What amount of immigration do you support?

[Muddy]

Once allied soldiers liberated the concentration camps they found a renewed passion for their part in kicking the hell out of the NAZI`s. But yes your right ,what was happening to the Jews,Jehovah Witness`,Gypsys was largely unknown and unbelieved that the German people would be a party to such barbarism.

But then the Commies in Russia and China really showed how to commit mass murder.Made Hitler and company look like amateurs.

[eyeball]

You make it sound like they chose to turn into birds. Also birds ruled the earth for a long time before mammals gained power.

Well, some people are making it sound like the Great White Race is a fricken species unto itself and that the universe will probably fall of it's hinges without it.

Get over yourselves.

[dizzy]

Your idea of a generation is a little bit on the long side. However, countries like Canada, United States and Australia are young compared to other countries that still can't get it right.

Are you suggesting that those countries never got it right?

[Guest TrueMetis]

Well, some people are making it sound like the Great White Race is a fricken species unto itself and that the universe will probably fall of it's hinges without it.

Get over yourselves.

Well I heard western civilization. I have no problem with the end of our civilization I just don't think it going to happen anytime soon.

The question is who is in the best position to become the dominate force should the west fall. I'll tell you one thing it's not the ME they had their turn.

[Bonam]

Well I heard western civilization. I have no problem with the end of our civilization I just don't think it going to happen anytime soon.

Why not? I think the end of our civilization would be a bad thing and am not ashamed to admit it. Our civilization can be taken to mean anything, whether Western civilization, the civilization of any particular race, or the human civilization as a whole. Any of these coming to an end would be a bad thing.

Most of society in North America seems agreed that, for example, steps should be taken to preserve what remains of native civilization and prevent its ultimate end, which some might consider to be inevitable without such efforts. Membership in native civilization is based heavily along racial lines, by the way. And yet if anyone makes a similar argument in regards to whites they are suddenly considered a white supremacist or something by people like eyeball.

Getting to the issue of race... one need not hold a belief of the superiority of any group to want to see that group maintained as a distinct entity in posterity. There is something to be said for diversity. I think the future should hold whites, asians, blacks, natives, and all other groups, and I think such a future would be richer than a future made up only of a uniform brown-asiatic mixture.

The question is who is in the best position to become the dominate force should the west fall. I'll tell you one thing it's not the ME they had their turn.

Well the obvious nominee for that would be China and south east Asia. They have the population, the land area, and most importantly, sanity and the drive to build a functioning civilization. Of course it would be a civilization with ideology revolving more around collectivist rather than individualist ideas than the West has been, but potentially a functional civilization nonetheless.

Edited April 20, 2010 by Bonam

[Guest TrueMetis]

Why not? I think the end of our civilization would be a bad thing and am not ashamed to admit it. Our civilization can be taken to mean anything, whether Western civilization, the civilization of any particular race, or the human civilization as a whole. Any of these coming to an end would be a bad thing.

Whenever a civilization ends it is replaced by a better one, after some turmoil as one ends though. Though I don't expect the end of ares to be the same as other. We aren't going to cease to exsist (though no civilization totally ceases to exsist) we're going to lose most of the power we enjoy, though like I said I don't expect this to happen anytime soon, certainly not within my lifetime.

Most of society in North America seems agreed that, for example, steps should be taken to preserve what remains of native civilization and prevent its ultimate end, which some might consider to be inevitable without such efforts. Membership in native civilization is based heavily along racial lines, by the way. And yet if anyone makes a similar argument in regards to whites they are suddenly considered a white supremacist or something by people like eyeball.

Getting to the issue of race... one need not hold a belief of the superiority of any group to want to see that group maintained as a distinct entity in posterity. There is something to be said for diversity. I think the future should hold whites, asians, blacks, natives, and all other groups, and I think such a future would be richer than a future made up only of a uniform brown-asiatic mixture.

