Chat Forum
It is currently Thu May 25, 2017 11:41 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 384 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 12:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24057
Zakar wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
I beg to differ Zakar. He is exactly right.

The existence of Ali Williams in New Zealand does not make us multi-cultural. Except for adding to the richness of the Maori haka culture.

The 'born overseas' figure is pure number-massaging by multicultural propagandists. Take out those from the the Anglosphere, take a look, take out those from Western Europe, take a look, take out those from rest of Europe, including Slavic countries, take a look, take out non-Muslim others, take a look, look at the communities having difficulty assimilating, and there you will have your interesting data.


What makes Australia a successful example of multiculturalism is assimilation. I'd argue that the UK has not been as successful in that regard.

I'm not overly invested in the subject, just continually annoyed in his terrible understanding of both statistics and antipodean society.

If my name was Yao Huang and I was born in Woden Valey hospital to two chinese parents, I'd tick 'Chinese' - so my vote counts once. If I was Reggie McDonald and I was born in Wyong and had a scottish grandparent and an irish grandparent, I might tick Australian, Irish or Scottish, so my vote counts twice... meaning that recent immigrants, with both parents born overseas, are underrepresented in this data.


But that's the oxymoron at the heart of the debate. When you are a second generation of Ukrainian descent who has a PhD from MacQuarie in Corporate Marketing and your only connection to the homeland is an awesome command of delicious peasant food from the steppes, then you are assimiliated. Sure, you have added to the richness of Australia's culture, but that is not multiculturalism. That is assimilation.

Immigration is ipso facto a good thing. Just the right kind of immigration, and in measured quantities. There are some communities in Australia right now who are failing one or both of those tests, and we will see how it goes in 30 years.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 12:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9861
Location: XPAT CUNT
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
I beg to differ Zakar. He is exactly right.

The existence of Ali Williams in New Zealand does not make us multi-cultural. Except for adding to the richness of the Maori haka culture.

The 'born overseas' figure is pure number-massaging by multicultural propagandists. Take out those from the the Anglosphere, take a look, take out those from Western Europe, take a look, take out those from rest of Europe, including Slavic countries, take a look, take out non-Muslim others, take a look, look at the communities having difficulty assimilating, and there you will have your interesting data.


What makes Australia a successful example of multiculturalism is assimilation. I'd argue that the UK has not been as successful in that regard.

I'm not overly invested in the subject, just continually annoyed in his terrible understanding of both statistics and antipodean society.

If my name was Yao Huang and I was born in Woden Valey hospital to two chinese parents, I'd tick 'Chinese' - so my vote counts once. If I was Reggie McDonald and I was born in Wyong and had a scottish grandparent and an irish grandparent, I might tick Australian, Irish or Scottish, so my vote counts twice... meaning that recent immigrants, with both parents born overseas, are underrepresented in this data.


But that's the oxymoron at the heart of the debate. When you are a second generation of Ukrainian descent who has a PhD from MacQuarie in Corporate Marketing and your only connection to the homeland is an awesome command of delicious peasant food from the steppes, then you are assimilated. Sure, you have added to the richness of Australia's culture, but that is not multiculturalism. That is assimilation.

Immigration is ipso facto a good thing. Just the right kind of immigration, and in measured quantities. There are some communities in Australia right now who are failing one or both of those tests, and we will see how it goes in 30 years.


I think multiculturalism, when handled correctly, leads to assimilation. As you say, the melting pot requires ingredients.

I'm sure you'll love my n=5 anecdotal evidence, but all my islamic background mates from highschool are now your typical early Millennia apathetic atheists. One has his own high rating insta feed about bodyweight fitness. :lol:

Will the more recent immigrants be similar? Who knows. I hope so.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 12:39 pm 
Online

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 1826
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
I beg to differ Zakar. He is exactly right.

The existence of Ali Williams in New Zealand does not make us multi-cultural. Except for adding to the richness of the Maori haka culture.

The 'born overseas' figure is pure number-massaging by multicultural propagandists. Take out those from the the Anglosphere, take a look, take out those from Western Europe, take a look, take out those from rest of Europe, including Slavic countries, take a look, take out non-Muslim others, take a look, look at the communities having difficulty assimilating, and there you will have your interesting data.


What makes Australia a successful example of multiculturalism is assimilation. I'd argue that the UK has not been as successful in that regard.

I'm not overly invested in the subject, just continually annoyed in his terrible understanding of both statistics and antipodean society.

If my name was Yao Huang and I was born in Woden Valey hospital to two chinese parents, I'd tick 'Chinese' - so my vote counts once. If I was Reggie McDonald and I was born in Wyong and had a scottish grandparent and an irish grandparent, I might tick Australian, Irish or Scottish, so my vote counts twice... meaning that recent immigrants, with both parents born overseas, are underrepresented in this data.


But that's the oxymoron at the heart of the debate. When you are a second generation of Ukrainian descent who has a PhD from MacQuarie in Corporate Marketing and your only connection to the homeland is an awesome command of delicious peasant food from the steppes, then you are assimiliated. Sure, you have added to the richness of Australia's culture, but that is not multiculturalism. That is assimilation.

Immigration is ipso facto a good thing. Just the right kind of immigration, and in measured quantities. There are some communities in Australia right now who are failing one or both of those tests, and we will see how it goes in 30 years.


People aren't clear enough on what these terms mean.

Assimilation is the incorporation of immigrants into the prevailing culture/political-legal system. The US may be the historical exemplar of this. This requires the prevailing culture/political-legal system to be either largely controlled by a majority indigenous group and/or for complete buy-in by the incoming groups.

Multiculturalism is a project in which the prevailing culture/political-legal system is adjusted to make room for incoming groups. Practically this means either a zero sum approach, where the prevailing culture/political-legal system is adjusted 'downwards' to accommodate the 'upward' adjustment for one or more incoming groups, or the incoming groups develop their culture/political-legal system in some kind of parallel.

These are not the same processes at all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 12:41 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11928
Location: Coalfalls
Zakar wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Zakar wrote:
What makes Australia a successful example of multiculturalism is assimilation. I'd argue that the UK has not been as successful in that regard.

I'm not overly invested in the subject, just continually annoyed in his terrible understanding of both statistics and antipodean society.

