What is the ultimate goal of the multicultural movement?

Post Reply New Topic

All this is often quite true. A lot of the more sensible Muslims often have little as possible to do with their religion and integrate as much as they possibly can into mainstream British life (essentially becoming agnostics with a cultural attachment to their homeland) and they deserve respect for this.

Bear in mind also that a lot of the Muslims we have in Northern England came from backward, tribal areas of Pakistan. They have basically been told that they can come here and keep that culture whilst living segregated lives. Can you see the problem? They see Western culture and Western values and take out all the 'pleasures' they can get from it (and often taking liberties, too) whilst at the same time hating their own country and hating the West.

Not all Muslims are alike, and a lot of them are horrified by the behaviour of the extremists and the misogynists. But they can't really speak out against it.

This is pre Nu Lab style immigration and a jolly good thing.

The problem is they had kids and the kids decided Jihad was better than having a few beers and going to uni.



As Islam has gotten distinctly nastier and more present in this country the ability of liberal muslims to integrate with the British poplation has decreased enormously. If they don't integrate with the islamic community that surrounds them there will be repercussions for them.

i won't be responding to you in discussions on the forum as i've had enough personal attacks for now.

Multiculturalism, regardless of whether it has good intentions or not, is going to lead to the suicide of the western hemisphere if a reality check isn't taken soon. The nations of the middle east, apart from Israel, do not care about allowing for outside cultures to exist. It's been brought about by decades of indoctrination here in the west and it has blinded many to see the dangers of those who see nothing wrong with genocide, killing heretics, killing people who stray from their nations' national religion, killing people because they're "infidels" or because they're Jewish, or "honor" killing within individual families for reasons of things that the liberals of this hemisphere have been fighting for for years. Now, there is a choice to be made: remain blind and convince oneself that all cultures are equally acceptable or open ones eyes and see what is going to happen if blindness were chosen rather than sight. One cannot keep their cake whole and yet eat it also.

In 'that other thread' things were quite snide from both of us but I fail to see how anything I've said on this thread could be even remotely interpreted as a personal attack, I was actually being extra careful to try and avoid it.

I'm willing to hug and move on if you are?

i seem to have missed the place where you apologised for your remarks.

I didn't.

And I'm not going to.

I also missed the place where you apologised.

But I was offering you a fig leaf of peace so that we could move on.

If you really want to bear a grudge about things may I suggest we go back and do a few more rounds on the original thread instead of letting it spill out all over other threads for months to come?

i didn't attack you, but you did attack me. the other mods pointed it out to you. really, i am just telling you this one time because i am not going to derail future threads over your misbehaviour. i just wanted to make sure that you were aware of why you are on the "ignore" list when it comes to my posts as a member.

The debate between liberals and conservatives about multiculturalism seems to revolve around the question of the extent to which immigrants should adopt the "cultural tenets" of their new host country. It is a phoney debate. It is based on the false belief that culture is unconnected to race, that the peoples of the world are interchangeable, and that one racial group can become like another just by adopting certain "values".

What would make so many White people believe such a thing, in contradiction to common sense and the evidence of their own eyes? What would make so many White people think there was anything so immoral about their own race maintaining control of their own living space on this planet so that they might preserve their own continued physical existence as a people?

Well, could part of the answer be that this idea has been helped into their minds by another competing racial group?

There's a young couple who live near me who have just started a family. If only visagrunt had been there to advise them; then they could have withheld having children and used the space in their house to take in lodgers instead - the more the better. Because, as visagrunt clearly "knows", the economic output of one's geographic location is far more important than things like kinship and genetic continuity.



So if, say, the government had instructed the young couple near me to take in lodgers, using visagrunt's "logic", that young couple would have no legitimate cause to complain on the basis that they still owned the majority of the wealth in their little geographic location (i.e., their house). In fact, visagrunt's argument is dumber than that still. He actually seems to be saying that ordinary White people who have been made to feel like foreigners in the nations their ancestors built, or who have lost loved ones to racial attacks by non-Whites their own elites have imposed upon them, should somehow feel comforted by the fact that there are still a load of White people on the boards of Microsoft, Coca Cola and McDonalds, never mind the fact that those rich Whites happily betray their own race for a few extra dollars.

Oh, what's the point? I could carry on taking visagrunt's stupid arguments at face value. I could pretend that there is some universal moral truth we are both aiming to reach through this "debate". But that's not the case. I am White, and visagrunt is a jew. He wants Whites to shut up and agree about how great it is having non-assimilating non-White groups living among them because he belongs to one of those groups himself. I don't know if he believes his own self-serving propaganda or not, but that's really an irrelevant question.

