The Student Room Group

Why would you want a multi-cultural society?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20
Original post by Thriftworks
To examine the effects of multiculturalism on society and to (hopefully) draw conclusions on what form of multiculturalism ( if any) would be the best outcome for society.


Yeah this is pretty much it! But in my head I'm drawing to the conclusions.
Reply 21
Original post by tc92
To keep with the footballing analogy, could you fit Messi into the Stoke City way of playing football? Some cultures simply do not mix very well.


That proves my point though. Two diverse styles/cultures, but they'd mix and do you want to bet that they wouldn't find a way of working together?
Original post by Thriftworks

Aside from your few nitpicks, which as a % of the globe come in at under 10% of landmass


Oh, I coulda ripped into it further, trust me.

This diagrams is generally correct, as the people of these certain groups all show lots of similarities in the defining factors such as religious idealogy etc.



It's correct insofar as it shows us what Latin America is, where the rest of the world's Christians live, were black people come from and where Muslims live. An 11-year old could produce that map, but they wouldn't label any of those groups as 'civilisations'.
Original post by tc92


To keep with the footballing analogy, could you fit Messi into the Stoke City way of playing football? Some cultures simply do not mix very well.


http://hasmessidoneitonawetnightinstokeyet.com/
Original post by Barden
Oh, I coulda ripped into it further, trust me.



It's correct insofar as it shows us what Latin America is, where the rest of the world's Christians live, were black people come from and where Muslims live. An 11-year old could produce that map, but they wouldn't label any of those groups as 'civilisations'.


Unless I've misread the OP has not labelled the map with civilizations?

The map isn't ideal, but the point is that there are distinctions in which people across the globe go about their daily lives and these distinctions can conflict with one another, unfortunately.
Reply 25
Original post by Drewski
Because diversification makes you stronger.




An overly simplistic metaphor, maybe, but look at professional football teams. Look at the diversity in the leading English teams. Imagine a team limiting itself to purely those players from within it's postcodes. It might have the odd strong link, but there'd be many more weak links.


I like the example but I'm not sure how well it fits.

No doubt experiencing other cultures can only make your mind stronger but mixing them up seems as though we're going in a direction which ends in the separation of cultures only in the same area. Which causes conflict.
Original post by Thriftworks
Unless I've misread the OP has not labelled the map with civilizations?

The map isn't ideal, but the point is that there are distinctions in which people across the globe go about their daily lives and these distinctions can conflict with one another, unfortunately.


I asked the him what he meant by 'civilisations'. He cited that map authored by a guy who wrote a book entitled 'Clash of Civilisations'.
Original post by pizzle223
Or I'm even sure you would agree (for example) that if they come to England they should try to be a part of the British Culture, while still practising what they wish in the privacy of their own home.

But they don't do that though.... do they?
Reply 28
The fact of the matter is some cultures aren't compatible with others. A culture that emphatically believes in X isn't going to fit perfectly within a society that vehemently opposes X. Claiming that is 'bigotry' is disingenuous.

As has been said, it isn't a race issue and it never was. It's the culture which makes people behave in the way they do, not colour.
Original post by Barksy
The fact of the matter is some cultures aren't compatible with others. A culture that emphatically believes in X isn't going to fit perfectly within a society that vehemently opposes X. Claiming that is 'bigotry' is disingenuous.

As has been said, it isn't a race issue and it never was. It's the culture which makes people behave in the way they do, not colour.



Yes, this. I completely agree.

I think we need measures such as more community outreach programmes such as those seen in Bradford to encourages more integration and community cohesion, unfortunately not all people can come to agreements on certain issues and these are necessary evils in the light of the benefits of a multicultural society, it does beg the question, should we preference the taking of immigrants from areas which have been proven to provide people that integrate better e.g Ireland as opposed to areas which have been proven to lead to less integration.
Reply 30
Original post by billydisco
But they don't do that though.... do they?


No
I think it depends what one refers to as a "culture"; if by "culture", one refers to what people eat, do in their spare time, interests they have, etc. I do want a multi-cultural society (well, I say want, I mean I don't really care about having one or not). If by "culture" you mean morality, however, then I guess I don't support such a society - I guess "cosmopolitan" is a better term to describe me.
(edited 10 years ago)
I very much applaud the wisdom conveyed through this post.
You are very right - in order to preserve the many colours of our societies through the multitude of our cultures we should avoid mixing them.
We all have our very own cultural values: our identity, history, roots, religions, traditions and preferences. We should celebrate them as they are in their respective geographic places.

Imposing cultures over one another means losing both our own values and our chance to experience the joy of visiting other cultures.

Another point we rarely consider in this context. A United States of Europe where we are all mixed, implies that families will be torn apart every time when the demand of labour calls a family member to live and work in another EU-state among the 27. It also implies that in lack of one agreed-upon language, to successfully compete for work places we should learn all the languages. How "efficient" is that?