If my name was Yao Huang and I was born in Woden Valey hospital to two chinese parents, I'd tick 'Chinese' - so my vote counts once. If I was Reggie McDonald and I was born in Wyong and had a scottish grandparent and an irish grandparent, I might tick Australian, Irish or Scottish, so my vote counts twice... meaning that recent immigrants, with both parents born overseas, are underrepresented in this data.


But that's the oxymoron at the heart of the debate. When you are a second generation of Ukrainian descent who has a PhD from MacQuarie in Corporate Marketing and your only connection to the homeland is an awesome command of delicious peasant food from the steppes, then you are assimilated. Sure, you have added to the richness of Australia's culture, but that is not multiculturalism. That is assimilation.

Immigration is ipso facto a good thing. Just the right kind of immigration, and in measured quantities. There are some communities in Australia right now who are failing one or both of those tests, and we will see how it goes in 30 years.


I think multiculturalism, when handled correctly, leads to assimilation.


And I think multiculturalism is a word used in (very) differing ways in different places and contexts. As this thread should have made pluperfectly obvious by now.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 12:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3960
Zakar wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
I beg to differ Zakar. He is exactly right.

The existence of Ali Williams in New Zealand does not make us multi-cultural. Except for adding to the richness of the Maori haka culture.

The 'born overseas' figure is pure number-massaging by multicultural propagandists. Take out those from the the Anglosphere, take a look, take out those from Western Europe, take a look, take out those from rest of Europe, including Slavic countries, take a look, take out non-Muslim others, take a look, look at the communities having difficulty assimilating, and there you will have your interesting data.


What makes Australia a successful example of multiculturalism is assimilation. I'd argue that the UK has not been as successful in that regard.

I'm not overly invested in the subject, just continually annoyed in his terrible understanding of both statistics and antipodean society.

If my name was Yao Huang and I was born in Woden Valey hospital to two chinese parents, I'd tick 'Chinese' - so my vote counts once. If I was Reggie McDonald and I was born in Wyong and had a scottish grandparent and an irish grandparent, I might tick Australian, Irish or Scottish, so my vote counts twice... meaning that recent immigrants, with both parents born overseas, are underrepresented in this data.


But that's the oxymoron at the heart of the debate. When you are a second generation of Ukrainian descent who has a PhD from MacQuarie in Corporate Marketing and your only connection to the homeland is an awesome command of delicious peasant food from the steppes, then you are assimilated. Sure, you have added to the richness of Australia's culture, but that is not multiculturalism. That is assimilation.

Immigration is ipso facto a good thing. Just the right kind of immigration, and in measured quantities. There are some communities in Australia right now who are failing one or both of those tests, and we will see how it goes in 30 years.


I think multiculturalism, when handled correctly, leads to assimilation. As you say, the melting pot requires ingredients.

I'm sure you'll love my n=5 anecdotal evidence, but all my islamic background mates from highschool are now your typical early Millennia apathetic atheists. One has his own high rating insta feed about bodyweight fitness. :lol:

Will the more recent immigrants be similar? Who knows. I hope so.


Mmm, no these are mutually exclusive. literally.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 12:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 38295
Does Australia have any equivalent of a Banlieue ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 12:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9861
Location: XPAT CUNT
Heymans wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
I beg to differ Zakar. He is exactly right.

The existence of Ali Williams in New Zealand does not make us multi-cultural. Except for adding to the richness of the Maori haka culture.

The 'born overseas' figure is pure number-massaging by multicultural propagandists. Take out those from the the Anglosphere, take a look, take out those from Western Europe, take a look, take out those from rest of Europe, including Slavic countries, take a look, take out non-Muslim others, take a look, look at the communities having difficulty assimilating, and there you will have your interesting data.


What makes Australia a successful example of multiculturalism is assimilation. I'd argue that the UK has not been as successful in that regard.

I'm not overly invested in the subject, just continually annoyed in his terrible understanding of both statistics and antipodean society.

If my name was Yao Huang and I was born in Woden Valey hospital to two chinese parents, I'd tick 'Chinese' - so my vote counts once. If I was Reggie McDonald and I was born in Wyong and had a scottish grandparent and an irish grandparent, I might tick Australian, Irish or Scottish, so my vote counts twice... meaning that recent immigrants, with both parents born overseas, are underrepresented in this data.


But that's the oxymoron at the heart of the debate. When you are a second generation of Ukrainian descent who has a PhD from MacQuarie in Corporate Marketing and your only connection to the homeland is an awesome command of delicious peasant food from the steppes, then you are assimilated. Sure, you have added to the richness of Australia's culture, but that is not multiculturalism. That is assimilation.

Immigration is ipso facto a good thing. Just the right kind of immigration, and in measured quantities. There are some communities in Australia right now who are failing one or both of those tests, and we will see how it goes in 30 years.


I think multiculturalism, when handled correctly, leads to assimilation. As you say, the melting pot requires ingredients.

I'm sure you'll love my n=5 anecdotal evidence, but all my islamic background mates from highschool are now your typical early Millennia apathetic atheists. One has his own high rating insta feed about bodyweight fitness. :lol:

Will the more recent immigrants be similar? Who knows. I hope so.


Mmm, no these are mutually exclusive. literally.


Nope.

Quote:
multicultural
mʌltɪˈkʌltʃ(ə)r(ə)l/Submit
adjective
relating to or containing several cultural or ethnic groups within a society.


Quote:
assimilation
əsɪmɪˈleɪʃ(ə)n/
noun
noun: assimilation; plural noun: assimilations
3.
the process of becoming similar to something.


Plenty extreme annoying types say its one or another. Thats laughably false, as if your vision of assimilation is driven by the film 'Coming to America'


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 12:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9861
Location: XPAT CUNT
Santa wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
I beg to differ Zakar. He is exactly right.

The existence of Ali Williams in New Zealand does not make us multi-cultural. Except for adding to the richness of the Maori haka culture.

The 'born overseas' figure is pure number-massaging by multicultural propagandists. Take out those from the the Anglosphere, take a look, take out those from Western Europe, take a look, take out those from rest of Europe, including Slavic countries, take a look, take out non-Muslim others, take a look, look at the communities having difficulty assimilating, and there you will have your interesting data.


