"The world has always been multiculturalist" WTF?!??

[lazygecko]

schwerpunk said:Now, along that same train of thought, would you concede that there's also a chance that Icelandic culture might also benefit from importing some elements of other cultures?

Elements such as cuisine, for example. Everyone benefits there

Nonsense. Why would they need anything other than fermented shark meat?

Iceland could do with tainting global cultures more with Mezzoforte though.

[Maes]

A lot of people here seem to be equating the commercial aspects of "multiculturalism" (aka imports/export) with multiculturalism as a whole.

I never thought that drinking some Coca Cola or Whiskey makes me "multicultural". There's a better word for that in Greek "Xenomania", aka an obsession over everything foreign, in particular commercial imported goods. In the 80s, it was viewed as a "trendy" thing for a while, as it was only then when most people could afford anything imported, and was usually associated with being a nouveau-rich. I guess something similar must have happened after the fall of Communism. It was (and is) considered a plague for the economy, but it's hardly what I think about when I hear "multiculturalism".

There's also the "trendy" mostly harmless variety of multiculturalism which apparently consists of frequenting social centers or "alternative" communities, wearing "ethnic" beads, sandals, Tupamaros/Zapatistas like colorful clothing, some "ethnik" jewelry, smoking big "multicultural" joints with ganja (Hey mon!) etc.

However, I think more of serious problems like:

• Giving disproportionate amounts of attention and privileges to foreigners compared to your own people. Overlaps with economic globalisation/outsourcing sometimes.
  
• Treating illegal immigrants (in PARTICULAR if they engage in crimes) with way too much leniency, to the point of calling standard police/law procedure against them "racist".
  
• Putting the rights of immigrants, IN PARTICULAR if they are illegal above those of our own nationals.
  
• Squatters/sweatshops/apartments turned into human storage dumps with 30 and 50 people in 55 m^2.
  

[DeathevokatioN]

Around 4 years ago in South Africa ago there was an outburst of violence against foreigners...

I'm not 100% sure what to think about the influx of people from other countries, if they've come here to work, then cool. We did provide work to some immigrants at some point. However a disproportionate number of the farm murders have been carried out by Zimbabwean immigrants, the same black extremists who destroyed their own country and turned it into an unlivable mess for black people now want to destroy ours.

[Maes]

To answer the thread's title, to say "the world has always been multiculturalist" by using the modern politically correct/corporate/trendy/anodyne definition of "multiculturalist" is the biggest hoax ever, and only the most idealistic of rainbow candy eatin', unicorn-dreamin' pacifists or kooks could disagree.

The world has always been multiculturalist,yes...in the sense that there always were many cultures stomping on each other's feet, not that they got along in the bland, corporate-shill sense of today.

[geekmarine]

Well, could anyone explain to me how multiculturalism promotes ethnic segregation? Because I'm still lost on that - when you don't promote multiculturalism, that's when everyone isolates themselves into little groups based on ethnicity. I mean, all I'm getting is "No, you're wrong," but I don't see the difference between that definition of multiculturalism and what basically amounts to the status quo where we promote only one "acceptable" culture.

Of course, I realize that the United States is kind of different, and being a much bigger country, it has many more examples of variations on a theme. But you know, we have areas where only one culture is tolerated, where cultural segregation is pretty firmly embedded in the traditions of the area. Then we have places where, due to various reasons, there's serious overlap between several different major cultures, to the point where you can't really separate them out.

And that's what my concept of multiculturalism is - when you have, say, three or four major cultural influences, and the local culture becomes a sort of mix of them all, incorporating elements of each one to create something entirely new. And if that's not multiculturalism, then what the hell is it because that's what I support.

[fraggle]

I think the problem is "culture" rather than "ethnicity", and it's important to distinguish between the two of them. Often the two are conflated because sources of different cultures are often immigrants from other countries. When I think about problems caused by "multiculturalism" it's when there's something that conflicts with what's considered appropriate or acceptable by the majority.

Not being able to speak the native language is one example. Another example would be something like the Niqab face veil. Personally I find it an offensive, sexist device - the French have gone to the extent of banning it completely, and while I think that's perhaps a step too far, I can understand why they would do so. In western society we've made huge progress towards ensuring that women are treated equally and giving women equal rights; to see a woman wearing a veil like this feels like we've suddenly stepped several centuries back in the opposite direction.

On the other hand, I do think it's good to have an open-minded and widely-embracing culture that isn't just a singular point of view. If they're integrated properly, these things can be enriching rather than a source of conflict.

The problem I find is that this does seem to be a very polarising subject. It's something that can cause problems, but it's difficult to criticise because most people who criticise "multiculturalism" are just racists trying to find a socially acceptable way to express their views. It's preferable to just refrain from commenting rather than be associated with people like that.