And this all is imposed as a "requirement" by the preference of a handful of international imperialist elite (EU), who build their military super-power to compete and fight against other super-powers. While pretending to build a peaceful, multicultural Europe, they push all EU-states into deeper and deeper debt, they play all EU-states against all the others, they laugh while the host countries blame their misery on the even more miserable immigrants, and they laugh even more when we are deceived with package-deal fallacies that equate immigrant-rights with leftism,
and equate our own protection with right wing politics, which fallacies will inevitably lead back to our captivity.
(Note: Contrary to the widespread myth, the EU is not a leftist organisation but the product of international right-wing libertarianism, The EU is in fact a self-erected private global government supported by the mega-rich classes.)

Their fallacies putting the label "nationalism" and other pejorative terms on our preference to preserve our values, to restore our national borders and to preserve our democratic rights to decide on how to maintain our cultural values and how to organise our lives, our politics and economies, is a form of deceit many of us have fallen for, hence we are losing national sovereignty to these dictatorial international powers.

More details on above on my blog: http://familyhurts.wordpress.com
Reply 33
Original post by Foo.mp3
Again, it would be fantastic if people could all think, and importantly feel, in terms of a top layer of oneness that transcends all mortal prejudices e.g. the brotherhood of humanity, and this is something we are moving towards as a civilisation/group of ‘civilised’ nations/communities. Unfortunately we’re not there yet


Yeah, this was the unwritten part of my point.

Ultimately it's a good thing, no matter what people say, but getting to that right point is neither immediate nor easy. People shouldn't assume it is/will be.
Original post by Foo.mp3
Because one is naive enough to think (hope) the world is like a Disney movie.. full of light, and colour, and love :h:

Unfortunately history has repeatedly shown, and most poignantly since the breakup of the Soviet Union, that mankind has not evolved to a sufficiently high state of dispassion (tolerance) or lost his capacity to discriminate (in the sense of indentifying: 'them and us') in order to qualify multiculturalism as the ideal that it is on paper, and die-hard/head in sand liberals would have you believe it is in practice

People have civilisational, religious, cultural, ethnic, local identities, affinities and allegences (usually in that order) and those that stick to them too rigidly, or in some cases violently, only serve as to demonstrate innate incompatibilities between such groupings and, at the macro level, the failure of the general model of inter-civilisational (and inter-religious, where Islam is concerned) multiculturalism

I would love to live in a socially cohesive, harmonious diverse society but I am resigned to the depressing reality that until mankind transcends his mortal foibles this is just a dream in all but regions with the most dilute, integrated/culturally assimilated concentrations of immigrant peoples

People say things like "we're an Island founded on immigration/we're all immigrants/look at the Huganos" etc etc, but they ignore the fact that where such demographic changes did not lead to horrific violence and massive social upheaval we're typically talking relatively small numbers of people who trickled in from relatively short distances, were from similar cultures and usually the same civilisation, and were eager to integrate


I think you've hit the nail on the head really. Humans I think are naturally tribal, and over time in different areas of the world have developed distinct cultures with which the people living there identify. It's not impossible for cultures to co-exist or mix peacefully, but because of our tribal nature, will always be accompanied by a degree of tension.

At the end of the day I don't have a problem with other cultures so long as they're peaceful, provided at least that people are not forced to engage or like them (as that is their choice), or that other cultures are forced upon us.

That's my thoughts on it really.
Reply 35
Original post by MsCourtney
IMO its not about whether we want a multicultural society. It just doesn't matter. ........People should not have this agenda of enforcing their beliefs on others,


Surely you want to enforce your belief on people that multicultural society is good or does not matter. I.e. a liberal wants to enforce to people that they should not object to multicultural society.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Tunkey1230
Surely you want to enforce your belief on people that multicultural society is good or does not matter. I.e. a liberal wants to enforce to people that they should not object to multicultural society.


Posted from TSR Mobile


No, you are free to object to a multi cultural society if you want to. I would believe that its wrong and discriminatory but I would like you to logically analyse the situation and draw your own conclusion.
Reply 37
Original post by MsCourtney
IMO its not about whether we want a multicultural society. It just doesn't matter. What we need is tolerance between all cultures and in fact it would be best to not view the cultures as separate but as one huge human culture. If we divide people into groups, they will not be at peace.

People should not have this agenda of enforcing their beliefs on others, in fact they should not even care about the trivial personal choices of others.


I know you have good intentions and you have my respect for that, however this view is utterly flawed. Say there are two cultures A and B if A is technological and economically more powerful than B it will inadvertently and on purpose export its culture e.g. Americanisation (so inadvertently being through movies and on purpose being dictating what is right and wrong). People in B will not like this and see it as a form of soft invasion, this will manifest itself as friction.
Original post by Gray Wolf
I know you have good intentions and you have my respect for that, however this view is utterly flawed. Say there are two cultures A and B if A is technological and economically more powerful than B it will inadvertently and on purpose export its culture e.g. Americanisation (so inadvertently being through movies and on purpose being dictating what is right and wrong). People in B will not like this and see it as a form of soft invasion, this will manifest itself as friction.


I know what you mean. This is because some cultures are ethically wrong. These people should not be allowed into the country in the name of religious freedom etc and if they do illegal things they should be prosecuted.
hi

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending