JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Dexter on January 25, 2008, 09:12:15 AM
-
In our era Multiculturalism is a way to erode the foundations of any standart society and to make it to an unstable society, culturally and political. It should be an interest of every society (or a state) to aspire for a cultural homogeneousness because that's the only way to unsure cultural and political stability. Ministries of Education and pedagogical contents have to mark an collective myths that creates united ethos.
We see in our days where does Multiculturalism leads us: Bosnia, Kosovo and the riots of Africans and Muslims in Paris streets. Today in the era of globalization, we live in a continual paradox: fragmentation of ethnic groups that disintegrate the society and threats the peacefull lives of the individual (us, in fact). Cultural homogeneousness is the best way for society to keep stable.
Democracy that doesn't recognize the value of homogeneousness society is a short-days Democracy.
There is no doubt that Pluralist society that covers diffrent mentalities and cultures is a wanted ideal. But in my opinion in this days it is an ideal only and Multicultural societies become unstable when the ideal of Pluralism becomes empty of contents. I am a bit influenced of book "The Coming Anarchy" by Robert D. Kaplan - the book gives us the ability to understand that the future is full of conflicts inside states and also stable (for now) migration states as the USA wouldn't be immune of the inside disintegration of society. The nature of Mankind leads us to conflict and conflict will happen near the "borders" of diffrent cultures in the same society/state. Therefor, Multiculturalism is the fuel that would light the conflict. We can see it today in Pluralistic states inside Europe and we will see it in the future in states like the USA where Whites, Blacks and Hispanics will struggle. The tendency for fragmentation that comes hand to hand with integration is unavoidable.
Multiculturalism is not a good thing and the aspiration always should be towards synthesis and not towards the eternal existens of thesis and antithesis. History teaches us what will happen to societies that can't solve the differences inside them, from the cultural revolution of China and to Bosnia and West-Africa.
-
Exactly. Read the book Death of the West. Covers this very topic very well.
-
Exactly. Read the book Death of the West. Covers this very topic very well.
Sounds a good book to me. I'll try to get my hand on it.
-
In our era Multiculturalism is a way to erode the foundations of any standart society and to make it to an unstable society, culturally and political. It should be an interest of every society (or a state) to aspire for a cultural homogeneousness because that's the only way to unsure cultural and political stability. Ministries of Education and pedagogical contents have to mark an collective myths that creates united ethos.
We see in our days where does Multiculturalism leads us: Bosnia, Kosovo and the riots of Africans and Muslims in Paris streets. Today in the era of globalization, we live in a continual paradox: fragmentation of ethnic groups that disintegrate the society and threats the peacefull lives of the individual (us, in fact). Cultural homogeneousness is the best way for society to keep stable.
Democracy that doesn't recognize the value of homogeneousness society is a short-days Democracy.
There is no doubt that Pluralist society that covers diffrent mentalities and cultures is a wanted ideal. But in my opinion in this days it is an ideal only and Multicultural societies become unstable when the ideal of Pluralism becomes empty of contents. I am a bit influenced of book "The Coming Anarchy" by Robert D. Kaplan - the book gives us the ability to understand that the future is full of conflicts inside states and also stable (for now) migration states as the USA wouldn't be immune of the inside disintegration of society. The nature of Mankind leads us to conflict and conflict will happen near the "borders" of diffrent cultures in the same society/state. Therefor, Multiculturalism is the fuel that would light the conflict. We can see it today in Pluralistic states like Europe and we will see it in the future in states like the USA where Whites, Blacks and Hispanics will struggle. The tendency for fragmentation that comes hand to hand with integration is unavoidable.
Multiculturalism is not a good thing and the aspiration always should be towards synthesis and not towards the eternal existens of thesis and antithesis. History teaches us what will happen to societies that can't solve the differences inside them, from the cultural revolution of China and to Bosnia and West-Africa.
This is quite impressive for a guy for whom English is a second language.
Good going, Dexter.
-
Even the way Dexter writes "I'll try to get my hands on it" shows his mastery of English. It's really incredible and the fact that he is only 14 makes it that much greater.
-
Thanks guys.
-
Even the way Dexter writes "I'll try to get my hands on it" shows his mastery of English. It's really incredible and the fact that he is only 14 makes it that much greater.
at least as great as some 41 year old!
-
Don't take it so far, I am a fool and ignorant, I have a lot, lot, lot [...] more to learn.
-
Don't take it so far, I am a fool and ignorant, I have a lot, lot, lot [...] more to learn.
Of course.
Me too.
It s a life long learning.
-
Multiculturalism is finte made by comies and musslimes to desintagrate the old societys; they're no any pluralism in countries governed by them. It's slow motion cultural Revolution.
-
Call it muFticulturaliSSlamism.
8)
-
I call it multicultism. :D
-
I call it multicultism. :D
What about muSStafacultotalitarianism ?
:D
-
Muliculturalism is a fraud.
It amounts to white guilt and self-hate forcing western countries to accept third worlders to pollute their nations.
-
Muliculturalism is a fraud.
It amounts to white guilt and self-hate forcing western countries to accept third worlders to pollute their nations.
It have nothing to do with white skin, it's all about culture.
-
Muliculturalism is a fraud.
It amounts to white guilt and self-hate forcing western countries to accept third worlders to pollute their nations.
Exactly..
