|
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 |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
 Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2009 11:33 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| It is not racism, but nationalism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2009 11:37 am Post subject: Re: Is it... |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/11/the_swiss_ban_minarets.asp
| Quote: |
| Is it simple racism for, say, the Dutch to want their nation to stay Dutch -- not just in terms of geography -- in terms of language, food, religion, government, architecture and all the things that make up a culture? |
Is it? |
No, it's not racism to want that. I would personally not want Canada, in a matter of years, to be over-run by arab Muslims, Korean Confucians, or schismatic Mormons with twenty wives each from rural Utah. And that's why I am not an advocate of open-border immigration, and believe that a country's influx should come from a variety of sources.
But, once the immigrants are living in the country, and if that country is claiming to be a democracy, I don't think you can just start cooking up arbitrary restrictions on what those immigrants can do. I honestly don't see how outlawing a particular form of religious architecture is any less a form of censorship than would be outlawing certain religious pamphlets or music. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2009 12:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Quote:
Is it simple racism for, say, the Dutch to want their nation to stay Dutch -- not just in terms of geography -- in terms of language, food, religion, government, architecture and all the things that make up a culture?
|
I'd say it's pretty short-sighted.
If those are the goals you want to achieve then you have to adopt policies that lead to that end. One of those is to institute an isolationist policy--and drop out of the EU, for one. For another, when times are good don't build industries that require more workers than your country can provide.
Then there's the thing about 'the dead hand of the past' controlling the future. While I loved my grandparents while they were alive, I don't feel any obligation to them--and even less to my great-grandparents--to do what suited them. I think the choices about 'languages, food, religion, government, architecture and all the things that make up a culture' are mine to make, not theirs.
I've been living in S. Korea for about 14 years and have seen huge changes but I still see Korea as Korea. My take on it is: If people are self-confident, they can change and still remain who they are. It's the people who lack confidence who worry about their identity when changes occur around them. I suspect back in the 17th Century there were Dutch guys sitting in their little fishing boats watching the big merchant ships sail out of Amsterdam who said, "Ain't nothing good going to come of this development." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rocket_scientist
Joined: 23 Nov 2009
Location: Prague
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2009 1:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ya-ta's boys arguments about industry's need are not fact based. Based on the post about Americans throwing away 40% of their food plus the fact that Americans over eat by 30% and that added to he earlier statitsic means that the USA does not need 70% of the foodstuffs we have, yet industry insists they still need labor.
The term "Industry" is an intentionally foggy, nay dishonest term. Industry means individual employers. When the concept is fogged in this way, its difficult to investigate the matter.
Ya-ta boy has his opinions on what heritage means. The Dutch, along with the rest of the Westerners are very uneasy about the slow burn extermination they are being subjected to. They are being replaced by people that want more money although the new ones mouth the word tolerance often.
The people in change of the shifting become the new leaders entitled to the wealth and power that comes along with it although they insist too that tolerance matters. See Gordon Brown's statement about why Labour really likes immigration. Immigration means votes.
Yes, by all means lets have more extorsion based democracy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Reggie
Joined: 21 Sep 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2009 1:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
I'd say it's pretty short-sighted.
If those are the goals you want to achieve then you have to adopt policies that lead to that end. One of those is to institute an isolationist policy--and drop out of the EU, for one. For another, when times are good don't build industries that require more workers than your country can provide.
Then there's the thing about 'the dead hand of the past' controlling the future. While I loved my grandparents while they were alive, I don't feel any obligation to them--and even less to my great-grandparents--to do what suited them. I think the choices about 'languages, food, religion, government, architecture and all the things that make up a culture' are mine to make, not theirs.
I've been living in S. Korea for about 14 years and have seen huge changes but I still see Korea as Korea. My take on it is: If people are self-confident, they can change and still remain who they are. It's the people who lack confidence who worry about their identity when changes occur around them. I suspect back in the 17th Century there were Dutch guys sitting in their little fishing boats watching the big merchant ships sail out of Amsterdam who said, "Ain't nothing good going to come of this development." |
I agree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2009 2:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| The Dutch, along with the rest of the Westerners are very uneasy about the slow burn extermination they are being subjected to. |
Aren't you radically overgeneralizing here? Isn't 'extermination' a highly inflammatory word choice (not to mention 'subjected to')?
