What % of non-whites are assimilated into Canadian culture?

[guyser]

I sincerely assumed, he would rather enjoy the company of women in a female chat group.

Simple isn't it!

For some it is.

Ya better stand up, Melanie was right and it went right over your head. Too funny.

[Melanie_]

Prove that I intentionally wanted to insult Bubber, commie lady?

This is priceless! I'm tempted to change my tagline to Commie Lady, but I'm too attached to Feminist Granny at the moment. Thanks for the laugh, Leafless!

[BubberMiley]

It's true. I do like women.

[xul]

What I wonder is - which idiot voted "more than 90%" and where does he live? PEI?

To those Canadian who believe that the culturals of those Canadian who were born in foreign countries and came Canada as immigrants are also the part of "Canadian culture", the answer should be 100%.

Judge whether a man was an idiot depends on which criterian people would adopt. Four hundred years ago, a teen student who believed that earth rotates around the sun was considered as an idiot by most of teachers. But today, a teen student who believed that the sun rotates around earth usually could be considered as an idiot by most of teachers.

[xul]

BC basis his wisdom on American aggression as a super power.

BC exploits the power of America for his own personal benefit.

I agree with you. But are we so different?

One thousand years ago, I suppose British was not strong enough then, if a China emperor had a fleet to reach England, what would he do? Grab all British gold back China, or just carry some pretty white girls to renew his concubines?

Sometime people like someone just because he has some function to them. There is a story:

In WW2, American had to commanders in Pacific region. One was Admiral Chester Williaam Nimitz, another was General Douglas MacArthur. Nimitz was mild but MacArthur was arrogant, so both two commanders disliked each other.

One day, a journalist occasionally found Admiral Nimitz always had a MacArthur's Photo frame on his desk of office and he knew that the two commanders were disharmonious so he was very curious why Nimitz did that. He asked Nimitz and got an answer:"have his photo on my desk just for keeping me away from the manner of arrogance."

But I guarantee I like him just because I like smart and frank guys. I have gotten a lot of the function I mentioned above from my countrymen in the past years, so I have no need of any American imports. I recite the story just for trying to say: if we dislike someone's way he used against us, we should not cheerfully use the same way to treat him or others.

[Rue]

In response to Leafless;

"I don't believe in official multiculturalism for the simple reason it requires the intervention of state control which leads to oppression and discrimination of other groups."

I think the above statement is a fair one. There are many examples of the above. Obviously where I would differ from you is that I believe a multi-cultural policy can be implemented but one that does not require state intervention. I agree trying to use a state to get people to respect one another will not work and probably does the exact opposite.

" IOW- The more equality the more government control....absolute equality means absolute government control."

Again your criticism or cynicism can be defended as many governments in the name of equality have simply used it as a pretense to impose state control over individuality. Certainly both facist and communist regimes have demonstrated that and religious theocracies. However I again would argue it is possible to have a working legal definition of equality that doesn't try impose a vision of equality but simply refers to laws being applied consistently to all people. Its not a matter of people being equal. None of us are. Some of us are fatter or shorter, etc. Its a matter of trying to assure all citizens can expect the law to be applied consistently and not differently depending on your amount of money or political beliefs.

"Briefly if I were prime minister everyone in Canada would be expected to be unconditionally Canadian first and be expected to conform to the majority culture and traditions of the land."

Again I agree with you but to an extent. I do not think you can have a nation exist unless all its citizens unconditionally put Canada first and a specific set of collective values first. I agree with you if the multi-cultural policy serves to tell people they can pick and choose what laws they will follow that is bullshit.

"There would be no 'Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the hands of the federal government and our original 'Bill of Rights would be reinstated and turned over to individual provinces to allow them full control relating to those specific rights. "

I am sure English Quebecers would have something to say to you about the above as well as aboriginals and for that matter your dear friends, French Canadians outside Quebec in other Canadian provinces.

You want a Canada first vision it won't happen having 10 provinces each fragmenting the Canadian identity-all it will do is encourage disunity and regional disparity.

"The addition of rights would be allowed but only utilizing a democratic process such as a referendum with a basic predetermined percentage."

The above comes right out of the Parti Quebecois manifesto. I knew it. "Leafless" is actually Jacques Parizeau!

" The undemocratic selling out the country to the counter productive political whims of minorities constitutes traitorism in my book."

So given the above comment, anyone listening to you and trying to implement what you say or acknowledge it is a traitor to Canada. Interesting.

See you in political prison.

[Argus]

To those Canadian who believe that the culturals of those Canadian who were born in foreign countries and came Canada as immigrants are also the part of "Canadian culture", the answer should be 100%.