-
Muliculturalism is a fraud.
It amounts to white guilt and self-hate forcing western countries to accept third worlders to pollute their nations.
It have nothing to do with white skin, it's all about culture.
That's what it is taken to mean and used for in the west.
Just like religion..........the 'pure' meaning and how it is practiced are often two different things.
-
Muliculturalism is a fraud.
It amounts to white guilt and self-hate forcing western countries to accept third worlders to pollute their nations.
It have nothing to do with white skin, it's all about culture.
That's what it is taken to mean and used for in the west.
Just like religion..........the 'pure' meaning and how it is practiced are often two different things.
As long as Blacks, Chinese and other groups will act like whites in USA and won't create any sub-culture, there will be no conflics on a cultural base, probably on ethnic and racial base.
-
Muliculturalism is a fraud.
It amounts to white guilt and self-hate forcing western countries to accept third worlders to pollute their nations.
It have nothing to do with white skin, it's all about culture.
That's what it is taken to mean and used for in the west.
Just like religion..........the 'pure' meaning and how it is practiced are often two different things.
As long as Blacks, Chinese and other groups will act like whites in USA and won't create any sub-culture, there will be no conflics on a cultural base, probably on ethnic and racial base.
That's a contadiction, Dexter.
If asians, blacks etc act like whites and don't form those sub-cultures, it's NOT 'multicuralism'. It's mono-culturalism. Multi-race, yes but not multi-culture.
-
Muliculturalism is a fraud.
It amounts to white guilt and self-hate forcing western countries to accept third worlders to pollute their nations.
It have nothing to do with white skin, it's all about culture.
That's what it is taken to mean and used for in the west.
Just like religion..........the 'pure' meaning and how it is practiced are often two different things.
As long as Blacks, Chinese and other groups will act like whites in USA and won't create any sub-culture, there will be no conflics on a cultural base, probably on ethnic and racial base.
That's a contadiction, Dexter.
If asians, blacks etc act like whites and don't form those sub-cultures, it's NOT 'multicuralism'. It's mono-culturalism. Multi-race, yes but not multi-culture.
yes, most likely mono-culturalism
-
Muliculturalism is a fraud.
It amounts to white guilt and self-hate forcing western countries to accept third worlders to pollute their nations.
It have nothing to do with white skin, it's all about culture.
That's what it is taken to mean and used for in the west.
Just like religion..........the 'pure' meaning and how it is practiced are often two different things.
As long as Blacks, Chinese and other groups will act like whites in USA and won't create any sub-culture, there will be no conflics on a cultural base, probably on ethnic and racial base.
That's a contadiction, Dexter.
If asians, blacks etc act like whites and don't form those sub-cultures, it's NOT 'multicuralism'. It's mono-culturalism. Multi-race, yes but not multi-culture.
Conflicts happen all the time, by diffrent factors, but they will never pass of our world.
-
Muliculturalism is a fraud.
It amounts to white guilt and self-hate forcing western countries to accept third worlders to pollute their nations.
It have nothing to do with white skin, it's all about culture.
That's what it is taken to mean and used for in the west.
Just like religion..........the 'pure' meaning and how it is practiced are often two different things.
As long as Blacks, Chinese and other groups will act like whites in USA and won't create any sub-culture, there will be no conflics on a cultural base, probably on ethnic and racial base.
That's a contadiction, Dexter.
If asians, blacks etc act like whites and don't form those sub-cultures, it's NOT 'multicuralism'. It's mono-culturalism. Multi-race, yes but not multi-culture.
yes, most likely mono-culturalism
multi-cultural means different cultures all living in the one country. It doesn't work. How can you have peace when one culture (arabs) demand the right to honour-kill their daughters and Jews/christians demand the prohibition of such acts. They'll never have one cohesive society and they'll NEVER get along.
G-d didn't create 70 separate nations in order for us to mix everything into a big pile of sludge.
-
Very good Dexter,
you are right. There is no place for insane ideoligies and evil cultures from the third world in the free West. Either they become decent members of our culture, or they have to go back to their hellhole-countries.
-
Muliculturalism is a fraud.
It amounts to white guilt and self-hate forcing western countries to accept third worlders to pollute their nations.
It have nothing to do with white skin, it's all about culture.
That's what it is taken to mean and used for in the west.
Just like religion..........the 'pure' meaning and how it is practiced are often two different things.
As long as Blacks, Chinese and other groups will act like whites in USA and won't create any sub-culture, there will be no conflics on a cultural base, probably on ethnic and racial base.
That's a contadiction, Dexter.
If asians, blacks etc act like whites and don't form those sub-cultures, it's NOT 'multicuralism'. It's mono-culturalism. Multi-race, yes but not multi-culture.
It's like in Switzerland, when you have German, French, Reto-Romans and Italian speakers, calvinists, lutherans and catholics but they have one swiss culture so they live in peace with each other for 500 years. The fact that each nation lives in its own valey-canton preety much apart helps too. So mono culturims and separatism aka Apartheid are OK!
-
Muliculturalism is a fraud.
It amounts to white guilt and self-hate forcing western countries to accept third worlders to pollute their nations.
It have nothing to do with white skin, it's all about culture.
That's what it is taken to mean and used for in the west.
Just like religion..........the 'pure' meaning and how it is practiced are often two different things.
