Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
US definition of diversity: Black, White, Hispanic.
Canadian definition of diversity: English, Scottish, Irish, Welsh, French, First Nations, German, Spanish, Belgian, Swiss, Russian, Belorussian, Ukranian, Serbian, Chinese, Taiwanese, Vietnamese, Laotian, Indian, Sri Lankan, Thai, Danish, Swedish, Finnish, Norwegian, Mexican, Portuguese, Italian, Greek, Moroccan, Argentinian, Ghanian, Egyptian, Bolivian, Iraqi, Cuban, Iranian, Haitian, Indonesian, Australian, New Zealander, Turkish, Syrian, South African, Jamaican, Trinidadian, Bahamian, El Salvadorean, and so many more. Including American.
In Canada, "diversity" is not measured by race. It is measured by nationality and a nation's culture.
We have all those and every nationality on Earth in the US today. That was baked in the 1965 Immigration Act. Do you really believe all those nationalities can keep their culture in one nation under one jurisdiction? And why would you want to do that? They all ready have their nations. Why would anyone want to turn their western nation into the United Nations and the tower of babel?
How many times do we have to explain in America over the centuries we assimilated and intermixed people from NW Europe to where they are almost indistinguishable. Some differences and old rivalries remained but for the most part they weren't noticeable. If NW Europeans live under one culture they become more or less indistinguishable over time. At the same time we had Indian and black population who were deemed inherently too different. Problems stated when we had too high level of immigration from non-traditional areas S and E Europe around ~1900 but that was remedied by slowing it down. America was never really multicultural and still doesn't officially support multiculturalism which is a post 1960s scheme.
You could take the geneticist view that Europeans are very close genetically or you could take the many cultures view and you would have many races/ethnics and cultures but in my view the latter can't all live within a free republic or democracy under one jurisdiction with all their conflicting interests without serious reprecussions.
US definition of diversity: Black, White, Hispanic.
Canadian definition of diversity: English, Scottish, Irish, Welsh, French, First Nations, German, Spanish, Belgian, Swiss, Russian, Belorussian, Ukranian, Serbian, Chinese, Taiwanese, Vietnamese, Laotian, Indian, Sri Lankan, Thai, Danish, Swedish, Finnish, Norwegian, Mexican, Portuguese, Italian, Greek, Moroccan, Argentinian, Ghanian, Egyptian, Bolivian, Iraqi, Cuban, Iranian, Haitian, Indonesian, Australian, New Zealander, Turkish, Syrian, South African, Jamaican, Trinidadian, Bahamian, El Salvadorean, and so many more. Including American.
In Canada, "diversity" is not measured by race. It is measured by nationality and a nation's culture.
You're wasting your typing with these ones, Chevy.
His first post was slamming Canada and Trudeau as being less than intelligent, expressing a hope we get taught a lesson like Europe's experience for taking in Syrian refugees. Links I posted show the U.S. is doing the very same thing. Those were ignored of course.
His definition of culture would fit nicely into a two word slot used by an air traffic controller to track a Cessna flying into Podunk IA.
You cannot talk common sense with those who do not understand the concept.
US definition of diversity: Black, White, Hispanic.
Canadian definition of diversity: English, Scottish, Irish, Welsh, French, First Nations, German, Spanish, Belgian, Swiss, Russian, Belorussian, Ukranian, Serbian, Chinese, Taiwanese, Vietnamese, Laotian, Indian, Sri Lankan, Thai, Danish, Swedish, Finnish, Norwegian, Mexican, Portuguese, Italian, Greek, Moroccan, Argentinian, Ghanian, Egyptian, Bolivian, Iraqi, Cuban, Iranian, Haitian, Indonesian, Australian, New Zealander, Turkish, Syrian, South African, Jamaican, Trinidadian, Bahamian, El Salvadorean, and so many more. Including American.
In Canada, "diversity" is not measured by race. It is measured by nationality and a nation's culture.
You're right that when Americans talk about diversity, they often sum it up as Black, White, Hispanic (and maybe Asian).
But as been said, all of the groups you mentioned for Canada are all present in the U.S. as well.
And first, second or third generation Turkish-Canadians or Vietnamese-Canadians are not necessarily going to be more Turkish or more Vietnamese than first, second or third generation Turkish-Americans and Vietnamese-Americans. Mileage varies tremendously depending on families, location and other factors.
All in all, the integration and assimilation "experience" for various immigrant groups is not significantly different in Canada vs. the U.S.
The focus is this: Do societies that have MORE influence of Islam result in BETTER outcomes for the people?
Show me a society that has become MORE FREE in the past 500 years or so as the number of Islam-subscribing adherents increased. Anybody? ...... Bueller? ...... Bueller? It's never the individual Muslim that's the problem, and I'm not even sure what the magic % number is, but ultimately, it's Islamic society as an aggregate that ALWAYS ends up being a problem.
No matter how many "nice peaceful" Muslims, the result of an Islamized society as a whole is almost without exception LESS freedom for women, LESS freedom for gays, LESS science, LESS innovation, LESS security for minorities .... in turn you are enriched with what? MORE hijabs and burkas and segregated spaces based on sex and religion?
::: slow golf clap ::: Wow. So worth it.
As an ideology, Islam it is succeeding to spread where all other religions are receding because of birthrates and hijrah. Yet, it's an abject failure in terms of a "software" to run a society. Embrace it to your detriment. Applaud your openness while ensuring future generations have to pay the price for your warm and fuzzies. I'm sure even a number of clapping well-wishers at German train stations last year welcoming hordes of unaccompanied young men regret what they have done.
Honestly, it's like importing Nazis into your society in great numbers, and expecting that this WON'T have a profound effect on the character, priorities and freedoms in your society once they gain sufficient numbers to start affecting policy and making demands. To suggest that they are going to be like the Amish and just "stick to themselves" with their backwoods nonsense is the highest order of naivete. Embarrassing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When did that happen? 
