Go to Naut's View
- Add a comment
- Go to Multiculturalism and its Discontent – Part II
TAPS
thanks for your comment. It's flattering to be considered a 'must read'! Actually, it's mutual...
posted by
Nautikos
on January 26, 2007 at 5:03 AM
| link to this | reply
Nautikos
I'm late as usual. I put off reading your posts thinking I will get some of the short and shallow ones out of the way first because I know that yours are going to make me think, to consider my opinions. I consider your posts required reading for me. I found your statistics on trust by race very interesting and telling.
posted by
TAPS.
on January 19, 2007 at 11:58 AM
| link to this | reply
pc
very succinct, and very true...
posted by
Nautikos
on January 17, 2007 at 10:20 AM
| link to this | reply
The problem with multiculturalism is ...
1. It is not tolerance of all cultures; and
2. It is not practiced by the source countries of the most intolerant cultures.
posted by
cpklapper
on January 17, 2007 at 6:00 AM
| link to this | reply
Wiley,
believe me when I say that I really appreciate your comment! And not only because it was the first, and probably the last time that I will be mentioned in the same breath as Soren Kierkegaard...
posted by
Nautikos
on January 15, 2007 at 5:56 PM
| link to this | reply
Ariel
thanks for that fulsome praise. As to your ( I suppose largely rhetorical) question - I think you have also suggested the answer: the threat is not (yet?) perceived, much less understood...
posted by
Nautikos
on January 15, 2007 at 5:51 PM
| link to this | reply
Nautikos
Let's be honest, if I was to study all of this post of yours, I'd have to be somebody other than who I am.
I find reading you is as much study for me as reading Soren Kierkegaard et al, it takes me weeks to read a very small book because of the subject matter.
Ach, but you'll know I stopped by and tried to get a grasp of it all my friend.
I say welcome all the immigrants, but make them adapt to our culture just as soon as we figure out for ourselves, we are really cold Americans with health care and Harper.
posted by
WileyJohn
on January 14, 2007 at 9:25 PM
| link to this | reply
Nautikos
What can one say but ... Bravo!!!
An intriguing thought for you and all your commentors : to what extent will the common threat of Islamic terrorism unify the currently bitterly divided factions in our societies?
Theoretically, it should spur on the required unity ; but are we too fatally divided to unite even in the face of such a common threat?
Hell, will we even perceive this threat? On past form, one doubts it! We'll sleepwalk into God knows what crisis ; like we did in the 1930s
Truly, we live in " ... interesting times."!
posted by
ariel70
on January 14, 2007 at 1:44 PM
| link to this | reply
Joe Love
it was a revelation to me as well! Although I do know there is not a lot going on in the Italian community here in T.O., and it's
huge...
posted by
Nautikos
on January 14, 2007 at 1:24 PM
| link to this | reply
Wow! I never knew about the Hispanic mistrust of others outside the family
I found the low percentage of Hispanic-based events in LA particularly eye-opening. I'd assumed there would be gads of festivals and events celebrating their heritage.
posted by
Joe_Love
on January 13, 2007 at 7:51 AM
| link to this | reply
richinstore
thanks for dropping in!
posted by
Nautikos
on January 13, 2007 at 6:02 AM
| link to this | reply
Talion
Thank you for your excellent, thoughtful comment. It deserves a far more detailed response than I am able to provide at this moment. But I will provide it, I promise. It may take the form of a separate post, where I will refer to your comments.
posted by
Nautikos
on January 13, 2007 at 6:00 AM
| link to this | reply
Very informative.
posted by
richinstore
on January 13, 2007 at 1:21 AM
| link to this | reply
Nautikos
I forgot one important aspect.
Following a custom is optional, meaning everyone should have the freedom to partipate or not without societal repercussions. However, not participating does not automatically earn the right to demand a just custom (one that does not inherently and intentionally cause harm to others) be stopped or altered, i.e. the recent Merry Christmas vs. Happy Holidays/no Christmas trees displayed in public nonsense.
posted by
Talion
on January 12, 2007 at 9:24 PM
| link to this | reply
Nautikos
This is truly fascinating. It provides me with a lot to think about and subsequently comment on, too much to do at once, so I'll start "small."
Whether it's the result of naivete or patriotic arrogance, dominant cultures foolishly believe all immigrants who come to their shores truly want to become citizens. While this may be the ultimate goal of those seeking asylum, like dissidents and former/soon-to-be political prisoners of the cruelest regimes, most are simply looking for a better way of life. It's ambition and/or greed that inspires immigration, rarely civic philosophy. I'm a proud American. Hypothetically, let's say I accept an offer I couldn't refuse in Russia. Does this make me suddenly Russian or am I an American in Russia? The answer is obviously the latter. Even if events in my life took a disastrous turn and my only hope was the offer in Russia, I'd still consider myself an American in Russia. Taking a spin on the old adage, when in Russia, I would certainly do as the Russians do, but I wouldn't be a Russian. I couldn't be a Russian. If anything, I'd cling to my Americanness even tighter to combat my literal alienation, both real and imagined. One must assume that native of other countries love their countries. The same patriotic fire that burns within my breast for my home country must also burn in theirs. With this in mind, it's the epitome of ridiculousness to believe immigrants would instantly renounce their native cultures and embrace those of the new one. They may want to live among us, but they don't want to be us. Whether it's the steroetypical liberal coddling or the ham-fisted approach of conservatives, the dominate culture must first come to terms with this disturbing fact and stop trying to force the issue. The hallmark of a free society is, well, freedom. Following the letter of the law is mandatory for all citizens, native born and immigrant. Following customs are optional. We must not confuse the two. How exactly we can pull this off, I unfortunately have no idea.
