Multiculturalism Can Kill A Nation

[NATO AIR]

let's be honest with ourselves...

http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion...0,4698972.column?coll=ny-viewpoints-headlines

Let's be honest: Multiculturalism can kill a nation

February 7, 2006

The lesson of the Muhammad cartoon controversy is: Multiculturalism between nations is inevitable, but multiculturalism within nations is disastrous.

Protests, many of them violent, have erupted across the world - including Europe, Australia and New Zealand - after the appearance of cartoons depicting the Muslim prophet Muhammad in unflattering ways.

It's time for all of us to recognize that different cultures have different values. For the West, broadly speaking, the highest value is freedom, including freedom of religious expression. But for the Muslim world, the highest value seems to be Islamic piety. To draw such a distinction between West and East is not to endorse cultural relativism; it's simply to take note of cultural reality.

Not everyone thirsts for liberty. Plenty of people around the world, maybe most, thirst instead to restrict liberty. And so, if Muslim crowds can't kill the Muhammad-mocking Danish cartoonists for "blasphemy," they will settle for burning Western embassies, at least for now.

Even the government of Afghanistan - where Danish forces have contributed to Western "democracy-building" - joined in the protests. Afghan President Hamid Karzai, who would not be in power save for Western intervention, added his voice to the chorus: "Any insult to the Holy Prophet is an insult to more than 1 billion Muslims, and an act like this must never be allowed to be repeated."

It should be obvious that our effort to influence Muslim public opinion in a positive way has reached a dead end. That is, we advocate democratization but get Islamization. That process empowers the likes of Hamas in Palestine and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Iran.

Even Turkey, commonly regarded as the most democratic and pro-American Muslim country, is changing its stance. The hot movie for Turks is titled "Valley of Wolves: Iraq." It depicts American GIs as blood-crazed war criminals. And, as UPI reported, the actor Gary Busey plays a "Jewish-American doctor at Abu Ghraib prison who disembowels innocent Iraqis so their organs can be sold to rich people in New York, London and Tel Aviv." These Turks are our friends?

And, oh, by the way, another piece of news concerning Western-Muslim relations is worth noting: Jamal Badawi, a leader in the bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen, back in 2000, has "escaped" from his Yemeni prison. We shouldn't hold our breath waiting for his recapture.

Differences between the West and the Muslim world can be chalked up to just that - differences. That's the truth about world ethnicity, and no amount of politically correct wishful thinking will change that truth. Countries that ignore that basic lesson of history and political science put themselves at grave risk of internal discord, subversion and civil war. Either a country is united in its common culture or it becomes disunited in its multiculturalism.

For proof, we need only look to Europe, where millions of Muslims have been allowed to immigrate without much thought given to their political and cultural integration into their host societies. In London, Muslims responding to the Danish cartoons chanted pro-jihad slogans and carried signs reading "7/7 is on its way" - a reference to the terror bombings last July 7 that killed 52 innocent Britons. That's not free speech; that's incitement to violence. A nation allowing such hostile populations to flourish in its midst is not defending liberty. It is enabling its own national suicide.

Short of worldwide war, followed by occupation, there's not much the West can do about Muslim culture in Muslim lands. That's international multiculturalism, alas. But on the issue of intra-national multiculturalism, there's plenty we can do. We can monitor, we can insist upon political and cultural assimilation and we can impose strict controls on immigration and travel visas - down to zero if need be.

We might not be able to change them, but we can keep them from changing us.

Email: [email protected]

 

[dilloduck]

let's be honest with ourselves...

Awesome find--you've been repped !

 

[NATO AIR]

Awesome find--you've been repped !

Time to take matters in our own hands at the polls and on the streets. Stop tolerating this crap and the politicians who support and aid it.

 

[William Joyce]

Pinkerton is bold enough a journalist to have considered attending a meeting with yours truly and some his highly un-PC associates... now THAT's gettin' somewhere!

Great article. Wonder how long he keeps his job.

 

[Annie]

let's be honest with ourselves...
Even the government of Afghanistan - where Danish forces have contributed to Western "democracy-building" - joined in the protests. Afghan President Hamid Karzai, who would not be in power save for Western intervention, added his voice to the chorus: "Any insult to the Holy Prophet is an insult to more than 1 billion Muslims, and an act like this must never be allowed to be repeated."

and this: http://www.zeenews.com/znnew/articles.asp?aid=273676&sid=WOR

Karzai calls for forgiveness amid cartoon furore
Kabul, Feb 06: Afghan President Hamid Karzai called on Muslims to be forgiving about a set of cartoons deemed to insult the Prophet Mohammed, saying they should not cause a dispute between cultures.

