Multiculturism is a huge failure

[guyser]

If its such a huge failure, then where is the strife that such a failure would bring about?

Do we have communities fighting and arguing with other ethnic communities?

Do we have violence from warring factions of different cultures? Religious factions duking it out?

I have a hard time reading and understanding someone commenting so critically when they live in the most white bread city in the country. Hell 75% of Ottawa is white , TO is half and the other half is foreign born. 46% of TO's pop is people of colour.

By the way, maybe 2-3 times a year in hotels. So what? Service personnel are found everywhere, and shopping for me is a blast in Chinatown,Kensington and many of the now huge Chinese grocery stores (think T&T) Little India is great for spices.

I assure you, English is available everywhere you go. So, maybe one doesnt know it, that happens at T&T and they will always scurry off to get someone fluent. Afterall, they dont want your money walkihng out.

[Argus]

Multiculturalism works because it provides a framework to allow new immigrants to join society without requiring that they completely abandon their current identity. This means Canada is much better at assimilating immigrants that countries like France or Japan.

Multiculturalism fails when the immigrants forget that if they want to live in Canada they also must strive to be Canadian - in addition to (not instead of) their ethnic identity.

The whole idea behind multiculturalism is respect for other cultures and support in maintaining them. I don't see how this helps integration, and the British PM, French PM and German chancellor have all said multiculturalism has been a faiulure in those countries, delaying integration and helping to build and sustain foreign cultures and foreign cultural values within their borders.

Of course, they're all just bigots and xenophobes.

[Argus]

It's not name calling at all. It's an accurate description of the arguments some "you lot" put forward.

It's a broad smear on anyone who takes the opposite position of yours because you have nothing else to counter their arguments.

[Argus]

Every board has one or two posters who will take a racist or misogynistic or xenophobic point of view t

This is about the twentieth time in the last two weeks you've made the same stupid, self-righteous post. It's even more boring than most of the dreck you come up with.

[Michael Hardner]

... the British PM, French PM and German chancellor have all said multiculturalism has been a faiulure in those countries,

And we don't have that experience here, on the political level or really much elsewhere.

What does that say ? Certainly less about multiculturalism as a policy than Canada as a nation with an open identity, wouldn't you agree ?

[Argus]

If its such a huge failure, then where is the strife that such a failure would bring about?

Do we have communities fighting and arguing with other ethnic communities?

Do we have violence from warring factions of different cultures? Religious factions duking it out?

No, I'd say multiculturalism has done far less damage here than it has in Europe, and in large part that's because we never took it as seriously as they did. Our version of multiculturalsm was kind of soter and wishy washy and avoided the strident political correctness of the British and French versions in particular. Do you know you can go to jail in those countries for calling someone an ethnic name? It doesn't even have to be in public, much less in the media. They pursued their multiculturalism with the kind of zealousness we'd only have seen here if the NDP were in charge.

But I would counter by asking where the success was of this policy, and what the money we put into it garnered us? Are Canada's immigrants better integrated and more proud to be here than America's immigrants?

I have a hard time reading and understanding someone commenting so critically when they live in the most white bread city in the country. Hell 75% of Ottawa is white , TO is half and the other half is foreign born. 46% of TO's pop is people of colour.

Experiences vary. I lived for twenty years in the Heron Gate area, which is part of the federal riding with the highest percentage of Muslims in Canada. I lived in what used to be a Minto complex of two 15 story buildings. Mine was about 50% immigrants, the other about 70% (according to the service people). The vast majority of the people I lived amongst were Somalians and Lebanese, and believe me, there wasn't an iota of religious love between them. Fights and shootings were fairly regular, if not in the building then all around it, despite a police substation being put into the second building.

[Black Dog]

The whole idea behind multiculturalism is respect for other cultures and support in maintaining them. I don't see how this helps integration, and the British PM, French PM and German chancellor have all said multiculturalism has been a faiulure in those countries, delaying integration and helping to build and sustain foreign cultures and foreign cultural values within their borders.

Of course, they're all just bigots and xenophobes.

