[Rugoz]

I'd much rather live in 1920's Italy, than in the nineteen twenties Soviet Union?

I'd say this has more to do with Italy than with any particular ideology

[Syph]

Sometimes people will have bad experiences living in multicultural areas. It is not because they are racists but because they experience hostility when they themselves become the ethnic minority.

I agree, people can have bad experiences. Perhaps, I'm fortunate but I've never felt hostility and I live in a city of minorities.

This does not stop multicultural societies becoming a free for all between the competing ethnic groups within their borders.

Racists and bigots on both sides prevent the necessary cohesion. Neve Shalom/Wahat al-Salam proves that if people are willing to put in the effort that community cohesion can trump ethnic tensions.

It is impossible to make an accurate forecast of demographic shifts. The fact is, in somewhere like London the English are now an ethnic minority. In Birmingham they are barely even the majority.

Population forecasting can tell you that a 5% Muslim share of the population won't become a 51% majority within centuries (if ever). It would take unprecedented migration/conversion and given the rapid acceleration of the number of non-believers I deem it unlikely.

There are good and bad among every people and all communities behave in the same way in terms of asserting their interests.

Exactly, bad eggs are a human problem. Yet you see Muslim migrants wrapped up in descriptive terms of insects with a brief pause when a few dead children get photographed on a beach. We are subconsciously treating these people like subhumans.

Mass immigration and multiculturalism is not a question of the merits of certain peoples but of human nature in a shared country. I am of the belief that multicultural societies are inherently unstable and quite frankly undersirable as well. I do not see why we cannot be friends with Muslims without wanting our continent to convert to Islam.

Multiculturalism should be about celebrating heritage in the context of a unified national identity (a la Brazil). I don't see what is inherently unstable about that. Distinct cultures within the same borders is a huge problem as demonstrated in Israel, Syria, Iraq, Turkey and Nigeria.

Your final sentence again mistakes Muslims for a Borg. Every Muslim is an individual without a tin foil had covert goal of Islamification. I've met Muslims that proselytize and many that don't. My experience is that living outside Sharia often breaks the cultural shackles rather quickly.

[Political Interest]

Racists and bigots on both sides prevent the necessary cohesion. Neve Shalom/Wahat al-Salam proves that if people are willing to put in the effort that community cohesion can trump ethnic tensions.

It goes far beyond simple racism. If you have a plural society of different ethnicities without one clear dominant one there will be tensions and competition for power. An ethnically and religiously homogenous society is a blessing. I cannot understand why anyone would want to become multi-ethnic if one is homogenous. It does not bring any benefits and actually makes running a functional society much more difficult. The fact that a cohesive community has been founded by Israelis and Arabs and that this is celebrated, attests to the otherwise abysmal state of inter-ethnic relations between the two groups.

Population forecasting can tell you that a 5% Muslim share of the population won't become a 51% majority within centuries (if ever). It would take unprecedented migration/conversion and given the rapid acceleration of the number of non-believers I deem it unlikely.

In 1950 no one thought that Englishmen would be a minority in London or that they would not be a clear and absolute majority in Birmingham.

In the early 20th century the Malay people became a minority in their own country as a result of unrestricted migration, aided and abetted by the British colonial regime as a means of divide and rule.

Open door immigration has the potential to radically alter demography.

And the issue is not so much one of Muslims, or religion. Those who are anti-Muslim miss the entire point of the mass immigration question, namely, that this is not about saying a certain religious or ethnic group are bad people, but instead realising that multicultural societies are inherently unstable and dangerous.

Exactly, bad eggs are a human problem. Yet you see Muslim migrants wrapped up in descriptive terms of insects with a brief pause when a few dead children get photographed on a beach. We are subconsciously treating these people like subhumans.

Our failure to recognise their human features is something everyone does, whether they are left or right. Both conservatives and progressives are guilty of dehumanising Muslims, but for very different reasons. Ultimately their perceptions of the Islamic world are based on ethnocentrism. The failure to recognise that Asian and African Muslims behave in exactly the same way as we do results in either portraying them too negatively or infantilising them and taking a naive stance on the immigration question.

Multiculturalism should be about celebrating heritage in the context of a unified national identity (a la Brazil). I don't see what is inherently unstable about that. Distinct cultures within the same borders is a huge problem as demonstrated in Israel, Syria, Iraq, Turkey and Nigeria.