As long as Blacks, Chinese and other groups will act like whites in USA and won't create any sub-culture, there will be no conflics on a cultural base, probably on ethnic and racial base.
That's a contadiction, Dexter.
If asians, blacks etc act like whites and don't form those sub-cultures, it's NOT 'multicuralism'. It's mono-culturalism. Multi-race, yes but not multi-culture.
It's like in Switzerland, when you have German, French, Reto-Romans and Italian speakers, calvinists, lutherans and catholics but they have one swiss culture so they live in peace with each other for 500 years. The fact that each nation lives in its own valey-canton preety much apart helps too. So mono culturims and separatism aka Apartheid are OK!
Politicians in Australia brag about our multiculturalism. But:
1/ It's going sour now with arabs, other muSSlims and africans etc.
2/ It has only worked so far because their is one dominant anglo-saxon culture with a lot of minorities thrown in. If there were equal numbers of anglo-saxons, hindus, musslims, asians, african etc, there'd be civil war and anarchy!
-
Be carefull. Christians may find that allowing Judaism is also a form of multiculitalism. One homogenoues culture un USA and Europe would mean no Jews!!!!!!!!
-
Be carefull. Christians may find that allowing Judaism is also a form of multiculitalism. One homogenoues culture un USA and Europe would mean no Jews!!!!!!!!
only Bolshevikkk and Nazi Christian Identity people would think Judaism is a form of multiculturalism not heroic "Judeo-Christians." ;)
-
Be carefull. Christians may find that allowing Judaism is also a form of multiculitalism. One homogenoues culture un USA and Europe would mean no Jews!!!!!!!!
No, Multiculturalism means cultural equality. Being against it doesn't mean other cultures wouldn't be allowed.
-
Be carefull. Christians may find that allowing Judaism is also a form of multiculitalism. One homogenoues culture un USA and Europe would mean no Jews!!!!!!!!
only Bolshevikkk and Nazi Christian Identity people would think Judaism is a form of multiculturalism not heroic "Judeo-Christians." ;)
Exactly. Italian, French and American Jews adopt and live cohesively with the cultures from those countries but maintain separate religious observance. That's NOT multi-culturalism but religious pluralism.
-
Be carefull. Christians may find that allowing Judaism is also a form of multiculitalism. One homogenoues culture un USA and Europe would mean no Jews!!!!!!!!
only Bolshevikkk and Nazi Christian Identity people would think Judaism is a form of multiculturalism not heroic "Judeo-Christians." ;)
Exactly. Italian, French and American Jews adopt and live cohesively with the cultures from those countries but maintain separate religious observance. That's NOT multi-culturalism but religious pluralism.
Religious pluralism sums it up ;) :)
-
Be carefull. Christians may find that allowing Judaism is also a form of multiculitalism. One homogenoues culture un USA and Europe would mean no Jews!!!!!!!!
only Bolshevikkk and Nazi Christian Identity people would think Judaism is a form of multiculturalism not heroic "Judeo-Christians." ;)
Exactly. Italian, French and American Jews adopt and live cohesively with the cultures from those countries but maintain separate religious observance. That's NOT multi-culturalism but religious pluralism.
Yes exactly the religius tolerance. Jewish people do contribute and never tried to enforce their culture or religion on host nations; They're oposite to muSSlime.
-
Like chaim said in a previous show Multiculturalism teaches kids that the forefathers were evil for owning slaves
-
Be carefull. Christians may find that allowing Judaism is also a form of multiculitalism. One homogenoues culture un USA and Europe would mean no Jews!!!!!!!!
I think the best way to prevent this is the separation of church and state.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But there is co-operation between Muslimes and Leftists in European countries.
The Leftists politicians give social care to the muzzies and enable them to breed, with the money which they have taken before from the hard working people.
The more Muzzies were born, the stronger will be the position of the Leftists, who are very hostile to Israel and the USA.
But this cooperation affects not only Muslimes, but other groups from third world too.
The more lazy evil people will flood into our countries, the stronger will be the hate against Israel and the Jews, because in my oppinion the cause of this whole antisemitism-issue is envy.
The more hard working and hungry for education people live in a country, the lesser is the antisemism.
But I have nothing against immigration in general or against people because they are different, but people who are unable to feed their families without social care and/or belonging to evil cultures, have no place in Western Countries.
-
In our era Multiculturalism is a way to erode the foundations of any standart society and to make it to an unstable society, culturally and political. It should be an interest of every society (or a state) to aspire for a cultural homogeneousness because that's the only way to unsure cultural and political stability. Ministries of Education and pedagogical contents have to mark an collective myths that creates united ethos.
We see in our days where does Multiculturalism leads us: Bosnia, Kosovo and the riots of Africans and Muslims in Paris streets. Today in the era of globalization, we live in a continual paradox: fragmentation of ethnic groups that disintegrate the society and threats the peacefull lives of the individual (us, in fact). Cultural homogeneousness is the best way for society to keep stable.
Democracy that doesn't recognize the value of homogeneousness society is a short-days Democracy.
