstrates multiculturalisms failure.

 

You do realise that the nations you're talking about are still trying to catch up with the rest of the world in a cultural sense, right?

Japan, for all its qualities, still doesn't have civil rights legislation which enforces or penalizes discrimination. As recently as 2002 the Japanese Government blanked an attempt to enact human rights legislation!

There are apartments, motels, night clubs and public baths which still bear written signs that state that no foreigners are allowed unless accompanied by a Japanese national!

And you're seriously using this kind of regime as an example of proper conduct? * me!

 

And all these different nationalities aren't integrating?

I've never heard of the Mexican ghettos I must admit.

 

Aye East Asian countries are arguably the most racist in the world.

 

Which kind of makes sense when you consider that those from the west who oppose immigration hold them up as the ideal! :smiley-laughing002:

 

Ahh, I just realised THG was including America in his post.

 

Are you questioning someones culture?! UGH ITS 2016 RACIST!

Ahem, sorry... I think Japan is doing quite well for itself tbh. There's plenty of other countries I can think of that need to 'catch up' than a wealthy, civilised, democratic nation with thousands of years of rich culture and history.

I'll take your word for that. I've never been to Japan but I've a cousin who worked there briefly. Said it was the best place he'd ever visited and the people couldn't be more helpful and friendly..

 

Are you going to tell me that China is not diverse? Beijing and Hong Kong are very diverse and the rural areas are filled with several ethnic groups. Not just one.

 

To be fair, the Irish didn't do that when they arrived in Scotland, did they? I don't recall tales from my granda of how he ditched his own identity and signed up at the Orange lodge.

People who come from other nations and cultures will always look to retain their own customs and history, and there's * all wrong with that. As long as they're not breaking any laws then what's the problem?