Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? - 11/28/2007 7:30:44 PM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline
Believing that is important to you isn't it, thompson.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
Sanity:
Thus far your posts are based on an appalling lack of knowledge of American history.
thompson


_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 141
RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? - 11/28/2007 7:50:11 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

Believing that is important to you isn't it, thompson.

Sanity:
Yes I find that the truth is important.  Truth is difficult to contradict. 
thompson

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 142
RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? - 11/28/2007 7:52:04 PM   
stella41b


Posts: 4258
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: SW London (UK)
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

Stella, if you was joking about Stalin then i was wrong to use the word contempt, i interpreted what you wrote and not the fact you was joking. While we are on about Stalin, The idea of the United nations was actually Winston Churchills, but i digress. You were the first to mention Thatcher, and as far as i am aware, i havent mentioned right wing at all. Only what it was like before communism and afterwards. What has Thatcher got to do with events in Poland, or for that matter the rise of the right wing. She took on the unions in the Uk and that was, in the view of many, a good thing. Talk about the miners, blame Scargill, he said he was going to bring down this ( democratically elected i may add ) government. Do you suggest he should have been allowed to do so. Blame Thatcher for everything, shes an easy target. Toxteth, Brixton, ect. Dont apportion any blame to the rioters but then answer me this, Here we are 25 years on, go to Brixton and see whats changed, even since Labour came to power ten years ago... Nothing, nada, zilch, the poor still get screwed, its how its always been and i doubt if it will change. Tell me about being poor, i grew up drinking from jam jars, so i have a bit of a clue. The working class in the UK have always been screwed, and the Unions screwed us some more by being political instead of trying to improve things. People get into power and enjoy the trappings, and for the most part any ideals they held close vanish, you only have to look at the present lot to see that.

Lets mention the guys you saw pissing on a homeless man, what politics did they hold, left wing ? right wing ? the answer doesnt matter, they acted like that because they were pathetic drunks, sadly it goes on.

I will read the links you posted about Poland but you stated yourself those people are here to work for monetary reasons. Blame the Polish government, Lech Kaczynski isnt a nice person, i grant you that. He stopped the gay right parades when he was mayor of Warsaw, but, and this is my point, He still got elected. I still say Poland is better off now than it was 20 years ago.

If you are hoping to find a better life there, i really hope you get what you are looking for.


Politesub53... it was probably my misunderstanding that you were over 'on the right'... apologies.

What has Thatcher got to do with Poland? Was it not Thatcher who together with Reagan sought to bring an end to the Cold War and communism? Oh and was it not Margaret Thatcher who persuaded George Bush senior to declare war on Iraq for invading Kuwait in 1990?

It was her government and people who killed off the British mining industry - an industry which like all our others needed restructuring, not destroying or selling off - by importing cheaper Polish coal, and then when that proved too expensive and a cheaper alternative was found, the Polish mining industry was destroyed and cheaper Ukrainian coal was imported.

Yes and no. Yes, because she was Prime Minister, and no because her policies were formed by a group of people. People like Robert Maxwell, people like Rupert Murdoch, these are the people who run our country, not the politicians.

Yes, she sorted out the unions, and yes, it was a good thing, I agree. Arthur Scargill was right, but he was obnoxious, pompous, and had his own political agenda. Scargill played his own part in destroying the British coal industry through refusing to compromise. But Thatcher also 'sorted' a lot of other people in this country, in fact everybody with her crazy ideas of 'productivity' and everything being run for profit.

I don't blame the rioters, having lived through the Manningham riots in Bradford in 1981. I agree with you Politesub53 but would go further to say the British people and everyone else, including all the foreigners, migrant workers, asylum seekers and refugees have been screwed.

Why has nothing changed? Because the same people are always in power, and it doesn't and will not matter who you vote for, they will always be in power. They are in power not just in Britain, but in the States, and in Europe. Their aims are always the same, to get control of resources - energy resources like oil, coal, gas, and manpower, and exploit those resources for productivity and profit. This is what globalism is all about. This is why the European Union was formed.

I write from personal experience, and three people who cannot be trusted are actors, journalists, and politicians. They make their living from words, from speaking and writing the 'correct' words, the right words. Margaret Thatcher had good intentions, so did Lech Walesa, so did John Major, Tony Blair, so too has Gordon Brown, but good intentions don't get you very far in politics.

I don't subscribe to communism (or any other present political system) as an acceptable form of government. Communism has got nothing to do with the theories of Engels and Marx, communism creates a hierarchy of the 'elite', the 'Party faithful', and the proletariat. It is a form of government which has never been fairly applied, not in Eastern Europe, nor in China, Vietnam, North Korea. It doesn't respect the rights of the individual, human rights, and this is shown right through history.

