Rosalind wrote:

Mostafa: You're the only one whose mentioned ethics, morals, and abandonment. I am not my country. I am loyal to it, but if I were to leave it I wouldn't suddenly lose my sense of morality, and I'm secure enough in who I am to not let anything define that. You're right, there is a difference between the East and the West; you wont find the West defining who they are by their place of birth.

Assumption? No, there is not an assumption. There are protesters in the streets, demonstrators and pamphleteers and petitions to try for change. There is the observations of secluded areas where certain nationalities flock together. There are more mosques in London than any other major European city - they are beginning to rival the number of churches - most of which have been built within the last 50 years, replacing churches that are being closed down through lack of funding. I'd count that as accommodating a pretty damn major change. Whether its intentional on the behalf of each citizen or not, their segregation is causing change in a country catering for them, just so they can abuse it and leave. Same thing if you moved here for work, you'd just be abusing the benefits of living in the country. It'd still be offering you something you couldn't get from your homeland, and you'd still be disrespecting that fact. Foreigners coming into the country will always cause tension, and they cost the government billions in attempting to satisfy their needs. I don't think showing a little love to a country willing to put all that effort in is a lot to ask.

Well said again. I wish I could be as clear and concise as you.

"No you are being selfish. You want all the benefits and none of the sacrifice that may be asked for it. Mind you this is for CITIZENS ONLY. So there is no confusion."
Allegiances can only lie in one place. And this discussion got a little misunderstanding from both sides, as long as it's citizens you're talking about. He who wishes an American nationality should be ready to defend America, yeah.

"So your loyalties would rather belong to dirt and rocks then ideals and principles that can be instituted any where? That seem ass backwards to me. The forefathers that came to America gave up everything they had in England for religious freedom. Risking everything for it and having no idea of what lay ahead. But they knew that they would be free and that was worth the sacrifice. Not caring about rock and trees that they wanted back at home. America has codes and laws that we live by too. Americans do not just abandon their country. In fact you will find it is much the opposite. Not to many American killing themselves to get over to the Middle East. But many from the Middle East are trying to get here. When that changes then you can speak to me about your country mens loyalties and codes. "
You know what I mean. :/ My loyalties lies with the country itself, and the principles and ideals it represents. You're confusing the middle east with Mexico mate. As for those who leave the middle east temporarly is only to get a better job, since you have a better economy than we do, but their allegiance lies with their home town, be sure of that. And wasnt it you who said I'd switch loyalties if my country forced me out ? a little contradicitve.

"Again America has ethics and morals that we live by also. So get off your high horse thinking that if we all don't follow the Muslim way we are all heathens and unethical. Your pride and willing to cling to rocks and twigs will be your downfall. Instead of trying to prosper you would rather kill each other off so that some piece of land could be yours. Until of course a bigger army comes in a kills you and the cycle starts all over. That is not loyalty, that is blind allegiance. "
I never said nor implied anything like that. I have my codes and you have yours. And oh, middle easterns have the same codes, muslims or christians. Who the hell would prosper with those who came to invade them ? If Russia came to invade America, would you just run and say, let's have peace and prosper ? -this is drifting away into an Arab-Israeli conflict debate, again.

"But the circumstance that may affect your loyalty is a gray area. Your "love it or leave it" attitude will get you no where. To keep your loyalty to a country that has kicked you out or one that you have abandoned to gain freedoms that that country did not offer is ludicrous and short sighted. If it was such a great country and so wonderful to live and full of opportunities then why leave? If it was because you were forced out, then why love it? My ancestors were Irish. Most likely coming to America during the potato famine. This was not a genocide or a forced mass exodus. They left so as not to die even though many stayed. While I am sure they were proud of Ireland and their home land. This did not stop many of them from enlisting in the military in the Civl War, WW1, and WW2(which my grandfather served). There is an entire race of people leaving their home land not because they were forced or made to leave because of religious practices. But this did not stop them from defending their new homeland when asked. That is loyalty. What you want with getting all that is good but none of the sacrifice. That is selfish.

Now I want to say again. I am talking about those who ARE, or WISH TO BE, CITIZENS of America or any country to which they were not born. Less there be any more confusion."
The reason for leaving doesnt concern you or me, concerns only he who leaves. Just as long as he abides by your country's rules and laws and be GOOD, he may maitan his loyalty to his own country. As I've said, if you're loyalties change just by changing land, then it's never was loyalty. Excuses aside and reasons for leaving aside. The country where I was born in, where I was raised and lived amongst it people will forever have my loyalty. Yeah, this whole discussion was a misunderstanding, if someone wishes to live in the USA as a citizen with a nationality of the USA then he must accept all that comes with it.

