posted
Omega M.'s topic included the following in his first post:
quote:Originally posted by Omega M.: I probably wouldn't want to have kids at all if the death of humanity (or at least "my" subset of it) weren't an issue. Anyone else feel this way?
This has never been a reason I want children (though I do, and I have 2 darling girls), but it reminded me of Mark Steyn's article on demographic forces at work in Europe and North America. It seems clear that the states with 35 hour workweeks, national health, retirement at 60, tiny birthrates, etc. cannot survive without immigration. It seems equally clear that a large part of those entering these nations are Muslim.
I'm suspicious of the accuracy of long-term extrapolations, but they lead to a scenario in which the majority is Muslim, Sharia is voted in, and Presto! Europe (for example) as we know it ceases to exist.
What do you think about all this? Am I missing something?
Posts: 105 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
not without a civil war, also dont most countries have laws that prevent people who are foreign for running in elections? And then even if theyre born in that country they at least must;ve became assimilated somewhat if its a modern western nation.
IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know anything about election laws, so I'm not much help there!
"...they at least must;ve became assimilated somewhat..."
That's the whole problem. Too many of them resist assimilation, forming their own neighborhoods (cf. France riots). Muslims are Muslims first, then adopted Germans/Frenchmen/whatever. The doctrine is shared by many religious groups, but few seem to follow it as strictly as Muslims.
Posts: 105 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
If they cause problems for the state then they become rebels and extremists, and depending on the circumstances will get whats coming to them.
IP: Logged |
Islamic fundamentalists find Europe a ripe ground for recruiting, but by and large have given up on mass recruiting in the US because the US Muslim population refuses to join them.
What is it about Muslims that come to America that is different than those that go to Europe. Or, what is different about America that makes them part of the fabric of the society, rather than a people apart?
There won't come a point in Europe where Muslims are ever a majority. Regardless of the human rights banner the Europeans clothe themselves in, and how open and inviting they say they are, at the end of the day they are Euro-centric. They won't let Muslims become a minority. If that means restrictions on immigration laws, or outright violence, the people will get involved in the process when they start to see the numbers creep up.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's just a fact that in order to continue, a society must have positive grown. If the Europeans aren't willing to do what's necessary to make sure that their country is inherited by their own children, then either it will be inherited by someone else (immigrants) or it will die to some degree or another.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
They'll kick it up a notch. Religious and political figures will team up and tell the people it is their religious and civic duty to create more little Europeans, and the people wil listen.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
They might follow the Norwegian model, with 80% pay during maternity leave. In other words, producing little Norwegians is a job, an important one, and the state will pay you for it. (More accurately, it will make your employer pay you for it.) Norway has the second highest fertility rate in Europe, only Ireland is better off.
Or, of course, we might note that this kind of thing is self-correcting. It is not clear that a tendency to have many children is genetic, but cultural transmission will do nicely : All that is required is that children of large families tend to have large families themselves. Rinse and repeat for a few generations, and everybody is descended from a line of large families. Voila, high fertility rates, land hunger, and general nastiness. A depressing gentleman is Dr Malthus, but he gets you in the end.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:What is it about Muslims that come to America that is different than those that go to Europe. Or, what is different about America that makes them part of the fabric of the society, rather than a people apart?
In America, you can assimilate without losing your ethnic identity. That's because the American identity is essentially multicultural. Not so in Europe where you can't become French or British or German just by getting citizenship there. You may be a good citizen but you remain an outsider.
Posts: 176 | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Edge, some Americans i heard of would disagree.
KoM, any other funny tidbits about Norway?
IP: Logged |
posted
Hmm..I don't know about America being inherently more multi-cultural. I think we've just had more practice. The imigrants of the mid-1800's (Germans, Irish, etc.) weren't well assimilated until the 1930's; now they're bedrock Americans. Similarly, it took two generations to really assimilate the slavic and Italian immigrants of the early 1900s. Generally, I think it takes two generations to assimilate a large group of immigrants into a native population. So I think Steyn's hand-wringing over constitutional implementation of Sharia in Western Europe is pretty overblown. <edit> Or at least premature. </edit>
I thought Steyn's arguments about birth rate and replacement were spot on, though. A nation's greatest resource is its people. It's ironic that a nation's prosperity appears to lead to neglect of the very things that support the prosperity. Although it should be obvious to readers of The Book of Mormon (which I realize not everyone here is...but they oughtta be ).