Christ. We've been through these tired canards before. What we call multiculturalism and what they call multiculturalism are two very different things.

Take the Turkish population in Germany. They were welcomed in as "guest workers," but were not provided with support or resources to integrate, nor were they offered a way into German society because they weren't expected to stick around. So what do you know, a population that was marginalized by the mainstream turned inward. France, with their hijab bans, open anti-immigrant politicians and rigid model of what it means to be French hasn't had similar poor results. In those countries, the failure to integrate new immigrants was not a bug in the system, but a feature.

[Argus]

Right, which is why I try not to project my experiences on the whole country.

But you do it anyway, as do I. Everyone does

The question is not whether it's affected, but how and to what degree. There are many forces at play, including increased opportunities in financial services, for example, due to an influx of foreign capital.

Increased opportunities when you don't speak the language? Doubtful. And living in a mass of foreigners makes you wonder what it would be like to live among Canadians again.

Right, but in the wide view, WalMart isn't significantly impacted by local opposition to their way of doing business.

The point is that you can see something new as creating more problems than it solves, and decide you don't want it. Ontario could, for example, ban Walmart and Target. I wish they would.

Not just friends, but people like us. Does Canada love immigrants to the degree my friends seem to ? Is it a powderkeg about to blow. Based on our experiences, one person is right and one person is wrong. The truth is far in between.

The truth is somewhere in between. Canada doesn't love immigrants, nor is this place a powderkeg (I don't know anyone who thinks it is). It does seem interesting that the comment pages of the Globe and Post are incredibly anti-Tory, even crazily anti-Tory, except when they do something to try to improve the immigration system. That's the one point where you can be guaranteed to see an overwhelmingly positive response for them.

It's viewS plural. There's no one Canadian viewpoint and I have much more in common with Israelis, Europeans, and Americans that I have met than my next door neighbour. You're overemphasizing the idea of the nation, which itself is a fairly new construct and not natural to human existence.

It's not a new construct. It's simple tribalism writ large. Everyone wants a group, tribe, nation, whatever, where they feel at home and where people share (more or less) their values and beliefs.

"Empirical" ... but I maintain that you look for evidence to support your experiences. I'm the opposite, because I don't think people have lived as I have, nor do I think they are as optimistic as me.

I don't know as I look for evidence to support my experience so much as having my opinions reinforced by the evidence I come across.

[Argus]

Christ. We've been through these tired canards before. What we call multiculturalism and what they call multiculturalism are two very different things.

I already said that.

Take the Turkish population in Germany. They were welcomed in as "guest workers," but were not provided with support or resources to integrate, nor were they offered a way into German society because they weren't expected to stick around.

Right. They were supposed to go home. But afterwards, after Germany started making them and others citizens, it then brought in the idea of multiculturalism, which failed.

France, with their hijab bans, open anti-immigrant politicians and rigid model of what it means to be French hasn't had similar poor results.

Poor example since it was immigration and the poor results of their integreation which gave rise to anti-immigrant sentiment and things like the hijab ban.

And by the way, how has multiculralism changed that in Quebec? There is enormous public support for things like a ban on the hijab there.

[Michael Hardner]

Increased opportunities when you don't speak the language? Doubtful. And living in a mass of foreigners makes you wonder what it would be like to live among Canadians again.

They're Canadians, for the most part. As the economy grows there are more opportunities for people in other sectors.

It's not a new construct. It's simple tribalism writ large. Everyone wants a group, tribe, nation, whatever, where they feel at home and where people share (more or less) their values and beliefs.

But the tribe is not the nation.

[Black Dog]

I already said that.

And yet you continue to use them as examples, suggesting some kind of comparison can be made between their systems and ours.

Right. They were supposed to go home. But afterwards, after Germany started making them and others citizens, it then brought in the idea of multiculturalism, which failed.

"Afterwards" being the late 90s, early 00s. So 40 or so years of immigration and marginalization, 15 years of "multiculturalism" and sure, yeah, it's the latter that failed.