Rosalind wrote:

Mostafa: You're the only one whose mentioned ethics, morals, and abandonment. I am not my country. I am loyal to it, but if I were to leave it I wouldn't suddenly lose my sense of morality, and I'm secure enough in who I am to not let anything define that. You're right, there is a difference between the East and the West; you wont find the West defining who they are by their place of birth.

Assumption? No, there is not an assumption. There are protesters in the streets, demonstrators and pamphleteers and petitions to try for change. There is the observations of secluded areas where certain nationalities flock together. There are more mosques in London than any other major European city - they are beginning to rival the number of churches - most of which have been built within the last 50 years, replacing churches that are being closed down through lack of funding. I'd count that as accommodating a pretty damn major change. Whether its intentional on the behalf of each citizen or not, their segregation is causing change in a country catering for them, just so they can abuse it and leave. Same thing if you moved here for work, you'd just be abusing the benefits of living in the country. It'd still be offering you something you couldn't get from your homeland, and you'd still be disrespecting that fact. Foreigners coming into the country will always cause tension, and they cost the government billions in attempting to satisfy their needs. I don't think showing a little love to a country willing to put all that effort in is a lot to ask.

Who said anything about loosing morality ? Iam talking about having allegiance to one country is from our codes that canot change no matter what. It tells alot about a person if he's ready to loose allegiance and loyalty to his country overnight. You should be secure about who you are, but a person without codes or ethics isnt living.

Protesters and demonstrators exists every where and for different reasons, not necessarly asking for change, but asking to be heard. Why does it piss people that there is alot of mosques ? or jew temples or whatever? just because it's not christian symbols ? this indeed is xenophobia or whatever the hell that word Geoff mentioned. When you see muslims abusing the society then leaving it, then you were right, but I assure you, you wont. As I've said many times in this thread, showing love, deepest respect for that country is a must, but allegiance ? hell no ! one with straight mind can only have one allegiance.

"That's the cost of having ethics and morals to live by." - You, explaining why you can't have loyalty to another country. I'm loyal to the country, not the people who run it - as you said. The difference is citizens of the western world will yell out their dissent for all to hear; that is the gift of free speech and democracy. It thus falls on the people running the show to keep us citizens happy, or we'll vote them out of power. My country doesn't define who I am, I define what the country is.

My point with the mosques is not one of xenophobia but an example of the lengths gone to in order to appease those arriving here from another country.

"When you see muslims abusing the society"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/mar/11/muslim-group-anti-war-protests

I can't believe this only just came to me; I don't there's a bigger example I can think of for Muslim immigrants spitting in the face of the country they reside in.

Rosalind wrote:

"That's the cost of having ethics and morals to live by." - You, explaining why you can't have loyalty to another country. I'm loyal to the country, not the people who run it - as you said. The difference is citizens of the western world will yell out their dissent for all to hear; that is the gift of free speech and democracy. It thus falls on the people running the show to keep us citizens happy, or we'll vote them out of power. My country doesn't define who I am, I define what the country is.

My point with the mosques is not one of xenophobia but an example of the lengths gone to in order to appease those arriving here from another country.

"When you see muslims abusing the society"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/mar/11/muslim-group-anti-war-protests

I can't believe this only just came to me; I don't there's a bigger example I can think of for Muslim immigrants spitting in the face of the country they reside in.

What brought the gift of free speech and democray into this ? Granted some of our rulers here arent very democratic, still we're loyal to the countrys, because that's where our loyalty should lie. You maybe able to define who the rulers of your country are, but you cant define a country, it's bigger than one person.

Those were protesting against war, talking about freedom of speech, eh?, you wouldnt think the same if they were christians, would you. So, a Swiss muslim doesnt get the right to protest against war ? as for extremists, they exist every where and it's not fair to blame an entire cult for the presence of a few bad seeds.

Mostafa wrote:

Rosalind wrote:

"That's the cost of having ethics and morals to live by." - You, explaining why you can't have loyalty to another country. I'm loyal to the country, not the people who run it - as you said. The difference is citizens of the western world will yell out their dissent for all to hear; that is the gift of free speech and democracy. It thus falls on the people running the show to keep us citizens happy, or we'll vote them out of power. My country doesn't define who I am, I define what the country is.

My point with the mosques is not one of xenophobia but an example of the lengths gone to in order to appease those arriving here from another country.

"When you see muslims abusing the society"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/mar/11/muslim-group-anti-war-protests

I can't believe this only just came to me; I don't there's a bigger example I can think of for Muslim immigrants spitting in the face of the country they reside in.

What brought the gift of free speech and democray into this ? Granted some of our rulers here arent very democratic, still we're loyal to the countrys, because that's where our loyalty should lie. You maybe able to define who the rulers of your country are, but you cant define a country, it's bigger than one person.

