Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Sparks on May 16, 2006, 11:33:39 AM
-
** 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 ??
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
the thread might be constured as a troll to begin with sir. :D
-
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 ....)
-
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".
-
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?
-
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).
-
Hang - first :aok 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".
-
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?
-
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.
-
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.
-
See Rule #5, #2
-
nobody cares about it lazs
go shoot something
:D
-
Hang, it's a bit off topic but Corporate Europe basically ignores borders other than for tax purposes. The early expansion of the EU very conveniently opened up a huge low pay / high skill workforce at a time when competition with China was and is ramping up. Major Corporations are basically no longer nationally based (e.g. Shell, EADS, Thales etc etc). Banking is now Europe wide. In the immigration debate they couldn't care less as long as low pay workers are released into the system to fuel pressure on lowering pay / benefits etc. Certainly corporations pull the economic strings that make politicians move. The figures speak for themselves ... while the government in the UK hits headlines for a £500 million[/b] deficit in the National Heath Service BP announce a £19 BILLION[/b] profit (less than Shell btw but they are dutch) and EADS runs 553 million Euro profit on 6.9 Billion turnover ......... you tell me where the power is.
Straffo - interesting you label GWB's speech as racist and nationalist while France is one of the prime movers in keeping it's national identity intact - even to the level of insisting other EU nations fund the maintenanace of French cultural identity ?? So what is assimilation while keeping external cultures intact ?
Replicant / Boroda, absolutely within a nation there are cultural differences but I would argue they are a part of the national identity not contrary to it and in conflict with it and others while trying to coexist ??
-
I believe if a european had said this in public (certainly in the UK) he/she would have been branded a nationalist racist.
over here in Holland there was one "Pym Fortuin"
He was the one that really started the dutch talking about immigration/intergration,
He was on the way to becoming the next prime minister till he got assasinated
The goverment of Holland has (due to popular demand) implemented a
strong Immigration/Intergration policy
up to the point where a member of parliment has been stripped of her nationality
for lying on her application for dutch citizenship (she's on her way to america YOUR welcome to her).
As a Brit living in Holland i'm all for it I chose to live in Holland so I should be the one
to intergate into the Dutch Culture,
and if the dutch don't think i'm doing enough then they have the right to kick me out.
-
Originally posted by Sparks
Hang, it's a bit off topic but Corporate Europe basically ignores borders other than for tax purposes. The early expansion of the EU very conveniently opened up a huge low pay / high skill workforce at a time when competition with China was and is ramping up. Major Corporations are basically no longer nationally based (e.g. Shell, EADS, Thales etc etc). Banking is now Europe wide. In the immigration debate they couldn't care less as long as low pay workers are released into the system to fuel pressure on lowering pay / benefits etc. Certainly corporations pull the economic strings that make politicians move. The figures speak for themselves ... while the government in the UK hits headlines for a £500 million deficit in the National Heath Service BP announce a £19 BILLION[/b] profit (less than Shell btw but they are dutch) and EADS runs 553 million Euro profit on 6.9 Billion turnover ......... you tell me where the power is.
[/B]
LOL! thanks, Sparks! I suspected as much; wasn't sure if you folks saw the same BS corporate playbook in operation we're seeing here. My guess.. inside 50 years we'll see corporations emerge from behind the skirts of the national politicians they control and the end of 'nationalisim'.
Looks like we're all in this together... and, I don't see any way to stop it.
-
and people wonder why we stay out of the EU..
.. and just as many wonder why we do..
Personally it would not affect me either way ( my workforce is, and will always be norwegian until we close down in 2013)
My next job (already started) will work good both ways.
If i think ouside my own sphere then the EU is bad for the present norwegian lifestyle, but ___perhaps___ good in the long run. Ill be dead by that time, but my daughter and grandkids (if she gets any) will know.