There is no doubt that Pluralist society that covers diffrent mentalities and cultures is a wanted ideal. But in my opinion in this days it is an ideal only and Multicultural societies become unstable when the ideal of Pluralism becomes empty of contents. I am a bit influenced of book "The Coming Anarchy" by Robert D. Kaplan - the book gives us the ability to understand that the future is full of conflicts inside states and also stable (for now) migration states as the USA wouldn't be immune of the inside disintegration of society. The nature of Mankind leads us to conflict and conflict will happen near the "borders" of diffrent cultures in the same society/state. Therefor, Multiculturalism is the fuel that would light the conflict. We can see it today in Pluralistic states inside Europe and we will see it in the future in states like the USA where Whites, Blacks and Hispanics will struggle. The tendency for fragmentation that comes hand to hand with integration is unavoidable.
Multiculturalism is not a good thing and the aspiration always should be towards synthesis and not towards the eternal existens of thesis and antithesis. History teaches us what will happen to societies that can't solve the differences inside them, from the cultural revolution of China and to Bosnia and West-Africa.
you say some smart things and I agree that multi cultaralism can ruin things..
However, it can also enhance a culture and make it better with the right culture.
-
In our era Multiculturalism is a way to erode the foundations of any standart society and to make it to an unstable society, culturally and political. It should be an interest of every society (or a state) to aspire for a cultural homogeneousness because that's the only way to unsure cultural and political stability. Ministries of Education and pedagogical contents have to mark an collective myths that creates united ethos.
We see in our days where does Multiculturalism leads us: Bosnia, Kosovo and the riots of Africans and Muslims in Paris streets. Today in the era of globalization, we live in a continual paradox: fragmentation of ethnic groups that disintegrate the society and threats the peacefull lives of the individual (us, in fact). Cultural homogeneousness is the best way for society to keep stable.
Democracy that doesn't recognize the value of homogeneousness society is a short-days Democracy.
There is no doubt that Pluralist society that covers diffrent mentalities and cultures is a wanted ideal. But in my opinion in this days it is an ideal only and Multicultural societies become unstable when the ideal of Pluralism becomes empty of contents. I am a bit influenced of book "The Coming Anarchy" by Robert D. Kaplan - the book gives us the ability to understand that the future is full of conflicts inside states and also stable (for now) migration states as the USA wouldn't be immune of the inside disintegration of society. The nature of Mankind leads us to conflict and conflict will happen near the "borders" of diffrent cultures in the same society/state. Therefor, Multiculturalism is the fuel that would light the conflict. We can see it today in Pluralistic states inside Europe and we will see it in the future in states like the USA where Whites, Blacks and Hispanics will struggle. The tendency for fragmentation that comes hand to hand with integration is unavoidable.
Multiculturalism is not a good thing and the aspiration always should be towards synthesis and not towards the eternal existens of thesis and antithesis. History teaches us what will happen to societies that can't solve the differences inside them, from the cultural revolution of China and to Bosnia and West-Africa.
you say some smart things and I agree that multi cultaralism can ruin things..
However, it can also enhance a culture and make it better with the right culture.
How so ?
-
In our era Multiculturalism is a way to erode the foundations of any standart society and to make it to an unstable society, culturally and political. It should be an interest of every society (or a state) to aspire for a cultural homogeneousness because that's the only way to unsure cultural and political stability. Ministries of Education and pedagogical contents have to mark an collective myths that creates united ethos.
We see in our days where does Multiculturalism leads us: Bosnia, Kosovo and the riots of Africans and Muslims in Paris streets. Today in the era of globalization, we live in a continual paradox: fragmentation of ethnic groups that disintegrate the society and threats the peacefull lives of the individual (us, in fact). Cultural homogeneousness is the best way for society to keep stable.
Democracy that doesn't recognize the value of homogeneousness society is a short-days Democracy.
There is no doubt that Pluralist society that covers diffrent mentalities and cultures is a wanted ideal. But in my opinion in this days it is an ideal only and Multicultural societies become unstable when the ideal of Pluralism becomes empty of contents. I am a bit influenced of book "The Coming Anarchy" by Robert D. Kaplan - the book gives us the ability to understand that the future is full of conflicts inside states and also stable (for now) migration states as the USA wouldn't be immune of the inside disintegration of society. The nature of Mankind leads us to conflict and conflict will happen near the "borders" of diffrent cultures in the same society/state. Therefor, Multiculturalism is the fuel that would light the conflict. We can see it today in Pluralistic states inside Europe and we will see it in the future in states like the USA where Whites, Blacks and Hispanics will struggle. The tendency for fragmentation that comes hand to hand with integration is unavoidable.
Multiculturalism is not a good thing and the aspiration always should be towards synthesis and not towards the eternal existens of thesis and antithesis. History teaches us what will happen to societies that can't solve the differences inside them, from the cultural revolution of China and to Bosnia and West-Africa.
you say some smart things and I agree that multi cultaralism can ruin things..
However, it can also enhance a culture and make it better with the right culture.
How so ?
Let's look at the USA...Started out with basiclly British discidents. Then came other peoples who immigrated to this country..italians, french, irish amongst many examples. this country is a melting pot of different cultures. Certainly, it is better to weed out evil aspects of every culture...
And look Israel.. While most people in Israel are Jewish, you have Persian, you have morrocan, you have russian, you have ashkenazim, you have spanish, you have ethopian you have sabra..etc etc etc...while we all follwo the same religion, we learn about the missing pieces of our brethren...This is also where multi-cultralism is a good thing.
-
Still Americans were different brand of Europeans including european Jews and Israelis are different brands of Jews, true multicultism is to acept not embrace the culture of negro al Sharpton loving savages or palestinian FATAH-HAMAS canibals.
