How would the ideal multi-cultural society work?

[Meshugger]

Culture is usually represented by language, rule of law and the arts. It is also has certain social taboos and expectations. But it is also an organic process, changed through time by its participants. So here is what i am pondering about:

 

1) Can a single nation-state survive in the long with no dominant culture? This would mean no official or dominant language(s), different courts for persons of different culture and little to social standard between you and your neighbour.

 

2) If there is a dominant culture in a state or area, how would the less cultures thrive and survive in order not to erode through the process of time?

 

By these definitions, it is not ordering exotic food, nor is it exotic elements in language or art. Those are just flavours added and succombed to the already dominant culture, which isn't really multi-cultural. So what is really a true multi-cultural society?

Edited September 16, 2010 by Meshugger

[Hurlshort]

Other than the court issue, this is basically the Northern California Bay Area in a nutshell. The key is that each culture works as a community to help others in the culture, but they still take part in the politics and larger area development. Actually the larger the cultural presence, the less support there seems to be. For example, the hispanic community is so large that the support network is unable to keep up, as opposed to the smaller Russian community. So really, the larger communities face more erosion than the smaller ones.

[Orogun01]

Other than the court issue, this is basically the Northern California Bay Area in a nutshell. The key is that each culture works as a community to help others in the culture, but they still take part in the politics and larger area development. Actually the larger the cultural presence, the less support there seems to be. For example, the hispanic community is so large that the support network is unable to keep up, as opposed to the smaller Russian community. So really, the larger communities face more erosion than the smaller ones.

I differ, they only become assimilated into the larger culture of the US. Hispanics already have an impact in the US, political representation, immigration issues, and even holidays. The support network as become the United States itself. Truly a mulit-cultural society wouldn't be able to exist without some ground rules and that means one government, otherwise it would be chaotic.

[Enoch]

Nerve-stapling.

[theslug]

We should all be consolidated into one culture; a single national identity for every man, women, and child. We should give up our homes and material wealth to be shared amongst ourselves (at the discretion and authority of the great national leader) and any aberrations removed for the good of the nation.

 

That's mean none of them coloured folk either.

 

Wait what?

 

edit: wrong alt

Edited September 17, 2010 by theslug

[Gorth]

Get rid of nation states. That would free the world from the scourge of nationalism.

[Walsingham]

Nerve-stapling.

 

I'm just playing Alpha Centauri, actually.

 

~

 

Multiple cultures work superbly well in art and science. Politically I fear they can only lead to friction. On the other hand, if we are living in such a throoughly intercoinnected world then perhaps the point is moot. We are already IN a multicultural society. The challenge now is to evolve strcutures and methods for ersolving differences either peacefully or at least with proportionate force.

[Meshugger]

So either one culture becomes engulfed by the other, or the nation-state seizes to exist? Meh, you all agree with me, how boring. Paging Numbersman and LoF for some action.

[Moose]

Just another social experiment that'll footnote in history classes in years to come.

[Walsingham]

So either one culture becomes engulfed by the other, or the nation-state seizes to exist? Meh, you all agree with me, how boring. Paging Numbersman and LoF for some action.

 

I think Numbers is doing a PhD, and LoF appears to have finally understoood that we aren't buying what he's selling.

[Kaftan Barlast]

Yo Im real happy for you an imma let you finish, but my reply is way better than eveyrone elses.

 

1) Can a single nation-state survive in the long with no dominant culture? This would mean no official or dominant language(s), different courts for persons of different culture and little to social standard between you and your neighbour.

 

2) If there is a dominant culture in a state or area, how would the less cultures thrive and survive in order not to erode through the process of time?

 

 

 

1) No, a nation state cannot survive without without a dominating language and/or culture. When friction between the different peoples becomes high enough, it will fracture into smaller regions without fail. Yugoslavia is a great example.

 

2) The lesser cultures will, and must be assimilated into the majority culture. A group that refuses to adapt will become outcasts, like the jews or gypsies.

Edited September 17, 2010 by Kaftan Barlast

[Hurlshort]

There are a lot of different levels of assimilation. Also, I'm not sure if the Jewish population of the US really considers itself outcasts.

[Orogun01]

There are a lot of different levels of assimilation. Also, I'm not sure if the Jewish population of the US really considers itself outcasts.

But they are still a minority, if counted apart from the white population.

[Hurlshort]

There are a lot of different levels of assimilation. Also, I'm not sure if the Jewish population of the US really considers itself outcasts.

But they are still a minority, if counted apart from the white population.

 

Minorities are the majority in the US. What does that have to do with being an outcast?

[Guard Dog]

1) No, a nation state cannot survive without without a dominating language and/or culture. When friction between the different peoples becomes high enough, it will fracture into smaller regions without fail. Yugoslavia is a great example.

 

Doh, you beat me to it.

[Meshugger]

Yo Im real happy for you an imma let you finish, but my reply is way better than eveyrone elses.

