Euros only pls - integration or multiculturalism ??

[Sparks]

** Pls Lazs and others - we ALL know your views on pansy left wing Europe etc etc etc - I'm curious how Euros see this in our immigration environment **

For those of us Euros on this BBS, in another thread this quote from GWB's speech caught my eye

The success of our country depends upon helping newcomers assimilate into our society, and embrace our common identity as Americans. Americans are bound together by our shared ideals, an appreciation of our history, respect for the flag we fly, and an ability to speak and write the English language. English is also the key to unlocking the opportunity of America. English allows newcomers to go from picking crops to opening a grocery, from cleaning offices to running offices, from a life of low-paying jobs to a diploma, a career, and a home of their own. When immigrants assimilate and advance in our society, they realize their dreams, they renew our spirit, and they add to the unity of America.

I believe if a european had said this in public (certainly in the UK) he/she would have been branded a nationalist racist.  I however believe it is the founding principle of successful immigration anywhere. I am an integrationalist. Multiculturalism makes no sense to me.  Most of us see the USA as a model of sucessful immigration (LEGAL immigration that is) so why do we insist that in Europe we try to maintain cultural patchworks that fuel conflict ??  France made a step towards integration and Holland have moved that way - why do we see it as racist ??
What say you ??

[CyranoAH]

Integration all the way. I don't know if it "works", but, IMO, if you go to someone's home, you follow their rules, not the other way around.

Daniel

[Nilsen]

I am all for forcing immigrants to learn our language, respect our culture, obey our laws and set their own culture and ways below ours on their agenda. If not they can take the first flight out. We can even afford to pay their airfare back to were they came from.

That beeing said, we should respect them and their ways as long as they follow the above. We have learned and adopted some very good things by beeing open to knowledge and culture of our new countrymen.

If I go to far-away-i-stan to get help I would be thankful and not demand everything from A to Z from my new hosts.

[Fishu]

I can hardly believe that was said by GWB, because I can agree with most of it and that's how I'd like it done over here. The only thing I don't agree is the part about "appreciation of our history", as it sounds rather strictly said, as if it is something utmost important. I'd rather have immigrants appreciate our culture, which is more important than history. At least when it comes to assimilating someone into a society.
I'm tired of having to adapt into foreign cultures only because we're taking immigrants here and not bothering to assimilate them into OUR society (because it's somehow bad to alter someones culturality, EXCEPT the majority's). If someone comes here, they better also be prepared to live like us and not expect us to make way to their demands because of their culturality. That's how I do it myself too; if I'd go to stay abroad for a while I'd try to respect the local culture, instead of demanding absurd amount of respect for mine.

[storch]

the thread might be constured as a troll to begin with sir.  

[Sparks]

Interesting that you guys seem to think integration is the way when it is so Politically Incorrect in todays Europe.  As I said I am a firm believer in integration.
Cyrano - what is the Spanish government policy ? Multi cultural or Integration ??

As far as history of the host nation - I actually think it is an important aspect of integration.  To understand a country you need to know it's past, how it became what it is now. To become a part of a society you need accept it's roots. (There's a better way of putting it but I can't find it right now ....)

[Boroda]

Originally posted by Nilsen
I am all for forcing immigrants to learn our language, respect our culture, obey our laws and set their own culture and ways below ours on their agenda. If not they can take the first flight out. We can even afford to pay their airfare back to were they came from.

That beeing said, we should respect them and their ways as long as they follow the above.

Couldn't say better.

There is a popular/hated slogan: Russia is for Russians (meaning Russians by nationality). I'd add: Russia is for Russians, and for those who agree with it. I am sick of the media that makes me think that I am a third-class foscist intolerant Russian nationalist scum for saying that. I am not going to study great Chechen culture and follow Shariat laws so the newcomers will feel better.

Damn, tolerastic attitude: when a Tajik drug-dealing family is attacked - it's  foscism, when a Russian girl is raped and killed by our guests from sunny Caucasus - it's OK. I am not going to be tolearant, IMHO "foscism" is better then such "tolerance".

[Hangtime]

Excellent thread.

Seems that from our perspective over here in the land of plenty (of illegal immigrants) PC speak and 'blind eye' permissiveness of law-breaking immigration over the course of the last 25 years has netted us one heluva problem.

Further.. we've seen both sides of the coin of frevrent 'nationalisim'.. by many here considered to be the root of many wars in europe over the past couple of hundred years. It would seem that many in Europe felt the same way; for awile it seemed that 'nationalisim' was suborned to the concept of forming a European Union.