Those were protesting against war, talking about freedom of speech, eh?, you wouldnt think the same if they were christians, would you. So, a Swiss muslim doesnt get the right to protest against war ? as for extremists, they exist every where and it's not fair to blame an entire cult for the presence of a few bad seeds.

You said you'd follow your country and never swear allegiance to anyone else. I said I would speak out against it. To me, that is democracy. I dont care where you came from, that wasn't protesting the war, that was protesting the armed forces. You can disagree with the war but to come to another country, abuse the privileges and in your spare time spit in the face of those who help protect it is beyond simply being rude. I'm not blaming a few 'bad seeds,' you said I'd never find a disrespectful Muslim. I believe I showed you a single group of about 200, and there are plenty of other groups. It is for reasons like this that you should show a little respect. How'd you like to be heckled coming out of school, have protests saying that "Muslims only teach murder" or something? How'd you like it if a group of 200 Americans began waving banners about? Do you think your government would even still allow them to stay there?

son_ov_hades wrote:

Christoff Odendaal wrote:

son_ov_hades wrote:

I'm really pretty shocked at the xenophobia displayed in this thread. I'll just say that the fear or immigrants changing the nature of a country is stupid, change is good.

Not always.

Of course, but new cultures, languages, religions or whatever forming their own communities within a Country is great.

Yeah... I kind of agree but again it's not a simple black-and-white picture. If I take the Italian, Irish and Jewish communities that formed in New York in the early 1900's: I like the principle very much. In this way they preserve their heritage, culture, language, cuisine and whatever else. But the problem is that when groups isolate themselves shit starts to go down. Animosity develops, groups that are supposed to be living side by side start getting estranged from each other. This separation of communities is what gave rise to organised crime in America and elsewhere. Can you see the problem? It's a good concept but, like all others, also flawed.

Not very well written, I thought, but made for interesting reading nonetheless:

http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2009/12/20091229223658221.html

I haven't checked the external for like 3 days and this is a pretty interesting thread but also very tl;dr. I've been skimming though.

What I will say is that globalization has the potential to crate a wonderful blend of cultures. Instead, everything's losing their own identity and it's all becoming a monoculture where everything is the same. Somebody said it at the beginning, I think Dale - everything is losing its uniqueness. :/

"You said you'd follow your country and never swear allegiance to anyone else. I said I would speak out against it. To me, that is democracy. I dont care where you came from, that wasn't protesting the war, that was protesting the armed forces. You can disagree with the war but to come to another country, abuse the privileges and in your spare time spit in the face of those who help protect it is beyond simply being rude. I'm not blaming a few 'bad seeds,' you said I'd never find a disrespectful Muslim. I believe I showed you a single group of about 200, and there are plenty of other groups. It is for reasons like this that you should show a little respect. How'd you like to be heckled coming out of school, have protests saying that "Muslims only teach murder" or something? How'd you like it if a group of 200 Americans began waving banners about? Do you think your government would even still allow them to stay there."
True, I'd never swear allegiance to any other country. But I too would criticize it's policies if I didnt like it. But what does that have to do with swearing allegiance to other countries !? So, criticizing my country means I'll abandony my loyalty to it ? What those did of dis-respect was wrong, and goes against Islamic teachings, hence I said you'd never find a disrespectful Muslim. And these are bad seeds, comparing 200 to a million ? not fair to generalize the matter. Agreed, but peacful protests regardless of what they're about, and regardless of what religion of those doing the protests, are IMO not a problem.

So they aren't actually Muslims? Im sure they'd take offence to that. Hell, that group was called "the Majority of Muslims," and they are doing all their actions in the name of their religion, because of their religion and for their religion.

Once again, you are the only one describing abandonment. The religion of the participants was never the issue, its the fact that immigrants come over here, clearly with no feelings of loyalty or pride in the country, publically displaying that. What about the muslim's in Odendaal's post, trying to operate a section of the country under Sharia law?

Thats 5,000 protesting the right to free speech
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4700482.stm

Some nice photo's of the streets of London
http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/muslimprotest.asp

And there, not even peaceful protesting.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1114041.html

Is everyone like that? Of course not. There are those that do have some form of respect for the country, or at the very least turn a blind eye to the acts of the homegrown majority rather than specifically cause trouble because it offends the way of thinking in their own homeland. I'm not arguing against them, as they generally assimilate into the society, function as a part of it, bringing their own culture and ideals to an already established country, operating within it with all the manners of someone born there. What i'm arguing against is the majority who act as you describe, abusing the privileges for your own ends and showing nothing in the way of thanks.

