Multiculturalism is dangerous

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

change the law then.

Already been proven on this forum that unethical is fine, as long as not illegal.

Not just in regards to Tax but other issues too.

There’s no political party going to stand on “fixing” the problem since there’s significant financial interest in ensuring it’s broken.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by jfman

There’s no political party going to stand on “fixing” the problem since there’s significant financial interest in ensuring it’s broken.

When the prime miniatures own wifes tax affairs are shady what chance is there of changing the law

[denphone]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

When the prime miniatures own wifes tax affairs are shady what chance is there of changing the law

Zero.

[Ms NTL]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

How many more times do aggressive tax avoidance schemes have to be proven not legal in court for people like you to wake up, the likes of you and I pay more because they won't pay their share and they get away with it because people like you parroting well, it's not illegal

You used harsh words: it is called tax relief

Money laundering is wealth transfer

[Mad Max]

Originally Posted by denphone

The vast majority of immigrants to this country are skilled workers, students and people we need to staff our increasingly crumbling social and health care systems.

In my opinion, the bit in bold is down to the fact that there's far too many people coming to and already in the UK, the country cannot cope with the levels of immigration we have at present.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Mad Max

In my opinion, the bit in bold is down to the fact that there's far too many people coming to and already in the UK, the country cannot cope with the levels of immigration we have at present.

We're an ageing population, whose pensioners are bleeding it dry, and whose young people can't afford housing or children. That is the main problem.

Any immigrants to do the jobs we meed to fill, we should be grateful for.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Any immigrants to do the jobs we meed to fill, we should be grateful for.

I don’t see any useful members of society arriving on the small boats…….do you?

I see people that hate us and our way of life, but like our welfare system.

Legal immigration is different, but no doubt still attracting some people that hate us.

[roughbeast]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

The goings on in France should be a warning to the UK. The North African culture has now become a discontented force and the Kraken has awakened. And this is all down to numbers.

The Wokerati will say that had there been no discrimination against them, then there'd be no trouble.

But why do you think there is discrimination? Putting aside the small percentage of racists, the truth is that cultures don't give up their traditions and don't/rarely mix. The other cultures call this "discrimination" but it's natural human behaviour to resist ruination of one's society.

Once the numbers rise past a certain point, there is a critical mass and that's what we're seeing in France.

Where do you think we're heading?

You appear to be confusing integration with assimilation.

Multiculturalism has integration at its core. Integration is what happens when immigrant families, over time, begin to work within the wider economy and society and frequently move out into the leafy suburbs. At the same time they keep many of their religious and cultural practices and such things as food and clothing. The process of integration takes more than a generation, but gathers pace from the second generation. For example, my wife arrived here from the Punjab when she was only three, so effectively is second generation immigrant, her parents being first generation. My wife is now the head teacher of a mostly white school. She has led it from barely Good to Outstanding. She dresses western style for work, gym and everyday activities, but dresses Punjabi for family religious events, multicultural events at school, and on special occasions such as weddings. This is what integration looks like. This is multiculturalism in practice.

We live in the leafy suburbs in a street of about 100 houses. A third of families are white British or 4th generation Irish Catholic immigrants. The remaining families are either Muslim, Hindu, Sikh or Taoist from India, Pakistan, Iraq, mainland China and Armenia. These are all professional people, doctors, accountants, solicitors, business owners or manager or teachers. They arrived in this country as children or were born here, but all started off in the immigrant ghettos (sic) All the cultural groups mentioned so far, including the Irish, are operating seamlessly within our economy and society, but retain their cultural identity celebrating it as you would expect but paying homage to the cultures represented in the street. We send cards for Eid, Chinese New Year, Diwali and Holi etc as well as Christmas. Our immigrant neighbours do likewise for us.

Those who decry multiculturalism focus mostly on conflicts or friction that occasionally happen in communities where economic immigrants or refugees have just arrived. These are the old industrial parts of towns and cities that had become slums over sixty years ago, but have had new life breathed into them by immigrants looking for cheap housing and looking for the comfort of living alongside those in a similar position to them and/or of the same culture. This is only natural. Once established here and having experienced the culturally welcoming multicultural ethos of our education system they begin, confidently and culturally validated, to go forth to university, or expand their own businesses or work in industry, commerce and the services alongside the rest of us. Gradually, they move out into the leafy suburbs, often replaced by new immigrants bringing their own new problems but striving to do well in their new country.