[schwerpunk]

geekmarine said:

And that's what my concept of multiculturalism is - when you have, say, three or four major cultural influences, and the local culture becomes a sort of mix of them all, incorporating elements of each one to create something entirely new. And if that's not multiculturalism, then what the hell is it because that's what I support.

Call that multiculturalism, an element thereof, or something else entirely, I think what you describe here is an ideal I can strive for.

There's not much point in 'defending' against the type of co-mingling of cultures where A) no one gets murdered, B) no one's right are trampled, and C) preferable elements (such as the equality of women) are allowed to dominate.

And I do believe it would be childish to think that all these cultures could co-exist without certain elements eventually coming to dominate the others. That all said, there will always be pockets of local culture - for instance, I couldn't live in a big city without a Chinatown somewhere.

[Csonicgo]

jute said:

Are hot dogs and Coca Cola products of Iceland or horrifying examples of multiculturalism?

The only way to "keep" your culture relevant is to share it, via conquest, trade or otherwise.

[The Lag]

Because of advances in technology and communications, the entire planet will one-day be truly one people.

Edited June 17, 2023 by The Lag

[hardcore_gamer]

The Lag said:

Because of advances in technology and communications, the entire planet will one-day be truly one people.

LOL!

Because the internet is such a great example of everyone getting together and being friends who treat each other with respect right?

Increased communications don't bring more understanding or peace. They just bring in more advanced ways to hurl insults at other people.

[The Lag]

.

Edited June 17, 2023 by The Lag

[Maes]

The Lag said:

like i said, at this point the only thing that could delay us all from breeding with one-another and becoming one singular race/ethnicity is a planet-wide natural disaster.

Or the prices of gasoline and air fares. If the world economy turns to shit, then only militaries will be able to operate vehicles of any kind, and any interbreeding that might occur will certainly not be entirely voluntary.

[schwerpunk]

...

I've gotta stop looking at Doom forums expecting to find uplifting views of the world-to-come.

[RestlessRodent]

hardcore_gamer said:

LOL!

Because the internet is such a great example of everyone getting together and being friends who treat each other with respect right?

Increased communications don't bring more understanding or peace. They just bring in more advanced ways to hurl insults at other people.

The internet is a great example of everyone getting together and being friends who treat each other with respect.

If nobody cooperated, There would be no Internet and we'd all be playing Doom over BBSes! And even if the Doom source was released, there probably wouldn't be the most dynamic and variable ports and levels out here today.

[schwerpunk]

I can't imagine being restricted to nothing but Canadian WADs...

Speaking of video-games, I actually enjoy playing games in foreign languages. For instance, I instantly found Assassin's Creed Brotherhood, not only bearable, but enjoyable, when I switched the spoken language to Italian - I highly recommend it!

Also, Metro 2033 in Russian, the Metal Gear series in Japanese, and Vanquish in French. If you like movies with subtitles, again, I highly recommend trying your games in other languages (with your native language subtitles on, of course). I haven't been this enthralled with video-game plots in years.

[Wagi]

The only point in history when we have been single-cultured is when there was only one human being in existence. From that point on, all "cultures" have been made up by experiences from around the world. Trying to suppress other "cultures" is foolish because in the end we should just let the better ones prevail naturally.

[DoomUK]

hardcore_gamer said:

Because the internet is such a great example of everyone getting together and being friends who treat each other with respect right?

Yes.

hardcore_gamer said:

Increased communications don't bring more understanding or peace. They just bring in more advanced ways to hurl insults at other people.

Sometimes. Comes with the "freedom of speech" thing. I'm fine with it.

[Csonicgo]

hardcore_gamer said:

Because the internet is such a great example of everyone getting together and being friends who treat each other with respect right?

Well, yeah, until you showed up?

[The Lag]

.

Edited June 17, 2023 by The Lag

[Maes]

"International cooperation" or commercial relations hardly count as multiculturalism. E.g. it's possible to have very advanced military or commercial/technological cooperation between nations in one area, but otherwise everybody keeping to his own.

We have a saying in Greece: "Από μακριά και αγαπημένοι", (lit. "Keeping afar and beloved"), meaning that certain relationships only really work well if you keep them superficial/segregated within a certain context. Taken to the extreme, it refers to something which is preferable to only speak about/view from afar, without interacting with it in any way.

E.g. Japan in the Age Of Sail found it A-OK to do business/trade with the Portuguese or Dutch, but otherwise kept their culture pure, and restricted trade to specially designated zones. The "dirty gaijins" even had to bring their own prostitutes, that's how afar they were kept.

Similarly, Saudi Arabia/Emirates do want the help of Western contractors for various engineering projects (and pay handsomely for it), but also impose that they work/live in relative segregation from their general populace, as there would be far too many problems to deal with if they were simply allowed to intermingle.