I favour political leaders who keep their principles, people like Ken Livingstone, like Colonel Gaddafi in Libya, and such. Nobody has defeated Ken Livingstone, but those in power are afraid of him, and he's done rather well in my opinion running London as its Mayor, and I would challenge anyone to name me someone better for the position of Prime Minister, but of course we're talking here of an ideal situation. My own view is that party politics has run its course, and we need a new political solution.

Sure Lech Kaczynski was democratically elected. And I understand why. I was still living in Poland during the fiasco of the Leszek Miller post-communist government. Off the top of my head since 1990 Poland has had about fifteen different Prime Ministers, and three presidents, Lech Walesa, Aleksander Kwasniewski, and Lech Kaczynski.

About the guys pissing on the homeless man, I assume that they're right wing. Why? I see the media barons like Murdoch as being right wing, and it appears to most of the editors in our media and entertainment industry that picking on people less fortunate than you, telling lies about them and persecuting and victimizing them is not only perfectly socially acceptable, but also good entertainment and necessary for the benefit of the economy. It's good for the economy because it keeps everyone on their toes, makes people suspicious of each other, and through this allows those in power to maintain power through divide and rule.

Consider also that some years ago I did some research for the Simon Weisenthal Institute in New York who wanted to invest in a Museum of Anti-Communism in Poland. I know all about the Holocaust in Poland, the Warsaw Ghetto, I've been to sites of the former camps of Majdanek, Treblinka, Sobibor, but also to the lesser known camps as Tulipan, the site of the current Warsaw West railway station, looked into the pogrom in Kielce in 1946, the mass deportations of Jews from Poland in March 1968. These things happened. Go see Polanski's film 'The Pianist', about the life of Wladyslaw Szpilman in the Warsaw Ghetto and how he managed to survive the Second World War in Warsaw. These things happened.

I am strongly in favour of multi-culturalism, in fact it's the basis of my artistic work and why I went to Poland to work in theatre anyway. One of my core and fundamental beliefs is tolerance, not unconditional tolerance because I know that freedom carries with it responsibility which not everybody accepts and which quite a few are inclined to abuse, but I work in my own specific area of theatre, cross-cultural theatre, and have recently developed my own theory of modern theatre - which is why I'm spending so much time at this computer writing about this theory.

This is why I would rather people like Kaczynski would keep his mouth shut about crimes committed against Poles during the Second World War and about gays, lesbians and instead focus on the more pressing problem caused by the downfall of the former regime, the reforms of Lech Walesa and the later Solidarity government and the economic problems caused by shutting out Russia, Poland's biggest trading partner.

Same too in this country... I'm getting tired of hearing about bogus asylum seekers, immigration problems, benefit scroungers, paedophiles, celebrity culture, surveys, and whole lot of meaningless trivial information. I'm getting tired of being dictated to by the media over what I should wear, how I should think, what I should do and being constantly brainwashed and put through fear motivation (fear of poverty, fear of unemployment, fear of benefits) to be considered 'socially acceptable' and a happy productive corporate slave and equally a happy little consumer.

Leaving this country isn't going to be easy, I love Britain, I love the people, until recently we were a very open, friendly, tolerant society, such that you couldn't find anywhere else in Europe, and the British people are genuinely very friendly, open and hospitable. So too are the others. I live openly as myself within sight of the Battersea Power Station, and I know it's the many areas in London with the immgrants, foreigners and a mix of other people which are still the friendly, open, tolerant areas, the poorer areas of London. The situation changes drastically when you move into other areas where one culture dominates, and here I have in mind places like Peckham, Abbey Wood, Eltham, and a lot of places outside London.

I refuse to accept the intolerance, resentment and prejudice shown to other people just because they are different. I refuse to accept this new culture where it's okay to be loud, rude, arrogant, aggressive, selfish, uneducated, ignorant where you can openly show hatred and animosity to people just because they are poor or different. I refuse to accept a culture which sees age and maturity as a weakness, or kindness and honesty as weakness.

But it's also personal. It's now over two years since I've seen any of my work on a stage. I'm tired of doing all the work on the promise of funding to later find that the funding has magically disappeared, which tends to make me look rather stupid to the people I work with.

Therefore I'm going to where I've been offered work. Anything to me is better than the prospect of sitting around doing nothing on benefits.

_____________________________

CM's Resident Lyricist
also Facebook
http://stella.baker.tripod.com/
50NZpoints
Q2
Simply Q

(in reply to Politesub53)
Profile   Post #: 143
RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? - 11/28/2007 7:56:46 PM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline
Why don't you try contradicting something I said then, as opposed to simply lashing out at me then, thompson?