posted by
Talion
on January 12, 2007 at 9:14 PM
| link to this | reply
bel
well yes, that's the whole point of my argument. But, to begin with, you can't 'keep politicians out of it'. You can't keep politicians out of anything. What you
can do is elect politicians who will adopt different policies, in this case
radically different policies - if such politicians existed. But I haven't seen any. In fact I haven't seen many people getting all worked up about the situation anyway...What would be required is a massive shift of attitudes, and that ain't happening, partly, but
only partly because the mainstream media are fully committed to the current trend as well...
posted by
Nautikos
on January 12, 2007 at 7:56 PM
| link to this | reply
But Naut
is that not forcing anothers culture down your throat? I may be phrasing it badly but honestly I think if we could keep the politians out of it we would all fare much better. I have no problem recognizing and even learning about anothers belief or holidays but I expect to be given the same respect. When someone tells me that I can't say Merry Christmas because it might offend I feel it's being forced upon me.
posted by
bel_1965
on January 12, 2007 at 7:32 PM
| link to this | reply
Corbin
I'm with you, I'm having my share of
posted by
Nautikos
on January 12, 2007 at 7:25 PM
| link to this | reply
bel
we, (collectively, as Western culture) don't force much down anyone's throat any longer. We're still here, and we do what we do, but that involves among other things that our 'elites' are telling the rest of the population that our culture has to make way for the culture of others, because our culture is offensive to others. To say Merry Christmas is offensive; a Christmas tree that was put up in front of a Toronto court house had to be removed because it offended someone. We don't have Easter Holidays any more, because that's offensive to someone, so it's just 'Spring Holidays'...and so it goes...and these are just superficial examples that barely scratch the surface...
posted by
Nautikos
on January 12, 2007 at 7:23 PM
| link to this | reply
Naut....
I am glad to see part two....and am looking forward to seeing it a lot better tomorrow after I have survived my...
...tonight....
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on January 12, 2007 at 6:37 PM
| link to this | reply
strat,
I value your judgment, and I am glad you thought well of it...
posted by
Nautikos
on January 12, 2007 at 6:35 PM
| link to this | reply
Ariel,
thanks for your kind words. I remember Enoch Powell, who, on this side of the Atlantic, was always called a 'racist'. I never thought he was a racist but a 'culturist', which is fine with me...
posted by
Nautikos
on January 12, 2007 at 6:31 PM
| link to this | reply
Individulism is mentioned
and that is one of my issues with the forcing of putting groups of anyone together. It seems too of each culture (my own included) tries to force ideals, opinions, etc... down the throat of another. Until we learn to live with one another and accept that we have our difference there will always be resentment. Sometimes I think the PC are simply trying to hard to prove something that we can figure out on our own if we are simply allowed to interact without someone trying to "teach" us to accept one another.
Good stuff Naut.
posted by
bel_1965
on January 12, 2007 at 1:55 PM
| link to this | reply
What Ariel said.
This was truly fantastic reading. Thanks for this work!
posted by
strat
on January 12, 2007 at 1:34 PM
| link to this | reply
Naut
Bravo! Yet another magnum opus!
I well recall Enoch Powell and Shirley Williams ( then the Labour Secretary for education ) debating this subject, and she said " What we need is a multicultural society."
To which he replied " Why?" leaving her gobsmacked to silence.
I've asked this question many time ; with the same lack of response.
What made the people in Britain who were responsible for the influx of people from India believe that the Sikhs, Hindus, Muslims et al, who had been slaughtering each other just a few years previously would live at peace and in harmony in Britain?
What induced them to believe that West Indian youths ( especially Jamaicans ) who had utter contempt for law and order would become good citizens?
One could go on ad infinitum listing " ... the crimes, follies and misfortunes ..." of this particular piece of history.
Oh, and now? Well ... er maybe they were right ; multiculturalism ain't such a good idea after all! Will they apoligise? Admit their tragic mistakes, for which ordinary people pay the price? No way. They'll saddle us with some other lunatic social engineering project.
Hell they are already!
Reading your posts makes me think how very, very apt was the headline on mine that you inspired " There Are None So Blind as Those Who won't See ; None So deaf as Those Who won't Hear"
These posts of yours, like yours on the threat of Islam should be required reading for every one!
posted by
ariel70
on January 12, 2007 at 1:12 PM
| link to this | reply