Posts: 2926 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Edge, some Americans i heard of would disagree
Certainly, there are plenty places where this isn't true but you can just choose not to live in those places.
quote:Hmm..I don't know about America being inherently more multi-cultural
I'm speaking mainly from my own limited experience. NYC is multicultural. In the US, there are areas where its easy for immigrants to be absorbed quickly.
Posts: 176 | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think you may be overstating how integrated NYC is. I mean, it takes a couple generations for a family to move from the Bronx to Uptown. The places where immigrants can be absorbed quickly are usually populated by other recent immigrants. They're not part of the political or economic power structures. It takes time for any society to adjust to perturbations.
In Boston there are Brazilian neighborhoods and Somalian neighborhoods and Hatian neighborhoods and whatnot. There aren't many Irish neighborhoods or Italian neighborhoods (except historically, like the North End), because those large immigrant influxes have largely been integrated now and don't feel the need to self-segregate.
I guess my point is that it takes time and Europe hasn't had that yet. I don't think the Islamic population is much better integrated here in America than in Europe (at least the areas of Europe I lived in, being Amsterdam, Rotterdam, and Antwerp). I just think we in America have the confidence of eventual success, bred from successful previous integration.
Posts: 2926 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I think part of the problem is also the view of the incoming immigrants by the natives. I live next door to the largest Arab-American population in America. People around here are used to seeing Arab-Americans, and seeing them doesn't seem out of place or anything. Most everyone is accepting of them. It seems normal.
Whereas, in Europe they are most easily identified as outsiders and people there are more defensive and on edge about it.
I don't know if time alone will help them, they have to make a pretty major shift in how they perceive their national identity in order to create a seamless integration, and I don't see signs of that happening on any large scale.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Everyone seems to agree that it's a real problem as things are now. Also, everyone seems to believe that European countries won't let this happen.
posted
In much of Europe laws prevent integration. For example, Muslims who come into Germany can't become German citizens, so there is a disconnect.
America on the other hand, encourages integration. Anyone can become a citizen regardless of race/religion/ethnicity. Even though people may live in neighborhoods with people of their own race, they generally think of themselves as American before they think of themselves as a member of their race.
While in Germany and France the Muslim population is thought of as Muslim immigrants, in America they are simply americans who happen to be Muslim.
Lately they have been facing a lot more descimination than in the past, but that doesn't make them less American. It would be hard to recruit exteamists from a population of people who feel like they are part of the country.
If European countries were to allow Muslim immigrants to become citizens, and work to integrate them I think the extremists would have a hard time recruiting anywhere.
Posts: 1901 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It can take a generation to make that integration though. And it depends on what part of the country you're in. It's easier for immigrants to blend in, in the north east and midwest than in the interior of the country.
But on the whole you're correct. I just don't know how quickly it would work for European nations, especially if the people are opposed to it. Legal designations might not make a difference if the populace won't accept them.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:In much of Europe laws prevent integration. For example, Muslims who come into Germany can't become German citizens, so there is a disconnect.
What are you talking about, Lupus? It is not easy to become a German citizen, but whether you do or not has nothing to do with being a Muslim. If anyone wants to read about German immigration laws, you can do it here.Posts: 896 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, wanting to maintain some sort of national identity is racist? Wanting people who move into your country to assimilate is racist?
Posts: 1069 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
In a somewat milder sense, it can be. They've already made the effort to follow our laws to be allowed to live and work here (putting aside illegal immigrants), why do they have to also culturally assimilate? Why can't they be met halfway?
posted
I think the "death of western civilization" is overstating the case. Demographics will change and the civilization will change. At what point does a civilization die?
I also agree that America is inherently pretty multi-cultural. I think that the standard of beauty in America seems to be changing to mean people whose genes are mixed and you can't tell what race they are. The classic blonde has been replaced by the tanned, exotic looking person. We live in a culture where people who identify with only one race or culture are the minority. I think it's only natural that we're pretty accepting of different cultures.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bok, I don't mean that immigrants should transform into 100% of the dominant culture, at least not immediately. They should, in the words of the Borg, add their distinctiveness to our own.