Poor example since it was immigration and the poor results of their integreation which gave rise to anti-immigrant sentiment and things like the hijab ban.

Yes because France was always a bastion of progressive recognition of difference before the Mooslums came along.

The hijab ban has more to do with the longstanding principle of laicité, the aggressive separation of church and state. Like Germany, France never adopted an intentional policy of multiculturalism and integration in the first place. Really, France has long put into practice the kind of measures you'd like to see here. It's a monoculture that is aggressive in its insistence on adherence to those cultural norms from language to dress. And they've made a hash of it.

Edited November 6, 2014 by Black Dog

[PIK]

No, I'd say multiculturalism has done far less damage here than it has in Europe, and in large part that's because we never took it as seriously as they did. Our version of multiculturalsm was kind of soter and wishy washy and avoided the strident political correctness of the British and French versions in particular. Do you know you can go to jail in those countries for calling someone an ethnic name? It doesn't even have to be in public, much less in the media. They pursued their multiculturalism with the kind of zealousness we'd only have seen here if the NDP were in charge.

But I would counter by asking where the success was of this policy, and what the money we put into it garnered us? Are Canada's immigrants better integrated and more proud to be here than America's immigrants?

Experiences vary. I lived for twenty years in the Heron Gate area, which is part of the federal riding with the highest percentage of Muslims in Canada. I lived in what used to be a Minto complex of two 15 story buildings. Mine was about 50% immigrants, the other about 70% (according to the service people). The vast majority of the people I lived amongst were Somalians and Lebanese, and believe me, there wasn't an iota of religious love between them. Fights and shootings were fairly regular, if not in the building then all around it, despite a police substation being put into the second building.

And by reading the papers the somalies have done a good job at shooting the place up, especially in the last yr or 2

[On Guard for Thee]

It's not name calling at all. It's an accurate description of the arguments some "you lot" put forward.

Interesting how he complains about name calling, by name calling.

[cybercoma]

It's a broad smear on anyone who takes the opposite position of yours because you have nothing else to counter their arguments.

No, not the opposite position. There are some very rational and intelligent points to be made about limiting immigration. You're just clearly incapable of making them.

[Argus]

No, not the opposite position. There are some very rational and intelligent points to be made about limiting immigration. You're just clearly incapable of making them.

And yet, oddly you haven't been able to rebut anything I've said, and instead have resorted to indignant insults.

Edited November 7, 2014 by Argus

[cybercoma]

And yet, oddly you haven't been able to rebut anything I've said, and instead have resorted to indignant insults.

Of course I haven't. Many posters have torn your xenophobic arguments to shreds over the years and you've yet to see it. Michael Hardner does so without giving you the kind of umbrage you throw at others and you still don't see it. I'm sorry you take it as an insult that people point out that your words have meaning, but those are wholly accurate descriptions of most of your posts on immigration and foreigners.

The only salient point you make on occasion is that immigrating to Canada is not some innate right. The government has an obligation to control immigration. Those things I agree with and like I said, there are sound and reasonable arguments to be made about immigration levels. You rarely make them. Your arguments mostly resort to fear mongering and touting ethnic and cultural superiority or making sweeping generalizations and moral denouncements about billions of people, which overlook the complexity and detail of the issues we're discussing.

Yes. I am indignant to those kinds of arguments.

[Argus]

Of course I haven't. Many posters have torn your xenophobic arguments to shreds over the years and you've yet to see it.

To YOU. But as I've observed on any number of occasions with regard to your beliefs, you're the most politically correct person on this web site. Anything that you can see as in some way expressing any level of unhappiness with regard to anything a non-white, non-Christian does or says is anathema to you and sets your hair on fire.

There is no criticism of immigration which would not outrage you.

I'm sorry you take it as an insult that people point out that your words have meaning, but those are wholly accurate descriptions of most of your posts on immigration and foreigners.