The First Nations are more than capable of retaining their own cultures. Retaining something just because it's tradition is pointless in the face of something better, retaining it for an actual reason is perfectly fine and good. If that reason exsists and is strong enough a culture will survive fine on it's own. Also race has very little to do with civilization most large civilizations have been very diverse. (mostly becuase of the large area they covered) Which to me says if the world was ever going to become a uniform colour it would have happened already.

Well the obvious nominee for that would be China and south east Asia. They have the population, the land area, and most importantly, sanity and the drive to build a functioning civilization. Of course it would be a civilization with ideology revolving more around collectivist rather than individualist ideas than the West has been, but potentially a functional civilization nonetheless.

And the benefit of not having to figure out everything we had to.

[Bonam]

Whenever a civilization ends it is replaced by a better one, after some turmoil as one ends though. Though I don't expect the end of ares to be the same as other. We aren't going to cease to exsist (though no civilization totally ceases to exsist) we're going to lose most of the power we enjoy, though like I said I don't expect this to happen anytime soon, certainly not within my lifetime.

I would not say that the end of a civilization always heralds the beginning of a better one, it can in fact lead to dark ages for a long period. The fall of Rome is an obvious example. It took a 1000 years before civilization started to shape up again.

Additionally, I am somewhat of the opinion that if we had a real collapse of civilization, it may be close to impossible for future humans to attain an advanced civilization a second time. That's because we've burned all the easily accessible oil. And it would be most difficult to progress from a pre-industrial civilization to a post-hydrocarbon civilization without having oil as an energy source to fuel progress and economic growth in between. Anyway, I don't expect a full collapse of civilization and a reversal to the dark ages either.

Actually this whole topic is somewhat rhetorical since our current civilization only needs to last another 30 or 40 years before we reach the technological singularity and all this will be irrelevant.

The First Nations are more than capable of retaining their own cultures.

They are, if we do not interfere with it. But if we were immigrating by the hundreds of thousands into the areas where they currently retain a majority (i.e. into their reserves and lands), they would have great difficulty maintaining that culture. Same goes for our culture. We can maintain it well enough on our own, but if it is flooded by a constant influx of people from other cultures, it can reach a point where it is overwhelmed and drowned out.

Retaining something just because it's tradition is pointless in the face of something better, retaining it for an actual reason is perfectly fine and good.

I'm not sure if I agree. Despite my enthusiasm for technology and progress, I am also somewhat of a traditionalist. I think there is no reason not to keep traditions and old things around unless they actually have some adverse effect.

As for the notion of something better coming along... remember that much of the discussion pertained to races. The modern common wisdom is that all races are equal. Do you suggest that some race should come along that is "better" than whites and we should thus meekly die out and let them come to their rightful place of dominance? I say that if we accept the notion that all races are equal, then that should imply that all races are worth preserving.

[Guest TrueMetis]

I would not say that the end of a civilization always heralds the beginning of a better one, it can in fact lead to dark ages for a long period. The fall of Rome is an obvious example. It took a 1000 years before civilization started to shape up again.

The exact time of Romes fall is subject to debate, whether it was Romulus Augustus, the last Emperor of the Western Roman Empire being deposed deposed by Odoacer, a Germanic chieftain in 476 AD, or whether it continued with the Eastern Roman Empire untill the Fall of Constantinople on May 29, 1453.

The next great was the Islamic empire which is pegged at the rise of Mohammad, 622 AD

In either event the though it took 1000 years for a new civilization to shape up is ridiculus.

Additionally, I am somewhat of the opinion that if we had a real collapse of civilization, it may be close to impossible for future humans to attain an advanced civilization a second time. That's because we've burned all the easily accessible oil. And it would be most difficult to progress from a pre-industrial civilization to a post-hydrocarbon civilization without having oil as an energy source to fuel progress and economic growth in between. Anyway, I don't expect a full collapse of civilization and a reversal to the dark ages either.

Actually this whole topic is somewhat rhetorical since our current civilization only needs to last another 30 or 40 years before we reach the technological singularity and all this will be irrelevant.

Yes at this point we either move forward or we die.