It just rubs me the wrong way, this fragmented society does. I don't want the "melting pot" to cool more than it has, resulting in little clumps of people here and there that do not belong to the culture. It's like claiming a piece of the US for whatever country these people came from - doesn't matter which. That makes me very uneasy. It really is like a peaceful invasion.
I can't say why it makes me uneasy. Legal immigrants have the right to do what they will. If that means only moving among their own groups, then so be it. As long as they follow the laws, as you say, they should be left alone.
Just because it's legal, does that mean it's good? I don't know.
Posts: 1069 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"I can't say why it makes me uneasy." Seriously, have you considered racism? It sure smells like racism to me. Did you think when people were racist before and during the civil rights movement that they were just all evil and stuff and not humans exactly like you, concerned about preserving their culture from being taken over by them?
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey now, that's coming on a little hard. Why don't you read carefully what I wrote. I love how you compare me to racists from before and during the civil rights movement. Apples and Oranges.
First. I am in no way advocating discrimination against anyone, nor do I discriminate based on race or culture. Anyone who does is wrong.
Second. I am suggesting that I'd like for people to gain the identity of Americans. Simple as that. If you want to call that racism, then that's your problem, not mine. I'm not asking anyone to give up anything. I love it when other cultures blend with "American" culture, and I want that to happen. What I don't want to happen is for people to move here, and not join with those already here. We're stronger together than we are Balkanized.
You really need to be careful throwing the racism missle around. I understand that forum posts are easily misunderstood, so I'll not take offense.
Posts: 1069 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"I am suggesting that I'd like for people to gain the identity of Americans."
I'm not calling you racist. Only you can judge your own self. I'm doing something very different. I'm asking you to look seriously, with an open heart, at these things you say, and ask yourself sincerely if they are racist. I'm telling you that statements like this and others you have made were quite characteristic of racists back in the day. None of them saw themselves as being evil, by the way. They felt totally justified and rational in their wishes and beliefs. They were for stability and the continuation of the society they loved, the world they knew, life as they saw it.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I understand where you are coming from. Thing is, I know how much people sharing their culture with us makes us stronger. Music, food, language - look how many great things American culture has that have come from another culture. Heck, most of it! I want that influx, and that's not going to happen if people don't share, don't add their distinctiveness to ours. That's what makes my statements not racist. Instead of wanting to keep society the way it is, I want people to add the strengths of their cultures to ours. An alloy is stronger than a pure metal, right? That's just the opposite of cultural discrimination/racism. I'm wanting you to share what it means to be German or Arabic or Chinese, as well as learning what it means to be an American. Come, share, learn. Don't segregate yourselves away from everyone else.
The last thing I want is Joe Lilly White American, in his blue Oxford shirt and khakis. I don't want that homogeneous, boring culture. I don't want a segregated culture either. There's a happy medium to be found.
quote: They felt totally justified and rational in their wishes and beliefs. They were for stability and the continuation of the society they loved, the world they knew, life as they saw it.
This applies equally well to the immigrants who want to self-segregate.
Posts: 1069 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Honestly, more of me agrees with Swampjedi than Tatiana. The thing is, I don't think it's AUTOMATICALLY racist, I think it CAN be racist, but it depends on the persons and their reasons.
SJ's concerns about a "peaceful invasion" might be a little harsh, but come on, if someone moves to America, shouldn't they expect to a certain degree that they have to become American? They shouldn't lose their cultural identity, but they should adapt to the nation they've CHOSEN to move to.
He's right, they should add their distinctiveness to the American fabric. It's abouting adding new threads that make the whole weaving more beautiful and unique, not about bleaching them all look the same. But at the same time, the threads shouldn't all group together off in their own little separate world. America is ONE, made up of pieces.
The problem in Europe is their culture is much, MUCH older, and they aren't at all used to assimilating foreign cultures into their own to create something new. It might be the beginnings of racism, but mostly it's isolationism. They want to stay the way they've always been for hundreds of years. Too much change, too fast, on a large scale is very scary for them, and I sympathize with that.
It's not cookie cutter racism though. Marking it as that blindly is irresponsible, a little insulting (to Swampjedi), and I think maybe a little ignorant of the history of racism.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank you, Lyrhawn. I believe you understand what I am saying.