Culture is a state of mind, not genetically determined, it has absolutely nothing to do with race in any shape or form.

The concept of race that you are espousing also has no basis in genetic reality. We have no need to make judgements about race anymore because we can simply read individual people's DNA and what was previously thought of as homogeneous 'races' have been proven to be very diverse collections of genes.

Your ideology belongs in 1930's Germany, sorry.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OVtpnpCOKM[/youtube]

There might be a sale on tinfoil if you need to make a new hat

How on earth to you start from my position that there is more profit in diversity than there is in homogeneity and get to that?

The decision of whether or not to have children is an entirely personal one. And great numbers of Europeans and North Americans have clearly made the decision that as far as family's are concerned: smaller is better. And it is not for me or you to question the wisdom of that decision.

It is, however, for public policy makers to evaluate the consequences of that decision, and see to the economic well being of the nation. The baby boomers are retiring, and the baby boomers' medical bills are about to climb dramatically. We have some choices: tax the younger generation to pay for the medical costs of the retirees, deprive the retirees of medical care, or grow the economy at a rate sufficient to ensure sustainability of public program spending without tax increases.

If you have decided on the third of those options, then you have to start to look at your strategies for growth--especially in the face of a falling birth rate.



Government has no place instructing anyone on whether or how many children to have, or who to take into their home. Nothing that I have suggested implies the contrary--except, perhaps, in your cognitively impaired interpretation.

Meanwhile, ordinary whote folks who feel like foreigners in their own nation are so wrapped up in their own egocentricity that they start seeing their own failure as an excuse for racism. Non-white folks are not a barrier to success. Period. End of statement. I am a white man who has been required to compete for my academic success, for my place in professional education, for my positions in my career. And at each of these steps I have been perfectly well aware of preferences in place to balance the playing field. But I also know that no one owes me a living. There are plenty of white folks who are failures, who, in the absence of non-whites would still be failures. But I challenge you to demonstrate that, in the absence of non-whites, any failed white folk would suddenly become successes.

non-Whites taking up places in universities? Well, if it weren't for that non-white population, there wouldn't be a need for as many places in universities. We'd need fewer physicians, fewer dentists and fewer accountants, and by extension, government would provide less support to universities and universities would provide fewer places. non-Whites taking up jobs? Unemployment is a fact of life, and it runs in cycles independent of migration--indeed, migration slows during times of high unemployment, because there are fewer pull factors. non-Whites driving down wages? Business is doing a perfectly fine job lining the pockets of political parties to erode employment standards and labour protection. Wages are falling in real terms because business is seeking to undo what was accomplished in the 25 years after the end of the War.

There is no excuse for crime or violence. I don't care if it's white racists burning crosses or disaffected minorities rioting. If crime and violence is the standard by which we measure the welcome that should be afforded to people within our borders, then white folk have plenty of rioting to apologize for in 2011.



What does being a Jew have to do with it? I received no preferences in acadaemia or employment from being a Jew (nor from being gay, for that matter). Not only am I white, but I am British white.

And yes, having non-assimilating groups living in my community is great. I live in one of the most livable, prosperous and safe cities in the world--and a key element of that prosperity, safety and standard of living is the diversity that we find here.

I don't need small minded racists telling me what I believe.

Taking a dump on the threads again, Vigilans?
That's not a very tactful message for a neurotypical to direct towards an aspie on a forum for aspies, is it?

However, since most people seem to think the real business of politics is slanging matches between "liberals" and "conservatives" over things like marginal tax rates, I can understand how my post might have seemed far out to you.

Ok, I've been trying to think about this and something occurred to me.

Do you actually understand that I am just as offended by your behaviour as you are by mine?

Just doing my best to cover the smell of another one of your visits with a little Lysol
It would be wise for you not to make any assumptions, codarac, since you do not know me.
Your general posting content is as close to digital feces as one can get. Intellectually bankrupt, absurd, passive aggressive, factually challenged, insulting- you do not get to talk about tact



Your post provided little insight or anything particularly original or interesting. As usual. I doubt you know a single useful thing about politics, you may consider your race war theories the most important of current political situations but they are not. Racists just see the skin, in both people and in situations, they miss 99% of the picture. Thankfully intellectually degenerate viewpoints are not relevant to people of reasonable inclinations. Reading your posts is like looking back in time; for that, I feel lucky to have the fortune of being party to a rare glimpse into another era