overthere Posted October 28, 2014 Report Posted October 28, 2014 You missed the point entirely. Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
guyser Posted October 28, 2014 Report Posted October 28, 2014 You missed the point entirely.Oh really, please do explain. Quote
Argus Posted October 28, 2014 Author Report Posted October 28, 2014 Uh. No. Because your method of screening by society of origin would keep out people who are looking to escape, remember? MNot that you have the slightest interest in letting them in anyway. I have not expressed a 'method of screening'. I commented on one someone else expressed, stating it would work. It WOULD work. But I have earlier stated a desire for psychological tests and the use of other behavioural models. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted October 28, 2014 Author Report Posted October 28, 2014 Is it a xenophobe or someone who wants to preserve the country? You cannot have a logical discussion with someone incapable of logic. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted October 28, 2014 Author Report Posted October 28, 2014 (edited) But you have hit on the nub of a difference between Canada and the US. The American melting pot requires that everybody more or less leave it behind and become true blue Americans. I don't think many in Canada feel that way. You are quite mistaken. http://www.angusreidglobal.com/polls/canadians-endorse-multiculturalism-but-pick-melting-pot-over-mosaic/ Edited October 28, 2014 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Black Dog Posted October 28, 2014 Report Posted October 28, 2014 I have not expressed a 'method of screening'. I commented on one someone else expressed, stating it would work. It WOULD work. But I have earlier stated a desire for psychological tests and the use of other behavioural models. All to keep out a minority of a minority. What evidence is there that this is not a solution in search of a problem? You are quite mistaken. http://www.angusreidglobal.com/polls/canadians-endorse-multiculturalism-but-pick-melting-pot-over-mosaic/ I wonder what people would say when they realized there's no practical difference in the two approaches. Just different branding, like Tide and Cheer. Quote
Big Guy Posted October 28, 2014 Report Posted October 28, 2014 I would like to preserve my country by keeping the xenophobes out and bigots on the next train south. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
guyser Posted October 28, 2014 Report Posted October 28, 2014 I would like to preserve my country by keeping the xenophobes out and bigots on the next train south.Relax, the longer we have people coming in, the more the assimilation moves ahead. Quote
cybercoma Posted October 28, 2014 Report Posted October 28, 2014 There is no reason not to consider willingness to fit in with a new culture. If they can't fit in it's a minus. Insistence on wearing non-Canadian garb should be considered a minus. We should probably have a talk about all of those Jews in Montreal then. Quote
carepov Posted October 28, 2014 Report Posted October 28, 2014 How is it not practical? And were it practical, do you believe it should be done? It is not practical to accurately determine the beliefs of an individual. And if it were practical to determine their beliefs I still think that Canada should not refuse entry to individuals that believe that women should wear burqas. Please do not mistake my acceptance of these people into Canada as an acceptance of this belief. Also, please do not try to suggest that I favour opening the borders to millions of these people. I am basically supporting the status quo, with a gradual, moderate increase in the number of refugees and immigrants. IMO, one of Canada's top strengths is our acceptance of all cultures and our ability to successfully integrate all cultures. This benefits us Canadians by giving us a good reputation and other advantages in a globalized world; but is also a benefit to the world as we are a model of tolerance and we also have a positive influence on other cultures. Quote
carepov Posted October 28, 2014 Report Posted October 28, 2014 For example, the Environics survey done in 2006 (being updated now) suggested that, in the struggle between moderates and extremists 80% of Canadian Muslims identify with the more 'moderate' side. Just 14% identified with the extremists. Which sounds good, except 14% of 1 million Muslims is 140,000 people in Canada who identify with extremist Muslim groups. Slightly more than your '100' figure. When questioned about the so-called 'Toronto 18' 73% of Canadian Muslims said those attacks were not justified. 5% said they were completely justified. 7% said they were somewhat justified. Do the math. That's 150,000 people we let into our country who believe that the attacks the Toronto 18 planned were either completely justified, or somewhat justified. http://www.environicsinstitute.org/institute-projects/completed-projects/survey-canadian-muslims This is an interesting study, thank you, I will look more into it, but I must correct you: in the above poll 14% of those Muslims that believe that there is a struggle between moderate Muslims and extremist Muslims self-identify as extremists. That would put the figure at 56,000. The Toronto 18 group question was also a subsample but a larger one. Is it a concern: yes. Is it reason to panic: IMO, no. A recurring theme throughout the report is that the more education a person has and the more frequent the contact with cultures, the more likely that person is tolerant of other cultures. Quote