Perhaps "peaceful invasion" was too harsh. I apologize, and retract that. It apparently doesn't convey what I meant to say.
Posts: 1069 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I want that influx, and that's not going to happen if people don't share, don't add their distinctiveness to ours.
How are people not doing this? It seems to me that you're arguing against something that doesn't exist.
Posts: 1658 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
"...and I think maybe a little ignorant of the history of racism."
I'm 47 years old. I grew up in Birmingham, Alabama. My mother lived in Montgomery during the bus boycotts, and has described it to me in great detail. When I was a child, they were demonstrating in downtown Birmingham for years, doing sit-ins at the luncheon counters and the soda fountains in the downtown shopping districts. My freshman year in high school was the first year that public schools were integrated here, and I went through that experience in 4 years of high school and learned a lot from it.
More recently, I've made a study of the civil rights movement, and am writing a novel set during the time of the civil rights movement. It was the series "Eyes on the Prize" on PBS when I was in my 20s that fired me up about it. There were two series, but the first was the greatest. I highly recommend that series to every American. I've been through the Civil Rights Institute, a museum of the struggle that exists now in downtown Birmingham. My family had African-American maids and yardmen when I was growing up. I saw the change take place when new opportunities opened up for blacks to go to college, and do non-menial work, and how the people in the corporations, civic leaders, homeowners, and CEOs reacted to that change.
My aunt lived in Auburn, Alabama, a place that was behind Birmingham in seeing the changes that integration brought. I went to college in Auburn, and went "back in time" during my college years, and saw some of the same changes happen again in Auburn. Your words that I quoted could have come out of my Aunt's mouth. by the way.
I've read books about the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, about the judicial battles that led up to the 1958 Brown vs. the Board of Education decision. About Thurgood Marshall and the NAACP. I've seen racism firsthand when hanging out with black friends, stuff they don't notice or mention, but that I see as a stark contrast to how I'm treated when with a group of whites. I've heard the family lore from another close friend, of how his uncle was lynched and left for dead, and so many other stories which are just the notable things. The everyday ones are not even remembered or bothered about.
I have to tell you children that I have heard racists talk all my life. I am no stranger to their arguments and worldview.
I point this out not because I enjoy contention or want to accuse anyone. Instead I sincerely don't want to see this very wrong and unjust thing happen again in my lifetime. So when I see it springing up, particularly among young people, I feel I have to speak about what I know, to be a gentle nudge or reminder in the right direction.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's not that much of a problem here. Most people move here wanting very much to assimilate.
The issue is when groups of people immigrate to some country, and then refuse to have anything to do with the host culture or people. They bring their countries with them, and only the geography changes. This is very obvious with the Muslim population in France.
Posts: 1069 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you're that informed about racism and it's history, especially in America, then you'll understand the difference between someone wanting immigrants to join with them in integration, and someone who believes others of a different race are inferior by nature.
The arguments are diametrically opposed to each other, I don't even see how you could allude to SJ being racist, at least not from the point of view of America's history of racism.. Racists in America supported exclusion and separation, Swamp is arguing FOR inclusion and integration.
You're using the wrong historical comparison.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lyrhawn and Swampjedi, what does an immigrant have to do, in your mind, in order to reach the level of integration you desire?
quote:The issue is when groups of people immigrate to some country, and then refuse to have anything to do with the host culture or people. They bring their countries with them, and only the geography changes. This is very obvious with the Muslim population in France.
How has the Muslim population in France refused "to have anything to do with the host culture or people"? Do their children go to French schools? Do they know at least some French? Do they shop in French stores? Do they have jobs? The only way I can see for an immigrant to have nothing to do with the culture of their adopted country is to stay in their home 24 hours a day with no contact with the outside world.
Posts: 1658 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
So far as I'm concerned America is just fine. I have no complaints, I was merely defending an ideology.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swampjedi: Tatiana, does my explanation make sense to you?
It does! And I'm glad you weren't thinking the way it sounded to me that you were thinking at first.
I'm still not sure what is the right approach to this problem, or if it really even is a problem. It seems to me that there isn't a problem, that culture disseminates, and is adopted by each generation in a modified form. Our separate cultures change every generation, and our combined ones do as well, hopefully preserving what's best from all the various flavors in the cultural stew. I don't think we have anything to fear, in other words. Or rather, the thing we have most to fear is that fear of the "other" will gain a new foothold and cause strife where there should be only kinship. The answer to that seems to lie in knowledge, acceptance, and mutual respect.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
We need to become less uneasy with the "other", and more accepting of differences.