They are, if we do not interfere with it. But if we were immigrating by the hundreds of thousands into the areas where they currently retain a majority (i.e. into their reserves and lands), they would have great difficulty maintaining that culture. Same goes for our culture. We can maintain it well enough on our own, but if it is flooded by a constant influx of people from other cultures, it can reach a point where it is overwhelmed and drowned out.

Not really all they need is a will to retain their culture, there are plenty of Natives who have managed it on their own even when they aren't the majority. It when people are forced to give up their culture that it goes away and even then it is dependant on how willing the people are to let it happen.

I'm not sure if I agree. Despite my enthusiasm for technology and progress, I am also somewhat of a traditionalist. I think there is no reason not to keep traditions and old things around unless they actually have some adverse effect.

What I ment was keeping something only because it is traditional is not enough of a reason. That does not mean you have to give up the entire thing, the Inuit had a traditional way of hunting seal but in the face of better alternatives like the rifle and the hakapik they switched to them. They still hunt seal though and it's still and important part of their culture.

As for the notion of something better coming along... remember that much of the discussion pertained to races. The modern common wisdom is that all races are equal. Do you suggest that some race should come along that is "better" than whites and we should thus meekly die out and let them come to their rightful place of dominance? I say that if we accept the notion that all races are equal, then that should imply that all races are worth preserving.

Well I geuss in this case it would be the next race of humans, if a new species of humans evolves from us they may take over and push us out. There will probably be a few steps between us though that could be defined as a new race, and I doubt we would meekly die out, that's not human nature.

[wyly]

In either event the though it took 1000 years for a new civilization to shape up is ridiculus.

[/Quote]the Chinese civilization was still strong and the Islamic civilization advanced many sciences as did those of India while europeans stumbled about in the dark....

[Argus]

It's amusing when one considers that those people here arguing about whether a better civilization will arise from ours are largely the same ones who absolutely cannot contemplate slowing immigration in order to preserve the present civiliation.

[Michael Hardner]

It's amusing when one considers that those people here arguing about whether a better civilization will arise from ours are largely the same ones who absolutely cannot contemplate slowing immigration in order to preserve the present civiliation.

The present civilization doesn't need to be 'preserved', it needs to evolve - or rather - to continue evolving as it did when it accepted Irish, Jews, Italians, and the latest wave of immigration.

If you think that it needs to be preserved in glass, like a butterfly in ether, then you're missing the point. Albania had a strong belief in keeping outsiders away. They're still catching up.

[eyeball]

Actually this whole topic is somewhat rhetorical since our current civilization only needs to last another 30 or 40 years before we reach the technological singularity and all this will be irrelevant.

Is this like a new religion or our evolution into something resembling the Borg?

I suppose I might make it another 30 - 40 years but perhaps I should be making arrangements to have my head frozen in case I die first. I'd hate to come so close and then miss out. Maybe someone will build a time machine and come back and rescue everyone. That's the ticket.

[justme]

The present civilization doesn't need to be 'preserved', it needs to evolve - or rather - to continue evolving as it did when it accepted Irish, Jews, Italians, and the latest wave of immigration.

If you think that it needs to be preserved in glass, like a butterfly in ether, then you're missing the point. Albania had a strong belief in keeping outsiders away. They're still catching up.

Canada's success is based on the fact that the US buys more than 77% of its exports not on it's ethnic diversity. The US sends no more than 20.1% of its exports to one country and the per capita income in the US is $8000 higher than in Canada despite the economic downturn. It is Canada that has catching up to do, but don't let facts get in your way.

[Michael Hardner]

Canada's success is based on the fact that the US buys more than 77% of its exports not on it's ethnic diversity. The US sends no more than 20.1% of its exports to one country and the per capita income in the US is $8000 higher than in Canada despite the economic downturn. It is Canada that has catching up to do, but don't let facts get in your way.

I'm not talking about Canada, I'm talking about our civilization - the 'west' if you like - which includes the US.

[Bonam]

Is this like a new religion or our evolution into something resembling the Borg?