-
Still Americans were different brand of Europeans including european Jews and Israelis are different brands of Jews, true multicultism is to acept not embrace the culture of negro al Sharpton loving savages or PLO/Hamas Arab Muslim Nazi FATAH-HAMAS canibals.
Multiculturalism is what destroys cultures and peoples, but liberals don't care and are self-loathing in general.
-
In our era Multiculturalism is a way to erode the foundations of any standart society and to make it to an unstable society, culturally and political. It should be an interest of every society (or a state) to aspire for a cultural homogeneousness because that's the only way to unsure cultural and political stability. Ministries of Education and pedagogical contents have to mark an collective myths that creates united ethos.
We see in our days where does Multiculturalism leads us: Bosnia, Kosovo and the riots of Africans and Muslims in Paris streets. Today in the era of globalization, we live in a continual paradox: fragmentation of ethnic groups that disintegrate the society and threats the peacefull lives of the individual (us, in fact). Cultural homogeneousness is the best way for society to keep stable.
Democracy that doesn't recognize the value of homogeneousness society is a short-days Democracy.
There is no doubt that Pluralist society that covers diffrent mentalities and cultures is a wanted ideal. But in my opinion in this days it is an ideal only and Multicultural societies become unstable when the ideal of Pluralism becomes empty of contents. I am a bit influenced of book "The Coming Anarchy" by Robert D. Kaplan - the book gives us the ability to understand that the future is full of conflicts inside states and also stable (for now) migration states as the USA wouldn't be immune of the inside disintegration of society. The nature of Mankind leads us to conflict and conflict will happen near the "borders" of diffrent cultures in the same society/state. Therefor, Multiculturalism is the fuel that would light the conflict. We can see it today in Pluralistic states inside Europe and we will see it in the future in states like the USA where Whites, Blacks and Hispanics will struggle. The tendency for fragmentation that comes hand to hand with integration is unavoidable.
Multiculturalism is not a good thing and the aspiration always should be towards synthesis and not towards the eternal existens of thesis and antithesis. History teaches us what will happen to societies that can't solve the differences inside them, from the cultural revolution of China and to Bosnia and West-Africa.
you say some smart things and I agree that multi cultaralism can ruin things..
However, it can also enhance a culture and make it better with the right culture.
How so ?
Let's look at the USA...Started out with basiclly British discidents. Then came other peoples who immigrated to this country..italians, french, irish amongst many examples. this country is a melting pot of different cultures. Certainly, it is better to weed out evil aspects of every culture...
And look Israel.. While most people in Israel are Jewish, you have Persian, you have morrocan, you have russian, you have ashkenazim, you have spanish, you have ethopian you have sabra..etc etc etc...while we all follwo the same religion, we learn about the missing pieces of our brethren...This is also where multi-cultralism is a good thing.
The USA is not a melting pot. A melting pot is a way to force a cultural homogeneousness. The USA is a polycentric (Having several central parts) nation, so there will be never a cultural homogeneousness. While whites of diffrent but similar culture can be, somehow, tolerence to each other's culture, it can't be tolerence to black or Islamic culture. Furthermore the USA is not an ethnic nation but a civilian nation.
Israel is an ethnic nation, and until you don't live here you don't know what hatred there is to other Jews because of their culture, skin colour and the place they came from. Israeli-Jewish society is not very stable because it have no common cultural base, that's why I would like to have more cultural homogeneousness in here although he are not in a bad place because we did much in the cultural aspect and the idea of gathering the exiled Jews.
-
Still Americans were different brand of Europeans including european Jews and Israelis are different brands of Jews, true multicultism is to acept not embrace the culture of negro al Sharpton loving savages or PLO/Hamas Arab Muslim Nazi FATAH-HAMAS canibals.
Multiculturalism is what destroys cultures and peoples, but liberals don't care and are self-loathing in general.
I think the problem is that liberals define multi culturalism as anything that isn't white and european.
I define multi culturalism as literally, different cultures including white and european cultures...
-
In our era Multiculturalism is a way to erode the foundations of any standart society and to make it to an unstable society, culturally and political. It should be an interest of every society (or a state) to aspire for a cultural homogeneousness because that's the only way to unsure cultural and political stability. Ministries of Education and pedagogical contents have to mark an collective myths that creates united ethos.
We see in our days where does Multiculturalism leads us: Bosnia, Kosovo and the riots of Africans and Muslims in Paris streets. Today in the era of globalization, we live in a continual paradox: fragmentation of ethnic groups that disintegrate the society and threats the peacefull lives of the individual (us, in fact). Cultural homogeneousness is the best way for society to keep stable.
Democracy that doesn't recognize the value of homogeneousness society is a short-days Democracy.
There is no doubt that Pluralist society that covers diffrent mentalities and cultures is a wanted ideal. But in my opinion in this days it is an ideal only and Multicultural societies become unstable when the ideal of Pluralism becomes empty of contents. I am a bit influenced of book "The Coming Anarchy" by Robert D. Kaplan - the book gives us the ability to understand that the future is full of conflicts inside states and also stable (for now) migration states as the USA wouldn't be immune of the inside disintegration of society. The nature of Mankind leads us to conflict and conflict will happen near the "borders" of diffrent cultures in the same society/state. Therefor, Multiculturalism is the fuel that would light the conflict. We can see it today in Pluralistic states inside Europe and we will see it in the future in states like the USA where Whites, Blacks and Hispanics will struggle. The tendency for fragmentation that comes hand to hand with integration is unavoidable.