Yes... i have positioned myself in a way that will ensure my future whatever happens. Im hoping that my taxes and votes gets me what i want for free anyway, but if it doesnt, i have funds set aside to make it happen anyway.,
-
Originally posted by Hangtime
LOL! thanks, Sparks! I suspected as much; wasn't sure if you folks saw the same BS corporate playbook in operation we're seeing here. My guess.. inside 50 years we'll see corporations emerge from behind the skirts of the national politicians they control and the end of 'nationalisim'.
Looks like we're all in this together... and, I don't see any way to stop it.
You know Hang, it is funny.
Unions gave us workers rights, and then the government made much of what they fought for federal law. Now unions in the US are dying and the American worker is being left behind for cheap labor in china and mexico.
The union protections and government ones are driving corps away. (for some legit reasons and non legit reasons depending on your point of view)
Sounds like something like that is taking place in Europe, but instead of going to china or mexica they are going to eastern europe.
It is interesting, the way worker protection laws in western nations seem to be failing because the workers they protected are being put out of work by cheap rightless workers in poor nations with no protections.
Will we see these countries unionise as time goes by? Or will demand for their cheap work cause the prices to go up and balance things out? Or will their governments step in and try and protect their people? ( fat chance on that last one). Or will the revolt and go Commie?
Its like most western nations have taken huge steps in workers rights, but are now throwing them away and oppressing the people in these nations that supply the cheap labor... Kinda Ironic.
Interesting thread though.
-
See Rule #4
-
Which countries in Europe are part of the EU and which are not? I thought the UK was part but they did not want to change thier currency to the Ecru(SP??) new Europien currency. Why is that?? I lived in Germany for 8 years and I will say the new currency hasnt gone over that well there. My in-laws still complain about it. Just a question anyways...
-
Integration in the UK is a dirty word, multi culturalism is the way forward according to our politicians. Although our current politicians despise England and its traditions and multi culturalism suits their aims very well.
wipass
-
Norway, Iceland and Switzerland are the only countries in western europe that are outside the EU
see map:
(http://www.ezilon.com/eu_countries_europe.jpg)
-
Originally posted by asilvia
I thought the UK was part but they did not want to change thier currency to the Ecru(SP??) new Europien currency. Why is that?? I lived in Germany for 8 years and I will say the new currency hasnt gone over that well there. My in-laws still complain about it. Just a question anyways...
The currency is euro. The reasons why people complain about it is because they believe it has caused inflation. In reality the reason for inflation was gouging and lack of competition.
-
Hi Sparks!
This topic is generally not one to get me going, but having grown up in a large Midlands city with a huge immigrant population, I thought I'd throw in my 2p.
Back in the 1960s when I was at school, already a large proportion of my city was inhabited by Asians, who had started coming over just after the war. In my school, the classes were "streamed" according to ability. Even back in 1964 we had entire classes composed of Asians. Regrettably this was because they were in the bottom level having been unable to take the assessment tests because they could not speak English. In the school yard at break time, they tended to stick together. They didn't mess with us, and we didn't mess with them. They were law abiding in their communities, and there was never any trouble. Most of these were Indians, with names like Singh and Patel, and one assumes they were Hindu, not Muslim. They were a valuable asset to the community. Indeed, the Leicester Corporation bus service would have been at a standstill without them.
Things changed more recently, with another wave of immigrants who imported their culture and built mosques. Often these mosques popped up in such a way as to encroach upon established white middle class areas, much to the chagrin of the people living there, who found their house prices devalued. It seems to be this group from which "Muslim Extremism" has stemmed. There have been racial clashes, and in recent local elections, a large swathe of disaffected working class voters indigenous to Britain voted for the British National Party, which is calling for an immediate halt to all further immigration. See the BNP policy statement: http://www.bnp.org.uk/policies/policies.htm
The third group is composed of caucasians, which means it is easier for them to blend in. Since the EU expanded to take in countries like Poland and Latvia, there has been considerable immigration to Britain from those countries and others like them. The difference here is that these people are more readily accepted. They don't try to import their culture in such a way as to encroach upon the indigenous population, they get jobs which other people might not be inclined to do, and they work damned hard. This group also includes South Africans who, despite having certain privileges that they cannot enjoy here (winks at Lazs) choose to come anyway to escape the high levels of crime in their own country. Many of these are descended from British grandparents, so they have legal right of entry to Britain. The South Africans who come here are also very hard working. Originally posted by asilvia
Which countries in Europe are part of the EU and which are not? I thought the UK was part but they did not want to change thier currency to the Ecru(SP??) new Europien currency. Why is that?? I lived in Germany for 8 years and I will say the new currency hasnt gone over that well there. My in-laws still complain about it. Just a question anyways...