Preserving distinct cultures is desirable. New world cultures in places like Brazil, the United States and Australia are artificial constructions born out of mass settler colonialism and modernity.

In the vast majority of cases it is unstable and cannot work.

I think that multiculturalism is better on a global scale. Instead of trying to make homogenous nations as diverse as possible it would be more sensible to celebrate culture internationally between nations, each preserving its distinct identity.

Your final sentence again mistakes Muslims for a Borg. Every Muslim is an individual without a tin foil had covert goal of Islamification. I've met Muslims that proselytize and many that don't. My experience is that living outside Sharia often breaks the cultural shackles rather quickly.

As I said before, this is not an issue of religion. Islamophobes have made the stupid mistake of thinking that the entire issue is to do with religion. Ethnicity plays a major role, if not the biggest role. Being an ethnic minority is not at all desirable. It creates many problems for those who have such a status. And that is what concerns me, the possibility that Europeans could become ethnic minorities as a result of mass immigration.

[anarchist23]

Trump is behaving like a dictator. As Trump has made many executive orders, he has surrounded himself with relatives who have been given official positions.

[Syph]

An ethnically and religiously homogenous society is a blessing. I cannot understand why anyone would want to become multi-ethnic if one is homogenous. It does not bring any benefits and actually makes running a functional society much more difficult.

I think you are making an assumption that ethnic and religious tensions pose more threat to a society than class or political tensions. The EU membership referendum caused huge tension along those lines as well as stoking racist embers.

In less populist times, ethnic tensions were kept under wraps by the social stigma attached to overt racism. Religion is rapidly losing influence around the globe, particularly in Europe. Most Christians do little more than get married in a church and return annually on Christmas. Even Muslims are becoming nominal in their beliefs, mosque attendances are dominated by first generation immigrants or their parents.

In 1950 no one thought that Englishmen would be a minority in London or that they would not be a clear and absolute majority in Birmingham.

I don't expect the man on the street to understand that cities are the only places likely to see "indigenous" (and I use that term reluctantly) populations become technical minorities. I live in a city with a 48% white population and it very difficult to tell the difference between that and a city with a 60% white population.

Open door immigration has the potential to radically alter demography.

The only "open door" immigration we've had is with the EU, and if I'm not mistaken most of the EU population is white.

Those who are anti-Muslim miss the entire point of the mass immigration question, namely, that this is not about saying a certain religious or ethnic group are bad people, but instead realising that multicultural societies are inherently unstable and dangerous.

I'm not sure where this inherently unstable thing is coming from. Do you have any data to back up your claims? There must be data out there.

Ultimately their perceptions of the Islamic world are based on ethnocentrism. The failure to recognise that Asian and African Muslims behave in exactly the same way as we do results in either portraying them too negatively or infantilising them and taking a naive stance on the immigration question.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Are you saying that the West has been lumping in Asian and African Muslims with their Middle Eastern contemporaries?

Preserving distinct cultures is desirable. New world cultures in places like Brazil, the United States and Australia are artificial constructions born out of mass settler colonialism and modernity.

Really, an appeal to "natural" societies. In the UK we are an artificial construct of Britons, Scots, Welsh, Irish, Angles, Saxons, Vikings, Huguenots, West Indians, Pakistanis, Indians etc. Each contributed to the UK and its contemporary culture.

I'd claim it's just as artificial to preserve "distinct cultures" than it is to have a USA/Brazil/Australia melting pot.

I think that multiculturalism is better on a global scale. Instead of trying to make homogenous nations as diverse as possible it would be more sensible to celebrate culture internationally between nations, each preserving its distinct identity.

What? Balkanisation worked really well for Yugoslavia. We've only had the one attempted genocide.

Ethnicity plays a major role, if not the biggest role. Being an ethnic minority is not at all desirable. It creates many problems for those who have such a status. And that is what concerns me, the possibility that Europeans could become ethnic minorities as a result of mass immigration.

We are coming at this issue from incompatible worldviews. You are within the "distinct ethnicity has value" camp and I'm in the "ethnicity is arbitrary" camp. I imagine you would have a negative reaction to my belief that humanity would benefit from more ethnic homogeneity to eliminate ethnic tensions. I accept that I'm a globalist with decentralized anarchist intentions.