Multiculturalism In Western European Countries - Success or Failure?

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Although I agree, I'd say the hype was more about how he was built in the media - he had a kind of a rock star status, which was unusual for a politician.
What surprised me more is that all those that didn't agree with him were labelled 'racist'.

Originally posted by Deadline
I thought just the fact Obama became President shows its the least racist country in the world (far from perfect though).

Originally posted by §P0oONY

Not at all. If say Diane Abbot won the Labour leadership and went on to be PM it woudn't be a big deal. Of course it woud be mentioned but not in the same way that Obama's was.

I'm guessing we'll see Diane back on the politics show sofa with Portillo soon enough.

Originally posted by jaden101
I'm guessing we'll see Diane back on the politics show sofa with Portillo soon enough.

Originally posted by roughrider
I think my home of Toronto, Canada, is likely the most cosmopolitan in the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto

Now I loved Sydney when I was there. I think I could live there.
Nonetheless, a Vietnamese maid at my hotel told me of the prejudice she sees and feels; asked me about Canada and if it was better. I said Canada is pretty chilled out about other cultures.

I agree with this.
Toronto is one of my favourite cities in world because of its successful multiculturalism, i still prefer Vancouver though.

The major difference between North America and Europe on this is the tendency for European nations to enshrine parts of their culture in the constitution. France is the best example, essentially expecting its immagrents to adopt a "French" way of life. In fact, from a Canadian perspective, what passes for "multi-culturalism" in much of the world seems hardly like lip service. This isn't to say I don't appreciate how many other cultures there are in England, just that, from my EXTREMELY limited perspective, we are more welcoming of people's cultures.

I think this has lead to the failure of multiculturalism in Europe, so far as it can be said to have faild. Look, 70 years ago, Hitler was burning Jews and a pretty sizable population of Europe was cool with it (North America too). This sort of thing seems impossible today, and that can certainly be seen as a success of multiculturalism.

I think the problem, especially in Canada and North America now, is that people saw multiculturalism as an end point. Unfortunatly, this still causes divides between peoples groups, and lots of other crazy in-group/out-group things, but it is certainly a step up from what we had previously.

Multiculturalism makes Canada a great county IMO.
Multiculturalism in the UK is pretty much a success or failure depending on how you look at.

Come to think of it i wonder what the UK would be like if they were no ethnic minorities at all?
Would the UK be better off if it had a 100% all white population?

My grandparents moved here at only 18 years old back in the early 1940's from India & they loved it so much they decided to settle here. Sometimes i wonder if they had not but thankfully they did & im very greatfull they did because it was the right decision.

Originally posted by inimalist
The major difference between North America and Europe on this is the tendency for European nations to enshrine parts of their culture in the constitution. France is the best example, essentially expecting its immagrents to adopt a "French" way of life. In fact, from a Canadian perspective, what passes for "multi-culturalism" in much of the world seems hardly like lip service. This isn't to say I don't appreciate how many other cultures there are in England, just that, from my EXTREMELY limited perspective, we are more welcoming of people's cultures.

I can't say whether the Canadians are more accepting of other cultures than here because I simply don't know enough about Canada. The British have had their issues in the past, and naturally there are those idiots out who think that immigration is the devil, mostly due to the "dey tuk r jubz" mentality... but on the whole we're very tolerant of other's cultures. If Canada doesn't have the group of people who are against immigration and stuff then I guess you can say the are more accepting. However you;d also need to factor in the fact that Britain's population is far more dense than that of Canada.

You're correct about the French though.

I think this has lead to the failure of multiculturalism in Europe, so far as it can be said to have faild. Look, 70 years ago, Hitler was burning Jews and a pretty sizable population of Europe was cool with it (North America too). This sort of thing seems impossible today, and that can certainly be seen as a success of multiculturalism.

I think the problem, especially in Canada and North America now, is that people saw multiculturalism as an end point. Unfortunatly, this still causes divides between peoples groups, and lots of other crazy in-group/out-group things, but it is certainly a step up from what we had previously.

When it comes down to it, "multiculturalism" is just a buzz word. It doesn't really mean much but makes people seem grounded and modern when they talk about it possitively.

The biggest problem in Canada hasn't been dealing with immigrants - for those who are interested, our biggest ethnic minority is the Chinese.

It's been dealing with the Aborigional Natives, and trying to slowly right hundreds of years of bad treatment (we were only a LITTLE better than the USA in dealings), with land claims & trying to give them an active role in society.

Originally posted by §P0oONY
We don't have a constitution in the UK (well, certainly not in the same way as a lot of countries), nor do we say that anyone who moves here must adopt a "british" way of life. So long as people don't break the law there really isn't an issue.

