- 20 Mar 2017 15:06
#14787907
Huh? So the immigrant gets to decide if he/she is assimilated into a society and not the society he is assimilating into? That makes sense.
Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...
Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods
Suntzu wrote:Huh? So the immigrant gets to decide if he/she is assimilated into a society and not the society he is assimilating into? That makes sense.
Pants-of-dog wrote:That has nothing to do with cultural assimilation. A person could be entirely assimilated and still not be seen as Swiss because of a vote, which could actually derail the whole assimilation process.
Suntzu wrote:Democracy can be brutal.
Pants-of-dog wrote:You never replied to my comment about how voting can derail assimilation, nor have you supported your weird idea that the immigrant is the only one who gets to decide.
Can we assume that you have no argument?
mikema63 wrote:He's making an argument against direct democracy in a very specific circumstance. It would be immensely disenginous to suggest he is against democracy writ large.
mikema63 wrote:Oh you have a special dictionary with your own definitions. That will make it easy to communicate about politics.
All social relations force conditions on someone else. Human beings evolved to be Tangled in social webs and relationships that controls the behavior of individual participants for the long term survival of the group. What form that control takes can vary, the forms of relationships change, but there is no opting out.
That is a defeatist position that rejects the ability for change.
There is always a way to opt out.
You prescribe values or egoisms to nature and evolution that neither has.
Both are illusions or phantasms created by the mind.
Suntzu wrote:In Switzerland the local citizens get to decide whether or not Swiss citizenship is granted based on assimilation. .....
Joka wrote:Are you making an argument against democracy?
The girls, ages 12 and 14, who live in the northern city of Basel, had applied for Swiss citizenship several months ago, but their request was denied, Swiss media reported Tuesday.
The girls, whose names were not disclosed, said their religion prevents them from participating in compulsory swimming lessons with males in the pool at the same time. Their naturalization application was rejected because the sisters did not comply with the school curriculum, Basel authorities said.
“Whoever doesn’t fulfill these conditions violates the law and therefore cannot be naturalized,” Stefan Wehrle, president of the naturalization committee, told TV station SRF on Tuesday.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/worl ... /86469658/
Joka wrote:There is multiculturalism that happens naturally and mutually concerning cultural assimilation. That particular kind is peaceful and harmonious. Then there is multiculturalism by force that revolves around state intervention. That kind is violent and revolves around coercion. Most of the multiculturalism of the west right now concerns primarily with the later.
Kaiserschmarrn wrote:Our western multicultural societies / those with a high rate of immigration actually require a substantial amount of assimilation with respect to those values that make peaceful multiculturalism work. For instance, immigrants who come from highly tribal or sectarian societies must lose the tribalism and/or sectarianism.
Donald wrote:
The irony of course is that the West will have to block low performing immigrants (i.e. those from tribal or sectarian societies) if they wish to preserve their multicultural institutions. I'm not against this per se (it works well for Canada or Australia, for example, where the immigration policy is meritocratic), but it does contradict the anti-racist dogma of multiculturalism.
Kaiserschmarrn wrote:The other aspect of the grumbling has to do with cultural cohesion and national identity and while still quite subdued I wouldn't be surprised if this becomes more assertive in the future, especially since our immigration advocates are now beginning to make a (baseless) case for low skilled migration and "open arms" aka open borders. There is also now a push for reversing the burden of proof, so that opponents to immigration would have to show that it is detrimental rather than the advocates showing that it is beneficial. If this push continues, I suspect that not even the tolerant Kiwis are going to stand by without putting up a fight.
no , i am not gonna do it. her grandfather was a[…]
did you know it ? shocking information , any comme[…]
Imagine how delighted you will be when the Circus[…]