How stands the current state of the Union? Has it become a 'trade' concept and less of a goal of a unified European Governemnt? Or, was the economic unity goal the prime effort?

[Replicant]

It all comes down to definition.  I mean I'm generally in favour of intergration but I can identify with some multiculturalism beliefs.  I have no objection to current Commonwealth nationals integrating within the UK and also maintaining some of their cultural beliefs.  For me it's a fine balance but ultimately they must follow their host nations laws and not be critical of their religious and cultural views.  Having said that I do appreciate what they can offer as well.  The problem is that those that don't integrate can bring an 'us and them' situation which, as you mention, can fuel hatred and distrust.  The same is happening here in Germany with the Turkish population.

Additionally the UK being made up of provences must retain their individual culture by definition to maintain a happy and successful Nation (e.g. Welsh language being taught in schools which over 20 years ago was very rare.  They're still integrating but also increasing their own cultural beliefs/history).

[Sparks]

Hang - first for not turning this into a US bashing Euro fest.
I think integration of immigrant population when considered in the bigger frame of the European Union is kind of double sided.

In terms of the open borders immigration caused by the EU and the right of freedom to work / live anywhere in the EU, then I think the debate is less about multi-cultural[/b] integration and much more about economic integration, language and the expansion of eastern block mafia gangs. I think that the concept was initially a "Federal Europe" but increasingly, due to the economic impact and the perception of increased criminality, we are seeing caused by rapid  EU expansion, individual nations are revising their outlook to slightly more trade based. Culturally we tend to integrate well but economically not so well and the cross border law enforcement structures are not sufficiently developed..

In terms of global immigration into the individual EU countries then we all seem to be seeing the same problems - and in that respect we are moving toward a more "Federal" approach. The problem is that the legal standards set by the European parliment of insisting on trying to maintain vastly different ,and often opposing, cultures side by side seems to be  at odds with the 'man on the street' and in my opinion are driving us all in Europe towards the same cliff edge.  We are tending to become very nationalistic in reaction to this and we are in danger of sucking in  the economic problems of Euro integration into the multi-cultural integration debate simply because it's an "immigration problem".

[Hangtime]

Do you see the Corporate Intrests as fueling the 'blending' of borders and economies? If so, what's their modus operendi? Here, they hide behind the Politicians who mouth platitudes for the people while quietly selling out the Nation.

Same there?

[straffo]

Originally posted by Sparks
[BI believe if a european had said this in public (certainly in the UK) he/she would have been branded a nationalist racist.  [/B]

I think it is.

I however believe it is the founding principle of successful immigration anywhere. [/B]

Well it's part of it but GW speech taste like something we already heard in the past ...

I am an integrationalist. Multiculturalism makes no sense to me. [/B]

? you lost me ,except if their assimilationism is an equivalent of integrationalist
I can't translate this sentence.

[Boroda]

Originally posted by Replicant
It all comes down to definition.  I mean I'm generally in favour of intergration but I can identify with some multiculturalism beliefs.  I have no objection to current Commonwealth nationals integrating within the UK and also maintaining some of their cultural beliefs.  For me it's a fine balance but ultimately they must follow their host nations laws and not be critical of their religious and cultural views.  Having said that I do appreciate what they can offer as well.  The problem is that those that don't integrate can bring an 'us and them' situation which, as you mention, can fuel hatred and distrust.  The same is happening here in Germany with the Turkish population.

Russia is a "multicultural" country from this point of view. We have dozens of national republics, that have their official languages (along with Russian), local constitutions, laws etc. And in USSR population of Soviet Republics didn't have to learn Russian at all, they did it because Russian is a "language of international communication" and they couldn't make a career at the level of the whole Union.

But I live in Central Russia, and I doubt that anyone appealing to Moscow city authorities in Tatar language will be understood. I'll have some problems in Tatarstan, probably less chances to get elected or get a government administrative job, but still their officials have to officially recognize Russian language. Not because Russians are a "master race" (in fact we are the most opressed nation in the Union and now in RF), but because if a Buryat will come to Kazan' - he needs some language to communicate...

BTW, Yakut Republic officially declared English as their third language after Yakut and Russian, they call it "business language".

More then 10% of Moscow population now are Azerbaijanians, we have 1.5 million Azeris, compare it to 3.5M in Azerbaijan - but I hope I'll not have to study Azeri language.

[lazs2]

See Rule #5, #2

[Nilsen]

nobody cares about it lazs

go shoot something