Another example: suuuuure, I do like Moroccan or Chinese themed restaurants (a very "light" version of multiculturalism), but I don't want Greece to become Morocco or China, in several ways.

[geekmarine]

You bring up an interesting point to me, Maes. Saudi Arabia has a very oppressive culture, and I think their isolationism is hurting them very much in that regard. They could potentially stand to embrace a little intercultural mingling, and would probably be better off as a culture because of it. To my looking at things, too much isolationism leads to the cultural equivalent of inbreeding - toxic memes within the culture begin to spread, with no alternatives to replace them. You need an injection of fresh ideas every once in a while to stay on top of things.

[Maes]

geekmarine said:

They could potentially stand to embrace a little intercultural mingling

They are actually pretty open to a very specific kind of intercultural mingling. That's not specific to the Saudi's though, but a characteristic of Islam in general: they "tolerate" what's clearly out of their reach or against their interests to mess with, but whatever is within reach had better become 100% Islam-compliant, or else.

Sure, they support all cultures mingling and being flattened into the One True Culture: Islam.

[myk]

hardcore_gamer said:
Knowing how to speak other languages or eating foreign food is not multiculture. Simply eating Pizza does not magically make me part-Italian.

It does a bit, at least because there are no fine lines in culture. While there are some bigger aspects to it, culture is pervasive and made up of all the bits and pieces of what people do. It goes the other way too, and for that you brought up a good example. In some senses, the idea of the Italian pizza became internationalized and developed to a large degree by immigrants around the world, modified by intermarriages, local habits and ingredients, and that influenced what we all know as the pizza, which we all think of as very Italian.

I don't suppose you think the British empire was multiculturalist even in spite of all of the cultural imperialism simply because they imported tea from India and obtained a liking to it?

So, what's the plan, conquer a few continents and attempt to slap your culture on them to obtain power and wealth, looking to guarantee yours is kept shielded, strong and "pure"? If you succeed to a degree and at whatever cost, it's likely your descendants down the lanes of history will have to deal with the consequences and embrace increasing amounts of multiculturalist policy...

Increased communications don't bring more understanding or peace. They just bring in more advanced ways to hurl insults at other people.

You jumped from one extreme to the other. It's clear it simply brings increased communication, without the need to add a particularly positive or negative modifier. That, though, more or less speaks against your purist stance, because, insults or kisses, it makes isolation more difficult!

Maes said:
Some cultures (like the British or Dutch) are simply better at concealing their skin-deep disgust/intolerance for immigrants and that's very dependent on how well the economy goes, others (like the Japanese or Korean) have such a stick-up-the-ass "inscrutable" nationalist attitude about it that it makes even the "stiff upper lip" of Britons appear like a friendly smile, and others (like most of Islamic countries) are openly against strangers, which are only tolerated under very special circumstances (why do you think engineering contractors in the various Emirates and Saudi Arabia are required to build walled communities for their foreign staff?).

That doesn't say anything about why each does what they do, which, coupled with allusions to emotions or attitudes, leaves an impression that we're talking about some kind of essential aspect they carry in their blood.

The British and Dutch aren't necessarily better at concealing anything. They just adapted to different circumstances and created deeper ties with external cultures. Imagine a nation that hasn't been able to appreciate the mingling that much. Perhaps it wasn't that much long ago that its people were under foreign influence, and now they're far from being at the center of Western culture, without direct access to its greatest benefits. In times of crises, this leads to frustration and distrust of strangers that the people of the nation feel can use them more than they can find use in the strangers. In turn, this resulting tendency doesn't help the nation grow or earn more respect, because, aside from incidental or temporary gains, culture and influence are mainly enriched by solid interactions with other cultures. They do need to retain cultural sovereignty to do so, which is what a marginalized country or people fear to lose, making them turn away from foreign mingling due to the vulnerability, but only from those weaker than themselves, because they can't stop those who are stronger from using them...

[Phml]

So, what's the plan, conquer a few continents and attempt to slap your culture on them to obtain power and wealth, looking to guarantee yours is kept shielded, strong and "pure"? If you succeed to a degree and at whatever cost, it's likely your descendants down the lanes of history will have to deal with the consequences and embrace increasing amounts of multiculturalist policy...

You don't need to look any further than US vs Europe to see this isn't true. The US have relentlessly pushed their own culture for the last 70 years, lean heavily right politically, and, as a result, american culture is ubiquitous and every person living there, even illegals, one way or another ends up being so american the country doesn't need to deal with multiculturalism and probably never will.

Compare and contrast with european countries who have welcomed people and different cultures with open arms, and as a result see their own national identity diluted further and further; part of it being replaced by american values, part of it being rejected either by immigrants sticking to their own culture or by natives not sure anymore what to believe in.