This is the way it is. This is multiculturalism. This is integration.

You appear to want assimilation, where immigrants don't retain and display their cultures as they integrate and where educational institutions don't recognise the richness of cultures within their community. Children gain confidence from affirmation of their cultures in school, be they white British or immigrant, because our cultures and families are part of what we are. To crush or ignore that in an attempt to force assimilation or their new national identity on children is a crime. National identity and culture is the sum of all its parts and is a changing thing. Britishness is a mix of all that its member citizens bring to it. It is different than that 60 years ago and will be different in 60 years time. What must not be allowed is for one element of our population to try to force their cultural or religious norms on the rest of us. That is a key principle of multiculturalism underpinned by our democratic institutions and processes, our laws and by our mostly pluralistic education system. You speak of a critical mass of immigrants or a certain culture or religion taking over the rest of us. What you say is an echo of what was said about the waves of Jewish immigrants arriving in this country, initially via Brick Lane.

Commentators at the time of mass Jewish immigration during the late 19th Century, early 20th Century and upon the rise of Nazi Germany and Stalin, declared that the Jews would soon overrun us. They pointed out the rapid growth of synagogues, virtually 100% Jewish areas, such as Brick Lane, Jewish shops and business polluting us with the smells of Jewish food and the sight of differently dressed people and places where English was not heard. (Eastern European Jews were as markedly different in dress, from indigenous folk, as Muslims and Hindus are now.) Commentators pointed out that Jewish families tended to be big and this meant they might outbreed us, reaching a critical mass that would overwhelm us.

What has really happened over three or four generations? You got it! Integration, with some Jews retaining all their traditions including dress, some dressing and living the same as everybody else, except on high days and holidays and those who have virtually forgotten their old culture. Did the Jews take over? Did they outbreed us? No. Jews are now part of what we are. As with any group of people coming from a country or region with poor education, water supply, medical facilities or work opportunities they had large families. Once here, the second generation had no more children than the indigenous population.

I suggest you focus your indignation on those who really control our lives and our nation, who deny the resources for all of us to live well and thrive and who try to blame the pressures on our institutions on immigrants rather than on those who control the purse strings and the political agenda.

---------- Post added at 10:38 ---------- Previous post was at 10:09 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

I don’t see any useful members of society arriving on the small boats…….do you?

I see people that hate us and our way of life, but like our welfare system.

Legal immigration is different, but no doubt still attracting some people that hate us.

Define useful.

Is a young healthy man from the Sudan prepared to do labouring, pick crops, wash cars or deliver takeaways useful or not? Is a doctor escaping persecution in Afghanistan or Iran useful or not? Is an engineer escaping jet bombers, snipers in the street in Syria potentially useful or not? Is a trained nurse, the wrong kind of Muslim, escaping the Taliban useful or not? These are the kind of people you find arriving on small boats. Some wait with their children in the refugee camps of first safe countries for their husband who has gone ahead acting as a forerunner. Is that scientific researcher husband and his family useful or not?

[Sephiroth]

@ROUGHBEAST
You've gone to a lot of trouble to show/explain where multiculturalism works and I cannot dispute that.

But there is one culture that is incompatible with multiculturalism. I suppose I've got the headline of this thread wrong. But it should be clear to everyone what I should have called this thread.

The goings on in Paris where broadly mirrored when 300,000 Hamas sympathisers took to our streets. They were un-policeable. And they were supporting Hamas, a genocidal, murderous organisation.

My position is that Islam does not do multiculturalism. I understand that it is a sweeping statement that has potentially crumbling edges. But, as a keen student of history, I know what will happen when/if the Muslim population exceeds the European population: The militant factions will take over and we'll all be facing east.

You mention the Jews and how they've integrated. The big difference is that Judeo-Christin culture is the underlying culture of Europe. The Jews don't do 9/11, 7/7, Sderot, etc.

There is a very informed read on this apect here: https://www.pewresearch.org/religion...0non%2DMuslims.

Europe’s Growing Muslim Population

Muslims are projected to increase as a share of Europe’s population – even with no future migration

My position is that this will destroy our culture in time.