Multiculturalism is not a good thing and the aspiration always should be towards synthesis and not towards the eternal existens of thesis and antithesis. History teaches us what will happen to societies that can't solve the differences inside them, from the cultural revolution of China and to Bosnia and West-Africa.
you say some smart things and I agree that multi cultaralism can ruin things..
However, it can also enhance a culture and make it better with the right culture.
How so ?
Let's look at the USA...Started out with basiclly British discidents. Then came other peoples who immigrated to this country..italians, french, irish amongst many examples. this country is a melting pot of different cultures. Certainly, it is better to weed out evil aspects of every culture...
And look Israel.. While most people in Israel are Jewish, you have Persian, you have morrocan, you have russian, you have ashkenazim, you have spanish, you have ethopian you have sabra..etc etc etc...while we all follwo the same religion, we learn about the missing pieces of our brethren...This is also where multi-cultralism is a good thing.
The USA is not a melting pot. A melting pot is a way to force a cultural homogeneousness. The USA is a polycentric (Having several central parts) nation, so there will be never a cultural homogeneousness. While whites of diffrent but similar culture can be, somehow, tolerence to each other's culture, it can't be tolerence to black or Islamic culture. Furthermore the USA is not an ethnic nation but a civilian nation.
Israel is an ethnic nation, and until you don't live here you don't know what hatred there is to other Jews because of their culture, skin colour and the place they came from. Israeli-Jewish society is not very stable because it have no common cultural base, that's why I would like to have more cultural homogeneousness in here although he are not in a bad place because we did much in the cultural aspect and the idea of gathering the exiled Jews.
I hear what you are saying, Dexter. I don't live in ISrael and still, you are indicating to me that there are still hatred of Jews for each other because of racial and cultural differences even though they are all Jews...
I think that's the problem with creating a Jewish State that is secular...IF Israel were a religious Zionist state, all Jews of different tribes and cultures would ahev a common goal and a common love for one another. Being an American Jew, i don't see as many wall to wall JEws as you do on a daily basis..so whenever I see a Jew, I automatically love him/her...But I do see what you mean.
-
That have nothing to do with religiouse or seculer state. The religiouse Jews also hate each other for raciel diffrences, especially Charedi Jews.
-
That have nothing to do with religiouse or seculer state. The religiouse Jews also hate each other for raciel diffrences, especially Charedi Jews.
Then they are doing what's unJewish not liking each other for racial differences....That's breaking one of the top 10 mitzvot received on Sinai...The same goes if it is happening vice versa.
-
That have nothing to do with religiouse or seculer state. The religiouse Jews also hate each other for raciel diffrences, especially Charedi Jews.
Then they are doing what's unJewish not liking each other for racial differences....That's breaking one of the top 10 mitzvot received on Sinai...The same goes if it is happening vice versa.
Exactly, they shouldn't racially divide and discriminate
-
Be carefull. Christians may find that allowing Judaism is also a form of multiculitalism. One homogenoues culture un USA and Europe would mean no Jews!!!!!!!!
only Bolshevikkk and Nazi Christian Identity people would think Judaism is a form of multiculturalism not heroic "Judeo-Christians." ;)
Exactly. Italian, French and American Jews adopt and live cohesively with the cultures from those countries but maintain separate religious observance. That's NOT multi-culturalism but religious pluralism.
Religious pluralism and multiculturalism are seen as the same thing by secular, especially when they deal with Jews. Most seculars think that Jews are outside general culture because they don't intermarry.
Different religions also mean different cultures, if you advocate ONE only culture, then there's no place for Judaism. Be carefull. I don't find the clue why so many peple here are inclined to trust so much in Gentiles!!!!!!!According to seculars and Christians (though they use different arguments), Jews are misfits, they keep meaningless dietary laws which irk society, don't intermarry thus being racist, and fled to "Falastina" commiting the "crime" of "invading" it and the crime of not assimilating into their countries. Don't trust in Gentiles if you want to survive. Only respect them, but don't take them for allies, except for Noahides and some very few others who are honest
-
Be carefull. Christians may find that allowing Judaism is also a form of multiculitalism. One homogenoues culture un USA and Europe would mean no Jews!!!!!!!!
only Bolshevikkk and Nazi Christian Identity people would think Judaism is a form of multiculturalism not heroic "Judeo-Christians." ;)
Exactly. Italian, French and American Jews adopt and live cohesively with the cultures from those countries but maintain separate religious observance. That's NOT multi-culturalism but religious pluralism.
Religious pluralism and multiculturalism are seen as the same thing by secular, especially when they deal with Jews. Most seculars think that Jews are outside general culture because they don't intermarry.
Different religions also mean different cultures, if you advocate ONE only culture, then there's no place for Judaism. Be carefull. I don't find the clue why so many peple here are inclined to trust so much in Gentiles!!!!!!!According to seculars and Christians (though they use different arguments), Jews are misfits, they keep meaningless dietary laws which irk society, don't intermarry thus being racist, and fled to "Falastina" commiting the "crime" of "invading" it and the crime of not assimilating into their countries. Don't trust in Gentiles if you want to survive. Only respect them, but don't take them for allies, except for Noahides and some very few others who are honest
Raul you are right. I see the problem too.