A google search would have given you the answer. Here, I've done it for you: http://europa.eu/abc/governments/index_en.htm
Norway is the most notable exception. You're right, and the UK did not switch to the single European currency. The other two that didn't were Denmark and Sweden. Part of the problem in Germany is that they cannot fix interest rates to be able to stimulate their economy. They're stuck with whatever interest rate is mandated by Brussels. Another major problem for Germany is of course their reunification costs.
Why didn't Britain adopt the Euro? Possibly because of the disastrous ERM (exchange rate mechanism) experiment of the early 1990s. Too long to go into here.
-
I am (getting closer to "I was") for multi-culturalism. London is the place where I've seen this work... then again, every person I met there spoke english.
*- Now to be honnest, the ammount of "non-integrate*" foreigners in Belgium/France is reaching a point I'm not too hot for. there are some areas where you won't see a commercial banner or shop name in french or dutch...all that's is left is arabic or turkish. That, I don't feel too comfortable with. I no longer live in Belgium, and there is no immigration per-se where I live now...immigration laws are tougher than Switzerland here...so I don't live with that issue on a day to day basis. Doesn't look better whenever I go down there though.
Regarding the "they are staling my job" part... I'm not in a niche where that happens , if you are, you should have studied a bit longer.
*-> maybe I'm just getting older.
-
Well so far those Euro residents who have expressed an opinion are tending toward integraton and yet our legislative politicians in Brussells and in our home nations - who we voted for - are pursueing a multi-cultural agenda ???
This is the sort of thimking I don't understand:-
It is all about proportion, immigrants should master the language, culture and habits of their new country but they can and probably should preserve a large part of their own cultural identity. As a rule of thumb, they should adopt everything that is required to function within our society, how far they will integrate further is entrely up to them and their environment.
So an immigrant should only have to learn enough to function economicaly in their new country but otherwise can live in a "Little Pakistan / China / Mexico". ? These are not immigrants but Economic Migrants - transients.
My feeling is that people emmigrate to improve their lives and future. By definition that means their country of origin has failed - the culture they live in has failed to generate a life they can live. Conversly the country they are emmigrating to - with a different culture - has succeeded in providing the lifestyle they aspire to. Is it surprising then that the nationals of the host country feel threatened when immigrants try to install a failed culture and lifestyle in their prosperous backyard and have the acceptance of it forced upon them.
Add to that the national conflicts that people then bring with them and trouble is garaunteed. In my home town the main gang wars are not now black v white but Kurd v Pakistan , Turk v Kurd etc. Following the current global conflicts.
If you compare the situations in the US and Europe:-
The US has immigration laws which effectively rule out econmic migration - you want to live there legally you emmigrate and integrate. However illegal economic migration has been allowed by failure to act and now the problem is too big to handle.
Europe through slack immigration laws has made economic migration possible legally and now we are in the situation of what to do with an out of control economic migration.
We both have problems of a non integrated population but at least the law is on the integration side in the US.
-
Originally posted by Hangtime
LOL! thanks, Sparks! I suspected as much; wasn't sure if you folks saw the same BS corporate playbook in operation we're seeing here. My guess.. inside 50 years we'll see corporations emerge from behind the skirts of the national politicians they control and the end of 'nationalisim'.