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
Sanity:
Yes I find that the truth is important.  Truth is difficult to contradict. 
thompson


_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 144
RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? - 11/28/2007 10:30:18 PM   
FullfigRIMaam


Posts: 718
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline
quote:

adding:areas of Washington DC quite near the White House and I think its called Liberty City  not far from Miami Airport are a bit of a problem. NO?
Yes Washington D.C. has a couple of poverty stricken/drug infested areas, but there is no area in D.C. that is not mixed with people from all over the world, no matter how wealthy, or how much melanin pigmented they are.   M

_____________________________

"touching was and still is and will always be the true revolution" Nikki Giovanni
"Love is the only sane and satisfactory answer to the problem of human existence." Erich Fromm

(in reply to seeksfemslave)
Profile   Post #: 145
RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? - 11/28/2007 10:40:46 PM   
philosophy


Posts: 5284
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: EPGAH

However, at least England HAS an official language...


...as usual you're shaky on the facts. First of all, the country you are referring to is the the UK, United kingdom. England is merely one of the four countries that make up the whole. As for official language, much of the ceremonial stuff in Parliament is done in French, a direct consequence of the Norman Conquest of 1066. On the ground i can count at least four indigenous languages that are taught in schools; English, Welsh, Scots Gaelic and Irish Gaelic.

No country needs to define its culture by its language. Culture is far more than that. It is also history, custom, arts etc. Culture is to nation what character is to human. Complex, rich and infinitely variable.

Your simplistic views on culture are juvenile.

(in reply to EPGAH)
Profile   Post #: 146
RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? - 11/28/2007 10:47:26 PM   
slaveboyforyou


Posts: 3607
Joined: 1/6/2005
From: Arkansas, U.S.A.
Status: offline
When I think of multiculturalism run amok, I think of that movie Blade Runner.  Huge megacities crowded with every conceivable ethnicity and language.  Polluted, crime ridden, impersonal, and dirty.  I don't see these utopias that liberals dream of where we are all living together in harmony.

(in reply to EPGAH)
Profile   Post #: 147
RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? - 11/28/2007 10:52:47 PM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
Stella, we already have "multi-culturalism" in the U.S. and in the U.K. I'm sure as well.
What's the problem?

_____________________________

"But Your Honor, this is not a Jury of my Peers, these people are all decent, honest, law-abiding citizens!"

(in reply to stella41b)
Profile   Post #: 148
RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? - 11/29/2007 5:33:25 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: slaveboyforyou

When I think of multiculturalism run amok, I think of that movie Blade Runner.  Huge megacities crowded with every conceivable ethnicity and language.  Polluted, crime ridden, impersonal, and dirty.  I don't see these utopias that liberals dream of where we are all living together in harmony.

slaveboyforyou:
As long as you base your view of reality on a movie then you will always view reality as such.
thompson

(in reply to slaveboyforyou)
Profile   Post #: 149
RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? - 11/29/2007 5:39:37 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

Why don't you try contradicting something I said then, as opposed to simply lashing out at me then, thompson?

Sanity:
That was my initial post which you must have failed to notice.  Perhaps my font was too small.
The contradiction I tried to point out to you is that we invaded their country and now you are accusing them of invading us.  Somehow that seems to be more than a little disingenuous.
thompson

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 150
RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? - 11/29/2007 6:59:23 AM   
LadyEllen


Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: Stourport-England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

In the end, I view a nation as a kind of club. If one wishes to be and remain a member of the club, then one abides by the rules of the club. One participates in the activities of the club, and one enjoys the benefits of the club. One is proud of one's membership and supports the club. One takes part in forming the rules of the club, one pays one's dues on time and one does not exclude new members because they are new, nor indeed does one vilify the older members of the club for their age. One does not exclude on the basis of ethnicity, religion, sexuality, gender or whatever - membership is open to all who wish to be members and will abide by the rules.

E


Who runs the club/sets the rules, and what are they?


Please re-read the whole post.

1) we need a new settlement which takes into account all of the population (ie not based on our outdated, inherited systems which are no longer relevant to the people now)
2) as part of the new settlement, everyone who wishes to be a citizen takes part in the formulation of the rules, which I would suggest has to be from the ground up by way of referenda to approve/discard existing and proposed new rules.

If the majority vote in a referendum to decide the official language for the country shows Urdu as being the choice, then Urdu will be used.

If the majority think that it is a good idea to legally protect "honour killings" then that shall be the way.

etc

E

_____________________________

In a test against the leading brand, 9 out of 10 participants couldnt tell the difference. Dumbasses.

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 151
RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? - 11/29/2007 7:03:51 AM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline
"Their" country, thompson?

You're sounding ridiculous.

_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 152
RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? - 11/29/2007 7:24:28 AM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline
  In neo-con land,we never invaded Iraq.We liberated them,and they should be thankful to us.Over a million killed? Hell, Hussein killed many more,so what`s the big deal? Sheeeshhh!