What makes Australia a successful example of multiculturalism is assimilation. I'd argue that the UK has not been as successful in that regard.

I'm not overly invested in the subject, just continually annoyed in his terrible understanding of both statistics and antipodean society.

If my name was Yao Huang and I was born in Woden Valey hospital to two chinese parents, I'd tick 'Chinese' - so my vote counts once. If I was Reggie McDonald and I was born in Wyong and had a scottish grandparent and an irish grandparent, I might tick Australian, Irish or Scottish, so my vote counts twice... meaning that recent immigrants, with both parents born overseas, are underrepresented in this data.


But that's the oxymoron at the heart of the debate. When you are a second generation of Ukrainian descent who has a PhD from MacQuarie in Corporate Marketing and your only connection to the homeland is an awesome command of delicious peasant food from the steppes, then you are assimiliated. Sure, you have added to the richness of Australia's culture, but that is not multiculturalism. That is assimilation.

Immigration is ipso facto a good thing. Just the right kind of immigration, and in measured quantities. There are some communities in Australia right now who are failing one or both of those tests, and we will see how it goes in 30 years.


People aren't clear enough on what these terms mean.

Assimilation is the incorporation of immigrants into the prevailing culture/political-legal system. The US may be the historical exemplar of this. This requires the prevailing culture/political-legal system to be either largely controlled by a majority indigenous group and/or for complete buy-in by the incoming groups.

Multiculturalism is a project in which the prevailing culture/political-legal system is adjusted to make room for incoming groups. Practically this means either a zero sum approach, where the prevailing culture/political-legal system is adjusted 'downwards' to accommodate the 'upward' adjustment for one or more incoming groups, or the incoming groups develop their culture/political-legal system in some kind of parallel.

These are not the same processes at all.


Bullshit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 12:57 pm 
Online

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 1826
Zakar wrote:
Santa wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
I beg to differ Zakar. He is exactly right.

The existence of Ali Williams in New Zealand does not make us multi-cultural. Except for adding to the richness of the Maori haka culture.

The 'born overseas' figure is pure number-massaging by multicultural propagandists. Take out those from the the Anglosphere, take a look, take out those from Western Europe, take a look, take out those from rest of Europe, including Slavic countries, take a look, take out non-Muslim others, take a look, look at the communities having difficulty assimilating, and there you will have your interesting data.


What makes Australia a successful example of multiculturalism is assimilation. I'd argue that the UK has not been as successful in that regard.

I'm not overly invested in the subject, just continually annoyed in his terrible understanding of both statistics and antipodean society.

If my name was Yao Huang and I was born in Woden Valey hospital to two chinese parents, I'd tick 'Chinese' - so my vote counts once. If I was Reggie McDonald and I was born in Wyong and had a scottish grandparent and an irish grandparent, I might tick Australian, Irish or Scottish, so my vote counts twice... meaning that recent immigrants, with both parents born overseas, are underrepresented in this data.


But that's the oxymoron at the heart of the debate. When you are a second generation of Ukrainian descent who has a PhD from MacQuarie in Corporate Marketing and your only connection to the homeland is an awesome command of delicious peasant food from the steppes, then you are assimiliated. Sure, you have added to the richness of Australia's culture, but that is not multiculturalism. That is assimilation.

Immigration is ipso facto a good thing. Just the right kind of immigration, and in measured quantities. There are some communities in Australia right now who are failing one or both of those tests, and we will see how it goes in 30 years.


People aren't clear enough on what these terms mean.

Assimilation is the incorporation of immigrants into the prevailing culture/political-legal system. The US may be the historical exemplar of this. This requires the prevailing culture/political-legal system to be either largely controlled by a majority indigenous group and/or for complete buy-in by the incoming groups.

Multiculturalism is a project in which the prevailing culture/political-legal system is adjusted to make room for incoming groups. Practically this means either a zero sum approach, where the prevailing culture/political-legal system is adjusted 'downwards' to accommodate the 'upward' adjustment for one or more incoming groups, or the incoming groups develop their culture/political-legal system in some kind of parallel.

These are not the same processes at all.


Bullshit.


It is. It doesn't happen by accident. It is a series of policy decisions.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 12:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24057
bimboman wrote:
Does Australia have any equivalent of a Banlieue ?


Queensland.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 12:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20276
Location: STRAYA PLUM
Santa wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
I beg to differ Zakar. He is exactly right.

The existence of Ali Williams in New Zealand does not make us multi-cultural. Except for adding to the richness of the Maori haka culture.

The 'born overseas' figure is pure number-massaging by multicultural propagandists. Take out those from the the Anglosphere, take a look, take out those from Western Europe, take a look, take out those from rest of Europe, including Slavic countries, take a look, take out non-Muslim others, take a look, look at the communities having difficulty assimilating, and there you will have your interesting data.


What makes Australia a successful example of multiculturalism is assimilation. I'd argue that the UK has not been as successful in that regard.

I'm not overly invested in the subject, just continually annoyed in his terrible understanding of both statistics and antipodean society.

If my name was Yao Huang and I was born in Woden Valey hospital to two chinese parents, I'd tick 'Chinese' - so my vote counts once. If I was Reggie McDonald and I was born in Wyong and had a scottish grandparent and an irish grandparent, I might tick Australian, Irish or Scottish, so my vote counts twice... meaning that recent immigrants, with both parents born overseas, are underrepresented in this data.


But that's the oxymoron at the heart of the debate. When you are a second generation of Ukrainian descent who has a PhD from MacQuarie in Corporate Marketing and your only connection to the homeland is an awesome command of delicious peasant food from the steppes, then you are assimiliated. Sure, you have added to the richness of Australia's culture, but that is not multiculturalism. That is assimilation.

Immigration is ipso facto a good thing. Just the right kind of immigration, and in measured quantities. There are some communities in Australia right now who are failing one or both of those tests, and we will see how it goes in 30 years.


People aren't clear enough on what these terms mean.

Assimilation is the incorporation of immigrants into the prevailing culture/political-legal system. The US may be the historical exemplar of this. This requires the prevailing culture/political-legal system to be either largely controlled by a majority indigenous group and/or for complete buy-in by the incoming groups.

