Multiculturalism

This is what I meant by misrepresentation. The melting pot does not necessarily destroy it's discrete components nor does it disallow any behaviour that does not conflict with the minimum universal requirements as outlined in the constitution and bill of rights.

Is someone going to cite some examples of what they are talking about. What attempt to legislate are you talking about here? I thought this was an attempt at mono-culture within Quebec.

Like the Quebec language laws. Exactly which is an attempt at multiculturalism in Canada.(I mean that it is tolerated because we have adopted a mc approach.)Edited by ProtoTypical, : No reason given.

Great. So let's just not do language legislation. Oh wait? We don't have that here. I wonder if Dr. Adequate knew that.

What?

Is that a way of saying "Actually, that's more than one culture"?

Your idea of "the melting pot" looks a lot like an attempt to force assimilation by neglecting the needs of minority cultures within a nation - even those that have as much claim to be "native" as the majority.It's also interesting that it relies on national boundaries - if Quebec went independent (and the concessions to Quebecois culture seem to have been created to avoid that) the case for describing the situation there as "multiculturalism" collapses. And that's because it isn't really multiculturalism. Promoting a few dominant regional cultures is hardly the same as trying to minimise inadvertent discrimination against minority cultures.I think that this question is one that should be answered. How many proponents of assimilation think that the European settlers in the Americas should have assimilated to the culture of the indigenous peoples ?

It is a way of saying that a melting pot approach is not equivalent to the Borg collective.

I suppose that there is pressure to conform but only to the most basic of requirements and they exist for all who would be a citizen. If your culture requires that you stone your daughter if she should dishonour you by being raped then you have to leave that when you flee from the shit hole that your culture has produced. I don't see why a reasonably functioning society should have to tolerate practices that are directly contrary to the principals that allow their society to succeed. One of these principals is equality under the law and pandering to individual cultures is not equality. There is a difference between coming as an immigrant and coming as a conqueror.

Your complaint about the French language in Quebec does not seem to mirror anything else being discussed here. Certainly Quebec is a legitimate part of the discussion, but Quebec's tactics seemed pretty much to be exactly what people favoring multi-culturalism are complaining about.Jon seems to be trying to find ways to impose more conformity on the rest of us and Coyote seems to think that un-named factions are deliberately trying to weaken the Union so that we cannot return to the Moon.You appear to have some sympathy with those positions, but so far not in any way that makes sense. Just some vague stuff about affirmative action and keeping the culture pure along with a Quebec example that does not apply.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Which means what, in your opinion? That everyone in Canada should speak English primarily? How about a short list of say three citizenship requirements. Give me some examples of people fighting for a brand of multiculturalism that would allow such a thing.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Show me where I used the word impose. I think my position has been clear. Based on the evidence, a degree of cultural uniformity is necessary to create the social cohesion that makes a cooperative society work. Multicultural policies do not provide that. But that does not mean the alternative is to impose more conformity, because it is not. I've actually mentioned some alternatives that encourage assimilation but still respect minority cultures where possible.Caricaturing others' arguments, while typical of your style, does nothing to address the points of the discussion.

When you said that you are going to engage students in activities that will force them to pick up values, I took you at your word. Adult students have a choice in the activities they participate in, but others do not. Some do and some don't. Part of our culture ought to be tolerance for other people's differences in religion, celebrations, manner of dress, etc. right?And what policies are you talking about? The idea that multi-culturalism is about isolation and separatism is what appears to me to be the cartooning. So far both you and Coyote seem very reluctant to provide any detail.Until you put up something concrete, don't expect that I or anyone else is going to automatically know what you are talking about. I and others have repeated asked for clarification and the response is more generalities and accusations. Object to something specific, and perhaps you can get agreement from someone other than the other people tossing out generalities.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Is that a way of saying "Actually, that's more than one culture"?

Your arguments are really bad.Do you mean to say that if minority cultures could create by secession their own governments, we could get away without making concessions?Are you of the belief that immigration should be viewed as an invasion?Just what nonsense is underlying your opinions and questions?