Things are changing. There isn't really any way of putting it; the numbers of muslims in Europe is rapidly increasing, and larger areas are becoming 'Islamified' as it were, replacing churches with mosques, newsagents no longer selling alcohol and Arabic signs in shop windows. There are more than a few roads in London where you'd be hard pushed to overhear a conversation in English, and the numbers are growing. Change is happening, and it is those from foreign countries pushing for it.

Rosalind wrote:

So they aren't actually Muslims? Im sure they'd take offence to that. Hell, that group was called "the Majority of Muslims," and they are doing all their actions in the name of their religion, because of their religion and for their religion.

Once again, you are the only one describing abandonment. The religion of the participants was never the issue, its the fact that immigrants come over here, clearly with no feelings of loyalty or pride in the country, publically displaying that. What about the muslim's in Odendaal's post, trying to operate a section of the country under Sharia law?

Thats 5,000 protesting the right to free speech
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4700482.stm

Some nice photo's of the streets of London
http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/muslimprotest.asp

And there, not even peaceful protesting.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1114041.html

Is everyone like that? Of course not. There are those that do have some form of respect for the country, or at the very least turn a blind eye to the acts of the homegrown majority rather than specifically cause trouble because it offends the way of thinking in their own homeland. I'm not arguing against them, as they generally assimilate into the society, function as a part of it, bringing their own culture and ideals to an already established country, operating within it with all the manners of someone born there. What i'm arguing against is the majority who act as you describe, abusing the privileges for your own ends and showing nothing in the way of thanks.

Things are changing. There isn't really any way of putting it; the numbers of muslims in Europe is rapidly increasing, and larger areas are becoming 'Islamified' as it were, replacing churches with mosques, newsagents no longer selling alcohol and Arabic signs in shop windows. There are more than a few roads in London where you'd be hard pushed to overhear a conversation in English, and the numbers are growing. Change is happening, and it is those from foreign countries pushing for it.

I think it's so ironic when people protest against free speech, because protesting is cearly a way of using free speech. I thought those pictures was edited, when I first saw them other places on the internet, looks like I was wrong. Those drawings really created a shit storm and the more people protest against them, the more I think we should print them again.
A truly tolerant society is a society where everyone can make fun of everyone and everyone laughs.

I'm not even asking you to laugh. I get pissed off when Christian preachers come up to me in the street, but I don't protest against Christianity. I guess I disagree with your definition of toleration; you don't necessarily have to like it, but you can still live with it. Can you imagine what would happen if every time someone made a Jew joke or a black joke people rioted?

Rosalind wrote:

So they aren't actually Muslims? Im sure they'd take offence to that. Hell, that group was called "the Majority of Muslims," and they are doing all their actions in the name of their religion, because of their religion and <i>for</I> their religion.

Once again, you are the only one describing abandonment. The religion of the participants was never the issue, its the fact that immigrants come over here, clearly with no feelings of loyalty or pride in the country, publically displaying that. What about the muslim's in Odendaal's post, trying to operate a section of the country under Sharia law?

Thats 5,000 protesting the right to free speech
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4700482.stm

Some nice photo's of the streets of London
http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/muslimprotest.asp

And there, not even peaceful protesting.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1114041.html

Is everyone like that? Of course not. There are those that <i>do</i> have some form of respect for the country, or at the very least turn a blind eye to the acts of the homegrown majority rather than specifically cause trouble because it offends the way of thinking in their own homeland. I'm not arguing against them, as they generally assimilate into the society, function as a part of it, bringing their own culture and ideals to an already established country, operating within it with all the manners of someone born there. What i'm arguing against is the majority who act as you describe, abusing the privileges for your own ends and showing nothing in the way of thanks.

Things are changing. There isn't really any way of putting it; the numbers of muslims in Europe is rapidly increasing, and larger areas are becoming 'Islamified' as it were, replacing churches with mosques, newsagents no longer selling alcohol and Arabic signs in shop windows. There are more than a few roads in London where you'd be hard pushed to overhear a conversation in English, and the numbers are growing. Change <i>is</i> happening, and it is those from foreign countries pushing for it.

Who am I to judge who's muslim and whos not ? all I'am saying is that what they do goes against Islamic teachings, so dont say because of their religion, Islam doesnt order us any where to act baraberic. The crusaded were done in the name of christianity, you dont see someone faulting the bible for it, do you?

Abandonement is what Aaron and I have been arguing through these pages. And again I tell you, dont fault all muslims in one country on the account of what some extremests do, the actions in these links are wrong and are condemned by Islam -you might want to find another sorce than Hareets though , they dont have the biggest love for Muslims in Israel.
"What i'm arguing against is the majority who act as you describe, abusing the privileges for your own ends and showing nothing in the way of thanks. "
Those are wrong as I've said many times..