Multiculturalism is a project in which the prevailing culture/political-legal system is adjusted to make room for incoming groups. Practically this means either a zero sum approach, where the prevailing culture/political-legal system is adjusted 'downwards' to accommodate the 'upward' adjustment for one or more incoming groups, or the incoming groups develop their culture/political-legal system in some kind of parallel.

These are not the same processes at all.

And there is no instance where either of these occur. Even Senecas Ukranian brings some change to the prevailing culture, however small. Cultures are dynamic beasts that are constantly evolving, and the evolution is primarily driven by interacrion with other cultures. Go back 100 years and you wouldnt recognise your cultural landscape. The argument really comes down to the rate of thqt change.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 12:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9861
Location: XPAT CUNT
Santa wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Santa wrote:
People aren't clear enough on what these terms mean.

Assimilation is the incorporation of immigrants into the prevailing culture/political-legal system. The US may be the historical exemplar of this. This requires the prevailing culture/political-legal system to be either largely controlled by a majority indigenous group and/or for complete buy-in by the incoming groups.

Multiculturalism is a project in which the prevailing culture/political-legal system is adjusted to make room for incoming groups. Practically this means either a zero sum approach, where the prevailing culture/political-legal system is adjusted 'downwards' to accommodate the 'upward' adjustment for one or more incoming groups, or the incoming groups develop their culture/political-legal system in some kind of parallel.

These are not the same processes at all.


Bullshit.


It is. It doesn't happen by accident. It is a series of policy decisions.


Multicultural is simply the presence of multiple cultures in society.

but nah its probably some kind of government conspiracy Silver lite.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:01 pm 
Online

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 1826
Zakar wrote:
Santa wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Santa wrote:
People aren't clear enough on what these terms mean.

Assimilation is the incorporation of immigrants into the prevailing culture/political-legal system. The US may be the historical exemplar of this. This requires the prevailing culture/political-legal system to be either largely controlled by a majority indigenous group and/or for complete buy-in by the incoming groups.

Multiculturalism is a project in which the prevailing culture/political-legal system is adjusted to make room for incoming groups. Practically this means either a zero sum approach, where the prevailing culture/political-legal system is adjusted 'downwards' to accommodate the 'upward' adjustment for one or more incoming groups, or the incoming groups develop their culture/political-legal system in some kind of parallel.

These are not the same processes at all.


Bullshit.


It is. It doesn't happen by accident. It is a series of policy decisions.


Multicultural is simply the presence of multiple cultures in society.

but nah its probably some kind of government conspiracy Silver lite.


No it isn't.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9861
Location: XPAT CUNT
Santa wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Santa wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Santa wrote:
People aren't clear enough on what these terms mean.

Assimilation is the incorporation of immigrants into the prevailing culture/political-legal system. The US may be the historical exemplar of this. This requires the prevailing culture/political-legal system to be either largely controlled by a majority indigenous group and/or for complete buy-in by the incoming groups.

Multiculturalism is a project in which the prevailing culture/political-legal system is adjusted to make room for incoming groups. Practically this means either a zero sum approach, where the prevailing culture/political-legal system is adjusted 'downwards' to accommodate the 'upward' adjustment for one or more incoming groups, or the incoming groups develop their culture/political-legal system in some kind of parallel.

These are not the same processes at all.


Bullshit.


It is. It doesn't happen by accident. It is a series of policy decisions.


Multicultural is simply the presence of multiple cultures in society.

but nah its probably some kind of government conspiracy Silver lite.


No it isn't.


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3960
Zakar wrote:
Heymans wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Zakar wrote:
What makes Australia a successful example of multiculturalism is assimilation. I'd argue that the UK has not been as successful in that regard.

I'm not overly invested in the subject, just continually annoyed in his terrible understanding of both statistics and antipodean society.

If my name was Yao Huang and I was born in Woden Valey hospital to two chinese parents, I'd tick 'Chinese' - so my vote counts once. If I was Reggie McDonald and I was born in Wyong and had a scottish grandparent and an irish grandparent, I might tick Australian, Irish or Scottish, so my vote counts twice... meaning that recent immigrants, with both parents born overseas, are underrepresented in this data.


But that's the oxymoron at the heart of the debate. When you are a second generation of Ukrainian descent who has a PhD from MacQuarie in Corporate Marketing and your only connection to the homeland is an awesome command of delicious peasant food from the steppes, then you are assimilated. Sure, you have added to the richness of Australia's culture, but that is not multiculturalism. That is assimilation.

Immigration is ipso facto a good thing. Just the right kind of immigration, and in measured quantities. There are some communities in Australia right now who are failing one or both of those tests, and we will see how it goes in 30 years.


I think multiculturalism, when handled correctly, leads to assimilation. As you say, the melting pot requires ingredients.

I'm sure you'll love my n=5 anecdotal evidence, but all my islamic background mates from highschool are now your typical early Millennia apathetic atheists. One has his own high rating insta feed about bodyweight fitness. :lol:

Will the more recent immigrants be similar? Who knows. I hope so.


Mmm, no these are mutually exclusive. literally.


Nope.

Quote:
multicultural
mʌltɪˈkʌltʃ(ə)r(ə)l/Submit
adjective
relating to or containing several cultural or ethnic groups within a society.


Quote:
assimilation
əsɪmɪˈleɪʃ(ə)n/
noun
noun: assimilation; plural noun: assimilations
3.
the process of becoming similar to something.


Plenty extreme annoying types say its one or another. Thats laughably false, as if your vision of assimilation is driven by the film 'Coming to America'


Okay so you don't know what you're talking about. Assimilation is fairly easy to undersdtand, it means "leave every scrap of your previous cultural identity at home, anbd don't pass it to your kids. become entirely "new nationality".

Multiculturalism is : do here like you would at home and don't mix with the native, don't try to adapt to their customs etc.

I fail to see how these are not mutually exclusive, must be my old world brain innit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9861
Location: XPAT CUNT
Heymans wrote:
Okay so you don't know what you're talking about. Assimilation is fairly easy to undersdtand, it means "leave every scrap of your previous cultural identity at home, anbd don't pass it to your kids. become entirely "new nationality".

Multiculturalism is : do here like you would at home and don't mix with the native, don't try to adapt to their customs etc.

I fail to see how these are not mutually exclusive, must be my old world brain innit.