jbg Posted October 29, 2014 Report Posted October 29, 2014 But you have hit on the nub of a difference between Canada and the US. The American melting pot requires that everybody more or less leave it behind and become true blue Americans. As it should be. My ancestors learned English as fast as they could and dropped their European connections like hot coals. I don't think many in Canada feel that way. We don't require anything of immigrants other than: get a job, pay taxes, obey the law. It's what we require from all citizens in the end, not just those who happen to have been born here.What about the rule that to gain citizenship status they need to be able to speak at least serviceable Canadian, English or French? Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
jbg Posted October 29, 2014 Report Posted October 29, 2014 (edited) Really? Hassidic Jews in NYC.? A group of people that I have problems with, especially for seeking to burn someone alive, locally, for worshiping at the "wrong" synagogue. (edited to remove my insult) Jews in general.?Most that I know are thoroughly integrated into American society. Pennsylvania Dutch?Who have they hurt? And do they draw benefits? Latinos from south of the Border?Big problem unless they start learning English and integrating. Hawains?Who have they hurt? I do have a problem with their high level of benefits' receipt. Natives...all the diff ones?A mucking fess on both sides of the border. There really isnt much of a diff at all.It's not as great as overthere made out but there is some difference between a melting pot and multicultural society. Edited October 29, 2014 by jbg Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 29, 2014 Report Posted October 29, 2014 As it should be. My ancestors learned English as fast as they could and dropped their European connections like hot coals. A popular myth....the U.S. never was a "melting pot"....more like a tossed salad or gumbo. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Argus Posted October 29, 2014 Author Report Posted October 29, 2014 It is not practical to accurately determine the beliefs of an individual. And if it were practical to determine their beliefs I still think that Canada should not refuse entry to individuals that believe that women should wear burqas. Please do not mistake my acceptance of these people into Canada as an acceptance of this belief. Also, please do not try to suggest that I favour opening the borders to millions of these people. I am basically supporting the status quo, with a gradual, moderate increase in the number of refugees and immigrants. The entire history of the human race is a quest for betterment in all things. Cultures which do not seek to improve things stagnate and die. Canada has always done its best to make things better, and I think we should continue to do so. The idea we should simply let in thousands of people with societal beliefs inimical to our own because we've been doing so for the last thirty or forty years makes no sense. We could easily draw in enough immigrants from cultures which are closer in sync to ours. You like difference, they can be different. That doesn't mean we want people who believe in cutting off little girls' clitorises and shrouding them in black sheets because they might otherwise inspire lust in men. Screw that. That is not an addition to our cultural mileau which is going to improve things at all. Quite the contrary. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted October 29, 2014 Author Report Posted October 29, 2014 Relax, the longer we have people coming in, the more the assimilation moves ahead. Absolutely untrue. Assimilation actually slows down if there are continuous streams of immigrants from 'the old country', who establish a demand for all the sorts of things they had at home. If you can live here without speaking a word of English, dealing only with people from your own culture that's going to enormously slow down integration. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
guyser Posted October 29, 2014 Report Posted October 29, 2014 Absolutely untrue.And when you look around at all the immigrant kids speaking english, doing activities that all CDN kids do, eating the food of this country, learning the mores and ways of this country, do they all of a sudden change when older? Would one not think that the young kids have a definite influence on their parents as they age? Recall the Van Olympic crowds of CDN's who were from other countries all celebrating the showing we did at said games? Lots of colour there. Assimilation actually slows down if there are continuous streams of immigrants from 'the old country', who establish a demand for all the sorts of things they had at home. If you can live here without speaking a word of English, dealing only with people from your own culture that's going to enormously slow down integration.Perhaps with some of the very elderly types, but anyone working and living here would need some command of the english language. Perhaps dad does, mom stays home speaking another language. I dont happen to know of any diffulculties arising from the Italians, who were heavily prejudiced against, as respects to the language. Mom may still not speak english to any degree of competency, but all her kids and grandkids certainly do, always will. and with that comes assimilation all the while holding on to some of their traditions. All in all, without the immigrant, this country would be soooooo much more boring than it already is . Quote