"Things are changing. There isn't really any way of putting it; the numbers of muslims in Europe is rapidly increasing, and larger areas are becoming 'Islamified' as it were, replacing churches with mosques, newsagents no longer selling alcohol and Arabic signs in shop windows. There are more than a few roads in London where you'd be hard pushed to overhear a conversation in English, and the numbers are growing. Change <i>is</i> happening, and it is those from foreign countries pushing for it"
As long as the change is not forced, then what's the problem ? by saying the number of muslims is increasing rapidly in europe you sound xenophobic. What if all the citizens of London embraced Islam for instance by full heart belief, I'am sure the governmenet would be extremely worried and try it's best to prevent that. MY point is, as long as people are WILLINGLY following another religion, and no one is forcing them to doing it, then what's all the hype?

Alright so what I'm gathering from this discussion is that people don't want their country changed by immigrants. It's fine for immigrants to keep their own culture, but when it becomes public it is seen as "taking over". This is pretty much the definition of xenophobia.

In all honestly I can understand it to some degree, getting back to the original topic Switzerland has a long tradition of Christianity and is proud of it. I get that, but the point is that the fear of the country being overrun is irrational. The example of Muslims "disrespecting" their host country and whatnot are clearly a small minority. I could bring up tons of examples of Muslim Americans who fight in the US military, and even Arab(not necessarily Muslims) Americans serving in Iraq as translators and cultural liaisons.

This is what I should have said at the beginning of the thread. Apologies, I had been using most of my brain power to sound articulate writing papers, which is over now.

son_ov_hades wrote:

Alright so what I'm gathering from this discussion is that people don't want their country changed by immigrants. It's fine for immigrants to keep their own culture, but when it becomes public it is seen as "taking over". This is pretty much the definition of xenophobia.

In all honestly I can understand it to some degree, getting back to the original topic Switzerland has a long tradition of Christianity and is proud of it. I get that, but the point is that the fear of the country being overrun is irrational. The example of Muslims "disrespecting" their host country and whatnot are clearly a small minority. I could bring up tons of examples of Muslim Americans who fight in the US military, and even Arab(not necessarily Muslims) Americans serving in Iraq as translators and cultural liaisons.

This is what I should have said at the beginning of the thread. Apologies, I had been using most of my brain power to sound articulate writing papers, which is over now.

Many immigrants adapt to life in a secular, Western society. I can bear witness to this as some of my friends are Muslims who've managed to adapt very well, whilst still retaining their religion and culture. But that's just it: they were willing to change a little to fit in. To expect everyone to adapt to suit the needs of an immigrant minority is illogical. And many, maybe not the majority, but many, immigrants be they Russian, Turkish, Chinese, African etc. simply don't make an effort to adapt. In probably every city in Germany I visited they told me the problem groups are the immigrant groups. In the small town of Baden-Baden a girl told me the grundschulen [the lowest school level out of three: grundschulen (for underachievers), realschulen (for average students) and gimnasien (for the academically very strong students)] are filled to the brim with Turkish and Russian students because they either don't care enough to learn German (and expect to be looked after by the German Government for free) or are simply too lazy to work. These groups are also mostly responsible for the ever rising crime-rate in Bavaria. And what's more, the highest school-level, the gimnasien, in this particular town has only one Russian student and no Turks. This is not an isolated situation - I heard similar stories everywhere I went. In Halle an der Saale, for example, someone told me the black people in the town live together in a single apartment building where almost no-one else goes because it's notoriously dangerous there (and also, most of the city's drug-dealers are Africans living in the same area). I'm sorry, but with stories like these you cannot continue to insist that there is no real problem. The fears of European countries are not as irrational as you make them out to be and the problems immigrant groups cause not as few.

I never faulted Islam for it, but like it or not they are doing it in its name. Just as the crusades were done in the name of Christianity. You can agree or disagree, that fact remains. I want people to assimilate into the country. I honestly couldn't care less what religion you follow - its all nonsense to me - but what I don't want is to lose what makes Britain Britain. If you consider me xenophobic for liking my country, so be it.

Rosalind wrote:

I never faulted Islam for it, but like it or not they <i>are</i> doing it in its name. Just as the crusades were done in the name of Christianity. You can agree or disagree, that fact remains. I want people to assimilate into the country. I honestly couldn't care less what religion you follow - its all nonsense to me - but what I don't want is to lose what makes Britain Britain. If you consider me xenophobic for liking my country, so be it.

Fair enough.

Rosalind wrote:

I never faulted Islam for it, but like it or not they are doing it in its name. Just as the crusades were done in the name of Christianity. You can agree or disagree, that fact remains. I want people to assimilate into the country. I honestly couldn't care less what religion you follow - its all nonsense to me - but what I don't want is to lose what makes Britain Britain. If you consider me xenophobic for liking my country, so be it.

