The Student Room Group

This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Benefits of multiculturalism?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Gales
Yes why? I've been in the Somali areas of Cardiff. It's not even that rough :confused:


Oh. Are you somalian? The welsh folks get robbed and/or beaten.
Original post by Objective-Truth
I know plenty. Picts, Brythons, Welsh, Scots , all different. All of them are more similar to each other than to people from the other side of the earth. It's just a truth multiculti types have to argue around I suppose.
"Given the multitude of dimensions along which people and objects might be perceived as either dis-similar or similar, the question remains why some dimensions become salient and important for categorisations and others do not. For instance, Medin and Wattenmaker (1987) point out that plums and lawnmowers are unlikely to be categorised together, even though they are clearly similar on a number of dimensions (both weigh less than 1000 kg, both cannot hear, both have a distinct smell, both can be dropped). It is not the case that one comparison dimension is objectively more relevant than another one, and that empirical reality would dictate which dimension should be attended to. Rather, the choice of comparison dimensions is informed by socially constructed meaning. However, if the choice of relevant dimensions is subjective rather than objective, judgements of relative similarity between objects are necessarily subjective too. Thus, again, perceived similarity does not straightforwardly stem from objective similarity there is a disjunction between the two" (Zagefka, 2009).

Given 'being Welsh' doesn't indicate anything about the individual's psychological traits, do you uphold the belief that every Welsh person is necessarily more culturally similar to you than every Pakistani person?

Personally, I would rather associate with my Pakistani friend from college who shares my musical interests, hobbies and interests and sociopolitical views, than a child rapist from Wales who doesn't share any of those things, but that's just me. :yep:
Original post by Objective-Truth
It's current inhabitants aren't all native to the area though, many will have chosen to separate themselves from the other religions in India during the partition Muslim leaders agitated for. In fact many Pakistanis will be descended from those Islamic imperialist invaders.


What's that got to do with any thing? There'll obviously be many many people worldwide that are descendants of x imperialist invaders, but it seems that you're implying that all Pakistanis are descended from imperialists and realistically who cares? It's not like I would give a damn if I realised that one of my friends (of any country) were descended from imperialists

If any thing, I'd be more inclined to research up on their history instead
Original post by whyumadtho
"Given the multitude of dimensions along which people and objects might be perceived as either dis-similar or similar, the question remains why some dimensions become salient and important for categorisations and others do not. For instance, Medin and Wattenmaker (1987) point out that plums and lawnmowers are unlikely to be categorised together, even though they are clearly similar on a number of dimensions (both weigh less than 1000 kg, both cannot hear, both have a distinct smell, both can be dropped). It is not the case that one comparison dimension is objectively more relevant than another one, and that empirical reality would dictate which dimension should be attended to. Rather, the choice of comparison dimensions is informed by socially constructed meaning. However, if the choice of relevant dimensions is subjective rather than objective, judgements of relative similarity between objects are necessarily subjective too. Thus, again, perceived similarity does not straightforwardly stem from objective similarity there is a disjunction between the two" (Zagefka, 2009).

Given 'being Welsh' doesn't indicate anything about the individual's psychological traits, do you uphold the belief that every Welsh person is necessarily more culturally similar to you than every Pakistani person?

Personally, I would rather associate with my Pakistani friend from college who shares my musical interests, hobbies and interests and sociopolitical views, than a child rapist from Wales who doesn't share any of those things, but that's just me. :yep:


They are generally.


You would rather associate with anyone in real life full stop. Beggars can't be choosers.
Original post by de_monies
What's that got to do with any thing? There'll obviously be many many people worldwide that are descendants of x imperialist invaders, but it seems that you're implying that all Pakistanis are descended from imperialists and realistically who cares? It's not like I would give a damn if I realised that one of my friends (of any country) were descended from imperialists

If any thing, I'd be more inclined to research up on their history instead


You're not very bright if you think I've implied that ALL pakistanis are descended from invaders. Some will have been native indians that will have converted or been forced to convert.

I suggest exactly that.
Original post by Objective-Truth
They are generally.
All of them are more similar to each other than to people from the other side of the earth. It's just a truth multiculti types have to argue around I suppose.


Since these two positions are incompossible, is the first one your official stance? How did you arrive at the 'generally' claim, given what I said about the ecological fallacy and the known presence of intranational variation?
Reply 246
Original post by Objective-Truth
Oh. Are you somalian? The welsh folks get robbed and/or beaten.


