UK Muslims targeted for speaking out about terror

[alanschu]

To be fair, I was literally intending to take the conversation in a different direction.  My original query was satisfied (through my assumption)

[NOK222]

 

As soon as I move to another country, I'll learn that language. Hell, I'd even go out of my way to learn Canadian. It might take all the air out of my balls but I'd do it.

 

After your previous diatribe towards me for failing to answer your question in a different thread, I find this response positively hilarious.

 

I'll take your answer as a "no."

 

 

Lets go on a journey with this.  Is it safe to say that you are a contributor to the "failure of multiculturalism?"

 

 

Alright Alanchu, there's no need to use ad hominems and get short with him. I don't agree about his views on multiculturalism, but I don't try to subtly dismiss him as conservative rambling like you do. Debate the points, not the person. 

Edited October 21, 2013 by NKKKK

[licketysplit]

 

As soon as I move to another country, I'll learn that language. Hell, I'd even go out of my way to learn Canadian. It might take all the air out of my balls but I'd do it.

 

After your previous diatribe towards me for failing to answer your question in a different thread, I find this response positively hilarious.

 

I'll take your answer as a "no."

 

 

Lets go on a journey with this.  Is it safe to say that you are a contributor to the "failure of multiculturalism?"

 

 

What do you want, for me to learn a foreign language while I live in the states? Which one? Ok, I want to learn Japanese. Happy?

[NOK222]

 

 

As soon as I move to another country, I'll learn that language. Hell, I'd even go out of my way to learn Canadian. It might take all the air out of my balls but I'd do it.

 

After your previous diatribe towards me for failing to answer your question in a different thread, I find this response positively hilarious.

 

I'll take your answer as a "no."

 

 

Lets go on a journey with this.  Is it safe to say that you are a contributor to the "failure of multiculturalism?"

 

 

What do you want, for me to learn a foreign language while I live in the states? Which one? Ok, I want to learn Japanese. Happy?

 

As for you, don't bite his obvious bait. 

[Hurlshort]

Japanese will serve you well in many business markets, so if that is an aim then I would go do it.

 

 

 

Learning a language is not exactly that easy, especially at an adult age.  I don't know a single second generation Mexican-American that does not speak English though, so I'm not quite sure where you are going with this.  They move here for the jobs, their kids learn English, what is the big problem?  Most of them understand English better than you'd assume, it's just a lack on confidence with speaking it.

 

It's also your mother's job as an ESL teacher to help them speak English.  You kind of make her out badly with your comments, I'm hoping that is simple hyperbole on your part.  Does she teach children or adults? 

[Wrath of Dagon]

Time to define terms I guess, this is from Wikipedia

Multiculturalism relates to communities containing multiple cultures. The term is used in two broad ways, either descriptively or normatively.[1] As a descriptive term, it usually refers to the simple fact of cultural diversity: it is generally applied to the demographic make-up of a specific place, sometime at the organizational level, e.g. schools, businesses, neighborhoods, cities, or nations.

 

As a normative term, it refers to ideologies or policies that promote this diversity or its institutionalization; in this sense, multiculturalism is a society “at ease with the rich tapestry of human life and the desire amongst people to express their own identity in the manner they see fit.”[2] Such ideologies or policies vary widely, including country to country,[3] ranging from the advocacy of equal respect to the various cultures in a society, to a policy of promoting the maintenance of cultural diversity, to policies in which people of various ethnic and religious groups are addressed by the authorities as defined by the group they belong to.[4][5] However, two main different and seemingly inconsistent strategies have developed through different Government policies and strategies:[6][7] The first focuses on interaction and communication between different cultures. Interactions of cultures provide opportunities for the cultural differences to communicate and interact to create multiculturalism. This approach is also often known as interculturalism. The second centers on diversity and cultural uniqueness. Cultural isolation can protect the uniqueness of the local culture of a nation or area and also contribute to global cultural diversity.[citation needed] A common aspect of many policies following the second approach is that they avoid presenting any specific ethnic, religious, or cultural community values as central.[8]

 

Multiculturalism is often contrasted with the concepts of assimilationism and has been described as a "salad bowl" or "cultural mosaic" rather than a "melting pot".[9]

Different people in this thread have latched on to their own definition, it's helpful to understand which one it is.

