|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
 Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 12:05 am Post subject: Enlightenment fundamentalism 4or racism of the anti-racists? |
 |
|
4444
Last edited by thepeel on Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:00 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 12:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Okay, I used my scanning powers to give you a response, BJWD. I do believe in multi-culturalism to some extent in terms you should tolerate immigrants, but they must assimilate to the target culture i.e. the Canadian culture and Canadians must be aware of the cultural problems pertaining to the various groups immigrating whether they are from Mexico, Chile, Somalia, or Lebanon. The government should be quite selective of who comes into the country, because, I do believe, as you said that though we may be tolerant those who are the target of toleration in many cases are often very intolerant. It doesn't mean we should be like them, though. That's my take.
By Horatio Severus, that was as long as the River Tiber!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
beck's
Joined: 02 Aug 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 2:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
I also scanned BJWD's article. I believe in multiculturalism as long as it benefits the target culture. Certainly, the western nations have benefited from immigration as it pertains to food and music and art and so forth. I think that we would all agree that middle eastern food has enriched all of our bellies and that there is nothing that compares with a delicious curry while listening to sitar music in the background.
However, when the immigrant culture consistantly disrespects the target culture then it's time to call a halt. Western culture is based on pluralism, individual rights, gender equality, rule of law, gender equality and rationalism as defined by the enlightenment to name just a few rocks in the foundation of our civilization. All mankind can benefit from western values.
Western nations must strictly cut off all immigration from cultural groups who cannot or will not respect our fundemental values. Furthermore, immigrants who are already in the west and who show that they cannot or will not accept our values must be deported. We must do this to protect our values and way of life. Not to do so is to commit cultural suicide. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 2:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| beck's wrote: |
I also scanned BJWD's article. I believe in multiculturalism as long as it benefits the target culture. Certainly, the western nations have benefited from immigration as it pertains to food and music and art and so forth. I think that we would all agree that middle eastern food has enriched all of our bellies and that there is nothing that compares with a delicious curry while listening to sitar music in the background.
However, when the immigrant culture consistantly disrespects the target culture then it's time to call a halt. Western culture is based on pluralism, individual rights, gender equality, rule of law, gender equality and rationalism as defined by the enlightenment to name just a few rocks in the foundation of our civilization. All mankind can benefit from western values.
Western nations must strictly cut off all immigration from cultural groups who cannot or will not respect our fundemental values. Furthermore, immigrants who are already in the west and who show that they cannot or will not accept our values must be deported. We must do this to protect our values and way of life. Not to do so is to commit cultural suicide. |
What kind of Middle Eastern food do you like, en passant? I like kebas, hummus, kofta, ful, falafel. Curry is not really Middle Eastern. It is associated with India. I was surprised to find out that curry actually originated in England, believe it or not. Anyway, back to what you were saying, and I agree with you.
I do think we have to consider that certain cultures can have a large percentage of the population who are so different from the target culture.
For example, not to sound prejudiced, Mexicans commit a higher percentage of crimes than say Argentinians another immigrant group or Americans and Canadians who are viewed as the target group to assimilate those coming to their countries.
Does it mean Mexicans should be cut off? Some say yes with that wall, but it is not really a no since they are trying to regulate things for cultural stability and are looking at the integrity of the target culture. The same with dealing with those from the Middle East. A much larger percentage are religious when compared to both Canadians and Americans. Secularism is much weaker. Of course, there are moderates, but one must not accept immigrants whole-sale from the Middle East without trying to select those one would think would be moderate by looking at their education, references or whatever can be looked at to guarantee a better outcome.
Basically, there shouldn't be an open door that is wide open, nor should there be a shut door. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 6:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| beck's wrote: |
| Western nations must strictly cut off all immigration from cultural groups who cannot or will not respect our fundemental values. |
So much for individual rights. Do you honestly believe that there aren't any Afghanis, Pakistanis, Iranians, Iraqis, Sudanese, et al who can contribute to Western society?
| Quote: |
| Furthermore, immigrants who are already in the west and who show that they cannot or will not accept our values must be deported. |
What goes against our "values"? Wearing a head scarf? Washing one's feet? Celebrating Ramadan? Speaking another language?
| Quote: |
| We must do this to protect our values and way of life. Not to do so is to commit cultural suicide. |
What country are you from? What is your "culture"? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 7:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
444
Last edited by thepeel on Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:58 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 7:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| So much for individual rights. Do you honestly believe that there aren't any Afghanis, Pakistanis, Iranians, Iraqis, Sudanese, et al who can contribute to Western society? |
No doubt some can. But not allowing those few who can contribute to the West to immigrate is a small price to pay if it means stemming the tide of Muslim immigration.
| Quote: |
| What goes against our "values"? Wearing a head scarf? Washing one's feet? Celebrating Ramadan? Speaking another language? |
Let me see. Honour killings, forced marriage, female circumcision, support for Shariah Law, including supporting violence against 'apostates', and those who 'defame' Islam. But, I'm sure only a 'tiny minority' of Muslims actually support such barbarism....
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2170160,00.html
A poll of more than 1,000 British Muslims, conducted by the Policy Exchange think-tank this year, found that 36 per cent of Muslims aged between 16 and 24 believe those who convert to another faith should be punished by death.
And those were the ones who admitted they supported such a policy. One wonders the actual percentage of Muslims who believe this.
One convert interviewed for the programme told how his local Muslim community in Bradford closed ranks against him after he switched to Christianity. 'They told me categorically had I been in an Islamic country - Pakistan, Middle East - that they would actually be the first to chop off my head,' he said.
As hundreds of thousands more liberal minded people from Somalia, Pakistan and Afghanistan are allowed into the West we can only benefit from such wonderful diversity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 2:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
And so it goes.