Karzai however also reiterated his "strong objection" about the 12 cartoons that have been published in several European newspapers and said they should never appear again.

covering ass

"We are people who by the instructions of religion are bound to take the course of forgiveness... we must have as Muslims the courage to forgive and not make it an issue of dispute between religions or cultures," Karzai said on Friday.

"But that doesn't mean that insulting cartoons about Islam must continue to appear, they must definitely, definitely stop," he told a media briefing.

The controversial cartoons, one of which shows the Prophet Mohammed with a bomb-shaped turban, have enraged the Arab and Muslim world because Islamic tradition bans depictions of the Prophet and Allah as blasphemous.

They prompted protests in several Islamic countries, including neighbouring Pakistan, but the streets of Afghanistan appeared quiet after morning prayers Friday.

At least 15 people were killed last May when protests erupted in deeply religious Afghanistan after US magazine Newsweek wrongly reported that the Koran had been mistreated at a US detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Bureau Report

The Newsweek article was close if not equal to this kerfuffle, which may be the outbreak of total war. In this case, 3 Muslim generated cartoons, not posted by the Denmark news outlet, are driving the crisis. Does anyone in the East or West, care?

 

[dilloduck]

and this: http://www.zeenews.com/znnew/articles.asp?aid=273676&sid=WOR

covering ass The Newsweek article was close if not equal to this kerfuffle, which may be the outbreak of total war. In this case, 3 Muslim generated cartoons, not posted by the Denmark news outlet, are driving the crisis. Does anyone in the East or West, care?

One helluva fence sitting job but I haven't seen any world leader do any better. This guy has a serious reason to care and in the uneviable position to make a possible local difference. Between PCness, fear or ignorance the rest of the world leaders seem paralyzed.

 

[Annie]

Dillo, you repped me? Never mind the Israelis and Palis, miracles do occur!

 

[ThomasPaine]

intolerant bigots. Another 9/11 type of attack here and it's time to warm up a few minutemen's in their silos. These people are ignorant morons. No more PC nice guy. It is time we look at the future without the rose colored glasses of trying to change these morons and merely look to securing what oil we can, developing our own energy resources, and keeping our finger on the nuclear trigger. After Iraq is over not one more drop of American blood spilt over these sub-humans. Next time just let the nukes do the talkin'.

 

[Just a guy]

...no.

I have tried.
In this thread multiculture is leaning on differences with muslims. But people talking multiculture seems to have a hard time defining it. Some say that "Multiculture" is a fact. It is the one culture in US. Spanish, african, indian and so on. It's your culture, it is what you have and it's a multiculture. Fine, but with this sort of reasoning "multiculture" looses all meaning.
Others mean that multicultures are the subcultures within a culture. But that somehow implies segregation - which is a bad thing talking multiculture.

Point is:
When you say multiculturalism can kill a nation, what definition is in use? The statement in itself doesn't bare logic here.
Either: This is a multicultural nation and it is what it is. It will only change and evolve, - not die.

or

This nation with multipel cultures will be overrun by one of the subcultures - get its name changed and the other cultures expelled. To accept this scenario you must define multiculture as a segregated society. Not a democrats dream, now?

I think the word should be put to rest, it has no clear meaning.

 

[Just a guy]

After Iraq is over not one more drop of American blood spilt over these sub-humans. Next time just let the nukes do the talkin'.

What on earth is a sub-human? Does it live in the sea?

 

[Adam's Apple]

I think Pinkerton was right on target with this article. If you don't assimilate your immigrants into your culture (language, values, etc.), you've got a powder keg waiting to explode down the road. Multiculturalism works only if immigrants make the effort to assimilate into the culture they have immigated to and the "natives" make them feel welcome and a part of it all.

 

[Just a guy]

Multiculturalism works only if immigrants make the effort to assimilate into the culture they have immigated to and the "natives" make them feel welcome and a part of it all.

Yes... and what is the "multiculture" here, that they might or might not believe in a different god or eat or might not eat certain food? Assimilated into a culture doen't sound like multiculture to me. (I don't disagree with you just repeting myself! )

 

[Adam's Apple]

I disagree with your interpretation of the word "multiculturalism." Just because an Irish Catholic becomes an American, doesn't mean s/he abandons the "Irish Catholic" part of him/herself. That is retained, but he gives his allegiance to America. He speaks its language, obeys it laws, defends it in time of war, etc. I am a German-American by extraction (both mother and father were from Germany), but I am an American first and foremost although my heritage is German. Members of my extended family all fought for America in the two wars against Germany. The first generatioin to come to America spoke only German in their homes because they did not know English, but when they learned English, that became their preferred language.