[Orogun01]

 

 

As soon as I move to another country, I'll learn that language. Hell, I'd even go out of my way to learn Canadian. It might take all the air out of my balls but I'd do it.

 

After your previous diatribe towards me for failing to answer your question in a different thread, I find this response positively hilarious.

 

I'll take your answer as a "no."

 

 

Lets go on a journey with this.  Is it safe to say that you are a contributor to the "failure of multiculturalism?"

 

 

What do you want, for me to learn a foreign language while I live in the states? Which one? Ok, I want to learn Japanese. Happy?

 

If you did you'd find the difficulties of learning another language, add to that the age and level of intelligence of some immigrants and not everyone can speak fluent English. Which is why many stay within their communities on which they share a common language with the rest. I would agree that mastery of the English language should be a requisite for some jobs, but then there are the people complaining about bilingual tests or when their cashier or [insert menial labor here] doesn't speak the language.

It is not their desire as am sure that they would like to be fluent but have not knowledge required, so at the very least I would expect a little empathy. Even though it is something difficult for most Americans to imagine. (The immigrant experience part not the empathy...although they may have some trouble with the empathy part too)

[Hurlshort]

Time to define terms I guess, this is from Wikipedia

Multiculturalism relates to communities containing multiple cultures. The term is used in two broad ways, either descriptively or normatively.[1] As a descriptive term, it usually refers to the simple fact of cultural diversity: it is generally applied to the demographic make-up of a specific place, sometime at the organizational level, e.g. schools, businesses, neighborhoods, cities, or nations.

 

As a normative term, it refers to ideologies or policies that promote this diversity or its institutionalization; in this sense, multiculturalism is a society “at ease with the rich tapestry of human life and the desire amongst people to express their own identity in the manner they see fit.”[2] Such ideologies or policies vary widely, including country to country,[3] ranging from the advocacy of equal respect to the various cultures in a society, to a policy of promoting the maintenance of cultural diversity, to policies in which people of various ethnic and religious groups are addressed by the authorities as defined by the group they belong to.[4][5] However, two main different and seemingly inconsistent strategies have developed through different Government policies and strategies:[6][7] The first focuses on interaction and communication between different cultures. Interactions of cultures provide opportunities for the cultural differences to communicate and interact to create multiculturalism. This approach is also often known as interculturalism. The second centers on diversity and cultural uniqueness. Cultural isolation can protect the uniqueness of the local culture of a nation or area and also contribute to global cultural diversity.[citation needed] A common aspect of many policies following the second approach is that they avoid presenting any specific ethnic, religious, or cultural community values as central.[8]

 

Multiculturalism is often contrasted with the concepts of assimilationism and has been described as a "salad bowl" or "cultural mosaic" rather than a "melting pot".[9]

Different people in this thread have latched on to their own definition, it's helpful to understand which one it is.

 

 

So...I'm a bit confused.  Do you feel that fits your definition?  That seems to fit my definition pretty clearly, mainly the multiculturalism is a society “at ease with the rich tapestry of human life and the desire amongst people to express their own identity in the manner they see fit.” 

[licketysplit]

 

Time to define terms I guess, this is from Wikipedia

Multiculturalism relates to communities containing multiple cultures. The term is used in two broad ways, either descriptively or normatively.[1] As a descriptive term, it usually refers to the simple fact of cultural diversity: it is generally applied to the demographic make-up of a specific place, sometime at the organizational level, e.g. schools, businesses, neighborhoods, cities, or nations.

 

As a normative term, it refers to ideologies or policies that promote this diversity or its institutionalization; in this sense, multiculturalism is a society “at ease with the rich tapestry of human life and the desire amongst people to express their own identity in the manner they see fit.”[2] Such ideologies or policies vary widely, including country to country,[3] ranging from the advocacy of equal respect to the various cultures in a society, to a policy of promoting the maintenance of cultural diversity, to policies in which people of various ethnic and religious groups are addressed by the authorities as defined by the group they belong to.[4][5] However, two main different and seemingly inconsistent strategies have developed through different Government policies and strategies:[6][7] The first focuses on interaction and communication between different cultures. Interactions of cultures provide opportunities for the cultural differences to communicate and interact to create multiculturalism. This approach is also often known as interculturalism. The second centers on diversity and cultural uniqueness. Cultural isolation can protect the uniqueness of the local culture of a nation or area and also contribute to global cultural diversity.[citation needed] A common aspect of many policies following the second approach is that they avoid presenting any specific ethnic, religious, or cultural community values as central.[8]

 

Multiculturalism is often contrasted with the concepts of assimilationism and has been described as a "salad bowl" or "cultural mosaic" rather than a "melting pot".[9]

Different people in this thread have latched on to their own definition, it's helpful to understand which one it is.