No, I'm Welsh. I'm white, I'm a British citizen. Both my parents are Welsh. All my grand parents are Welsh and the only foreigner in my family is my Irish uncle. I hope this is an adequate response to your question.
Original post by Objective-Truth
What was the population at the time?

More than that.


About 40 million.
And I don't think it was more.
Reply 248
Original post by billydisco
Is anyone else getting bored of the phrase "benefits of multiculturalism"? Lets be honest there arent any- it just seems to be a trendy phrase to say if you're an EU, BBC or Labour wannabe.

If multiculturalism was so great why do most ethnic groups decide to live in the same parts of the country? Why do most people want to preserve British culture rather than "embrace" other cultures?

There is no celebration of multiculturalism. Our culture is British and if you don't want to be part of it- you don't belong in our country.


Not necessarily. Alot of young people want to live in London because of the greater employment opportunities there, but alot of old people seem to want to live in isolated rural areas or near the sea. Not sure why.
Reply 249
Original post by Piprod01
There isn't really such a thing as one British Culture. I find a lot to disagree with in the supposed British values, proposed by parties like UKIP who claim to reinforce British Culture and also support things like an established church, alliance to the queen, ect. and I disagree with nearly all of them.

I'd suggest that a part of British culture is being varied and open to influence from the people who live here, and being welcoming to people who settle here.


So how come we don't have a culture but everybody else seems to have/be allowed one?
Original post by Gales
No, I'm Welsh. I'm white, I'm a British citizen. Both my parents are Welsh. All my grand parents are Welsh and the only foreigner in my family is my Irish uncle. I hope this is an adequate response to your question.


Lucky.
Original post by effofex
Not necessarily. Alot of young people want to live in London because of the greater employment opportunities there, but alot of old people seem to want to live in isolated rural areas or near the sea. Not sure why.


for the peace and quiet. the beauty. sedate pace of life.
:smile:
Original post by ashtoreth
for the peace and quiet. the beauty. sedate pace of life.
:smile:


Also a lot of people move to the countryside because there's fewer non-white people there.
Original post by Objective-Truth
You're not very bright if you think I've implied that ALL pakistanis are descended from invaders. Some will have been native indians that will have converted or been forced to convert.

I suggest exactly that.


So what's your point? This happened all across the world, with most major religions. Why single out Pakistanis?
Original post by Brutal Honesty
Also a lot of people move to the countryside because there's fewer non-white people there.


This is true.
Original post by Objective-Truth
Of course, the ones that are already here.


What about (cultural) Pakistanis who are not already here, not criminals, not benefit claimants etc. who are not here, but wish to come here, and whose presence we could benefit from? Why should they not come here?

Wait, so because "we" haven't allowed Icelanders and Indians to mix (read let millions of indians into Iceland) they are in a state of sectarian conflict? How many casualties have there been so far?

How? How can people be violently sectarian to one another if they don't see each other?


No, they are not in a state of sectarian "conflict", or violent towards each other. They are in a state of sectarianism, whereby two sectors of people are kept separate.

If we're talking about actual violence, then this is a separate issue. Similar to the issue of rape we discussed earlier. If we only allow in people who we believe will be law-abiding, this isn't a problem.

I know, but we were talking about pakistanis. Most are on benefits.


Most Pakistanis in this country are on benefits? Source?
Original post by de_monies
So what's your point? This happened all across the world, with most major religions. Why single out Pakistanis?


They have particularly frightening demographic statistics in the UK.
Original post by Brutal Honesty
Also a lot of people move to the countryside because there's fewer non-white people there.


it's possible i s'pose, tho i hadn't considered that when i made my response :smile:
Original post by tazarooni89
What about (cultural) Pakistanis who are not already here, not criminals, not benefit claimants etc. who are not here, but wish to come here, and whose presence we could benefit from? Why should they not come here?



No, they are not in a state of sectarian "conflict", or violent towards each other. They are in a state of sectarianism, whereby two sectors of people are kept separate.

If we're talking about actual violence, then this is a separate issue. Similar to the issue of rape we discussed earlier. If we only allow in people who we believe will be law-abiding, this isn't a problem.



Most Pakistanis in this country are on benefits? Source?


No thanks. Why? Because we tried to accommodate Pakistani culture, but it evidently hasn't worked. There is nothing wrong with learning from facts or experience.

Sounds frightful, do many people die from this?

How do we ascertain who is going to be law abiding?

Terribly sorry old chap, it's merely 40 percent.
This thread has gone very off topic and is fully of spammy posts, so is being closed for now.

Latest

Trending

Trending