While I don't often agree with bacaspar, I think he's onto something when he says this issue is about nationalism, at least in part.
| Quote: |
| They are being replaced by people that want more money |
This also caught my eye. Typically, foreign labor is paid less than native labor, at least in the US. Maybe that doesn't happen in Europe, but I doubt it. A large part of the problem goes back to business leaders (since r_s dislikes the use of 'industry') demanding more labor than the country can supply. A more money-hungry bunch of people are hard to find, in my opinion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ytuque
Joined: 29 Jan 2008
Location: I drink therefore I am!
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2009 2:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| It is not racism, but nationalism. |
If only issues were so simple, they could be defined by a single word. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kimbop
Joined: 31 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2009 6:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| It is not racism, but nationalism. |
Or perhaps culture-ism? Or civilizational-ism? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2009 9:59 pm Post subject: Re: Is it... |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/11/the_swiss_ban_minarets.asp
| Quote: |
| Is it simple racism for, say, the Dutch to want their nation to stay Dutch -- not just in terms of geography -- in terms of language, food, religion, government, architecture and all the things that make up a culture? |
Is it? |
It's not racist, and it's totally acceptable. Such a decision comes with benefits and downsides, and it's theirs to make. I think that in the long run the downsides might outweigh the benefits, though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arthur Dent
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Location: Kochu whirld
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2009 11:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Islam is a religion and composed of many 'races.' Therefore it cannot be racism.
Some believe that Islam and its proponents are a threat to Western style democracy and ideals though immigration and non-assimilation of those immigrants. They believe that we need to sacrifice our various ideals and freedoms in order to protect them.
Others believe that Islam is not the threat it is made out to be. They believe that in sacrificing some of our freedoms - directed against a particular belief system and its followers - we will lose our very identity and thus the values which we give us those freedoms.
Certainly some aspects of Islam and some of their believers views are incompatible with modern Western ideology.
(The Christian nations and churches also once held views which would be far from popular amongst many today.)
But there are also those who hold moderate views and do not support the more radical among them.
Perhaps the real question is whether we believe we are strong enough to assimilate a "reasonable number" of immigrants from Muslim nations (or just Muslims, if you prefer) without sacrificing our ideals.
Although each country does and should have the right to decide particulars for themselves, we should consider a more unified position for the larger aspects. This way we maintain our independence while presenting a strong and unified position of reinvigorating our democracies and of tolerance but not one which 'surrenders' to minority interests.
The strategy of dealing with these 'threats' - perceived or otherwise - piecemeal is neither a useful nor comprehensive path. We should not act out of fear but out of the strength which we possess but have forgotten, and the confidence in the ideals and values which we seem so fearful of losing.
Banning the 'apparel' of Islam makes us look petty and spiteful.
| Quote: |
| Switzerland is small and whether minarets are built there is of little importance. |
This line makes the writer seem ridiculous. What do the two have to do with each other really?
| Quote: |
The issue, though, is whether it is a legitimate aspiration of a people to want to maintain a nation as a home for a certain people.
|
This is more to the point insofar as individual nations are concerned. Clearly it is a legitimate aspiration to maintain one's identity. But how do a large group of people emigrate to another nation without changing its nature?
It is difficult to judge whether a people are being parochial, fearful, or nationalistic - or on the opposite side, defending freedoms, welcoming new citizens, and reinvigorating their nation with new ideas and cultural influences - when making such decisions, but one cannot criticize them for acting within their own perceived interests and within the bounds of their laws. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 12:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| It is difficult to judge whether a people are being parochial, fearful, or nationalistic - or on the opposite side, defending freedoms, welcoming new citizens, and reinvigorating their nation with new ideas and cultural influences - when making such decisions, but one cannot criticize them for acting within their own perceived interests and within the bounds of their laws. |
I don't really agree with the last part of this. There is something immoral in inviting a group of people in, having them work, pay taxes and contribute to the wealth of a nation, but say to them: Neither you nor your kids nor even your grandchildren are welcome here as equals. You and your descendants must remain forever second class. When someone acts selfishly, as in my example, I think it's OK to point it out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Koveras
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 7:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Switzerland faces a Muslim Backlash� |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arthur Dent
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Location: Kochu whirld
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 7:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think I see what you're getting at Ya-ta Boy but that wasn't the intent of that sentence.