I don't want bride burning to be a part of my culture. I don't want honour killing to be part of my culture either. I don't want violent religious fanaticism, or the lack of commitment to basic human rights to be part of my culture either. There are all kinds of ignorant attitudes in third world crap holes that I don't want our culture to absorb.

[M.Dancer]

I don't want bride burning to be a part of my culture. I don't want honour killing to be part of my culture either. I don't want violent religious fanaticism, or the lack of commitment to basic human rights to be part of my culture either. There are all kinds of ignorant attitudes in third world crap holes that I don't want our culture to absorb.

When did bride burning become pandemic in Canada? Or Honour killing?

None of these things are in any danger of becoming part of our culture....

Nothing to see here...move on

[Argus]

When did bride burning become pandemic in Canada? Or Honour killing?

None of these things are in any danger of becoming part of our culture....

Nothing to see here...move on

If one accepts the notion that Canada's culture is nothing more than a mosaic of cultures, all equal, then those things and more have as much a place in our "culture" as Thanksgiving and hockey. And what's more you're a racist for disapproving of them.

[M.Dancer]

If one accepts the notion that Canada's culture is nothing more than a mosaic of cultures, all equal, then those things and more have as much a place in our "culture" as Thanksgiving and hockey. And what's more you're a racist for disapproving of them.

If one accepts our fundamental laws are part of our culture, and they are, then fringe practises which for the most part are outlawed overseas and certainly are already outlawed here are in no way going to take root here.

Yom Kippor and Thanksgiving are part of our culture, Chinese New Year is spreading (Gung Hey Fat Choy) and one day maybe ramadan eveing feasts will be the flabpour of the month too....

But bride burning has as much chance of being Canadian as negro lynching...

[Leafless]

But bride burning has as much chance of being Canadian as negro lynching...

Negro lynching....LOL.

This is highly against Canadian law.

But bride burning committed by foreign cultures as part of their tradition would probably be treated like the turban issue with the RCMP.

You know, religious rights and all that crap would probably trump murder or be so well covered by that race, (just like the Air India bombing) no one would suspect a bride was actually burnt to death.

[M.Dancer]

Negro lynching....LOL.

This is highly against Canadian law.

But bride burning committed by foreign cultures as part of their tradition would probably be treated like the turban issue with the RCMP.

What can I say? Because murdering a woman, unlike murdering a man is not highly against the law? Because it is tantamount to wearing a turban?

Are you delusional?

[Leafless]

What can I say? Because murdering a woman, unlike murdering a man is not highly against the law? Because it is tantamount to wearing a turban?

Are you delusional?

In this country it appears race trumps law of the land.

[guyser]

In this country it appears race trumps law of the land.

Not when it comes to wearing a helmet on a motorbike. He lost. Helmets it is.

So much for race trumping anything.

[Argus]

If one accepts our fundamental laws are part of our culture, and they are, then fringe practises which for the most part are outlawed overseas and certainly are already outlawed here are in no way going to take root here.

Bride burning has been outlawed for many years in India. It continues because large segments of the population don't give a crap. Likewise, honour killing is illegal everywhere, but accepted by large portions of the population in some countries.

Laws don't matter. The attitude of the population matters. Or to take this back to the starting point, the more people you have who do not support Canadian attitudes on key aspects of our culture the weaker those attitudes become and the more prone they are to being washed away.

There are, for example, to borrow from another thread, a large number of people here, both immigrants and Canadian born, who have no real understanding of what freedom of speech is, and are more than a little opposed to the concept. We have a number of them on this web site, in fact. The fewer are the supporters, the more apt such freedoms are to be nibbled away at by government, regardless of what the law says now.

Edited March 6, 2008 by Argus

[guyser]

Bride burning has been outlawed for many years in India. It continues because large segments of the population don't give a crap. Likewise, honour killing is illegal everywhere, but accepted by large portions of the population in some countries.

Is it accepted because the police dont enforce those laws or because everyone agrees with it? I suspect the former. The bad aspects of culture can be left behind, the criminal aspects of culture generally are anyway. If not we would have plenty of crimes to peruse.

Laws don't matter. The attitude of the population matters. Or to take this back to the starting point, the more people you have who do not support Canadian attitudes on key aspects of our culture the weaker those attitudes become and the more prone they are to being washed away.

Perhaps those that immigrate ( and pretty much most do considering we dont have bride burnings at all, and honour killings are stat insignificant) quickly learn that what may have been considered allowable back home is not allowable here. Add in the second gen that knows it is wrong, and councils their parents that you simply cannot do that here. (whatever "that" is)

Thus, the immigrant learns Canadian attitudes.

When in India , eat with your left hand. See what happens. In Canada there is nothing wrong with it , but one must not do it there,only use the right hand. No I am not equating the two, but showing that one learns the hosts customs and norms is pretty universal.

