Why multiculturalism is causing conflict.

Conflict derives from having separated societies, the closer the proximity of said societies the more likely violence is. If you have them running parallel to one another within a country it's asking for violence, which is pretty much what multiculturalism means.

Back when immigration was just among European countries the big word was integration, even with communist countries like China etc. the word was still integration. But as soon as the borders opened to Islamic theocracies the word multiculturalism came into play, because these people were never going to integrate. You could argue their non-integration was because there weren't proper measures put into place to deal with the large numbers, rather than saying it was a complete unwillingness on their part if you like..... it seems a mute point.

We have Sharia courts in the UK, separate banking systems, benefits changes with polygamy in mind etc. etc.

No other group has ever done such a thing after immigrating, how dare they! how dare our government!

Imagine you immigrated to another country, say Saudi Arabia, I would like to think you would do your utmost to adopt their culture and obey their laws (if not just because your life depends on it). You wouldn't go there and say "yeah, your country needs to change to fit my wants"....... "it needs to be more Christian orientated in some aspects". It would be insulting to your hosts, giving special treatment to any religious group is unfair let alone second generation immigrants.


There is a rise in right wing groups in every country Muslims immigrate too like (but not limited to) the EDL, the Golden Dawn, The 969 Buddhists!!! (They are so intolerant of their hosts culture that they even cause a right wing break away sect in Buddhism).
These far right groups are a response, these people live on the front line of a multicultural society and the government whitewashes their grievances while pandering to the ideology of immigrants. There are no-go areas/immigrant ghettos popping up all over Europe were non-Muslims dare not live.
Muslim pedophile gangs that target non-Muslims girls are almost a bimonthly event now in the UK, every other week there is news of a foiled terrorist attack by Muslims in Europe with annual successes, riots in Stockholm etc.etc.

Our government is failing them and us, Multiculturalism breeds violence and this has to stop.

Our government is failing them and us, Multiculturalism breeds violence and this has to stop.

You;
..And Immediately your stance is shown, as connoted with the language use, ooh-ahh, English Literature has become useful...

JC;
You wish to start of by stereotyping me, OK?

You;
Digressing to the point, this is a lopsided argument. Multiculturalism, whilst it can breed violence, poses an array of benefits. What's more, many of the people here under the premise of multiculturalism aided this very country in the post war years GREATLY.Stemming from this, multiculturalism itself, albeit with a few flaws, worked well in the 1960s and continues to do so.

JC;
Of course there has been immigration before and it has brought with it allot of benefits, but you have really misconstrued and misrepresented my point. What you speak about is nothing on the scale of what we have today, hence people could integrate back then. You are comparing the net immigration without any numbers and saying they are the same, that is at best completely dishonest. You are right in saying multiculturalism stemmed from immigration, but from mass immigration were integration was not fee-sable.


You;
I have friends of all races, backgrounds, creeds and the school I attend is diverse.

JC;
OK

You;
Society itself only works with such a feat as an inherent component; doctors, nurses, engineers, you name it, an academic pursuit you can think of, will most likely be pursued by the minority(yes, they are the minority) in the majority. Thus, they(those who partake in said 'multiculturalism') form a great and inherent aspect of our economy.

JC;
No, you are stereotyping all immigrants and saying what? That most of them are Doctors......errmm?! Have you got any numbers to back this up?



You;
THE VERY REASON WHY WE HAVE MULTICULTURALISM IS THIS COUNTRY WOULD HAVE SEIZED TO BE PROSPEROUS IN ANY MANNER WITHOUT THE INFLUX OF IMMIGRANTS TO FILL LABOUR SHORTAGES AND FIX THE ECONOMY.(Soz 4 caps, cba re-typing) So, you're arguing what, we send home, what? 2nd, 3rd generations of people from other cultures? People who had forefathers building the very foundations of society we live? Bull****, I say. And to that, I also say that your use of the minority of a sect's wrong doing to be a claim which is biased and untrue as a majority.

JC;
So their forefathers built our society 3 generations ago? and no I never suggested we do anything other than talk about the topic of mass immigration without integration.

You;
On top of this, the very reason some of those people are here are due to the exact and opposite reason today. The British Empire. Do you know how Kenyan Asians arrived in the country? Upon the abolishing of slavery, Indian migrants were moved to parts of Africa by British Companies for work, under schemes no better than slavery! Fast forward 100 years, these people are persecuted in the very areas the British have left them, and as a consequence, in the late 1960s, Kenyan Asians were forced out, so to speak, to England, and Ugandan Asians were simply expelled (50,000 of them) in 1972 by Idi Amin. Now, you're wondering why I'm including this. No?

JC;
Britain took in 30,000 of these immigrants, which was 6 weeks immigration by the 1990's. The numbers between then and now........look them up.