It could be argued this is just tied to the US being the leading power rather than anything else, yet Japan also fits the pattern. Strong nationalism to the point of xenophobism, strong culture exporting well and taking over in some other countries.

Intolerance isn't morally defensible, but it undoubtedly works. Being indiscriminately open and accepting of everyone ends up meaning other people who may not feel as nicely use the opportunity to walk all over you.

Of course, to even discuss multiculturalism on a public and english-speaking forum is an uphill battle. When you're living in North America that concept might mean getting to eat spicy food; when you're living in Europe the same thing might mean seeing public streets closed to non-believers and public pools closed to men to accomodate Islam.

[The Lag]

what makes you think the united states isn't extremely multicultural? it hasn't been around very long, what exists presently is a result of the mixture of many cultures brought by the many different ethnicities of people who have settled here.

[geekmarine]

I'd have to agree with The Lag here... The US is practically the epitome of multiculturalism. To the extent that it has a culture of it's own, it stems from so many different people from different cultures coming here and finding common ground. There are many different takes on it, though, and practically everyone has their own variation on the theme.

Truth is, I think a lot of people tend to feel culturally starved here in America. After all, the culture that is uniquely ours is one not built upon generations of tradition or anything, but out of simple necessity for everyone to have a common cultural language. Everything else is borrowed from other cultures, seemingly at random.

[hardcore_gamer]

geekmarine said:

I'd have to agree with The Lag here... The US is practically the epitome of multiculturalism. To the extent that it has a culture of it's own, it stems from so many different people from different cultures coming here and finding common ground. There are many different takes on it, though, and practically everyone has their own variation on the theme.

Truth is, I think a lot of people tend to feel culturally starved here in America. After all, the culture that is uniquely ours is one not built upon generations of tradition or anything, but out of simple necessity for everyone to have a common cultural language. Everything else is borrowed from other cultures, seemingly at random.

And on the other extreme end of the spectrum, you have countries like Japan and South-Korea who are thousands of years old and have a very conservative stance towards their culture. Tell people from those countries that their nation's are multicultural and most will laugh at you.

[geekmarine]

hardcore_gamer said:

And on the other extreme end of the spectrum, you have countries like Japan and South-Korea who are thousands of years old and have a very conservative stance towards their culture. Tell people from those countries that their nation's are multicultural and most will laugh at you.

I was never arguing that those countries are multicultural, I was only disagreeing with the notion that the US is not multicultural. In the case of the US, I think it's just that the different cultures which make it up have become so blended together that it's hard to tell. Actually though, come to think of it, I'll bet if you went back far enough into the history of Japan, you'd see that it didn't originate from one culture, but was the product of several cultures being blended together.

[The Lag]

Forgetting about the fact that western culture is very prevalent in Japan, one major indication that Japan is not a monoculture is: religion.

Christianity, Shinto, Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism, Aleph, Ryukyuan, Jainism, etc. etc. etc.

[myk]

Phml said:
The US have relentlessly pushed their own culture for the last 70 years, lean heavily right politically, and, as a result, american culture is ubiquitous and every person living there, even illegals, one way or another ends up being so american the country doesn't need to deal with multiculturalism and probably never will.

I more or less agree with the facts you list at first, which generate a bunch of tensions in US (and world) culture and policies, but the US deals with multiculturalism because it's a key player in the history of modern multiculturalism, pushing for the universal declaration of human rights after the war and with human rights movements such as black emancipation or aboriginal rights, or its general idea of liberty based on Christian reform as opposed to the more unitarian hierarchy of Catholicism. The capitalism the US furthers also creates all sorts of mixtures that must then be dealt with socially, and while many in the elite try not to care, the consequences exceed their plans.

Compare and contrast with european countries who have welcomed people and different cultures with open arms, and as a result see their own national identity diluted further and further; part of it being replaced by american values, part of it being rejected either by immigrants sticking to their own culture or by natives not sure anymore what to believe in.

Europe is dominated by the US military (through NATO) and most of its countries have lost their financial sovereignty. This makes it hard to administer economic problems or avoid being manipulated by international bankers, and since Europeans feel too habituated or scared to oppose US influence in a deeper way they take it on who they can. Germany slaps smaller countries around, and these can kick little more than immigrants.

It could be argued this is just tied to the US being the leading power rather than anything else, yet Japan also fits the pattern. Strong nationalism to the point of xenophobism, strong culture exporting well and taking over in some other countries.

I'd say Japan, South Korea and Israel are all US satellites geopolitically. Europe is too, to a point, but it's much larger and more eclectic.

Intolerance isn't morally defensible, but it undoubtedly works.

Aside from consequences like the Nazis, it also creates the demand for solutions, or multicultural policies. If intolerance is a violent knee jerk reaction, multicultural policy is a healing process.