 

[Just a guy]

I disagree with your interpretation of the word "multiculturalism." Just because an Irish Catholic becomes an American, doesn't mean s/he abandons the "Irish Catholic" part of him/herself. That is retained, but he gives his allegiance to America. He speaks its language, obeys it laws, defends it in time of war, etc. I am a German-American by extraction (both mother and father were from Germany), but I am an American first and foremost although my heritage is German. Members of my extended family all fought for America in the two wars against Germany. The first generatioin to come to America spoke only German in their homes because they did not know English, but when they learned English, that became their preferred language.

So what are you saying? Your parents represents multiculturalism and thus poses a threat to the nation? I'm having a hard time defining multicultural and I claim it's a fuzzy word made up to confuse.

 

[Adam's Apple]

How in the world did you ever draw that conclusion?

 

[Just a guy]

How in the world did you ever draw that conclusion?

Maybe it was a bit provocative. Sorry. But you said you disagreed with my definition of multiculturalism. As I said, i have a hard time defining it at all. Then you tell me about your origin and I somehow got the feeling that that was your definition of multiculturalism (damn the word is unspellable too). If so, they fall into a category of people that could potenonally bring down a nation.

IF multicultural was to mean exactly this:
"Many different cultures" and only that, no left or right wing politian would claim to want a multicultural society. They define it more like:
"Many different cultures that share the most vital values of the people in this nation"
Wich your parents would fit in to, but maybe not a radical muslim, right?
The problem with that last way of defining the unspellable is that some cultures will have to change the key values of their beliefs - thus ceasing to be the same culture.

 

[Adam's Apple]

I cannot understand your thinking on this topic. Go back and re-read everything in this post, beginning with NATO's original post of Pinkerton's article. The difference between what is "multicultural" and what is not "multicultural" is very clear to me. Basically, it is this: multiculturalism works when the immigrants are assimilated into the adopted country's culture and accept it as their own. Multiculturalism does not work when immigrants are not assimilated into the adopted country's culture and do not accept the customs and laws of that country as their own. Pinkerton was saying that the latter effect can kill a country.

Perhaps you placed too much emphasis on what I said about my German ancestry. I only mentioned that as an example of how immigrants become assimilated into a new country and accept it as their own.

 

[Just a guy]

The difference between what is "multicultural" and what is not "multicultural" is very clear to me. Basically, it is this: multiculturalism works when the immigrants are assimilated into the adopted country's culture and accept it as their own. Multiculturalism does not work when immigrants are not assimilated into the adopted country's culture and do not accept the customs and laws of that country as their own.

No I'ts not clear to you at all. Sorry, you describe two kinds of multiculture here: Working and non-working. But okay, fair enough - that'll be the definition of multiculture - good or bad - tell me whats not multicultural then?
Is it a country with one culture only, where every single aspect of life is shared by every citizen? Is there such a place? Even small countries have different villages with different traditions.

The problem is obvious when pro-multicultural gets to be equal to tolerance. That leavs no room for a balanced debate.

 

[Adam's Apple]

Sorry, you describe two kinds of multiculture here: Working and non-working.

That's what Pinkerton was discussing--multiculturalism when it works, and multiculturalism when it does not. It's clear to me. Sorry that it isn't for you.
Perhaps someone else will pick up this thread and discuss this topic with you. I have a 10 o'clock appointment and have been on the computer far longer this morning than I should have been.

 

[Just a guy]

That's what Pinkerton was discussing--multiculturalism when it works, and multiculturalism when it does not. It's clear to me. Sorry that it isn't for you.

Well, I rest my case. But pay attention to when different people use this word. They might mean something else than you do.


http://www.answers.com/topic/multicultural

In the United States, multicultural led a quiet life until it became a key word in the "culture wars" of the 1980s and 1990s. Liberals began voicing their dream of the United States as a multicultural country, one with diverse peoples and cultures drawn from all over the world, sharing a common belief in freedom and democracy. Instead of seeing the country as a melting pot (1907) cooking up a single American way of life, they celebrated diversity.

They also began to expand the definition of culture beyond ethnicity, race, and religion to include gender and lifestyle, so that multicultural could mean "respect for different ages, sexes, physical or mental capabilities, and sexual orientations." At an extreme, respect might even be demanded for the distinct "cultures" of vegetarians, animal rights activists, millenarians, and transvestites. For some conservatives, this was too much. They saw multiculturalism as undermining respect for our unique American ideals and way of life, for the Western Civilization from which these ideals sprang, and for "family values." The debate continued inconclusively as the century drew to an end.