There are, for example, to borrow from another thread, a large number of people here, both immigrants and Canadian born, who have no real understanding of what freedom of speech is, and are more than a little opposed to the concept. We have a number of them on this web site, in fact. The fewer are the supporters, the more apt such freedoms are to be nibbled away at by government, regardless of what the law says now.

Quite right !

But dont stop there as plenty seem not to understand any of the rights granted them. From free speech to privacy concerns. Some would rather have portions of our society shot behind the ear for minor digressions.

[BC_chick]

But bride burning committed by foreign cultures as part of their tradition would probably be treated like the turban issue with the RCMP.

You know, religious rights and all that crap would probably trump murder or be so well covered by that race, (just like the Air India bombing) no one would suspect a bride was actually burnt to death.

So let's see, nobody ever burned their wife and got away with it in the 30+ years of mulitculturalism but you are against the our current immigration policy because of conditional future events that *may* occur if the trend continues? Not even a certain conditional like "would definitely" but a "would probably"?

Who can argue with that? I mean, that's unsubstantitated fear-mongering a strong argument you got there.

[xul]

I don't want bride burning to be a part of my culture. I don't want honour killing to be part of my culture either. I don't want violent religious fanaticism, or the lack of commitment to basic human rights to be part of my culture either.

It is reasonable. I also want these will never be a part of Canadian culture just as Americans also don't want puppy cliff crashing will not be a part of culture of their army.

I'm sure all these will not be a part of Canadian culture or American army culture. Because there have a screen to guarantee most of immigrants or army soldiers will not be criminals, perverts, acidheads, terrorists or AIDS virus carriers. Several cases you mentioned above are only exception of the failure of screen system----just as any screen system also has several percentage of failure, such as CIA may also have some kGBs inside it. These several criminals' actions could not be considered as a culture.

In China, there are also a lot of foreigners from developed country, occasionally several of them also committed crime or improper behaviors. There is an example below. These don't mean white guys have brought the culture of ATM crashing into China.

Rage against the machine

Rage against the machine

An American man was arraigned in a Guangzhou court yesterday for destruction of private property. Michael Edward Lovett allegedly flew into a rage one late evening past April, when a China Construction Bank ATM mistakenly confiscated his bank card (which happens in China when an incorrect PIN is entered the third time). Mr. Lovett was then caught on surveillance cameras shattering the ATM screen and then completely destroying the machine — all in a failed attempt to get his card back. He was arrested the following afternoon at his hotel.

During his court appearance, Mr. Lovett appeared genuinely contrite, apologized profusely and did not contest any of the charges. Lovett’s attorney cited his client’s recent unemployment (previously an English teacher) and his stolen wallet and passport for his foul mood and pleaded for leniency. His lawyer also mentioned Mr. Lovett’s positive contribution to Sino-American cultural exchange over the years as an English teacher. The judge is still mulling over the final sentence -- we’ll keep you posted.

Edited March 6, 2008 by xul

[Melanie_]

Wow, Xul, that is one scary picture of the guy! I don't know if I'd want him teaching my kids anything!

[xul]

Wow, Xul, that is one scary picture of the guy! I don't know if I'd want him teaching my kids anything!

I don't know who painted the portrait for him, but I think the painter would pretty fit to be a police portrait painter for outlaws.

According to some Chinese newsletters I read, he was not as bad as the picture showed. That night, he just had too many alcohol in a dinner party with his friend. He got a detain for 6 month and needed to pay the bank $2,000 for the damage of the machine.

Edited March 7, 2008 by xul

[xul]

About English teachers in China, there is another drollery to show how judging peope by their skin color are stupid.

Due to more and more people get rich in some China small town, more and more parents there want their kids to be teached by British English teachers and due to British in TV usually are white guys, so most of them believe only a white teacher could teach their kids with "pure" English pronunciation.

But the kindergartens in small towns usually can not recruit enough British teachers, because most of them lives in big city. So a headmaster of a kindergarten in a small town hired a dozen of Russian as the kid's English teachers to cater for parents' skin color favor. Before the scandal was revealed by a journalist, those Russian English teachers had bred out a lot of Russia flavor English speaking kids for their skin color believing parents.

Edited March 7, 2008 by xul

[Argus]

But dont stop there as plenty seem not to understand any of the rights granted them. From free speech to privacy concerns. Some would rather have portions of our society shot behind the ear for minor digressions.

I would suggest most people don't consider drug smuggling and narcotics trafficking to be either privacy issues or minor digressions.

Perhaps you hang around a different crowd.

[guyser]

I would suggest most people don't consider drug smuggling and narcotics trafficking to be either privacy issues or minor digressions.

Perhaps you hang around a different crowd.

I agree.....although I have no idea the context of this in relation to your lack of understanding your rights.