Looks like we're all in this together... and, I don't see any way to stop it.
Dude... the future is Rollerball (the James Caan version). ;)
-
Ok... I know I'm not supposed to but....
How can you not have multiculturalism if you have a EU? Seems that you are going to have to accept not only language but customs and even laws of countries that have nothing to do with your traditions or founding.
lazs
-
Lazs, most countries in Europe have a common past and more things in common than Europe as a whole with the countries from the magreb, india, pakistan, or any islamic country.
Daniel
-
Within the EU yes there are multiple cultures but still defined within the nation boundaries - that is not the same. What we are talking about here is integration of people on an individual level into communities. If I as an Englishman moved to Germany I would expect to have to adjust my lifestyle to the German culture, not set up a mini England and gather like minded English round me to form our own English state in bavaria. The French are fiercely protective of their national culture - currently at the expense of other EU nations (but that's another story).
As far as laws go in the EU - I never said I liked or agreed with the European Parliament or the idea of a Federal Europe and I think it is bad for Europe. A better bet would be a free trade area. Norway and Iceland have the right idea.
-
It's not a matter of race, ethnicity or religion to me. I'm a pragmatist and whatever works is good.
When I am a guest, I follow the house rules. When I am living on someone elses charity, same thing, except I'll feel an obligation to assist in any way I can.
When I have guests, I make sure they follow mine. I do not allow them to redecorate my living room. Beer, food and snacks are free, but if they're consistently mooching, they're not getting a re-invite. If they take a dump and don't clean their mess, I'll remind them. If they forget again - out the door no re-invite til they understand I am serious about the rules.
Whine about the mess and I tell you to clean it up if it bothers you. Whine again without doing anything and I show you the door.
The only thing I *need* to tolerate in my own place is my neighbors. My place, my rules. If you think they stink - fine by me, you don't have to come.
If I am elected prime minister, I'll push for the same rules for the country I was born in. I don't give a damn about race, culture whathaveyou. Be courteous, do your best to pull your weight and I'll do my best to be the perfect host, helping where I can. I won't suffer lazy complaining parasites though - no matter who they are.
Of course, bleeding-hearts will call this "hidden racism". And it is, in the sense that it includes all races, targetted on the level of the individual.
-
so how is that different from what we want here in the states? We want to have free trade with mexico but we want to speak our own language and to have all permanent residents be legal and to be loyal to the United States.. we want them to go through the citizenship routine and speak the language or not be allowed to live here.
Once a citizen they are free to practice the customs of their former country (along with those of the new) and add to our culture. You can't disallow a mexican resturant with mexican decorations on the walls for instance.... and wouldn't want to..
You shouldn't allow them to hire illegal aliens tho or to be citizens who can't speak their countries language.
We have parades for the Irish and the Italian and Mexican and whatever... no big deal.... milky white Americans drinking mexican beer and wearing a sombrero for a day that is a mexican national holliday is a good thing.
a ghetto where everyone only speaks spanish and no one knows how to read the language of the country they are in or abides by that countries laws is a bad thing.
It's pretty black and white and easy to figure if you are realistic about it.
laz
-
I guess a good example would be the guy who immigrated from Scotland and flies and American flag at his home... His business is a scottish meat pie resteraunt with all the paraphanalia.
He does not drive on the left side of the road when he leaves tho.
lazs
-
If you re-read my starting post Lazs I say that it is generally recognized that the US is the model for sucessful legal immigration - so no it isn't any different but that was my point of asking the question to my fellow Euro's "why then do some of our lawmakers believe multi-culturalism is the better way?" - to the point of labelling those who believe in integration racists.
This isn't a US - Euro debate - the argument question would have been the same if the sucessful model was Wonkaland..
Interesting points you raise though about parades etc. I agree the mexican who sets up a national restaurant with national theme within the broader collection of other restaurants is a good thing. A nationally based parade to celebrate a national holiday of the origin country ? Where do you draw the line ? Why not the building of a monument to celebrate it ? Asking for a national public holiday for those of Mexican descent ?