But the more people flood to the first world with poor working ethik, the more will socialism grow.
This is a fact. Muslimes are unable to feed their families under "natural" conditions. They must vote for socialist political parties to survive.
This is a real threat.
In Germany 90 percent of all Muslimes vote for socialist parties.
European antisemitism + Islam is deadly. Please think about it.
-
Be carefull. Christians may find that allowing Judaism is also a form of multiculitalism. One homogenoues culture un USA and Europe would mean no Jews!!!!!!!!
only Bolshevikkk and Nazi Christian Identity people would think Judaism is a form of multiculturalism not heroic "Judeo-Christians." ;)
Exactly. Italian, French and American Jews adopt and live cohesively with the cultures from those countries but maintain separate religious observance. That's NOT multi-culturalism but religious pluralism.
Religious pluralism and multiculturalism are seen as the same thing by secular, especially when they deal with Jews. Most seculars think that Jews are outside general culture because they don't intermarry.
Different religions also mean different cultures, if you advocate ONE only culture, then there's no place for Judaism. Be carefull. I don't find the clue why so many peple here are inclined to trust so much in Gentiles!!!!!!!According to seculars and Christians (though they use different arguments), Jews are misfits, they keep meaningless dietary laws which irk society, don't intermarry thus being racist, and fled to "Falastina" commiting the "crime" of "invading" it and the crime of not assimilating into their countries. Don't trust in Gentiles if you want to survive. Only respect them, but don't take them for allies, except for Noahides and some very few others who are honest
Jews shud not trust any people but G-d. All member here are zionist and I dare to say more pro jewish than mayority of Israeli left and liberal self hating Jews from America. RM is divisive and arogant to tell Jews who they may trust or not. It's their choice not yours or mine.
-
Jews shud not trust any people but G-d. All member here are zionist and I dare to say more pro jewish than mayority of Israeli left and liberal self hating Jews from America. RM is divisive and arogant to tell Jews who they may trust or not. It's their choice not yours or mine.
No, I cannot tell Jews whom they must trust. But I certainly can and have every right to oppose those Jews (or from any other nation) who advocate Goyshe rights to ban things. I am just defending myself. I am a goy, but don't trust in the majority of goyim, and certainly don't want other gentiles interfering in my privacy. If Jews make alliances with people of different religions, and support right wings Christians, they are only preparing a new inquisition. And it's obvious that Inquisition will burn me also for not eating blood ( Dam min Hachai), as they burnt Jews for not eating pork!!!!!!!
To oppose multiculturalism, means also to oppose religious freedom..... without that freedom we are lost!!!! The dominant culture/religion shall be either Crhistianity or secularism, and I don't fit into any of them. So I have every right to protest about it and defend myself!!!!!!
-
Jews shud not trust any people but G-d. All member here are zionist and I dare to say more pro jewish than mayority of Israeli left and liberal self hating Jews from America. RM is divisive and arogant to tell Jews who they may trust or not. It's their choice not yours or mine.
No, I cannot tell Jews whom they must trust. But I certainly can and have every right to oppose those Jews (or from any other nation) who advocate Goyshe rights to ban things. I am just defending myself. I am a goy, but don't trust in the majority of goyim, and certainly don't want other gentiles interfering in my privacy. If Jews make alliances with people of different religions, and support right wings Christians, they are only preparing a new inquisition. And it's obvious that Inquisition will burn me also for not eating blood ( Dam min Hachai), as they burnt Jews for not eating pork!!!!!!!
To oppose multiculturalism, means also to oppose religious freedom..... without that freedom we are lost!!!! The dominant culture/religion shall be either Crhistianity or secularism, and I don't fit into any of them. So I have every right to protest about it and defend myself!!!!!!
Multiculturalism =ethnic gangs, ghettos and muSSlim rapists on the loose.
Jews and western europeans in the west, third worlders in the third world.
-
Jews shud not trust any people but G-d. All member here are zionist and I dare to say more pro jewish than mayority of Israeli left and liberal self hating Jews from America. RM is divisive and arogant to tell Jews who they may trust or not. It's their choice not yours or mine.
No, I cannot tell Jews whom they must trust. But I certainly can and have every right to oppose those Jews (or from any other nation) who advocate Goyshe rights to ban things. I am just defending myself. I am a goy, but don't trust in the majority of goyim, and certainly don't want other gentiles interfering in my privacy. If Jews make alliances with people of different religions, and support right wings Christians, they are only preparing a new inquisition. And it's obvious that Inquisition will burn me also for not eating blood ( Dam min Hachai), as they burnt Jews for not eating pork!!!!!!!
To oppose multiculturalism, means also to oppose religious freedom..... without that freedom we are lost!!!! The dominant culture/religion shall be either Crhistianity or secularism, and I don't fit into any of them. So I have every right to protest about it and defend myself!!!!!!
Multiculturalism =ethnic gangs, ghettos and muSSlim rapists on the loose.
Jews and western europeans in the west, third worlders in the third world.
Multiculturalism = Extinction of prosperous Westerners
-
Jews shud not trust any people but G-d. All member here are zionist and I dare to say more pro jewish than mayority of Israeli left and liberal self hating Jews from America. RM is divisive and arogant to tell Jews who they may trust or not. It's their choice not yours or mine.