guyser Posted October 29, 2014 Report Posted October 29, 2014 (edited) A group of people that I have problems with, especially for seeking to burn someone alive, locally, for worshiping at the "wrong" synagogue. (edited to remove my insult) Most that I know are thoroughly integrated into American society. Who have they hurt? And do they draw benefits? Big problem unless they start learning English and integrating. Who have they hurt? I do have a problem with their high level of benefits' receipt. A mucking fess on both sides of the border. It's not as great as overthere made out but there is some difference between a melting pot and multicultural society. You're moving the goalposts. The point of it all was simple, people can hold on to traditions, manners of dress, cultures, all the while becoming americanized/candianized at the same time. A Yank or Canuck wearing a turban is a Yank/Canuck. They live by the same rules, play by the same rules. Edited October 29, 2014 by Guyser2 Quote
overthere Posted October 29, 2014 Report Posted October 29, 2014 As it should be. My ancestors learned English as fast as they could and dropped their European connections like hot coals. What about the rule that to gain citizenship status they need to be able to speak at least serviceable Canadian, English or French? I don't care much if immigrants learn English or French. They know better than I that the quality of their lives here is directly related to their ability to compete in the workplace. And that means fluency in one of the official languages. It's a choice, and doesn't make much difference to me. Citizenship is at the end of a process, not the beginning. The US and Canadian immigration processes are not so different, we both have streams of economic migrants and refugfees. The economic migrants to Canada get resdiency on a points sytem. One of the elements is proficiency in an official language, and nearly all who gain residency already are fluent enough to first get in, then eventually get citizenship if they choose. The refugee stream is smaller and who cares what they speak? we are undertaking their entry as a humanitarian gesture and take on some extra responsibilites as a result. . Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
jbg Posted October 29, 2014 Report Posted October 29, 2014 The refugee stream is smaller and who cares what they speak? we are undertaking their entry as a humanitarian gesture and take on some extra responsibilites as a result. .I don't want to go "Biblical" here but there is the story of the tower of Babel. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Black Dog Posted October 30, 2014 Report Posted October 30, 2014 I don't want to go "Biblical" here but there is the story of the tower of Babel. What does a fairy story about what an asshole God is have to do with anything? Quote
carepov Posted October 30, 2014 Report Posted October 30, 2014 The entire history of the human race is a quest for betterment in all things. Cultures which do not seek to improve things stagnate and die. Canada has always done its best to make things better, and I think we should continue to do so. The idea we should simply let in thousands of people with societal beliefs inimical to our own because we've been doing so for the last thirty or forty years makes no sense. We could easily draw in enough immigrants from cultures which are closer in sync to ours. You like difference, they can be different. That doesn't mean we want people who believe in cutting off little girls' clitorises and shrouding them in black sheets because they might otherwise inspire lust in men. Screw that. That is not an addition to our cultural mileau which is going to improve things at all. Quite the contrary. IMO, allowing people with unacceptable beliefs about human rights in the numbers that we do today has no significant negative impact on Canadian society. It does however have a major positive impact on the individuals and families that do immigrate, and therefore a positive impact towards making the world more civilized. When small in number as they are now in Canada, it is not beliefs that matter, it is behaviour. For every person supporting FGM that immigrates to Canada, how many fewer actual cases of FGM are there in the world? Quote
jbg Posted October 30, 2014 Report Posted October 30, 2014 What does a fairy story about what an asshole God is have to do with anything?The natural result of multi-culturalism. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Argus Posted October 30, 2014 Author Report Posted October 30, 2014 You're moving the goalposts. The point of it all was simple, people can hold on to traditions, manners of dress, cultures, all the while becoming americanized/candianized at the same time. Not if the tradition includes despising behaviours we consider normal. You hold onto that and you aren't going to be integrating at all. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted October 30, 2014 Author Report Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) IMO, allowing people with unacceptable beliefs about human rights in the numbers that we do today has no significant negative impact on Canadian society. What does that even mean? You're acknowledging it's a negative impact, but say it's not 'significant'. It's significant to the people who encounter them. And anyway, shouldn't we seek for it to be positive, not negative? Why allow these people in if the impact is negative? Especially when their economic contribution is also negative (as shown in a number of posted cites)? It does however have a major positive impact on the individuals and families that do immigrate, and therefore a positive impact towards making the world more civilized. Again, to my way of thinking, our immigration system should be dedicated to improving Canada, not making foreigners happy. Edited October 30, 2014 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.