 

1) Can a single nation-state survive in the long with no dominant culture? This would mean no official or dominant language(s), different courts for persons of different culture and little to social standard between you and your neighbour.

 

2) If there is a dominant culture in a state or area, how would the less cultures thrive and survive in order not to erode through the process of time?

 

 

 

1) No, a nation state cannot survive without without a dominating language and/or culture. When friction between the different peoples becomes high enough, it will fracture into smaller regions without fail. Yugoslavia is a great example.

 

2) The lesser cultures will, and must be assimilated into the majority culture. A group that refuses to adapt will become outcasts, like the jews or gypsies.

 

I have to say that jews have integrated quite well compared to gypsies, but that's a whole other story.

[Orogun01]

There are a lot of different levels of assimilation. Also, I'm not sure if the Jewish population of the US really considers itself outcasts.

But they are still a minority, if counted apart from the white population.

 

Minorities are the majority in the US. What does that have to do with being an outcast?

Even though they are counted as a majority their unique traditions separate them from the rest. They don't consider themselves outcast since they are their universe center and hold on to their culture, since they have always been libeled as the outcast; no country of their own. Even when they have stetted into a place their history usually makes them a very closed community to the outside.

[Hurlshort]

I'm pretty sure you have plenty of Jewish people who consider the US their country, and antisemitism is a pretty rare thing in most places. What I'm saying here is Jewish people are very much a part of mainstream US culture, and yet they still maintain a unique identity. And lo and behold, the nation has not collapsed.

[Orogun01]

I'm pretty sure you have plenty of Jewish people who consider the US their country, and antisemitism is a pretty rare thing in most places. What I'm saying here is Jewish people are very much a part of mainstream US culture, and yet they still maintain a unique identity. And lo and behold, the nation has not collapsed.

Just as many other people have grown out of their communities and heritage, by the third generation there is hardly a sense of kinship with the motherland. Instead you grow as an American, and it's up to each family to choose to uphold their traditions or not. But despite this being a multicultural society it is not a multicultural government, each ethnicity does not have a separate code of law and government.

[Guest The Architect]

If each culture would give up their old belief system and instead worship me as their God. Sure, I may be a cold, humourless man who sits in a large circular room covered with television monitors all day, but I am your creator.

[Orogun01]

If each culture would give up their old belief system and instead worship me as their God. Sure, I may be a cold, humourless man who sits in a large circular room covered with television monitors all day, but I am your creator.

[kirottu]

I have to say that jews have integrated quite well compared to gypsies, but that's a whole other story.

 

That

[Gromnir]

But it is also an organic process, changed through time by its participants.

 

...

 

Those are just flavours added and succombed to the already dominant culture, which isn't really multi-cultural. So what is really a true multi-cultural society?

 

 

...

 

ok.

 

...

 

you recognize that cultures change, but you wonder if a multicultural society can somehow avoid such change? am honestly not certain what your definition o' a "multicultural society" is to begin with. take a look at some Inodnesian nations and the degree to which the cultures of those peoples has evolved and changed over the past five decades. you tell us that certain aspects o' cultural diversity does not rise to the level o' your envisioned multicultural society w/o any real explanation or justification. does a predominant national identity somehow preclude the possibility o' a multicultural society? why? ask folks in the Southie neighborhood o' Boston if they is feeling like they has lost their Irish culture... ask folks o' the Polish Downtown in Chicago if they has become lost to their heritage. the Oglala o' Pine Ridge has, in large part, retained core beliefs and language o' the Lakota people. 'course Pine Ridge also gots infant mortality and poverty more in line with 3rd world countries than what one would expect in the United States. other Indian/Native American reservations has had considerably greater success as they has attempted to retain their culture, but such reservations is, as the name implies, synthetic creations.

 

our recollections o' cultural anthropology from University is blurred due to remoteness, but we seem to recall that Culture were a damned expansive term. a school could have a culture, and the individual departments and sports teams might also has thriving and identifiable cultures. organizations and clubs on/off campus might also breed identifiable and distinct cultures. if a single school campus could breed so many healthy and enduring cultures, then why would stepping off campus kill the prospects for multiculturalism? expansive... not limited.

 

am thinking that mesh is using "multicultural" different than the way it were taught to us... which don't mean that he is wrong. after all, our school were (and still is) the largest and most enduring hippie freak show in the United States.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Gorth]

The only "multicultural" place I've seen/experienced for a longer period of time would be New Zealand. The Maori have kept some aspects of their culture and given up on others. They don't eat the losers of a conflict any more.

[Walsingham]

I'm pretty sure you have plenty of Jewish people who consider the US their country, and antisemitism is a pretty rare thing in most places. What I'm saying here is Jewish people are very much a part of mainstream US culture, and yet they still maintain a unique identity. And lo and behold, the nation has not collapsed.

 

Good point.