You;
(Well, I have a History exam tomorrow, but more to the point, it serves a purpose)

It shows that British influence in History had a great affect on countries as part of its Empire, some of which are resonated with your claims of injustice, but regardless of this fact - many immigrants came to Britain, stayed, and lived in peace with others but were attacked despite of all they offered to the country. This is mirrored through any text books on GCSE History you read.

JC;
OK

You;
Blah, I can't be bothered arguing for a lost cause, but will simply leave you with the advice to look at the bigger picture. Are we in the west not pillaging and bring the destruction we feel here, UPON MILLIONS abroad? In wars, WE shouldn't even be in?

JC;
Examples?


IRAQ, AFGHANISTAN? The Iraqi deathtoll is in its millions, and yet you sit here and argue that the MINORITY of Muslims is doing the same sort of problem to us? Bull****, again. The majority live in peace, and it is only the minority which the media continues to defame and so, we believe it.

JC;
Iraqis are generally killed by other Iraqis my friend, the Britsh and American forces were asked to intervene after the Northern Alliance over throw the Dictator and wanted to hold elections, DEMOCRATIC ELECTIONS. Contrary to what you may know the western forces try to limit the civilians caught killed unlike the people who would fight them.
The Northern Alliance were afraid they would be unable to hold elections because the "minority" of peace loving Muslims were trying to impose a barbaric interpretation of Sharia. And where are the majority of Muslims against violent Jihad protests, I quite often see the "you don't have the right to free speech" protests.

It's people like you, and any idiot with half their sense submerged in a profound sense of omniscient fueled ignorance who perpetuate a problem, creating it to prolong...

JC;
Really I thought it was the special concessions being made to a religious group which has bloody borders all over the world that was the problem, and, people like you who see a Jihadists say "I love death more than you love life" then commit suicide and whitewash it as propaganda. A small percentage of 1.6 billion people are suicidal mass murders, that could be allot of mass murders.



Consider both sides, history, why? and then re-evaluate.

JC;
I would encourage you to take a walk around certain no go areas at night exercising you right to do things Muslims otherwise wouldn't do and see the problem for yourself.

And what do you suggest we do?

David Cameron himself said that multiculturalism has failed, and i've not seen much recently, from the current government, which promotes multiculturalism. Am I missing something? Since Cameron said this, I got the impression that multiculturalism HAS 'stopped':

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12371994

As much as you may dislike it, most countries in the world will one day be multicultural. Take into account how easy it is to move around. It's rather inevitable, unless you pull a North Korea and lock all your citizens up so nobody can enter/leave.

Where is your evidence that most Iraqis are being killed by other Iraqis? The fact remains there were no bombs going off in Iraq before the war, also the US is the patron of Saddams (even Thatcher famously said, "Saddam, a true ally of the west") and fought to keep him in power after the first gulf war. Not only that, 75% of all of Iraqs oil has been pillaged by the west!

In other words, you want us to remove people of other cultures from this society? Are you solving a problem or making it worse?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/23/world/middleeast/23casualties.html?_r=0

There were also no elections, they over threw the dictatorship that was murdering people on mass. There were plenty of bombs going off before the war, hell aside from killing tens of thousands of Kurds he also attacked Iran. And as for Thatcher's political motivations, well, I could speculate but I don't know.

Piss off you idiot

No, I would like it if we integrated. But I am not proposing a solution, just that we recognize there is a problem.

There were also no elections, they over threw the dictatorship that was murdering people on mass.

There were plenty of bombs going off before the war,

hell aside from killing tens of thousands of Kurds he also attacked Iran

And as for Thatcher's political motivations, well, I could speculate but I don't know.

No other group has ever done such a thing after immigrating, how dare they! how dare our government!


..And Immediately your stance is shown, as connoted with the language use, ooh-ahh, English Literature has become useful...

Digressing to the point, this is a lopsided argument. Multiculturalism, whilst it can breed violence, poses an array of benefits. What's more, many of the people here under the premise of multiculturalism aided this very country in the post war years GREATLY. Stemming from this, multiculturalism itself, albeit with a few flaws, worked well in the 1960s and continues to do so. I have friends of all races, backgrounds, creeds and the school I attend is diverse. Society itself only works with such a feat as an inherent component; doctors, nurses, engineers, you name it, an academic pursuit you can think of, will most likely be pursued by the minority(yes, they are the minority) in the majority. Thus, they(those who partake in said 'multiculturalism') form a great and inherent aspect of our economy. THE VERY REASON WHY WE HAVE MULTICULTURALISM IS THIS COUNTRY WOULD HAVE SEIZED TO BE PROSPEROUS IN ANY MANNER WITHOUT THE INFLUX OF IMMIGRANTS TO FILL LABOUR SHORTAGES AND FIX THE ECONOMY.(Soz 4 caps, cba re-typing) So, you're arguing what, we send home, what? 2nd, 3rd generations of people from other cultures? People who had forefathers building the very foundations of society we live? Bull****, I say. And to that, I also say that your use of the minority of a sect's wrong doing to be a claim which is biased and untrue as a majority.

