How would the ideal multi-cultural society work?

[lord of flies]

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.

Hmm, yes, that's...

 

Wait, no. You clearly don't know **** about ****. Yugoslavia was stable for most of its life, it was Serbian nationalism (i.e. the attempt to establish a dominating language and/or culture) that lead to its destruction. Ethnic groups also coexisted peacefully in the Soviet Union until Gorbachev decided to sack the (Kazakh) first secretary of the Communist Party of Kazakhstan and thus replace him with an ethnic Russian. The existence of a dominating culture (Sinhalese) in the Sri Lanka has caused significant political instability throughout the country's life. India has no dominant ethnic group yet doesn't seem about to collapse.

[I want teh kotor 3]

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.

[Walsingham]

Ethnic groups also coexisted peacefully in the Soviet Union until Gorbachev

 

Priceless

[lord of flies]

Ethnic groups also coexisted peacefully in the Soviet Union until Gorbachev

 

Priceless

Also true. From 1924 (with the complete consolidation of the USSR as a cohesive state including Central Asia, the Caucuses, Belarus, the Ukraine and Russia) to 1985, there was no major incidents of inter-ethnic violence. Look it up if you don't believe me. Over time, admittedly, there were some things put in place that were obviously intended to result in Russification - but these were things like "you have to take Russian, you don't have to take Belarusian" in schools - but the opposite also occurred, such as the Crimea becoming part of the Ukraine or the practice of putting leaders of the local ethnicity in the number one position of each ethnic republic (e.g. Kazakhs in the Kazakh SSR, Ukrainians in the Ukrainan SSR).

 

Of course, when Captain Dumbass Liberal decided to run the country into the ground, he sparked huge ethnic violence, such as the Nagorno-Karabakh War or Jeltoqsan.

Edited September 27, 2010 by lord of flies

[Meshugger]

About India, it is more about the hindi culture, and less about race. The Soviet Union was totalitarian, 'nuff said.

[lord of flies]

About India, it is more about the hindi culture, and less about race. The Soviet Union was totalitarian, 'nuff said.

Except for High Stalin (1936-1942)? No, it was not totalitarian. You could argue that it was authoritarian, but totalitarian? Please.

Edited September 29, 2010 by Gorth
Lets cut down on the insults?

[Oblarg]

I find a lot of the **** about "multiculturalism" to be a bit absurd. Unifying culture is a very important part of a nation's stability.

[Orogun01]

I find a lot of the **** about "multiculturalism" to be a bit absurd. Unifying culture is a very important part of a nation's stability.

But a unified world is what has made us more civilized. Culture in the ancient world was shared mostly through warfare but among the conqueror and the conquered there was communication that wouldn't had happened otherwise. What's more the less advanced would start becoming integrated into the world.

It is the great empires that have laid the foundation in which the world stands today, now multilateralism is more important than ever. The world is becoming a multicultural society of it's own, so we need a world unifying culture. Its not an absurd endeavor.

[Nightshape]

We're heading towards a worldwide mono-culture, they're just selling it as if it were multicultural.

[Meshugger]

I find a lot of the **** about "multiculturalism" to be a bit absurd. Unifying culture is a very important part of a nation's stability.

 

Strange, none of the mainstream politicans agree. And LoF about Stalin? My gosh

Edited September 29, 2010 by Meshugger

[Orogun01]

We're heading towards a worldwide mono-culture, they're just selling it as if it were multicultural.

So you think that culture and history can be forgotten like that. While there will be a greater amount of shared traits, the idiosyncrasy of each culture will remain and the future ones will come from it.

[Humodour]

From my observations of Australia: multiculturalism works if successive natural-born generations amalgamate both parent cultures - if the kids are receptive, everything will be fine and Aussies will be happy to adopt a bunch of aspect of their culture in turn. If this doesn't happen (the kids don't fit in) then the immigrant culture's size as a percentage of the population should be held below a certain percent to prevent racial tension building up - this basically means limiting how many you accept as immigrants per year in future for a while.

 

Australia is a good example of multiculturalism working remarkably well at a certain level. Specifically: 25% of the population weren't born here, 40% of the population's parent's weren't born here, 10% of the population is Asian, an even larger chunk of the population are non-English Europeans typically from the oppressed and low socio-economic countries of the 1900's. Despite all this, or in fact because of it, we have one of the most socially and economically advanced countries in the world.

 

Australia is also an (unfortunately) good example of multiculturalism working remarkably poorly in the past in various forms too, so we know a thing or two about it.

[Meshugger]

From my observations of Australia: multiculturalism works if successive natural-born generations amalgamate both parent cultures - if the kids are receptive, everything will be fine and Aussies will be happy to adopt a bunch of aspect of their culture in turn. If this doesn't happen (the kids don't fit in) then the immigrant culture's size as a percentage of the population should be held below a certain percent to prevent racial tension building up - this basically means limiting how many you accept as immigrants per year in future for a while.

 

Australia is a good example of multiculturalism working remarkably well at a certain level. Specifically: 25% of the population weren't born here, 40% of the population's parent's weren't born here, 10% of the population is Asian, an even larger chunk of the population are non-English Europeans typically from the oppressed and low socio-economic countries of the 1900's. Despite all this, or in fact because of it, we have one of the most socially and economically advanced countries in the world.

 

Australia is also an (unfortunately) good example of multiculturalism working remarkably poorly in the past in various forms too, so we know a thing or two about it.

 

That sounds more like integration that multi-culturalism, imo.

[obyknven]

multi-cultural society

 

http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/...florence-video/

[Meshugger]

^Careful there, lets take the high road on that matter.