Also,in neo-con land,the answer to all our problems in Iraq,is to invade Iran.This`ll give insight into how neo-cons think and operate.Willful ignorance and fairytale narratives are big part of it.Along with the criminal negligence.

< Message edited by Owner59 -- 11/29/2007 7:26:48 AM >

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 153
RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? - 11/29/2007 7:25:10 AM   
EPGAH


Posts: 500
Joined: 12/25/2006
Status: offline
America conquered, then bought, a large amount of what was formerly Mexico back in 1848...Since then, we've made VAST improvements, while Mexican culture seems to be mired in 1800s thinking, especially the part about more children somehow being better, while in America, people usually put having children "on hold" in exchange for a career...
Note, however, that Mexicans are either inherently incompetent, or inherently corrupt: The areas under American stewardship have fared well enough that the Mexicans seek to invade them, to steal our benefits. That at least tacitly acknowledges that our side is "better", although I doubt the invaders would admit it under ANY circumstances...Once here, they set about trying to make it the same as THEIR side: overpopulated, impoverished, and diseased...Once that is accomplished, they push deeper into America, and repeat the process!

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 154
RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? - 11/29/2007 7:55:55 AM   
camille65


Posts: 5746
Joined: 7/11/2007
From: Austin Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: EPGAH

Note, however, that Mexicans are either inherently incompetent, or inherently corrupt: The areas under American stewardship have fared well enough that the Mexicans seek to invade them, to steal our benefits. That at least tacitly acknowledges that our side is "better", although I doubt the invaders would admit it under ANY circumstances...Once here, they set about trying to make it the same as THEIR side: overpopulated, impoverished, and diseased...Once that is accomplished, they push deeper into America, and repeat the process!
 Just when I am sure you can't say anything to further amaze me, you prove me wrong.

_____________________________


~Love your life! (It is the only one you'll get).




(in reply to EPGAH)
Profile   Post #: 155
RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? - 11/29/2007 8:12:38 AM   
EPGAH


Posts: 500
Joined: 12/25/2006
Status: offline
Well, America has only been around for 231 years...We've "only" had that long to make our country the way WE want it...Mexico's had that same amount of time to make THEIR country the way THEY want it!
It's not racist, Mexican isn't a race, it's a country...Apparently, a highly overpopulated, corrupt, diseased one?
If they'd been better stewards, they wouldn't HAVE to come here!

(in reply to camille65)
Profile   Post #: 156
RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? - 11/29/2007 8:15:21 AM   
GoddessMine


Posts: 250
Joined: 9/27/2007
Status: offline
 I think he proved you wrong again, Camille.

Love,
GM


_____________________________

Pleasure of the Text? Pleasure of the Goddess, more like it.

(in reply to EPGAH)
Profile   Post #: 157
RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? - 11/29/2007 8:16:44 AM   
camille65


Posts: 5746
Joined: 7/11/2007
From: Austin Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessMine

 I think he proved you wrong again, Camille.

Love,
GM

 Yuppers. Maybe I need to clean my rose colored glasses? They seem to have a nasty smudge on them

_____________________________


~Love your life! (It is the only one you'll get).




(in reply to GoddessMine)
Profile   Post #: 158
RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? - 11/29/2007 8:23:59 AM   
YesMistressIrish


Posts: 1135
Joined: 5/1/2007
From: Calif
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: EPGAH

America conquered, then bought, a large amount of what was formerly Mexico back in 1848...Since then, we've made VAST improvements, while Mexican culture seems to be mired in 1800s thinking, especially the part about more children somehow being better, while in America, people usually put having children "on hold" in exchange for a career...
Note, however, that Mexicans are either inherently incompetent, or inherently corrupt: The areas under American stewardship have fared well enough that the Mexicans seek to invade them, to steal our benefits. That at least tacitly acknowledges that our side is "better", although I doubt the invaders would admit it under ANY circumstances...Once here, they set about trying to make it the same as THEIR side: overpopulated, impoverished, and diseased...Once that is accomplished, they push deeper into America, and repeat the process!




Edited to show exactly what it was about that post that made me puke.

< Message edited by YesMistressIrish -- 11/29/2007 8:25:45 AM >

(in reply to EPGAH)
Profile   Post #: 159
RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? - 11/29/2007 8:29:35 AM   
EPGAH


Posts: 500
Joined: 12/25/2006
Status: offline
How else could you explain America being better than Mexico, or at least enough of a "disparity" that Mexicans keep coming to America illegally, rather than the opposite?

(in reply to YesMistressIrish)
Profile   Post #: 160
Page:   <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Multiculturalim is dangurous? Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094