I simply meant that within the framework of the Swiss nation, this was a decision they had the right to make. Not necessarily moral in everyone's view.
Have a look at this G&M article which offers a different point of view:
| Quote: |
Of the country's 400,000 Muslims, representing less than 5 per cent of the population, the largest group are of European background, with ancestors from the historically Muslim Balkan countries of southeast Europe � in other words, they are as culturally and historically European as any Christian Swiss citizen.
The politics of Swiss Muslims are notably liberal and democratic, more so in many respects than the rest of the Swiss population. Burkas and other conservative head coverings are almost unknown, and there are no mosques calling for sharia law or any other form of political Islam.
And if Swiss voters came to believe that minarets are symbols of creeping fundamentalism, they were almost comically misled. |
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/swiss-minaret-ban-emboldens-europes-extremists/article1383413/
It seems Europe's courts are already trying to overturn it. Though the last line in the following quote states that some are looking to follow Switzerland's lead.
| Quote: |
| Even as European human-rights courts began attempts to block the Swiss amendment Monday, extremist politicians across Europe were examining their countries' laws to see if a similar referendum could be accomplished. |
Of course it is hardly fair to make someone a citizen and then restrict their rights because of their religious beliefs. But it is within the rights of its citizens to protect themselves from threats. The question for me is more whether there is a real threat, and whether the decision by the Swiss is an effective response. I think it is not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 9:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Koveras wrote: |
| Switzerland faces a Muslim Backlash� |
Right on schedule:
| Quote: |
| Egypt mufti says Swiss minaret ban insults Muslims |
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5geRfhlTwImkMsEipD-A2sZYSO7og
Though, given the way that Egypt treats Christians, I honestly could not care any less what any Egyptian muslim has to say about anything.
http://www.christianpost.com/article/20091130/egyptian-christians-refuse-to-open-stores-after-muslim-riot/
| Quote: |
Copts - the Christian community in Egypt - said they will not be coerced into overlooking the mass riot that left reportedly 65 Christian shops damaged, as reported by Assyrian International News Agency on Sunday. Instead, they are uniting to make authorities recognize what happened and punish perpetrators.
Authorities, however, reportedly are putting pressure on the Coptic Church in Nag Hammadi, which is under the same governorate as Farshoot, to tell the victims to accept extrajudicial reconciliation and reopen their businesses without compensation. Police in Farshoot are also reportedly refusing to issue police reports to victims, forcing them to travel 37 miles away to make a report with the Attorney General in Qena, the capital of the governorate. Authorities have also not carried out an estimated loss investigation despite requests the church has made for a week.
"There will be no reconciliation before full financial compensation has been paid to the Coptic victims, and the criminals are brought to justice, so that safety and security can be restored to the district," said Bishop Kirollos of the Nag Hammadi Diocese, according to AINA.
Kirollos told activist Wagih Yacoub of the Middle East Christian Association that the victims have no money to clean up, restock items and reopen their stores.
Reports estimate that 10 pharmacies and 55 shops and businesses in Farshoot and several nearby villages were vandalized, torched or damaged during the few days of riots which began on Nov. 21. In Farshoot alone, about 80 percent of Coptic businesses were destroyed, which translates to about over $1 million in damages.
The riot, which drew hundreds of angry Muslims, was due to a rumor that a Coptic young man kidnapped and raped a 12-year-old Muslim girl. However, an investigating officer told a Farshoot pastor that the girl said she was only sure that her attacker wore a black jacket and nothing else.... |
An excitable bunch. The religion who cried wolf. |
|
| 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