We are melting together very quickly, in fact. I think if you ask immigrant parents they would mostly say their kids have become very American, maybe to a greater extent than they had hoped.
Keeping different religious customs is the hallmark of a free country, for instance. Religious dress is really important to people. Mormons, unlike Orthodox Jews, Sikhs or Muslims, have their religious garb worn where it is rarely seen, yet it would be a terrible imposition if we were asked not to wear it to school. France's law against religious garb in school is pretty chilling, I think. And that was purportedly made in the same spirit that you support, of assimilation.
Instead it means that the various religious groups have to have private schools so that practicing members can be educated and still be faithful to their laws regarding clothing.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lyrhawn, racism isn't always about segregation. In a much broader sense it's about fear of one's own identity group losing power, and about some other identity group taking over and erasing one's own group. It's about fear of the world we know changing into one in which, instead of having our group be dominant, we might have to share power or even become the less powerful group. As well as you know history, I'll leave it to you to think of all the examples of this in history, nearly everywhere that different groups of humans have come into contact.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swampjedi: It's not that much of a problem here. Most people move here wanting very much to assimilate.
The issue is when groups of people immigrate to some country, and then refuse to have anything to do with the host culture or people. They bring their countries with them, and only the geography changes. This is very obvious with the Muslim population in France.
I agree that it's not much of a problem here, but that's more because that a lot of areas, especially urban ones, are already fairly multi-cultural.
I suspect, however, that you don't actually have a lot of interpersonal experience with immigrants. I'm not accusing you of hating or avoiding them or any such thing, so hear me out. I go to school in Seattle, where we have many foreign students. And what happens, basically, is almost exactly what you describe as happening in other countries. At the UW, Koreans and Taiwanese are somewhat notorious for this kind of thing. Some of these students were just reacting to a culture shock by trying to keep as much familiar as possible. And in all honesty, it's a legitimate psychological reaction. Then again, some of them were just racist (warning: anecdotal evidence to follow, proceed with caution). I was friends for a while with a really cool Korean girl (cute too) who told us we couldn't go to her apartment because she lived with her sister, who wouldn't let non-Koreans in. I think, sometimes, that a lot of people forget that many other cultures in the world still practice forms of social, if not legal, racism. I mention Asian countries more, because that's what my experience is, both growing up, and in college, but I am not accusing them of being worse or better than any, say, european or african country. I have a friend who's teaching English in Japan. He described them once as, "politely racist." It bears out in their immigration policies. According to Wikipedia, there are about 127 million people living there. There are fewer than 4 million non-Japanese living there. That's a 97% percent homogenous racial and lingual population. Ny grandmother, a 2nd generation (nissei) Japanese-American makes the strangest remarks about black people sometimes. But she's a 4'10" 80 year-old lady, so it's often difficult to make myself really listen what she says, but in hindsight, it's obvious she didn't grow up in the most...progressive household. And yet, here I am. I'm fourth-generation, speak almost no Japanese, (to my shame) but definitely have some distinctly Asian characteristics. Like my all consuming need for white rice with almost every meal, for example. And I consider myself fully American. The point I'm trying to make, in a very roundabout way, is that assimilation just takes time. I think it takes until the second or third generation to be fully "American." This is in a country, as many have pointed out, that has experience dealing with "invasions" as some people do see them, legitimately or not. Then again, these countries have the advantage of having anti-discrimination laws already in place; nor do they have institutionalized slavery, factors that influenced, for better or worse, the path multiculturalism took in USA. In France, let's say, the time-frame might edge more towards three generations, rather than two, but I consider the process more or less inevitable. Beyond the question of legal status, assimilation isn't something we can "do" or be effective at, but something that occurs like natural law.
Side Note: Multiculturalism will be an increasingly useful societal skill, peak in necessity, then decline. This will coincide with the size of the multiracial population. It will increase, as the number of us (I'm Japanese-white) increase, at least initially, as people will be forced to come into familial contact with people of other races. As the number of us increase*, as it most certainly will, it will become second nature, then completely outside of thought. Think about it. How often today do we worry about, say, tensions between Irish-Americans and Greek-Americans. If those phrases sound strange to you, that's just evidence of that what I'm saying is true.