You've made up some stupid arsed definitions there frenchy.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:06 pm 
Online

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 1826
Zakar wrote:
Heymans wrote:
Okay so you don't know what you're talking about. Assimilation is fairly easy to undersdtand, it means "leave every scrap of your previous cultural identity at home, anbd don't pass it to your kids. become entirely "new nationality".

Multiculturalism is : do here like you would at home and don't mix with the native, don't try to adapt to their customs etc.

I fail to see how these are not mutually exclusive, must be my old world brain innit.


You've made up some stupid arsed definitions there frenchy.

Image


You're being quite a plum about this. I hadn't pegged you as one.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24057
.
Quote:

Multicultural is simply the presence of multiple cultures in society.

but nah its probably some kind of government conspiracy Silver lite.


https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ntegration


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9861
Location: XPAT CUNT
Santa wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Heymans wrote:
Okay so you don't know what you're talking about. Assimilation is fairly easy to undersdtand, it means "leave every scrap of your previous cultural identity at home, anbd don't pass it to your kids. become entirely "new nationality".

Multiculturalism is : do here like you would at home and don't mix with the native, don't try to adapt to their customs etc.

I fail to see how these are not mutually exclusive, must be my old world brain innit.


You've made up some stupid arsed definitions there frenchy.

Image


You're being quite a plum about this. I hadn't pegged you as one.


My point, that I'm making in an incredibly plumish way to amuse myself, is that there is a real discrepancy of understanding about what these terms mean, to the point that debate on the topic is mired in misunderstanding, hatred from far wings on either side, and no solidified platform to frame the debate.

Also, I f**k love Coming From America

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:15 pm 
Online

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 1826
Quote:
Multiculturalism centers on the thought in political philosophy about the way to respond to cultural and religious differences. It is closely associated with "identity politics," "the politics of difference," and "the politics of recognition." It is also a matter of economic interests and political power. (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). Despite the fact that multiculturalism has mainly been used as a term to define disadvantaged groups, including African Americans, LGBT, and the disabled, many theorists tend to focus their arguments on immigrants who are ethnic and religious minorities, minority nations, and indigenous peoples.

Multiculturalism can refer to a demographic fact, a particular set of philosophical ideas, or a specific orientation by government or institutions toward a diverse population. Most of the debate over multiculturalism centers around whether or not public multiculturalism is the appropriate way to deal with diversity and immigrant integration. Recognition in the context of multicultural education is a demand not just for recognition of aspects of a group's actual culture but also for the history of group subordination and its entire experience.

The term multiculturalism is most often used in reference to Western nation-states, which had seemingly achieved a de facto single national identity during the 18th and/or 19th centuries.[10] Multiculturalism has been official policy in several Western nations since the 1970s, for reasons that varied from country to country,[11][12][13] including the fact that many of the great cities of the Western world are increasingly made of a mosaic of cultures.[14]

The Canadian government has often been described as the instigator of multicultural ideology because of its public emphasis on the social importance of immigration.[15][16] The Canadian Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism is often referred to as the origins of modern political awareness of multiculturalism.[17] In the Western English-speaking countries, multiculturalism as an official national policy started in Canada in 1971, followed by Australia in 1973 where it is maintained today.[18][19][20][21] It was quickly adopted as official policy by most member-states of the European Union. Recently, right-of-center governments in several European states—notably the Netherlands and Denmark— have reversed the national policy and returned to an official monoculturalism.[22][unreliable source?] A similar reversal is the subject of debate in the United Kingdom, among others, due to evidence of incipient segregation and anxieties over "home-grown" terrorism.[23] Several heads-of-state have expressed doubts about the success of multicultural policies: The United Kingdom's ex-Prime Minister David Cameron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Australia's ex-prime minister John Howard, Spanish ex-prime minister Jose Maria Aznar and French ex-president Nicolas Sarkozy have voiced concerns about the effectiveness of their multicultural policies for integrating immigrants.[24][25]

Many nation-states in Africa, Asia, and the Americas are culturally diverse, and are 'multicultural' in a descriptive sense. In some, communalism is a major political issue. The policies adopted by these states often have parallels with multicultural-ist policies in the Western world, but the historical background is different, and the goal may be a mono-cultural or mono-ethnic nation-building—for instance in the Malaysian government's attempt to create a 'Malaysian race' by 2020.[26]


So not just different people in one country.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20276
Location: STRAYA PLUM
I read the other day that Coming to America 2 is now being produced.
I have low hopes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9861
Location: XPAT CUNT
Santa wrote:
Quote:
Multiculturalism centers on the thought in political philosophy about the way to respond to cultural and religious differences. It is closely associated with "identity politics," "the politics of difference," and "the politics of recognition." It is also a matter of economic interests and political power. (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). Despite the fact that multiculturalism has mainly been used as a term to define disadvantaged groups, including African Americans, LGBT, and the disabled, many theorists tend to focus their arguments on immigrants who are ethnic and religious minorities, minority nations, and indigenous peoples.

Multiculturalism can refer to a demographic fact, a particular set of philosophical ideas, or a specific orientation by government or institutions toward a diverse population. Most of the debate over multiculturalism centers around whether or not public multiculturalism is the appropriate way to deal with diversity and immigrant integration. Recognition in the context of multicultural education is a demand not just for recognition of aspects of a group's actual culture but also for the history of group subordination and its entire experience.

The term multiculturalism is most often used in reference to Western nation-states, which had seemingly achieved a de facto single national identity during the 18th and/or 19th centuries.[10] Multiculturalism has been official policy in several Western nations since the 1970s, for reasons that varied from country to country,[11][12][13] including the fact that many of the great cities of the Western world are increasingly made of a mosaic of cultures.[14]

The Canadian government has often been described as the instigator of multicultural ideology because of its public emphasis on the social importance of immigration.[15][16] The Canadian Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism is often referred to as the origins of modern political awareness of multiculturalism.[17] In the Western English-speaking countries, multiculturalism as an official national policy started in Canada in 1971, followed by Australia in 1973 where it is maintained today.[18][19][20][21] It was quickly adopted as official policy by most member-states of the European Union. Recently, right-of-center governments in several European states—notably the Netherlands and Denmark— have reversed the national policy and returned to an official monoculturalism.[22][unreliable source?] A similar reversal is the subject of debate in the United Kingdom, among others, due to evidence of incipient segregation and anxieties over "home-grown" terrorism.[23] Several heads-of-state have expressed doubts about the success of multicultural policies: The United Kingdom's ex-Prime Minister David Cameron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Australia's ex-prime minister John Howard, Spanish ex-prime minister Jose Maria Aznar and French ex-president Nicolas Sarkozy have voiced concerns about the effectiveness of their multicultural policies for integrating immigrants.[24][25]

Many nation-states in Africa, Asia, and the Americas are culturally diverse, and are 'multicultural' in a descriptive sense. In some, communalism is a major political issue. The policies adopted by these states often have parallels with multicultural-ist policies in the Western world, but the historical background is different, and the goal may be a mono-cultural or mono-ethnic nation-building—for instance in the Malaysian government's attempt to create a 'Malaysian race' by 2020.[26]


So not just different people in one country.