Exchange Britain for America and I agree completely. The difference is that England has far more years of history then America. As someone who hopes to visit Europe at some point I hope it is worth going and that the things I have only seen in pictures and TV will still exist. The thing with America is we don't have a true culture. Ours is a amalgamate of all the different cultures that have come to this country(though it sounds by what you have said that England has been that way for a time). But at our root America has commonalities that are truly American, and as you said. I as an American don't want to lose that. Like you said. If that makes me xenophobic so be it.

Christoff Odendaal wrote:

son_ov_hades wrote:

Alright so what I'm gathering from this discussion is that people don't want their country changed by immigrants. It's fine for immigrants to keep their own culture, but when it becomes public it is seen as "taking over". This is pretty much the definition of xenophobia.

In all honestly I can understand it to some degree, getting back to the original topic Switzerland has a long tradition of Christianity and is proud of it. I get that, but the point is that the fear of the country being overrun is irrational. The example of Muslims "disrespecting" their host country and whatnot are clearly a small minority. I could bring up tons of examples of Muslim Americans who fight in the US military, and even Arab(not necessarily Muslims) Americans serving in Iraq as translators and cultural liaisons.

This is what I should have said at the beginning of the thread. Apologies, I had been using most of my brain power to sound articulate writing papers, which is over now.

Many immigrants adapt to life in a secular, Western society. I can bear witness to this as some of my friends are Muslims who've managed to adapt very well, whilst still retaining their religion and culture. But that's just it: they were willing to change a little to fit in. To expect everyone to adapt to suit the needs of an immigrant minority is illogical. And many, maybe not the majority, but many, immigrants be they Russian, Turkish, Chinese, African etc. simply don't make an effort to adapt. In probably every city in Germany I visited they told me the problem groups are the immigrant groups. In the small town of Baden-Baden a girl told me the grundschulen [the lowest school level out of three: grundschulen (for underachievers), realschulen (for average students) and gimnasien (for the academically very strong students)] are filled to the brim with Turkish and Russian students because they either don't care enough to learn German (and expect to be looked after by the German Government for free) or are simply too lazy to work. These groups are also mostly responsible for the ever rising crime-rate in Bavaria. And what's more, the highest school-level, the gimnasien, in this particular town has only one Russian student and no Turks. This is not an isolated situation - I heard similar stories everywhere I went. In Halle an der Saale, for example, someone told me the black people in the town live together in a single apartment building where almost no-one else goes because it's notoriously dangerous there (and also, most of the city's drug-dealers are Africans living in the same area). I'm sorry, but with stories like these you cannot continue to insist that there is no real problem. The fears of European countries are not as irrational as you make them out to be and the problems immigrant groups cause not as few.

Before I get into, I find kind of funny that you referred to South Africa as a western country. This is a first for me, but anyway the term "western" is ridiculously flawed.

I never said there were no problems with immigrant groups, my argument is about culture. It most certainly is irrational to fear immigrants eroding the cultural identity of a country. The only way this would happen is massive amounts of people coming at the same time and taking power, the way settlers did in the Americas and Australia,and to a lesser extent in South Africa. So aside from military conquest, it just doesn't happen. The best recent example is Israel, the area became dominated by Jewish culture only because of war.

The fear of peaceful immigrants that don't adapt culturally displacing the existing culture is flat out irrational. These groups of people have an extremely hard time acquiring political power, and thus can't do much to erode the existing culture.

AarO)))n wrote:

Rosalind wrote:

I never faulted Islam for it, but like it or not they are doing it in its name. Just as the crusades were done in the name of Christianity. You can agree or disagree, that fact remains. I want people to assimilate into the country. I honestly couldn't care less what religion you follow - its all nonsense to me - but what I don't want is to lose what makes Britain Britain. If you consider me xenophobic for liking my country, so be it.

Exchange Britain for America and I agree completely. The difference is that England has far more years of history then America. As someone who hopes to visit Europe at some point I hope it is worth going and that the things I have only seen in pictures and TV will still exist. The thing with America is we don't have a true culture. Ours is a amalgamate of all the different cultures that have come to this country(though it sounds by what you have said that England has been that way for a time). But at our root America has commonalities that are truly American, and as you said. I as an American don't want to lose that. Like you said. If that makes me xenophobic so be it.

Yeah but what makes America America? Like you said, culturally this country has always been a synthesis of other cultures. So how does co-opting new cultures destroy American culture? This may sound a bit hypocritical, but a place like China which has some of the longest history in the world and a distinctly Chinese culture that has existed in the country for thousands of years would have a much more valid claim.

son_ov_hades wrote:

Yeah but what makes America America? Like you said, culturally this country has always been a synthesis of other cultures. So how does co-opting new cultures destroy American culture? This may sound a bit hypocritical, but a place like China which has some of the longest history in the world and a distinctly Chinese culture that has existed in the country for thousands of years would have a much more valid claim.