*It takes 1 generation to make someone like me, but it would take 4 generations of perfect breeding to remove either ethnicity. You can't get rid of us! You think you've seen an "invasion?" Mua. Mua ha ha.
Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Lyrhawn, racism isn't always about segregation. In a much broader sense it's about fear of one's own identity group losing power, and about some other identity group taking over and erasing one's own group. It's about fear of the world we know changing into one in which, instead of having our group be dominant, we might have to share power or even become the less powerful group.
Within the scope of this thread, in America, I'm interpretting your definition of "racism" as "fear that non-Americans will take over America."
I'm really having trouble seeing how this is racist. While I definitely understand where your historical evidence comes into play (after all, cultural purity was one of the key ideas of the KKK), I think it's one thing to want to keep external cultural influences out of your country and another thing entirely to fear another culture taking over completely. The former I think can be interpretted as racist - the latter, I really can't see as racist at all.
If someone accused Japanese people of negative cultural infiltration of America because of the prevalence of anime, sushi, and language evolution*, I would find that racist. If someone expressed reasonably well-grounded fears that Japan was going to invade the United States, I really can't see how that's racist.
I suppose the difficulty comes when the feared invasion is entirely cultural - if America became a second Japan through economic and cultural penetration and Americans were unhappy about it, would THAT be racist? Where do you draw the line between harmless cultural intrusions (e.g. anime, sushi) and complete cultural replacement (America growing culturally indistinguishable from Japan)?
*The other day I walked past a billboard ad for Timex that included the phrase "just a skosh**." I almost died laughing.
**Americanization of sukoshi, Japanese for "a little bit."
posted
Well, look at South Africa. While there were definitely segregation issues there as well, the main fear of the white minority was losing power. They were afraid of the cultural changes that would come about when the majority democratic rule took over.
Here in the U.S. when blacks were elected mayors of major cities for the first time, again there was that fear I heard expressed that "they" were taking over, and "we" were in trouble.
Arguments couched in these terms have been stated again and again by racists of varying stripes all over the world.
I guess I want us to remember that most racists weren't some evil hate filled murderers. Very few of them dragged handicapped people behind their cars until they were dead. Most were just ordinary people worried about keeping society the same as they had always known, and were afraid of the unknown "other" taking control.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I guess I want us to remember that most racists weren't some evil hate filled murderers. Very few of them dragged handicapped people behind their cars until they were dead. Most were just ordinary people worried about keeping society the same as they had always known, and were afraid of the unknown "other" taking control.
I see your point, and think it's a good one to address. My worry still stands, though: where's the line?
It's also worth noting that at this point, black political figures are pretty much American, period, with perhaps a few cultural holdovers (the same variety that inspire Celtic festivals or Bon dances).
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"My worry still stands, though: where's the line?" I see nothing to fear. People immigrate to western countries because of the freedom and opportunity here. They assimilate in a generation or two. They contribute a lot to our cultures, including lots of hard work that benefits our economies. I just don't see this as a threat in any way. I believe this fear is as misfounded as was that of the people who were afraid of black mayors in our cities.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
My worries about where the line is are actually about when it's fear of cultural replacement and when it's racism, rather than a manifestation of my own fear of cultural replacement. Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It sounds like we're trying to decide where the line between protecting your own culture ends, and oppressing someone else's begins. I think some of what cultural minorities get away with would be considered, by those same minorities, racism if expressed by the majority group. Then again, cultural minorities ARE in greater danger of actually losing their culture. It's a blurry line.
Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Juxtapose, you describe something that was similar to my experience at my university here in the south. Several groups were notorious for seperation, while others were completely integrated.
I don't mean to imply that people should fully integrate as soon as they arrive. I understand that it takes time, as it surely did for my ancestors who came here. Like Tatiana and Juxtapose (and perhaps others), I don't see it as a major problem here, or even anything to worry about.
Having said that, I think erosomniac and Juxtapose are spot on the true issue behind this. Is protecting your culture wrong? I don't believe so, but it's probably ultimately futile. If I recall, some Muslim government banned import of American entertainment, which did very little good.
Posts: 1069 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
).
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