Your quote disagrees.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3960
Zakar wrote:
Heymans wrote:
Okay so you don't know what you're talking about. Assimilation is fairly easy to undersdtand, it means "leave every scrap of your previous cultural identity at home, anbd don't pass it to your kids. become entirely "new nationality".

Multiculturalism is : do here like you would at home and don't mix with the native, don't try to adapt to their customs etc.

I fail to see how these are not mutually exclusive, must be my old world brain innit.


You've made up some stupid arsed definitions there frenchy.

Image


No I haven't you f**k dimwit, you just have no f**k clue. Multiculturalism is like "separate but equal", the existence of multiple cultures in a single country. Assimilation is literally the opposite of that, the refusal of an outside culture brought by immigrants. Assimilation means the 2nd generation is as close to identical to the target population, mutliculturalism means the 2nd generation is identical to its parents, and actively maintaining their source identity, thus NOT getting any closer to the target culture.
Maybe in your shit brains theres' a way these 2 are similar, but they sure aren't for the rest of us.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9861
Location: XPAT CUNT
Farva wrote:
I read the other day that Coming to America 2 is now being produced.
I have low hopes.


Hollywood making stupid remakes and sequels is a far greater problem to Western society than immigration.

The Point Break remake very nearly turned me into a suicide bomber.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20276
Location: STRAYA PLUM
I dont agree with that definition.
That is two poles and ignoring the middle ground, that wveryone occupies.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:24 pm 
Online

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 1826
Zakar wrote:
Santa wrote:
Quote:
Multiculturalism centers on the thought in political philosophy about the way to respond to cultural and religious differences. It is closely associated with "identity politics," "the politics of difference," and "the politics of recognition." It is also a matter of economic interests and political power. (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). Despite the fact that multiculturalism has mainly been used as a term to define disadvantaged groups, including African Americans, LGBT, and the disabled, many theorists tend to focus their arguments on immigrants who are ethnic and religious minorities, minority nations, and indigenous peoples.

Multiculturalism can refer to a demographic fact, a particular set of philosophical ideas, or a specific orientation by government or institutions toward a diverse population. Most of the debate over multiculturalism centers around whether or not public multiculturalism is the appropriate way to deal with diversity and immigrant integration. Recognition in the context of multicultural education is a demand not just for recognition of aspects of a group's actual culture but also for the history of group subordination and its entire experience.

The term multiculturalism is most often used in reference to Western nation-states, which had seemingly achieved a de facto single national identity during the 18th and/or 19th centuries.[10] Multiculturalism has been official policy in several Western nations since the 1970s, for reasons that varied from country to country,[11][12][13] including the fact that many of the great cities of the Western world are increasingly made of a mosaic of cultures.[14]

The Canadian government has often been described as the instigator of multicultural ideology because of its public emphasis on the social importance of immigration.[15][16] The Canadian Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism is often referred to as the origins of modern political awareness of multiculturalism.[17] In the Western English-speaking countries, multiculturalism as an official national policy started in Canada in 1971, followed by Australia in 1973 where it is maintained today.[18][19][20][21] It was quickly adopted as official policy by most member-states of the European Union. Recently, right-of-center governments in several European states—notably the Netherlands and Denmark— have reversed the national policy and returned to an official monoculturalism.[22][unreliable source?] A similar reversal is the subject of debate in the United Kingdom, among others, due to evidence of incipient segregation and anxieties over "home-grown" terrorism.[23] Several heads-of-state have expressed doubts about the success of multicultural policies: The United Kingdom's ex-Prime Minister David Cameron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Australia's ex-prime minister John Howard, Spanish ex-prime minister Jose Maria Aznar and French ex-president Nicolas Sarkozy have voiced concerns about the effectiveness of their multicultural policies for integrating immigrants.[24][25]

Many nation-states in Africa, Asia, and the Americas are culturally diverse, and are 'multicultural' in a descriptive sense. In some, communalism is a major political issue. The policies adopted by these states often have parallels with multicultural-ist policies in the Western world, but the historical background is different, and the goal may be a mono-cultural or mono-ethnic nation-building—for instance in the Malaysian government's attempt to create a 'Malaysian race' by 2020.[26]


So not just different people in one country.


Your quote disagrees.

Image


You didn't read it if you came to that conclusion. Or you chose one sentence and ignored the rest.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9861
Location: XPAT CUNT
Heymans wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Heymans wrote:
Okay so you don't know what you're talking about. Assimilation is fairly easy to undersdtand, it means "leave every scrap of your previous cultural identity at home, anbd don't pass it to your kids. become entirely "new nationality".

Multiculturalism is : do here like you would at home and don't mix with the native, don't try to adapt to their customs etc.

I fail to see how these are not mutually exclusive, must be my old world brain innit.


You've made up some stupid arsed definitions there frenchy.

Image


No I haven't you f**k dimwit, you just have no f**k clue. Multiculturalism is like "separate but equal", the existence of multiple cultures in a single country. Assimilation is literally the opposite of that, the refusal of an outside culture brought by immigrants. Assimilation means the 2nd generation is as close to identical to the target population, mutliculturalism means the 2nd generation is identical to its parents, and actively maintaining their source identity, thus NOT getting any closer to the target culture.
Maybe in your shit brains theres' a way these 2 are similar, but they sure aren't for the rest of us.


Image

Getting your definitions from Académie française mate?