There is nothing inherent to Western culture that makes the West the wealthy, liberal place it is. All is the same, and who are we to say that we have a culture? It must be a fluke that the UK is wealthy and Thailand less so. |
Do we really want to start using wealth as a measure of cultural worth?
| Quote: |
| Huff, read the article. I think your questions were sufficiently answered. |
When I have time. Meanwhile, I'll assume beck's can speak his/her own mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 6:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
444
Last edited by thepeel on Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:58 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 1:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bigverne wrote: |
| Quote: |
| So much for individual rights. Do you honestly believe that there aren't any Afghanis, Pakistanis, Iranians, Iraqis, Sudanese, et al who can contribute to Western society? |
No doubt some can. But not allowing those few who can contribute to the West to immigrate is a small price to pay if it means stemming the tide of Muslim immigration. |
Which would in effect keep people like Ayaan Hirsi Ali out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 3:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
| Huff, read the article. I think your questions were sufficiently answered. |
Have you read any of the follow up articles? I glanced at a couple, at it sounds like Bruckner is the master of straw men.
From Ian Buruma (the accused multiculturalist), in his response:
http://www.signandsight.com/features/1161.html
| Quote: |
Liberal democracy must be defended against violent extremism, and women should be protected from abuse. There can be no religious justification for it. My skepticism is about her analysis of the social problems in European societies caused by the influx of large numbers of non-Western refugees and immigrants. Revolutionary Islamism, emanating from the Middle-East, is indeed a threat to all free societies. Where I differ from Hirsi Ali is perhaps a matter of emphasis. Having turned from devout Islamism to atheism, she tends to see religion, and Islam in particular, as the root of all evils, especially of the abuse of women. Cultural traditions, tribal customs, historical antecedents, all of which are highly diverse, even inside the Muslim world, are flattened into a monolithic threat. Islam, as practised in Java, is not the same as in a Moroccan village, or the Sudan, or Rotterdam. In her autobiography, Hirsi Ali herself describes the considerable differences between her native Somalia and Saudi Arabia.
In Europe, even the issue of headscarves cannot be treated simply as a symbol of religious bigotry. Some women wear them to ward off male aggression, others because their parents insist on it, and some by their own choice, as a defiant badge of identity, even rebellion. Bruckner admires rebels. Should we only side with rebels whose views and practices we like? Or does living in a free society also imply that people should be able to choose the way they look, or speak, or worship, even if we don't like it, as long as they don't harm others? A free-spirited citizen does not tolerate different customs or cultures because he thinks they are wonderful, but because he believes in freedom.
To be tolerant is not to be indiscriminate. I would not dream of defending dictatorship in the name of tolerance for other cultures. Violence against women, or indeed men, is intolerable, and should be punished by law. I would not defend the genital mutilation of children, let alone wife-beating, no matter how it is rationalized. Honour killings are murders, and must be treated as such. But these are matters of law enforcement. Figuring out how to stop violent ideologies from infecting mainstream Muslims, and thus threatening free societies, is trickier. I'm not convinced that public statements, such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali has made, that Islam in general is "backward" and its prophet "perverse", are helpful.
She has the perfect right to say these things, of course, just as Mr Bruckner has the right to describe Muslims as "brutes". I am not in the slightest bit "embarrassed" by her critique of Islam, nor have I ever denied her the right "to refer to Voltaire." But if Islamic reform is the goal, then such denunciations are not the best way to achieve it, especially if they come from an avowed atheist. Condemning Islam, without taking the many variations into account, is too indiscriminate. Not every Muslim, not even every orthodox Muslim, is a holy warrior in spe. Isolating the jihadis and fighting their dangerous dogmas is too important to be dealt with by crude polemics. |
Is he a moral relativist? Not that I can see. Where exactly are these multiculturalists you keep fearing?
| BJWD wrote: |
| There is no "individual right" to immigrate. |
Non sequitur. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SPINOZA
Joined: 10 Jun 2005
Location: $eoul
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 4:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
The population of England is 50,714,000.
England's area is 50,346 sq miles.
The population density of England therefore is 1,007 per sq mile. As you can see, England is twice as crowded as South Korea: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_density
(if the U.S. had England's population density, its population would be 3,744,725,865, which would be 2.88 x that of China)
End immigration into England.
Last edited by SPINOZA on Thu Sep 20, 2007 4:10 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony_Balony
Joined: 12 Apr 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 4:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| beck's wrote: |
I also scanned BJWD's article. I believe in multiculturalism as long as it benefits the target culture. Certainly, the western nations have benefited from immigration as it pertains to food and music and art and so forth. I think that we would all agree that middle eastern food has enriched all of our bellies and that there is nothing that compares with a delicious curry while listening to sitar music in the background.
|
Hi - The above is all trash. Dont speak for me. I can do without sitar music or I can buy a CD. Indian and Pakistani food make me sick. I dont find the women appealing.
Multiculturalism isn't an idea, its an attack described as an idea. Im tired of the debate. I favor civil war. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leslie Cheswyck
Joined: 31 May 2003
Location: University of Western Chile
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 4:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| BJWD wrote: |
| There is no "individual right" to immigrate. |
Non sequitur. |
Dude, you brought it up. He rebutted. Now you proclaim it a "non sequitur". That's coming it a bit high, isn't it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 4:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Leslie Cheswyck wrote: |
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| BJWD wrote: |
| There is no "individual right" to immigrate. |
Non sequitur. |
Dude, you brought it up. He rebutted. Now you proclaim it a "non sequitur". That's coming it a bit high, isn't it? |
I was referring to rights in the general sense. That is, the right of individuals to be judged as individuals versus being judged as a member of a group. Shouldn't that be a right in a liberal democracy?
The "right" of immigration is only a diversion from this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