Agreed to some degree. But thanks to their Communist government they don't have much to worry about in losing their culture as it is not the free society that Europe and America are. I doubt I could move there and suddenly run the streets demanding change so that it felt more like America. Hell even their own people tried it and where ran over by tanks, and they did it peacefully. Not taking to the streets with threats of a "real holocaust".

Again I have no problem with the introduction of new ideas and cultures. In fact I believe that we as America should take all the great ideas that other countries have. Whether it be environmental or something as simple as out door urinals that I have heard are outside bars in some European countries. I think that America sometimes get to caught up in the "doing it the American way" forgetting that the American way is co-opting other cultures and ideas. But that does not include take overs by these cultures. Parts of L.A. are turning into Mexico and Korean. This is not good to me. They are able to live outside the system to some degree and this weakens a nation. I love their culture and foods and what not. But part of becoming an American is adding that to the mix while assimilating to what we do here. Not forsaking it and doing things like you did in the country you left. With out this synthesis as you say we are not America. May are not willing to put there ideas with America but instead wish to keep it separate. I mean when I drive down the street and see people with Mexican flags hanging on the vehicles and no American flag, am I to think they are proud to be an American? Because that us not the message they are sending. Even terms like Mexican American or African American I find a little unnerving. Considering many who use it have never been and are not directly from those countries. I am not an Irish American. I am an American who has a Irish heritage. To think otherwise I believe weakens a nation almost like saying America comes after country of origin or worse country my for-fathers of many many many moons ago came from. Now if all this sounds xenophobic or nationalistic, then guilty as charged. But I am not against immigration or new cultures. But I am for the protection of what makes America America and it's ability to keep that. This does not exclude new cultures. Instead it embraces them and welcomes them to be added to what we have with out forsaking what has been established. Working together and exchanging outside cultural ideas is what will keep this nation strong. Not finding pockets and corner to hide in with people of your own kind and never venturing out.

son_ov_hades wrote:

Before I get into, I find kind of funny that you referred to South Africa as a western country. This is a first for me, but anyway the term "western" is ridiculously flawed.

I never said there were no problems with immigrant groups, my argument is about culture. It most certainly is irrational to fear immigrants eroding the cultural identity of a country. The only way this would happen is massive amounts of people coming at the same time and taking power, the way settlers did in the Americas and Australia,and to a lesser extent in South Africa. So aside from military conquest, it just doesn't happen. The best recent example is Israel, the area became dominated by Jewish culture only because of war.

The fear of peaceful immigrants that don't adapt culturally displacing the existing culture is flat out irrational. These groups of people have an extremely hard time acquiring political power, and thus can't do much to erode the existing culture.

After I had posted I realised South Africa doesn't exactly qualify as a Western country, but the community I live in is more or less as westernised as any American or British one, so I thought it was a valid comparison. Anyway, if not Western per se, it's definitely commercial, secular and "civilised" in the Western sense.

But you talk about culture. I am definitely of the opinion that mass-immigration does cause its fair share of cultural shift and, ultimately, erosion through the changing age-old of tendencies and practices. And the level of immigration that European countries are experiencing is surely large enough for cultural concern, imo. All the examples I've listed show it's not an isolated issue but a literal mass-migration of people from Asia, Eastern Europe and Africa to Western Europe. What will be the end result of this? The culture of Western Europe will change and disappear into the mixed masses. European cuisine, architecture and tradition are already mutating into some Euro-Arabian-Asian hybrid. Maybe that's not such a bad thing, but change is certain if the change is fueled by groups who are statistically more socially problematic than the original groups, isn't that already valid reason for concern?

My concerns are primarily that the relative economic, social and political stability that we have seen develop in post-communist Europe is threatened by the immigration of groups who do not assimilate well and who are responsible for higher crime-rates, more poverty, a growing financial burden for the countries and political unrest as a result of these social issues. And if they are socially and economically crippling to the country, why should we be so thrilled about their cultures reforming our own? Social deterioration ultimately leads to cultural deterioration and the former IS what is being caused.

Christoff Odendaal wrote:

son_ov_hades wrote:

Before I get into, I find kind of funny that you referred to South Africa as a western country. This is a first for me, but anyway the term "western" is ridiculously flawed.

I never said there were no problems with immigrant groups, my argument is about culture. It most certainly is irrational to fear immigrants eroding the cultural identity of a country. The only way this would happen is massive amounts of people coming at the same time and taking power, the way settlers did in the Americas and Australia,and to a lesser extent in South Africa. So aside from military conquest, it just doesn't happen. The best recent example is Israel, the area became dominated by Jewish culture only because of war.