On top of this, the very reason some of those people are here are due to the exact and opposite reason today. The British Empire. Do you know how Kenyan Asians arrived in the country? Upon the abolishing of slavery, Indian migrants were moved to parts of Africa by British Companies for work, under schemes no better than slavery! Fast forward 100 years, these people are persecuted in the very areas the British have left them, and as a consequence, in the late 1960s, Kenyan Asians were forced out, so to speak, to England, and Ugandan Asians were simply expelled (50,000 of them) in 1972 by Idi Amin. Now, you're wondering why I'm including this. No?

(Well, I have a History exam tomorrow, but more to the point, it serves a purpose)

It shows that British influence in History had a great affect on countries as part of its Empire, some of which are resonated with your claims of injustice, but regardless of this fact - many immigrants came to Britain, stayed, and lived in peace with others but were attacked despite of all they offered to the country. This is mirrored through any text books on GCSE History you read.

Blah, I can't be bothered arguing for a lost cause, but will simply leave you with the advice to look at the bigger picture. Are we in the west not pillaging and bring the destruction we feel here, UPON MILLIONS abroad? In wars, WE shouldn't even be in?

IRAQ, AFGHANISTAN? The Iraqi deathtoll is in its millions, and yet you sit here and argue that the MINORITY of Muslims is doing the same sort of problem to us? Bull****, again. The majority live in peace, and it is only the minority which the media continues to defame and so, we believe it.

It's people like you, and any idiot with half their sense submerged in a profound sense of omniscient fueled ignorance who perpetuate a problem, creating it to prolong...

Consider both sides, history, why? and then re-evaluate.

Conflict derives from having separated societies, the closer the proximity of said societies the more likely violence is. If you have them running parallel to one another within a country it's asking for violence, which is pretty much what multiculturalism means.

Back when immigration was just among European countries the big word was integration, even with communist countries like China etc. the word was still integration. But as soon as the borders opened to Islamic theocracies the word multiculturalism came into play, because these people were never going to integrate. You could argue their non-integration was because there weren't proper measures put into place to deal with the large numbers, rather than saying it was a complete unwillingness on their part if you like..... it seems a mute point.

We have Sharia courts in the UK, separate banking systems, benefits changes with polygamy in mind etc. etc.

No other group has ever done such a thing after immigrating, how dare they! how dare our government!

Imagine you immigrated to another country, say Saudi Arabia, I would like to think you would do your utmost to adopt their culture and obey their laws (if not just because your life depends on it). You wouldn't go there and say "yeah, your country needs to change to fit my wants"....... "it needs to be more Christian orientated in some aspects". It would be insulting to your hosts, giving special treatment to any religious group is unfair let alone second generation immigrants.


There is a rise in right wing groups in every country Muslims immigrate too like (but not limited to) the EDL, the Golden Dawn, The 969 Buddhists!!! (They are so intolerant of their hosts culture that they even cause a right wing break away sect in Buddhism).
These far right groups are a response, these people live on the front line of a multicultural society and the government whitewashes their grievances while pandering to the ideology of immigrants. There are no-go areas/immigrant ghettos popping up all over Europe were non-Muslims dare not live.
Muslim pedophile gangs that target non-Muslims girls are almost a bimonthly event now in the UK, every other week there is news of a foiled terrorist attack by Muslims in Europe with annual successes, riots in Stockholm etc.etc.

Our government is failing them and us, Multiculturalism breeds violence and this has to stop.

Most of the conflict multiculturalism causes is on the internet.

Lots of cities in the UK are multicultural and you hardly ever hear of race based conflict. Yes you get the odd march here and there from the EDL and their counter marches but it has not even scratching the surface in terms of ethnic groups coming in to conflict with each other.

Ever since Enoch Powell and his rivers of blood speech the far right has been predicting race war, TSR is always full of predictions that there's going to be a 'race war in Europe'. What they really mean is the far right groups want a race war but they have only minority support in the white community, most white people are pretty chilled out about multiculturalism and don't care about the colour of someone else's skin. Hence why the far right always bemoan the fact "we're not allowed to talk about race because we'll get called racists", they are a minority in their own community just like the Islamic fundamentalists only have minority support in their community.

Multiculturalism does cause a lot of arguments on the internet betwee far right whites and other whites, with one group shouting "leftists" and the other group shouting "racists" but this is not rivers of blood in the street between whites and non whites....