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.
No more dishonest than we are to pretend that we will continue to tolerate such barbarism.
Sadly, your post 'says it all'. At some point, we simply WON'T continue to tolerate some things....even things that up to now, have been OK. At some point, we're either going to 'step up to the plate', or cease to have any credibility as a nation. Multicultural 'feel-goodism' can't trump the obvious signs that 'enough is enough', and even 'good' people have limits.
I don't know why you, macmeal, would say multiculturalism is dead. If it does fail here in the US, well, then the US fails. But there does have to be a limit of some kind on what is tolerated, what is not. But to what point? Do "we" declare one religion over all others, indicating nothing but that religion is allowed? If "we" follow radical Islam, well, then, that declaration would be true. Do "we" declare one race sacrosanct, that all others should be/will be eradicated? If "we" follow radical Islam, well, then, that declaration, too, would be true. As I understand the Founding Fathers, all men (and women) are created equal, and are on equal footing in this country. It's when the radicals - religious or otherwise - form up a line that is unbearable, that cannot be penetrated, cannot be torn asunder, well, then, that puts a whole different light on the subject, doesn't it? I ramble, sometimes, too.
This once great nation was founded on Western Christian English speaking values. "Multiculturalism" is destroying what was the apple of the worlds eye! There are those who HATE White European Christians, and they're doing their best to destroy our heritage.
-The practice of acknowledging and respecting the various cultures, religions, races, ethnicities, attitudes and opinions within an environment.
-A system centred on respect for and the promotion of ethnic diversity in a society. The notion frequently arises that respect for ethnocultural diversity takes precedence over the imperatives of collective integration.
-the doctrine that several different cultures (rather than one national culture) can coexist peacefully and equitably in a single country.
Multiculturalism is only a failed concept from the perspective of racists. It works well for everyone else.
-The practice of acknowledging and respecting the various cultures, religions, races, ethnicities, attitudes and opinions within an environment.
-A system centred on respect for and the promotion of ethnic diversity in a society. The notion frequently arises that respect for ethnocultural diversity takes precedence over the imperatives of collective integration.
-the doctrine that several different cultures (rather than one national culture) can coexist peacefully and equitably in a single country.
Multiculturalism is only a failed concept from the perspective of racists. It works well for everyone else.
Source? Or just your interpretation, which is not bad, actually!
I don't know why you, macmeal, would say multiculturalism is dead. If it does fail here in the US, well, then the US fails. But there does have to be a limit of some kind on what is tolerated, what is not. But to what point? Do "we" declare one religion over all others, indicating nothing but that religion is allowed? If "we" follow radical Islam, well, then, that declaration would be true. Do "we" declare one race sacrosanct, that all others should be/will be eradicated? If "we" follow radical Islam, well, then, that declaration, too, would be true. As I understand the Founding Fathers, all men (and women) are created equal, and are on equal footing in this country. It's when the radicals - religious or otherwise - form up a line that is unbearable, that cannot be penetrated, cannot be torn asunder, well, then, that puts a whole different light on the subject, doesn't it? I ramble, sometimes, too.
The founding fathers "assumed" an awful lot. While emphasizing a bold determination thaty they'd be free of government tyranny and submission, they assumed (like most responsible people in their time did), that we'd be under another kind of tyranny...the tyranny of a conscience, and the sort of peer pressure that, in those days, kept people by-and-large 'doing the right thing'. AS you know, those who violated that 'social code' in those days paid a heavy price in public scorn and social stigma. The founding fathers ASSUMED that 'good men' didn't need a "King" telling them how to act, because they'd pretty well agree on how to act (and how NOT to act) on their own.
Today, we've succeeded in ridding ourselves of that shame and that scorn. Today, ANY behavior is "OK". THere IS really no 'acceptable' way to behave, and how NOT to behave. No behavior, no lifestyle choice, no way of acting is REALLY wrong..it's just 'different'. Other than our LAWS, we are free to act and behave in any way we choose, and 'to hell with what the neighbors think".
I don't think the founding fathers had the slightest inkling that we'd ever end up this way, and they simply didn't take that into account. How should they have handled it differently? Frankly, I don't know. But I don't think they anticipated a nation of 330 million people each acting the way he 'felt', and unaqble to agree on any common values, common language, or even common citizenship. I think they simply assumed we'd handle it better, on our own, without 'big brother' having to step in. Obviuosly, the founding fathers may have been a little overly optimistic.
-The practice of acknowledging and respecting the various cultures, religions, races, ethnicities, attitudes and opinions within an environment.
-A system centred on respect for and the promotion of ethnic diversity in a society. The notion frequently arises that respect for ethnocultural diversity takes precedence over the imperatives of collective integration.
-the doctrine that several different cultures (rather than one national culture) can coexist peacefully and equitably in a single country.
Multiculturalism is only a failed concept from the perspective of racists. It works well for everyone else.
Several cultures cannot coexist peacefully. The United States is a melting pot. Melting pot does not equal multiculturalism. Basically it blends all cultures into one. We are moving away from this concept. Canada is an example of a country with multiculturalism. Currently Quebec has been in the process of trying to secede from Canada for many years.
Iraq is a country where multiculturalism is prevalent. And look at the problems facing them.
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.