How exactly do you even have 2nd generation immigrants without multiculturalism?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9861
Location: XPAT CUNT
Santa wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Santa wrote:
Quote:
Multiculturalism centers on the thought in political philosophy about the way to respond to cultural and religious differences. It is closely associated with "identity politics," "the politics of difference," and "the politics of recognition." It is also a matter of economic interests and political power. (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). Despite the fact that multiculturalism has mainly been used as a term to define disadvantaged groups, including African Americans, LGBT, and the disabled, many theorists tend to focus their arguments on immigrants who are ethnic and religious minorities, minority nations, and indigenous peoples.

Multiculturalism can refer to a demographic fact, a particular set of philosophical ideas, or a specific orientation by government or institutions toward a diverse population. Most of the debate over multiculturalism centers around whether or not public multiculturalism is the appropriate way to deal with diversity and immigrant integration. Recognition in the context of multicultural education is a demand not just for recognition of aspects of a group's actual culture but also for the history of group subordination and its entire experience.

The term multiculturalism is most often used in reference to Western nation-states, which had seemingly achieved a de facto single national identity during the 18th and/or 19th centuries.[10] Multiculturalism has been official policy in several Western nations since the 1970s, for reasons that varied from country to country,[11][12][13] including the fact that many of the great cities of the Western world are increasingly made of a mosaic of cultures.[14]

The Canadian government has often been described as the instigator of multicultural ideology because of its public emphasis on the social importance of immigration.[15][16] The Canadian Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism is often referred to as the origins of modern political awareness of multiculturalism.[17] In the Western English-speaking countries, multiculturalism as an official national policy started in Canada in 1971, followed by Australia in 1973 where it is maintained today.[18][19][20][21] It was quickly adopted as official policy by most member-states of the European Union. Recently, right-of-center governments in several European states—notably the Netherlands and Denmark— have reversed the national policy and returned to an official monoculturalism.[22][unreliable source?] A similar reversal is the subject of debate in the United Kingdom, among others, due to evidence of incipient segregation and anxieties over "home-grown" terrorism.[23] Several heads-of-state have expressed doubts about the success of multicultural policies: The United Kingdom's ex-Prime Minister David Cameron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Australia's ex-prime minister John Howard, Spanish ex-prime minister Jose Maria Aznar and French ex-president Nicolas Sarkozy have voiced concerns about the effectiveness of their multicultural policies for integrating immigrants.[24][25]

Many nation-states in Africa, Asia, and the Americas are culturally diverse, and are 'multicultural' in a descriptive sense. In some, communalism is a major political issue. The policies adopted by these states often have parallels with multicultural-ist policies in the Western world, but the historical background is different, and the goal may be a mono-cultural or mono-ethnic nation-building—for instance in the Malaysian government's attempt to create a 'Malaysian race' by 2020.[26]


So not just different people in one country.


Your quote disagrees.

Image


You didn't read it if you came to that conclusion. Or you chose one sentence and ignored the rest.


Isn't contrarianism annoying?

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2015 11:48 pm
Posts: 5025
Australians seem to be speaking from a point of smug ignorance. 15-20u years ago on this very board the conversation was flipped on it's head. With the British evangelising multiculturalism and sneering at the cultural waste lands of our cousin's. You're 20 years behind the compounding of the negatives and enjoying the smug glow of it all. It's not that long since you were threatening to blow up boats full of refugees. Heed the warnings.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 2:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2015 11:45 am
Posts: 4087
Farva okay so this is when I lose interest spontaneously. I tried to express the points but all I seem to get out of you is "yes there are issues with multiculturalism but your points are subjective, and I think the pros outweigh the cons". You will notice there are essential points, a majority factual, that you haven't even addressed at all. Totally skipped and ignored. An entire continent going more and more far right is an enormous, gigantic factual phenomenon that is so overwhelmingly significant to everything that is discussed here it's practically symbolic. The glaring example the US is of the failure of multiculturalism, alone, should be enough to dissuade any defender of it and force him to review his position.

The good thing (well, not sure if it's a good thing, really..) about such a conversation is this. When both parties are done exchanging, there is...reality. Both sides of the conversation may've thrown in the most convincing arguments, examples, figures and facts...but somehow to no avail. But then. There's what's actually happening. This isn't a debate about how well Jonah Lomu would do in the modern era, we'll never know for sure it's theoretical debate. Here, you'll get to see with your own eyes, once they're finally opened (by force) just what multiculturalism is, and what it does to a nation.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 2:31 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18986
Location: Middle East
People her seem to worry that debate is stifled by calling each other libtard or racist or whatever.

If you really want to stifle debate you just mire it down in some semantic pedantic circlejerk about defining terms that you're never going to agree upon or actual move on to the debate itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 2:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2289
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
I beg to differ Zakar. He is exactly right.

The existence of Ali Williams in New Zealand does not make us multi-cultural. Except for adding to the richness of the Maori haka culture.

The 'born overseas' figure is pure number-massaging by multicultural propagandists. Take out those from the the Anglosphere, take a look, take out those from Western Europe, take a look, take out those from rest of Europe, including Slavic countries, take a look, take out non-Muslim others, take a look, look at the communities having difficulty assimilating, and there you will have your interesting data.


What makes Australia a successful example of multiculturalism is assimilation. I'd argue that the UK has not been as successful in that regard.

I'm not overly invested in the subject, just continually annoyed in his terrible understanding of both statistics and antipodean society.

If my name was Yao Huang and I was born in Woden Valey hospital to two chinese parents, I'd tick 'Chinese' - so my vote counts once. If I was Reggie McDonald and I was born in Wyong and had a scottish grandparent and an irish grandparent, I might tick Australian, Irish or Scottish, so my vote counts twice... meaning that recent immigrants, with both parents born overseas, are underrepresented in this data.


But that's the oxymoron at the heart of the debate. When you are a second generation of Ukrainian descent who has a PhD from MacQuarie in Corporate Marketing and your only connection to the homeland is an awesome command of delicious peasant food from the steppes, then you are assimiliated. Sure, you have added to the richness of Australia's culture, but that is not multiculturalism. That is assimilation.

Immigration is ipso facto a good thing. Just the right kind of immigration, and in measured quantities. There are some communities in Australia right now who are failing one or both of those tests, and we will see how it goes in 30 years.