I can't say whether the Canadians are more accepting of other cultures than here because I simply don't know enough about Canada. The British have had their issues in the past, and naturally there are those idiots out who think that immigration is the devil, mostly due to the "dey tuk r jubz" mentality... but on the whole we're very tolerant of other's cultures. If Canada doesn't have the group of people who are against immigration and stuff then I guess you can say the are more accepting. However you;d also need to factor in the fact that Britain's population is far more dense than that of Canada.

You're correct about the French though.

There are legal and tax benefits for people promoting minority culture in Canada, it helps immigration if you have "cultural" points, etc. It is an actual governmental policy to encourage other cultures in Canada.

Though, I can't say how different it is, in practice, from Britain. Our leader recently caused waves by saying a group of refugee Sri Lankans would be sent home for entering canada illegally, but such a measure is nearly unheard of by Canadian immigration, and his sentiments were unpopular.

Originally posted by §P0oONY
I think the main problem is that of grouping all of western Europe together. Every country has their differences. Some European countries have dealt with multiculturalism better than others. This is mainly due IMO to every country in Europe having it's own diverse history.

When it comes down to it, "multiculturalism" is just a buzz word. It doesn't really mean much but makes people seem grounded and modern when they talk about it possitively.

yes, but the past 70 years have seen not only the diversity within cultures expand, but the tolorance and appreciation of such diversity, to a point where it is essentially unheard of in human history... I actually can't think of another time when people of all races, religions, creeds, etc, have been encouraged, legitimately, to come and gather together for the common good of society.

There are problems, but to say this is just "another type of cultural definition" is to ignore clear social trends that arose... well, at the very least in the post WW2 period

Originally posted by roughrider
The biggest problem in Canada hasn't been dealing with immigrants - for those who are interested, our biggest ethnic minority is the Chinese.

It's been dealing with the Aborigional Natives, and trying to slowly right hundreds of years of bad treatment (we were only a LITTLE better than the USA in dealings), with land claims & trying to give them an active role in society.

100% true

They are holding "truth and reconciliation" hearings over the residential schools issue in Winnipeg, they started in August, I might check them out.

Its easy to be cynical here, but man I'd love for some positive to come from it

Originally posted by inimalist
The major difference between North America and Europe on this is the tendency for European nations to enshrine parts of their culture in the constitution. France is the best example, essentially expecting its immagrents to adopt a "French" way of life. In fact, from a Canadian perspective, what passes for "multi-culturalism" in much of the world seems hardly like lip service. This isn't to say I don't appreciate how many other cultures there are in England, just that, from my EXTREMELY limited perspective, we are more welcoming of people's cultures.

I think this has lead to the failure of multiculturalism in Europe, so far as it can be said to have faild. Look, 70 years ago, Hitler was burning Jews and a pretty sizable population of Europe was cool with it (North America too). This sort of thing seems impossible today, and that can certainly be seen as a success of multiculturalism.

I think the problem, especially in Canada and North America now, is that people saw multiculturalism as an end point. Unfortunatly, this still causes divides between peoples groups, and lots of other crazy in-group/out-group things, but it is certainly a step up from what we had previously.

French have every right to expect immigrants to adopt French way of life. Unlike Canada, that was built on immigration, France is a much older nation with it's own traditions and history which they do not necessarily just want to give up.

North America and Europe cannot be compared in such ways - North America was born out if immigration and very recently.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
French have every right to expect immigrants to adopt French way of life. Unlike Canada, that was built on immigration, France is a much older nation with it's own traditions and history which they do not necessarily just want to give up.

North America and Europe cannot be compared in such ways - North America was born out if immigration and very recently.

I'm not debating any of that, or trying to say the French shouldn't have the stance that they do

I think the position is dumb and North America is demonstrably better because of its openness to other cultures, but certainly there is a longwinded explanation of why various nations have the views they do.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
French have every right to expect immigrants to adopt French way of life. Unlike Canada, that was built on immigration, France is a much older nation with it's own traditions and history which they do not necessarily just want to give up.

North America and Europe cannot be compared in such ways - North America was born out if immigration and very recently.

Yep that's all correct same can be said about the UK as well.

Originally posted by inimalist
There are legal and tax benefits for people promoting minority culture in Canada, it helps immigration if you have "cultural" points, etc. It is an actual governmental policy to encourage other cultures in Canada.

Though, I can't say how different it is, in practice, from Britain. Our leader recently caused waves by saying a group of refugee Sri Lankans would be sent home for entering canada illegally, but such a measure is nearly unheard of by Canadian immigration, and his sentiments were unpopular.

yes, but the past 70 years have seen not only the diversity within cultures expand, but the tolorance and appreciation of such diversity, to a point where it is essentially unheard of in human history... I actually can't think of another time when people of all races, religions, creeds, etc, have been encouraged, legitimately, to come and gather together for the common good of society.