[GrimUpNorth]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

@ROUGHBEAST
You've gone to a lot of trouble to show/explain where multiculturalism works and I cannot dispute that.

But there is one culture that is incompatible with multiculturalism. I suppose I've got the headline of this thread wrong. But it should be clear to everyone what I should have called this thread.

The goings on in Paris where broadly mirrored when 300,000 Hamas sympathisers took to our streets. They were un-policeable. And they were supporting Hamas, a genocidal, murderous organisation.

My position is that Islam does not do multiculturalism. I understand that it is a sweeping statement that has potentially crumbling edges. But, as a keen student of history, I know what will happen when/if the Muslim population exceeds the European population: The militant factions will take over and we'll all be facing east.

You mention the Jews and how they've integrated. The big difference is that Judeo-Christin culture is the underlying culture of Europe. The Jews don't do 9/11, 7/7, Sderot, etc.

There is a very informed read on this apect here: https://www.pewresearch.org/religion...0non%2DMuslims.



My position is that this will destroy our culture in time.

We better start controlling their population then, because I don't think it's been tried before and I'm sure it'll turn out fine .

[roughbeast]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

@ROUGHBEAST
You've gone to a lot of trouble to show/explain where multiculturalism works and I cannot dispute that.

But there is one culture that is incompatible with multiculturalism. I suppose I've got the headline of this thread wrong. But it should be clear to everyone what I should have called this thread.

The goings on in Paris where broadly mirrored when 300,000 Hamas sympathisers took to our streets. They were un-policeable. And they were supporting Hamas, a genocidal, murderous organisation.

My position is that Islam does not do multiculturalism. I understand that it is a sweeping statement that has potentially crumbling edges. But, as a keen student of history, I know what will happen when/if the Muslim population exceeds the European population: The militant factions will take over and we'll all be facing east.

You mention the Jews and how they've integrated. The big difference is that Judeo-Christin culture is the underlying culture of Europe. The Jews don't do 9/11, 7/7, Sderot, etc.

There is a very informed read on this apect here: https://www.pewresearch.org/religion...0non%2DMuslims.



My position is that this will destroy our culture in time.

I am encouraged that you place a lot of store in history. That should prevent you from making classic historical mistakes.

You appear to know Islam well, so you will know that at its height, during its golden age, there were more Christians living in Muslim territories than Christians living in the Christian world. There were more churches in Muslim lands than in Christian lands. These were, compared with our times, pretty barbaric for the ordinary citizen, but it was the norm for Christians to be left to get on with their lives peacefully. This was a time of fantastic cultural and scientific exchange between Christian and Muslim academics and artists. No doubt you will find exceptions, but from the Prophet down to all Muslims, tolerance of Christians and Jews, as People of the Book, was at the core of managing subjugated peoples. We hear of the holy wars, but these were driven largely by zealots and power mongers of the Christian world wishing to reclaim Jerusalem metaphorically and actually.

You quite rightly point out the excesses of Hamas and its supporters, much as we might point out the excesses of the Taliban, the Ayatollahs, al Qaeda and ISIS. President Biden, to the fury of the Israeli government, said one sensible thing recently. He said that the Hamas attacks of 7th October did not happen in a vacuum. How right he is!

I would suggest that the resurgence of Islamic extremism this last 60 years has been triggered or is the result of three main factors.

1. The carving up of the Ottoman Empire, including Greater Syria, into badly drawn countries, such as Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine. These were inherently unstable because they ignore ethnic, religious and cultural differences.
2. The imposition of a virtual European colony, on the indigenous peoples, the Arabs of the Holy Lands, i.e, the Jewish State of Israel.
3. The continued interference, by the west in Muslim lands, largely to secure oil supply but also in support of Israel. Even though, since 1967, it has chosen expansion over security the west has unconditionally supported Israel.

It is easy to see why extremists in Muslim lands might gain traction and to begin to gain the upper hand in so many countries. During 1973, I travelled by land via Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan to India, Sri Lanka and Nepal. Through Muslim lands I was met with great hospitality, interest in my views of life, and a readiness to talk about religion and politics. Apart from the occasional threat of bandits I felt safe and welcome. In the streets of Baghdad, Tehran, Kabul and Lahore I saw many local women and school girls dressed western-style without even a hijab. You don't need me to tell you that something has changed.