One community, in particular, has failed to assimilate in over the time span you just quoted. Well ... they kinda have, but it's generally those of a non-religious persuasion that have done so.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 2:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2289
Heymans wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Heymans wrote:
Okay so you don't know what you're talking about. Assimilation is fairly easy to undersdtand, it means "leave every scrap of your previous cultural identity at home, anbd don't pass it to your kids. become entirely "new nationality".

Multiculturalism is : do here like you would at home and don't mix with the native, don't try to adapt to their customs etc.

I fail to see how these are not mutually exclusive, must be my old world brain innit.


You've made up some stupid arsed definitions there frenchy.

Image


No I haven't you f**k dimwit, you just have no f**k clue. Multiculturalism is like "separate but equal", the existence of multiple cultures in a single country. Assimilation is literally the opposite of that, the refusal of an outside culture brought by immigrants. Assimilation means the 2nd generation is as close to identical to the target population, mutliculturalism means the 2nd generation is identical to its parents, and actively maintaining their source identity, thus NOT getting any closer to the target culture.
Maybe in your shit brains theres' a way these 2 are similar, but they sure aren't for the rest of us.


Despite being French, you are bang on the money here. I doff my red, made in the USA, MAGA cap.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 2:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3960
Zakar wrote:
Heymans wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Heymans wrote:
Okay so you don't know what you're talking about. Assimilation is fairly easy to undersdtand, it means "leave every scrap of your previous cultural identity at home, anbd don't pass it to your kids. become entirely "new nationality".

Multiculturalism is : do here like you would at home and don't mix with the native, don't try to adapt to their customs etc.

I fail to see how these are not mutually exclusive, must be my old world brain innit.


You've made up some stupid arsed definitions there frenchy.

Image


No I haven't you f**k dimwit, you just have no f**k clue. Multiculturalism is like "separate but equal", the existence of multiple cultures in a single country. Assimilation is literally the opposite of that, the refusal of an outside culture brought by immigrants. Assimilation means the 2nd generation is as close to identical to the target population, mutliculturalism means the 2nd generation is identical to its parents, and actively maintaining their source identity, thus NOT getting any closer to the target culture.
Maybe in your shit brains theres' a way these 2 are similar, but they sure aren't for the rest of us.


Image

Getting your definitions from Académie française mate?

How exactly do you even have 2nd generation immigrants without multiculturalism?


you f**k twat. I piss in you moms mouth


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 3:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2289
Oh well, there goes that argument.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 3:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9861
Location: XPAT CUNT
Heymans wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Heymans wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Heymans wrote:
Okay so you don't know what you're talking about. Assimilation is fairly easy to undersdtand, it means "leave every scrap of your previous cultural identity at home, anbd don't pass it to your kids. become entirely "new nationality".

Multiculturalism is : do here like you would at home and don't mix with the native, don't try to adapt to their customs etc.

I fail to see how these are not mutually exclusive, must be my old world brain innit.


You've made up some stupid arsed definitions there frenchy.

Image


No I haven't you f**k dimwit, you just have no f**k clue. Multiculturalism is like "separate but equal", the existence of multiple cultures in a single country. Assimilation is literally the opposite of that, the refusal of an outside culture brought by immigrants. Assimilation means the 2nd generation is as close to identical to the target population, mutliculturalism means the 2nd generation is identical to its parents, and actively maintaining their source identity, thus NOT getting any closer to the target culture.
Maybe in your shit brains theres' a way these 2 are similar, but they sure aren't for the rest of us.


Image

Getting your definitions from Académie française mate?

How exactly do you even have 2nd generation immigrants without multiculturalism?


you f**k twat. I piss in you moms mouth


:lol:

Flawless victory.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 3:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3960
Zakar wrote:
Heymans wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Heymans wrote:
Zakar wrote:

Multiculturalism is : do here like you would at home and don't mix with the native, don't try to adapt to their customs etc.

I fail to see how these are not mutually exclusive, must be my old world brain innit.


You've made up some stupid arsed definitions there frenchy.

Image


No I haven't you f**k dimwit, you just have no f**k clue. Multiculturalism is like "separate but equal", the existence of multiple cultures in a single country. Assimilation is literally the opposite of that, the refusal of an outside culture brought by immigrants. Assimilation means the 2nd generation is as close to identical to the target population, mutliculturalism means the 2nd generation is identical to its parents, and actively maintaining their source identity, thus NOT getting any closer to the target culture.
Maybe in your shit brains theres' a way these 2 are similar, but they sure aren't for the rest of us.


Image

Getting your definitions from Académie française mate?

How exactly do you even have 2nd generation immigrants without multiculturalism?


you f**k twat. I piss in you moms mouth


:lol:

Flawless victory.[/quote]

Victory of what? getting me pissed off? It happens all the time mate, anglos getting their jollies up by trolling people is just sad. you're sad. Never really got that one...

I wonder if you'd think the same after you got punched in the mouth?

You have no clue about what you're talking about so in effect trolling is evertything left you have. still sad.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 3:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9861
Location: XPAT CUNT
:lol: :lol:

I'm both right, and have got your little French knickers all twisted up because you can't argue with me effectively. Bless.

But by all means, continue to get pissy, insult my mother, threaten to fight me and any other 'anglo' that you just can't understand.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 4:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3373
Sad to see Zakar turn into waguser on this thread. :thumbdown:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 5:29 pm 
Online

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 1826
Man In Black wrote:
Sad to see Zakar turn into waguser on this thread. :thumbdown:


It's the old act the twat and declare victory approach. I am familiar with the first part but don't delude myself into thinking I've actually said anything.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 384 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 4071, Bing [Bot], Bogbunny, Brazil, croyals, DragonKhan, duke, elcamino, geordie_6, Google Adsense [Bot], Grizz Wyllie, hermie, HighKingLeinster, Homer, Jensrsa, kiweez, Lobby, lorcanoworms, Margin_Walker, Market Square Hero, mr bungle, Mullet 2, MungoMan, nardol, Nolanator, Ogre, Peaches, penguin, Petros, Porterbelly1, rabble, Santa, Silver, spookly, swc, theo, The Sun God, Tony Blair's Therapist, Turbogoat, Wilson's Toffee and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group