No, I cannot tell Jews whom they must trust. But I certainly can and have every right to oppose those Jews (or from any other nation) who advocate Goyshe rights to ban things. I am just defending myself. I am a goy, but don't trust in the majority of goyim, and certainly don't want other gentiles interfering in my privacy. If Jews make alliances with people of different religions, and support right wings Christians, they are only preparing a new inquisition. And it's obvious that Inquisition will burn me also for not eating blood ( Dam min Hachai), as they burnt Jews for not eating pork!!!!!!!
To oppose multiculturalism, means also to oppose religious freedom..... without that freedom we are lost!!!! The dominant culture/religion shall be either Crhistianity or secularism, and I don't fit into any of them. So I have every right to protest about it and defend myself!!!!!!
Multiculturalism =ethnic gangs, ghettos and muSSlim rapists on the loose.
Jews and western europeans in the west, third worlders in the third world.
Exactly I dare to say that religius freedom is not idol to worship, it means to tolerate others of whom i might disagree in the name of respect of their humanity and religius peace. And yes there will be "inquisition" of sort to root out self hating traitorous leftist PC multicultists but mayority of them will fall in the war with iSSlam anyway some of them with bullets in their backs ;) . And catholic church which burned milions of right wing christians you hate won't be in power for long, Holy See is rotten by marxist "liberation theologians" and masonic lodges to the core. Soon we'll turn vatican into giant museum. ALL those books and documents hidden in secret library to study 8;)
-
Even the way Dexter writes "I'll try to get my hands on it" shows his mastery of English. It's really incredible and the fact that he is only 14 makes it that much greater.
careful.. His writing is good, but that particular quote is not such a great example. You don`t want to encourage him to keep using that expression!!!!!
Or he`ll end up with a really bad reputation !
Most israelis have terrible english, because hebrew does not have that many words. So they just use the basic words.. So when they want to borrow something, they say "I AM TAKING YOUR BOOK". The socialist education system israel has does not help them either. Dexter is very impressive..
-
No, we don't say "I AM TAKING YOUR BOOK", we say "Can I take your book?" etc'.
And thanks for the compliments.
BTW, what should I say instead of "I'll try to get my hands on it" ?
-
No, we don't say "I AM TAKING YOUR BOOK", we say "Can I take your book?" etc'.
And thanks for the compliments.
BTW, what should I say instead of "I'll try to get my hands on it" ?
How long have you been learning english?
I think a multicultural society with a very small minority of cultural input is very good, as long as the initial native culture of a society isn't replaced by newcomers, it isn't always a bad thing.
-
Well, two years. But it's school so we studie English very slow.
I think that a society with a small numbers of diffrent cultures can be fine, but it doesn't mean it should be Multicultural society.
-
Well, two years. But it's school so we studie English very slow.
I think that a society with a small numbers of diffrent cultures can be fine, but it doesn't mean it should be Multicultural society.
You've made excellent progress then.
If there was such thing as an all respecting, good multicultural society then i would say it is very good indeed as a diverse range of benefits can improve the community in more ways then one. However there are many cultures and differences that will never synchronize.
Are you meaning religion as well as culture?
-
No, we don't say "I AM TAKING YOUR BOOK", we say "Can I take your book?" etc'.
no, you speak hebrew!
but in hebrew you just stick "HaIm" before it and it becomes a request. To translate that literally into english- impossibly bad english of course, it looks like
REQUEST - I TAKE YOUR BOOK!!
except they may leave out the word REQUEST!
The concept of reversing I/you/him followed by the verb. Does not exist in hebrew.. So you say
I CAN or HaIm I CAN. You don`t say "can I" in hebrew.. And so some hebrew speakers whose english is very poor, do not say "can I" either. Or HaIm, since it does not translate literally in place.
And thanks for the compliments.
BTW, what should I say instead of "I'll try to get my hands on it" ?
it`s fine.. Great english, in the context.
But in other contexts it would be very inappropriate.. for example.
If talking about something "material". i.e. money related. money or expensive items. To say "I would love ot get my hands on it" sounds terrible.. sounds very greedy.
The reason why it is fine to say you would love to get your hands on a book, is because greed for knowledge is considered a good thing.
One would use more conservative language if talking of something material that one would like.. For example. "That job looks like a nice little earner".
Similarly, if it was a girl you were talking about. Then to use that expression "love to get your hands on her" would be inappropriate too. Of course, you know that..
I was just saying that for somebody to take that statement "love to get your hands on it". And say GREAT ENGLISH. Might encourage you to use it more often, and then you may use it in the wrong context , and look greedy.. (ie greedy for something material).. And I was also joking there that one could use it in the context of a female without realising the full meaning. I know you wouldn`t make that mistake, that is why I meant that example as a joke!) I didn`t mention that example of the female, because it was obvious. If you were a bit older you`d have noticed it when I mentioned about getting a bad reputation if using that phrase too often/ in inappropriate circumstances!
It is great english though.. the way you used it. In the context of wanting a book, it looks very good. It implies a very physical grabbing and real longing to have it. A sort of greed, in this case a good greed. So you used it well..
It can also be used in those other circumstances, for a bad person.. like, "he will do anything to get his hands on that money/prize"