Does multiculturalism defeat the purpose of countries?

Post Reply New Topic

If you think about it, multiculturalism is where people from different cultures and ethnic backgrounds live side by side together whereas countries separate different groups of people.

I guess countries (that do not embrace mutliculturalism) are for people who do not wish to live in a place where different cultures exist together.

i think that have a diverse country give people better tolerance.

Yes

It wasn't always that way though.

Also a better range of skill and outlooks. Up to a point, multiculturalism increases the flexibility of the society to adapt to new situations. The worse thing for a nation is if all its citizens were intellectual and psychological clones of just one person or a very few.

ruveyn

Last edited by ruveyn on 11 Aug 2010, 1:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

+ 1

It's one thing to provide humane treatment to all people in a society, but cultures are not and should not be treated as equal. Cultures that practice sharia law, honor killings, any type of forced body mutilation, any type of slavery, human trafficking, domestic violence being socially acceptable, or double standards of tolerance do not deserve equal treatment under the law. If someone kills their daughter for refusing an arranged marriage, culture should not be a factor and they should be tried for murder 1. If some newspaper publishes the picture of Mohamed, anyone in the country that makes threats should be prosecuted. However, if someone wants to sacrifice a chicken to an idol or have a bizarre cultural festival, don't inconvenience anyone.

The Mexicans on the next street over with their subwoofer thumping at 11pm would be another example of a inferior culture that offends because I regularly have to call the cops on them. When it comes to Mexicans I'm just going to leave it at that for now before I go into a tirade.

There are a lot of other cultures from around the world in our society that are laughable but at least they obey the law.

"do not deserve equal treatment under the law."

Uh uh, Western laws no doubt. Might not want to assume everyone has the same.

That depends on what you think the purpose of countries is.

I'm opposed to multiculturalism, because I consider it racist and regressive. I strongly support open borders and the right of individuals to live how they wish, and I think that our modern obsession with 'respecting' & granting rights to abstract entities like cultures is eroding our path to these targets.

I recommend the book Strange Fruit: Why Both Sides Are Wrong on the Race Debate by Kenan Malick to anyone interested in this topic.

.

You know that even within those societies, it is only a minority who engage or accept these unlawful practices. Many are silenced in those countries because of a minority who rules with an iron fist and controls the society. In western societies you also have incidences where women are treated only for pleasure to have sex with (the media ads kind of suggest this) and things like rape happens. But it is only a minority who thinks rape is ok or who tries to justify it.

I am technically for something could be called "multiculturalism", but not as a matter of promoting different ideas so much as tolerating them. Basically, I believe we should create a culture that is fine with combining the ideas of other cultures to a great extent, and tolerating cultural variation.

Never will happen.

People can not agree to a common standard. Even people who live together from different backgrounds and cultures have common views. The larger the community, the less likely of finding common ground.

I take a somewhat different view, zer0netgain. I submit that the expectation of a common standard is an unrealistic expectation, even in the most homogenous of cultures. Disparities of wealth, regional tribalism, and political view can all create disputes over "common standards."

Generally speaking it has required a dictatorial government to impose a common standard on societies. Consider the fate of Yugoslavia upon its dissolution--the artificial unity of the country was fractured because no one bought into the idea of a "Yugoslavian" nationality.

In my view, mere tolerance doesn't cut it. Multiculturalism isn't about costumes and dancing. It's about the larger culture embracing the ideas of diversity; the idea that every person should be free to live in the family and the community of their choice, with a minimum of imposition from outside cultures. Condemning so-called "honour killings" is a reasonable limit. Banning headscarves is not.

Multicultural countries are economically advantaged over "melting pots." By encouraging people to maintain connections with their countries of heritage, the people-to-people links are maintained, which are the bridges upon which trade and prosperity are built.

That is not to say that multiculturalism does not bring challenges, but these are healthy challenges that continually serve to make societies more flexible, and more robust.

Toronto is the most multicultural city on earth, and it has accomplished this while remaining one of the safest and most prosperous cities on earth, too.

If civilized behavior has such broad popular support among other cultures, then there shouldn't be any political correctness issues when prosecuting some immigrant's ass for imposing sharia law vigilante style.

I see...

Nice...when you can't defeat the argument attack the person. I guess I win.

Multiculturalism is fine as long as a country has only one official language and one set of laws.

Misunderstandings happen when people are unable to talk to one another. Everyone speaking one common language solves that problem. Canada still has problems dealing with just two languages.

Some cultures have traditions that are not compatible with the western culture. Murder for religious misdeeds, treating women like a second class citizens, kidnapping brides, and underage marriages are just a few. These traditions need to be left in the old country if people want to be accepted in the new one. Laws have to apply to everyone.

Open borders is not viable at this time in human evolution. Open borders will destroy a country by allowing the native population to be diluted into non existence by the incoming ones. Declaring completely open borders is the same as declaring anarchy and the repeal of all laws. With open borders, how would you stop another country from making you a slave? The result is private armies declaring ownership of whatever land and people they can control by force just like most of the third world.