How about St Patrick's day parades ? Harmless ? But perhaps the commercialism that has grown aorund them masks the small non-integrated Irish communities (which for other nationals would be labelled ghettos) in various cities. Communities closed to outside eyes who have been able to fund foreign terrorist organisations without law enforcement action because those same communities took control of the agencies who would stop them - maybe not so harmless and maybe these parades fire up dormant nationalism which is the fuel of conflict. If the Israeli community had a parade to celebrate the victory of the 7-Day war do you think that would promote good relations with the Arabic community or fuel divisions? In Europe we already see nationally based events fuleing inter-community violence - a clip from my local paper race violence (http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=845&ArticleID=828434)
I am not raising the point as sticking the finger up to the US as saying it's failed but to highlight that even in the success story the line between integration and multi-culturalism can be broken. Once broken it's hard to repair.
In my home town an Indian festival that was once a small local affair now has public park space, policing, carparking arrangements provided by the city council. If I want to fly the English flag outside my house on St George's day I'm a racist.
I think people who are thinking of emmigrating look on it too lightly - it is a big decision - you need to make your detination country home and consider it yours, not just a temporary place to stop while you earn some good money.
-
Sparks, I think you will find there are few non integrated Irish ghettos in the US, if any. That time is long gone. Any more than there are Irish ghettos in the UK. Paddy's day is way past any triumphalist celebration of Irishness and in fact if anything has been Americanised and internationalised. In fact it's and excellent example of positive multiculturalism as anyone can celebrate the day.
Like the British the Irish long since integrated into the US culture. Your point is good though even though the example is bad.
You mention the Indians too but in fact they and the Chinese seem in general to have found the right balance. Both have kept their culture but often are fully integrated into the country they live in. In a way it's inevitable, they're not white and are alway subject to some racism so their original identity is always preserved. The children of European immigrants simply merge with the rest.
I always believe immigrants should integrate into the country they live in. By all means celebrate their culture but you have to try and adapt to the ways of the country you live in. It applys both ways. I know of many Irish and British who move to Spain to live for example and never bother to learn much more than Pidgin Spanish. It cuts both ways.
Multiculturalism has been given a bad name because of some of the absurdities often highlighted but there is nothing wrong with it as long as it's not imposed on the host country.
I think in truth though, is the this issue is as much to do with the rise of Islam and Islamism. That is where the real clash is. An intolerant religion clashing with a tolerant society. That is the real problem for Europe in general.
By the way the title of this thread 'Euros only'. Isn't that a bit intolerant? I mean this is an American forum. Where is the integration?:rolleyes:
-
sparks... I thought I was sticking to the subject and not making it a U.S. vs euro arguement.
I simply have more experiance with the way we do it.... good and bad.
The answer to some of your questions is.... parade? good. National recognized holliday or statue... bad. It is not difficult to draw the line..
You want a statue? How bout a statue or painting or mural of immigration? we have those... No problem.... turn it into a statue of some national hero of another country and it becomes a bad thing.
A memorial to the brave souls who fought in WWII should not be about the enemy even tho some people (immigrants) may be of that ancestry.... they need to feel proud that as Americans (in this example) we kicked the crap out of their relatives.
I think that once the immigrant feels he is a citizen and loyal to the country he chose... that is the real success... if he still feels that his loyalty should be divided.... he needs to leave and go figure it out some more.
nothing wrong with still likeing the food of your ancestors... good for everyone..... divided loyalty? well that is another thing.
simple stuff in my opinion.
An American who is of mexican decent should be outraged when mexican illegals (in this case as example) put down his country of the U.S. If they aren't then they are not welcome.
lazs
-
I have European ancestors, can I post? I think this guy makes some interesting points related to the topic.
http://rantwraith.blogspot.com/2005/11/coming-of-eurabian-civil-war.html