 

 

So...I'm a bit confused.  Do you feel that fits your definition?  That seems to fit my definition pretty clearly, mainly the multiculturalism is a society “at ease with the rich tapestry of human life and the desire amongst people to express their own identity in the manner they see fit.” 

 

Do you really think that's a fair description of America? Try to cite something outside of your own anecdotal experience.

[Wrath of Dagon]

So...I'm a bit confused. Do you feel that fits your definition? That seems to fit my definition pretty clearly, mainly the multiculturalism is a society “at ease with the rich tapestry of human life and the desire amongst people to express their own identity in the manner they see fit.”

If you re-read it you'll see there are several meanings offered there, you just picked the one you happen to like. And if your definition includes expressing you own identity in the manner you (not society) see fit, such as having a harem of wives and beating them to keep them in line, then I'm sorry for you. The definition I would pick involves the refusal to assimilate (as indicated in the last line) and refusal to conform to societal norms (because hey man, my culture is every bit as good as yours, so what if we burn widows and kill female children).

Edited October 21, 2013 by Wrath of Dagon

[Hurlshort]

 

So...I'm a bit confused. Do you feel that fits your definition? That seems to fit my definition pretty clearly, mainly the multiculturalism is a society “at ease with the rich tapestry of human life and the desire amongst people to express their own identity in the manner they see fit.”

If you re-read it you'll see there are several meanings offered there, you just picked the one you happen to like. And if your definition includes expressing you own identity in the manner you (not society) see fit, such as having a harem of wives and beating them to keep them in line, then I'm sorry for you. The definition I would pick involves the refusal to assimilate (as indicated in the last line) and refusal to conform to societal norms (because hey man, my culture is every bit as good as yours, so what if we burn widows and kill female children).

 

 

 

I guess you want to address the legality of multiculturalism, how droll.  We shouldn't have to even say that the laws of the land apply to everyone regardless of culture.  Let's keep this conversation interesting instead of resorting to lazy what-if scenarios.

 

I still really don't see how any of the definitions fit yours.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Because that's exactly what advocates of multiculturalism want. For example they want Sharia to apply to Muslims in America, not American law.

[NOK222]

 

 

We shouldn't have to even say that the laws of the land apply to everyone regardless of culture.

 

What? Are you saying that the Earth belongs to us all? and that borders and cultures are social constructs that divide humanity?

 

Commie. 

[licketysplit]

 

 

So...I'm a bit confused. Do you feel that fits your definition? That seems to fit my definition pretty clearly, mainly the multiculturalism is a society “at ease with the rich tapestry of human life and the desire amongst people to express their own identity in the manner they see fit.”

If you re-read it you'll see there are several meanings offered there, you just picked the one you happen to like. And if your definition includes expressing you own identity in the manner you (not society) see fit, such as having a harem of wives and beating them to keep them in line, then I'm sorry for you. The definition I would pick involves the refusal to assimilate (as indicated in the last line) and refusal to conform to societal norms (because hey man, my culture is every bit as good as yours, so what if we burn widows and kill female children).

 

 

 

I guess you want to address the legality of multiculturalism, how droll.  We shouldn't have to even say that the laws of the land apply to everyone regardless of culture.  Let's keep this conversation interesting instead of resorting to lazy what-if scenarios.

 

I still really don't see how any of the definitions fit yours.

 

 

There is no legality for Multiculturalism. But there is making excuses to look egalitarian. You and Allan fit the bill.

[Hurlshort]

 

 

Time to define terms I guess, this is from Wikipedia

Multiculturalism relates to communities containing multiple cultures. The term is used in two broad ways, either descriptively or normatively.[1] As a descriptive term, it usually refers to the simple fact of cultural diversity: it is generally applied to the demographic make-up of a specific place, sometime at the organizational level, e.g. schools, businesses, neighborhoods, cities, or nations.