There are problems, but to say this is just "another type of cultural definition" is to ignore clear social trends that arose... well, at the very least in the post WW2 period

By saying "multiculturalism" is simply a buzz word isn't ignoring the fact that countries are diversifying, it's simply ignoring it's importance. Society may very well benefit from a larger diversity, but no one deserves a pat on the back for this. It's just the natural progression of a world made ever smaller by technology.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
French have every right to expect immigrants to adopt French way of life. Unlike Canada, that was built on immigration, France is a much older nation with it's own traditions and history which they do not necessarily just want to give up.

North America and Europe cannot be compared in such ways - North America was born out if immigration and very recently.

North American countries simply don't have a culture, certainly not in the same way any European country has... they are far too young.

Originally posted by §P0oONY
My point it that in the grand scheme of things attaching a label to it simply isn't necessary. Different cultures combining "for the common good of society" isn't an active process, or at least it shouldn't be... people aren't emigrating for that reason. People are moving for the sole reason of finding a better life for themselves, it's not to better society.

By saying "multiculturalism" is simply a buzz word isn't ignoring the fact that countries are diversifying, it's simply ignoring it's importance. Society may very well benefit from a larger diversity, but no one deserves a pat on the back for this. It's just the natural progression of a world made ever smaller by technology.

except in cases like Canada, where it is actually a thing that informs immigration policy, with diversity as an end goal.

The citizens themselves who are the immigrants may be coming for whatever their reason, the receptiveness to their culture, at least in the case of Canada, is a deliberate policy as opposed to simply passively letting them set up (which is more comparable to America).

I'd also not say any place has more or less culture than another. North American culture works in a very different way than France's, but the idea that just because the nations are young there is nothing that binds the people together is sort of nonsense. National identites can be built over night.

This video is quite interesting, it does explain alot about multiculturalism regarding the British Asian community:

YouTube video

I pretty much agree with it all said but i LOL'd at the Asian girl with blonde hair & blue eyes?! WTF is all that about?

I gotta find out who she is?

I don't think anyone should be necessarily afraid of losing their culture, at most they develop, as they have for years, perhaps more rapidly now mixing with others, but even that has happened in the past.

The view lil b was talking about seems a bit like, yeah, culture's that thing of the past, and we are at the end point now and have to preserve it...which I don't think applies.

Also denying younger countries their culture cause it doesn't date as far back (which may not even be true, unless you somehow decide that culture is a localized thing and once you move you lose it) seems also very arrogant, and is a view that I have heard a couple of times, usually from Europeans.

The US may have only started really developing its separate culture in the last 400 years or so, but it already came with a lot of culture from other places and that working together forged a new and vast culture very fast as well.

Originally posted by inimalist

I think this has lead to the failure of multiculturalism in Europe, so far as it can be said to have faild. Look, 70 years ago, Hitler was burning Jews and a pretty sizable population of Europe was cool with it (North America too). This sort of thing seems impossible today, and that can certainly be seen as a success of multiculturalism.

I have to quite strongly disagree with this sentiment. You only have to look at several recent examples, one of which was in Europe, in how attitudes to and reactions to ethnic cleansing hasn't exactly been any better in modern times than in the 1930's and 40's.

Former Yugoslavia

DR of Congo...Death toll of 5.4 million in 5 years...The most deadly war since WW2.

Rwanda (a million people in 100 days meant a greater number of dead per day than the Nazis managed at the height of the final solution) I still remember the video below and how utterly despicable that woman seemed at the time...I now realise she was the scapegoat.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VWJQIn91hc&feature=related

Sudan/Darfur

Reaction to those was either extremely slow or non existent by either Europe or North America.

It did fine in Brasil. So fine there is no actual multi-culturalism, not like it is understood in most other countries. Melting pot really did melt distinct cultural identities away. People mostly refer to their ethnic backgrounds as nothing more than curiosities, if they are aware of them at all, and the overhelming majority - including the most recent migration waves of the 20th century - are sanguinelly miscigenated as well.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I don't think anyone should be necessarily afraid of losing their culture, at most they develop, as they have for years, perhaps more rapidly now mixing with others, but even that has happened in the past.

The view lil b was talking about seems a bit like, yeah, culture's that thing of the past, and we are at the end point now and have to preserve it...which I don't think applies.

Also denying younger countries their culture cause it doesn't date as far back (which may not even be true, unless you somehow decide that culture is a localized thing and once you move you lose it) seems also very arrogant, and is a view that I have heard a couple of times, usually from Europeans.

The US may have only started really developing its separate culture in the last 400 years or so, but it already came with a lot of culture from other places and that working together forged a new and vast culture very fast as well.

There is a difference between culture evolving and culture forcibly changing in the name of accommodating something that isn't French and hasn't ever been French.
For many people, culture is identity and there is no logical reason why France is to become anything other than France.