And again, to someone like you, the mildest expression of uncertainty about the benefits of immigration makes one a leading light of the Ku Klux Klan. Your unthinking outrage is automatic, and it's one of the reasons you're such a terribly ineffective debater on any issue which involves race, religion ethnicity or immigration. The only reason you keep involving yourself in them is you think it's your place as a noble white man to protect people you consider inferiors from being unfairly criticized.

[Big Guy]

My cut/paste function is still not working. As to the previous reference to the KKK, I suggest you key in "Ku Klux Klan principles and philosophy" you will find a number of references in which you will find arguments about immigration very similar to those in this thread.

Edited November 7, 2014 by Big Guy

[On Guard for Thee]

To YOU. But as I've observed on any number of occasions with regard to your beliefs, you're the most politically correct person on this web site. Anything that you can see as in some way expressing any level of unhappiness with regard to anything a non-white, non-Christian does or says is anathema to you and sets your hair on fire.

There is no criticism of immigration which would not outrage you.

And again, to someone like you, the mildest expression of uncertainty about the benefits of immigration makes one a leading light of the Ku Klux Klan. Your unthinking outrage is automatic, and it's one of the reasons you're such a terribly ineffective debater on any issue which involves race, religion ethnicity or immigration. The only reason you keep involving yourself in them is you think it's your place as a noble white man to protect people you consider inferiors from being unfairly criticized.

Maybe you should go take a valium. You are coming dangerously close to name calling again which apparently is one of your pet peeves.

[WestCoastRunner]

To YOU. But as I've observed on any number of occasions with regard to your beliefs, you're the most politically correct person on this web site. Anything that you can see as in some way expressing any level of unhappiness with regard to anything a non-white, non-Christian does or says is anathema to you and sets your hair on fire.

There is no criticism of immigration which would not outrage you.

And again, to someone like you, the mildest expression of uncertainty about the benefits of immigration makes one a leading light of the Ku Klux Klan. Your unthinking outrage is automatic, and it's one of the reasons you're such a terribly ineffective debater on any issue which involves race, religion ethnicity or immigration. The only reason you keep involving yourself in them is you think it's your place as a noble white man to protect people you consider inferiors from being unfairly criticized.

All I see here are accusations:

'You', 'You', 'You'. I suspect you are projecting these faults of yours onto others. Think about it for a minute.

Edited November 7, 2014 by WestCoastRunner

[WestCoastRunner]

I thought this board had well educated posters. I must have been misinformed.

I was chastised for posting this comment because it was assumed that I was addressing the posters instead of the posts. But in fact, I was addressing the posts. Everyone knows that when someone spouts off racist remarks, it is usually because of a lack of knowledge, a bit of ignorance and a lack of empathy.

This thread is full of racist, ignorant remarks directed at anyone that is not a white individual that has immigrated to Canada.

[On Guard for Thee]

I was chastised for posting this comment because it was assumed that I was addressing the posters instead of the posts. But in fact, I was addressing the posts. Everyone knows that when someone spouts off racist remarks, it is usually because of a lack of knowledge, a bit of ignorance and a lack of empathy.

This thread is full of racist, ignorant remarks directed at anyone that is not a white individual that has immigrated to Canada.

I blew off a little steam a little while ago over these same issues. I find the racism particularly offensive when I hark back to my work history which has allowed me to go to many of those countries that aren't WASP populated. I wonder if some of these posters understand that WASP's are a rather small minority globally.

[Michael Hardner]

Racism should be debunked before it is censored in my opinion.

[WestCoastRunner]

I blew off a little steam a little while ago over these same issues. I find the racism particularly offensive when I hark back to my work history which has allowed me to go to many of those countries that aren't WASP populated. I wonder if some of these posters understand that WASP's are a rather small minority globally.

I don't mind being chastised if it creates further dialogue on this issue, which in fact it did. I have lived in many 'white' communities and I have lived in many 'multi-cultural' communities. It offends me to hear these remarks about immigrants and I feel the need to speak out for them.

[WestCoastRunner]

Racism should be debunked before it is censored in my opinion.

That is true and voila, did you notice the comments afterwards. We are having a dialogue about racism. I don't see it being censored at all.