 

As a normative term, it refers to ideologies or policies that promote this diversity or its institutionalization; in this sense, multiculturalism is a society “at ease with the rich tapestry of human life and the desire amongst people to express their own identity in the manner they see fit.”[2] Such ideologies or policies vary widely, including country to country,[3] ranging from the advocacy of equal respect to the various cultures in a society, to a policy of promoting the maintenance of cultural diversity, to policies in which people of various ethnic and religious groups are addressed by the authorities as defined by the group they belong to.[4][5] However, two main different and seemingly inconsistent strategies have developed through different Government policies and strategies:[6][7] The first focuses on interaction and communication between different cultures. Interactions of cultures provide opportunities for the cultural differences to communicate and interact to create multiculturalism. This approach is also often known as interculturalism. The second centers on diversity and cultural uniqueness. Cultural isolation can protect the uniqueness of the local culture of a nation or area and also contribute to global cultural diversity.[citation needed] A common aspect of many policies following the second approach is that they avoid presenting any specific ethnic, religious, or cultural community values as central.[8]

 

Multiculturalism is often contrasted with the concepts of assimilationism and has been described as a "salad bowl" or "cultural mosaic" rather than a "melting pot".[9]

Different people in this thread have latched on to their own definition, it's helpful to understand which one it is.

 

 

So...I'm a bit confused.  Do you feel that fits your definition?  That seems to fit my definition pretty clearly, mainly the multiculturalism is a society “at ease with the rich tapestry of human life and the desire amongst people to express their own identity in the manner they see fit.” 

 

Do you really think that's a fair description of America? Try to cite something outside of your own anecdotal experience.

 

 

Of course it isn't honest to say the US is some idealized wonderland of multiculturalism.  The struggle to get people to embrace what is different is far from over.  But you have a fantastic selection to look at for historical precedents.  Do we really need to go over the history of New York, San Francisco, etc.?

[NOK222]

 

 

 But there is making excuses to look egalitarian

 

And what is your issue with egalitarianism? 

[Hurlshort]

Because that's exactly what advocates of multiculturalism want. For example they want Sharia to apply to Muslims in America, not American law.

 

Are these the same people that blew up the twin towers and shot JFK?

 

 

I'm pretty sure egalitarianism is something to strive for. 

Edited October 21, 2013 by Hurlshot

[licketysplit]

 

Because that's exactly what advocates of multiculturalism want. For example they want Sharia to apply to Muslims in America, not American law.

 

Are these the same people that blew up the twin towers and shot JFK?

 

 

I'm pretty sure egalitarianism is something to strive for. 

 

You generalize, but what he says is true. Sharia is debated in England and the Netherlands. But maybe it's up your alley, I don't know...

[NOK222]

American's won't allow Shaira Law, it's not even debatable here. 

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

Because that's exactly what advocates of multiculturalism want. For example they want Sharia to apply to Muslims in America, not American law.

 

Are these the same people that blew up the twin towers and shot JFK?

 

 

I'm pretty sure egalitarianism is something to strive for.

 

Huh?

[Hurlshort]

Shariah is a silly talking point for shock jocks trying to drive their ratings up.  It preys on the ignorance of the average American about Islam.  We have a separation of church and state, that isn't going to change because we have Muslims in the country.   

[Malcador]

 

 

Because that's exactly what advocates of multiculturalism want. For example they want Sharia to apply to Muslims in America, not American law.

 

Are these the same people that blew up the twin towers and shot JFK?

 

 

I'm pretty sure egalitarianism is something to strive for.

 

Huh?

 

Think he's trying to imply you are some right wing conspirotard.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Shariah is a silly talking point for shock jocks trying to drive their ratings up.  It preys on the ignorance of the average American about Islam.  We have a separation of church and state, that isn't going to change because we have Muslims in the country.