The fear of peaceful immigrants that don't adapt culturally displacing the existing culture is flat out irrational. These groups of people have an extremely hard time acquiring political power, and thus can't do much to erode the existing culture.

After I had posted I realised South Africa doesn't exactly qualify as a Western country, but the community I live in is more or less as westernised as any American or British one, so I thought it was a valid comparison. Anyway, if not Western per se, it's definitely commercial, secular and "civilised" in the Western sense.

But you talk about culture. I am definitely of the opinion that mass-immigration does cause its fair share of cultural shift and, ultimately, erosion through the changing age-old of tendencies and practices. And the level of immigration that European countries are experiencing is surely large enough for cultural concern, imo. All the examples I've listed show it's not an isolated issue but a literal mass-migration of people from Asia, Eastern Europe and Africa to Western Europe. What will be the end result of this? The culture of Western Europe will change and disappear into the mixed masses. European cuisine, architecture and tradition are already mutating into some Euro-Arabian-Asian hybrid. Maybe that's not such a bad thing, but change is certain if the change is fueled by groups who are statistically more socially problematic than the original groups, isn't that already valid reason for concern?

My concerns are primarily that the relative economic, social and political stability that we have seen develop in post-communist Europe is threatened by the immigration of groups who do not assimilate well and who are responsible for higher crime-rates, more poverty, a growing financial burden for the countries and political unrest as a result of these social issues. And if they are socially and economically crippling to the country, why should we be so thrilled about their cultures reforming our own? Social deterioration ultimately leads to cultural deterioration and the former IS what is being caused.

Yeah I didn't mean any offensive or anything. The term is so flawed though, even Australia is part of the "western" world. Sure Europe, America, Australia, and yes South Africa share a lot of common political and cultural ideas, but using a geographic descriptor doesn't really make sense.

I understand your argument, but I disagree that the type of immigration going on in western Europe is displacing European culture. You make a valid argument, and I think we're not gonna get much farther from here. Agree to disagree I guess, this was fun though.

AarO)))n wrote:

son_ov_hades wrote:

Yeah but what makes America America? Like you said, culturally this country has always been a synthesis of other cultures. So how does co-opting new cultures destroy American culture? This may sound a bit hypocritical, but a place like China which has some of the longest history in the world and a distinctly Chinese culture that has existed in the country for thousands of years would have a much more valid claim.

Agreed to some degree. But thanks to their Communist government they don't have much to worry about in losing their culture as it is not the free society that Europe and America are. I doubt I could move there and suddenly run the streets demanding change so that it felt more like America. Hell even their own people tried it and where ran over by tanks, and they did it peacefully. Not taking to the streets with threats of a "real holocaust".

Again I have no problem with the introduction of new ideas and cultures. In fact I believe that we as America should take all the great ideas that other countries have. Whether it be environmental or something as simple as out door urinals that I have heard are outside bars in some European countries. I think that America sometimes get to caught up in the "doing it the American way" forgetting that the American way is co-opting other cultures and ideas. But that does not include take overs by these cultures. Parts of L.A. are turning into Mexico and Korean. This is not good to me. They are able to live outside the system to some degree and this weakens a nation. I love their culture and foods and what not. But part of becoming an American is adding that to the mix while assimilating to what we do here. Not forsaking it and doing things like you did in the country you left. With out this synthesis as you say we are not America. May are not willing to put there ideas with America but instead wish to keep it separate. I mean when I drive down the street and see people with Mexican flags hanging on the vehicles and no American flag, am I to think they are proud to be an American? Because that us not the message they are sending. Even terms like Mexican American or African American I find a little unnerving. Considering many who use it have never been and are not directly from those countries. I am not an Irish American. I am an American who has a Irish heritage. To think otherwise I believe weakens a nation almost like saying America comes after country of origin or worse country my for-fathers of many many many moons ago came from. Now if all this sounds xenophobic or nationalistic, then guilty as charged. But I am not against immigration or new cultures. But I am for the protection of what makes America America and it's ability to keep that. This does not exclude new cultures. Instead it embraces them and welcomes them to be added to what we have with out forsaking what has been established. Working together and exchanging outside cultural ideas is what will keep this nation strong. Not finding pockets and corner to hide in with people of your own kind and never venturing out.

Fair enough. I can agree to some extent, but can't get on board with you're nationalist tendencies. Understand I'm not trying to insult you, I'm just a flaming liberal and nationalism is not my thing. I do agree that communities isolating themselves is of course a bad thing, but these communities existing is fine by me. Can you honestly say if you moved to another country you wouldn't feel more comfortable living among American immigrants and their descendants?