Basically turning into the Borg yeah, but maybe with a bit of free will left, and the implants wouldn't be visible and ugly like the Borg drones ;p

I suppose I might make it another 30 - 40 years but perhaps I should be making arrangements to have my head frozen in case I die first. I'd hate to come so close and then miss out.

Here you go.

[justme]

I'm not talking about Canada, I'm talking about our civilization - the 'west' if you like - which includes the US.

We can do that too: It wasn't ethnic diversity in the West that won the Cold War; it was the fact that Western economies were open while the Soviet Union was closed, and it could not keep up with American military spending.

[wyly]

We can do that too: It wasn't ethnic diversity in the West that won the Cold War; it was the fact that Western economies were open while the Soviet Union was closed, and it could not keep up with American military spending.

that's the myth...the truth, an shipyard electrician, a Polish Pope and internal reform by the Soviets

[Bonam]

The Cold War was won the moment it began. While the Russians and other Soviet peoples rotted in misery, were executed by the millions by their leaders, and treated as little more than slaves the rest of the time, the people of the West prospered, gained improved rights and liberties, and boomed in numbers.

The Soviet Union was on a path to its own downfall since before WWII even began.

[dizzy]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/distorted-multiculturalism-to-blame-for-rise-in-sikh-extremism-dosanjh-says/article1541355/

[Argus]

The present civilization doesn't need to be 'preserved', it needs to evolve - or rather - to continue evolving as it did when it accepted Irish, Jews, Italians, and the latest wave of immigration.

How does a civilization evolve - which implies continued progression - by absorbing massive numbers of people who cling to much less evolved cultures and then encouraging them to retain their less evolved cultures?

Or did you mean to use the term "devolve" instead?

[Michael Hardner]

We can do that too: It wasn't ethnic diversity in the West that won the Cold War; it was the fact that Western economies were open while the Soviet Union was closed, and it could not keep up with American military spending.

That's one example of how an open society is stronger than a centrally planned and closed society.

[Michael Hardner]

How does a civilization evolve - which implies continued progression - by absorbing massive numbers of people who cling to much less evolved cultures and then encouraging them to retain their less evolved cultures?

Or did you mean to use the term "devolve" instead?

You have no evidence that said cultures will behave any differently than other cultures that have been assimilated. Other peoples have left cultures with different values and have assimilated so why are these people so different ? Are they biologically different ?

I have continually asked for the reasons why this may be the case and I end up getting incorrect answers, or circular arguments.

[dizzy]

How does a civilization evolve - which implies continued progression - by absorbing massive numbers of people who cling to much less evolved cultures and then encouraging them to retain their less evolved cultures?

Or did you mean to use the term "devolve" instead?

Is your problem with immigration? It sounds like it has more to do with the present practice of multiculturalism.

[Machjo]

There are some people in Canada who'd vote for the BNP if they were in the UK.

[Argus]

You have no evidence that said cultures will behave any differently than other cultures that have been assimilated.

You have no evidence they will behave the same. These cultures are a lot more differant from ours than most previous cultures, and there are a lot more immigrants now than ever before. All the previous incidences of huge immigration waves were of people who mostly came from the British Isles and so had an almost identical culture to the one found here.

Further, we there is no evidence that Sikhs or Muslims fully integrate anywhere, regardless of how many generations live there. In every nation on Earth where there is any substantial minority of Muslims there is friction between them and the majority. Why is that? Further, there was no concept of multiculturalism in the past, no acceptance of differences. Immigrants were very strongly, and sometimes pointedly instructed that the way to be Canadian, the only way to be accepted, was to learn our language and culture and blend in. That is not the case now and has not been for some decades.

And further still, immigrants who came from the likes of Poland in the past were more or less cut off here and assimilated in large part because of that. Today's immigrants have satellite television, the internet, and easy telephone access with their homelands, as well as the means to return home fairly frequently. Many live in huge immigrant communities filled with their countrymen - communities continually replenished with newcomers every year. Again, all of that was not the case in the past.

You are basing your presumptions on past immigration waves despite the fact today's waves are not operating under anything like the same circumstances.