Most of the Constitution has already been thrown out, why not that part? And even if the law is nominally there, that doesn't stop an insular anti-assimilationist community from ignoring it. The fact that a large portion of the Mosques and religious schools in the US are affiliated with Muslim Brotherhood (such as the one Tsarnaev brothers attended, and had already previously spawned a number of terrorists) should give anyone pause, and that's a fact, not right wing paranoia. Edited October 21, 2013 by Wrath of Dagon

[alanschu]

 

 

As soon as I move to another country, I'll learn that language. Hell, I'd even go out of my way to learn Canadian. It might take all the air out of my balls but I'd do it.

 

After your previous diatribe towards me for failing to answer your question in a different thread, I find this response positively hilarious.

 

I'll take your answer as a "no."

 

 

Lets go on a journey with this.  Is it safe to say that you are a contributor to the "failure of multiculturalism?"

 

 

What do you want, for me to learn a foreign language while I live in the states? Which one? Ok, I want to learn Japanese. Happy?

 

 

 

Let me just be honest here, what I think you actually feel is "People should become more like you, because you like your culture."  Am I correct in this assessment?

 

Or perhaps I should just call you lazy for not having learned another language?  As I could also interpret it as "People should become more like you, because it means they have to do all the work."

 

The point (which WAS nestled deep) was "Try shifting from your own perspectives and be as open to outside influences as you may want."  I'm an agnostic/atheist but you probably see me get more defensive towards those that trash on religion than many religious people because frankly a lot of the ire comes across as outright hypocritical and yes, against my perspectives of which I value (and there's no need to point out that some of my perspectives are incompatible with perspectives of other people - I recognize this but I also evaluate the idea that my perceptions may be the ones that are in the wrong).

 

If multiculturalism is failing though, it's as much on us as it is the other cultures.  Lest we think we're above making sweeping generalizations of other cultures that aren't us.

 

 

 

 

The definition I would pick involves the refusal to assimilate

 

But you just picked the one that you happened to like.  We can go in circles here.  I think that your interpretation is used as a means to undermine the efforts specifically to ensure cultural hegemony because when you're on top, it's easy to have the perception that relatively speaking, the only direction we have is down.

 

 

 

 

Because that's exactly what advocates of multiculturalism want. For example they want Sharia to apply to Muslims in America, not American law.

Nonsense.  As you yourself pointed out, "there are several meanings offered there, you just picked the one you happen to like."  I value multiculturalism, in the sense that I think there is value added for different perspectives to intermingle because it is a benefit to all.  Until Earth has "one culture" being understanding of different perspectives is a positive thing.  It does not mean that I do not have reservations about different cultures (since I have issues with my OWN culture).  In the end I think cultural identity is actually a bad thing.  There's a reason why when someone asks me what nationality I think a visible minority is in Canada, I usually say "Canadian."

 

I support multiculturalism, but I'm not going to support issues in other cultures that I am not even happy with in my own (i.e. things like racism, sexism, and so forth).  If this means I don't actually like multiculturalism, then lets come up with a proper word since semantics is so important to some people.

 

What this means is I don't like it when Quebec passes a law that prohibits displays of religious materials in government centers (and not just by employees), while making concessions for "small things."  Status quo symbols, like a cross or star of David are still okay.  But a hijab?!  Whoa whoa whoa.... our government centers are secular thank you very much!

 

Or when Canadian RCMP states that a Sikh must remove his turban to be an RCMP officer, because their cap is an essential part of the uniform.  So basically "If you identify as a Sikh, and identify strongly as being a Canadian, well you're screwed the RCMP isn't for you.  Because I'm sure that there'd be no intrinsic advantages to having a Sikh member of the service either!

 

 

But there is making excuses to look egalitarian.  You and Allan fit the bill.

 

When did I say anything about egalitarianism?  But since you brought it up, no I don't think that cultural spread is bad.  Cultural differences are used to fuel so much hatred and fear (you seem to fit that bill... hey passive aggression is fun :D ) and you'll have a hard time convincing me that having a cultural hegemony is a good thing.  And even without immigration we still have problems with that in spades here in the West.

 

The world is increasingly global.  You can hide behind your cultural walls or you can recognize that if you want a melting pot, immigrants aren't the only one that are going to need to redefine their cultural identity.  Of course, it's easier to do nothing and let that redefinition be done by other people.

Edited October 21, 2013 by alanschu

[licketysplit]

I still don't know which language Alan thinks I should learn. To be all multicultural and such.