I must be careful here, not to make the historical mistake of comparing contemporary times with those of the ancients, the Middle Ages and early modern times, but we should not ignore the brutality of the Christian world right through to the Enlightenment and on into the period of brutal and evangelical European colonialism. You speak of Islam as being especially unable to integrate, but Islamic history compared with Christian history doesn't suggest that.

Both religions have their roots in the shared scriptures of The Old Testaments. They share the same prophets - Moses, Abraham etc. A deep dive into those scriptures reveals a blood thirsty approach to sinners and enemies. The new scriptures deriving from the Prophet and the life of Jesus, whether we regard them as the word of God or not, were written in the context of the times derived from the moral imperatives of the time. The New Testaments and the Quran contain passages of great beauty proposing love, peace, charity, respect for other races and care for the natural world. Yet, with a nod to the stoics of the time, both sets of scriptures contain homophobic stances and the terrible things that might happen to sinners.

Despite the overwhelming proposals for love and peace in the scriptures, the extremist, profiteers and preachers of hate in the Christian, Muslim and Jewish world find plenty passages and verses to in their shared and discreet scriptures to justify great violence and exploitation. For example, the Christian slave trade, contrasting with the ancient slave trades, was justified by a passage in the Old Testament that suggests that black Africans were an inferior sub-species to whom Christian ethics of fair treatment did not have to apply. This philosophy was preached from the pulpit across English-speaking lands and at home. I believe our culture has not recovered from that wrong.

I give these examples and apply a picture of the past with a rather large brush, only to illustrate that your view of Islam is taken from a very narrow perspective that fails to take into account a wide historical perspective, only focussing on evidence supplied by modern extremists.

EDIT. The statistic your link pointed me at is pretty desperate. At the time of Irish, Catholic immigration, families >10 were not uncommon. Due to Papal edict regarding contraception this continued into my mother's generation. Have we been overwhelmed by Catholics or Catholic culture? Your statistic presumably covering first and second generation Muslim immigrants points out families being one child larger than those of existing populations. I suggest that as we move into wholly second and third generation Muslim immigrants that the difference in fertility pointed out will narrow due to factors I suggested previously. We al;so don't know what will happen regarding indigenous fertility either. Econo0mic outlook can change things, e.g., the Blair years of economic prosperity and improving public services produced a wave of births that has only recently left our school system.

[Sephiroth]

@ROUGHBEAST

I'll single out just three of your paragraphs on which to comment. My reading of your post suggests that those three paragraphs covers the full sense of your response.

You appear to know Islam well, so you will know that at its height, during its golden age, there were more Christians living in Muslim territories than Christians living in the Christian world. There were more churches in Muslim lands than in Christian lands. These were, compared with our times, pretty barbaric for the ordinary citizen, but it was the norm for Christians to be left to get on with their lives peacefully. This was a time of fantastic cultural and scientific exchange between Christian and Muslim academics and artists. No doubt you will find exceptions, but from the Prophet down to all Muslims, tolerance of Christians and Jews, as People of the Book, was at the core of managing subjugated peoples. We hear of the holy wars, but these were driven largely by zealots and power mongers of the Christian world wishing to reclaim Jerusalem metaphorically and actually.

I know Islam no better than having read the Koran twice and what I observe with my own eyes. As with all cultures, there are wings, and I have observed that there is an obvious plan for Muslim population growth in Europe and that eventually the militant wing(s) will dominate the rest.

You then pray in aid to your example of the Christian/Muslim institutions living together well in the past. But time have changed in at least two meaningful ways (in this oil money era that have altered the dynamic you have described: (1) Sunni vs Shia power play/consequences; (b) Israel.

Although your historical account may be true, it no longer applies (9/11, 7/7, Yemsn, Sderot, etc).

Both religions have their roots in the shared scriptures of The Old Testaments. They share the same prophets - Moses, Abraham etc. A deep dive into those scriptures reveals a blood thirsty approach to sinners and enemies. The new scriptures deriving from the Prophet and the life of Jesus, whether we regard them as the word of God or not, were written in the context of the times derived from the moral imperatives of the time. The New Testaments and the Quran contain passages of great beauty proposing love, peace, charity, respect for other races and care for the natural world. Yet, with a nod to the stoics of the time, both sets of scriptures contain homophobic stances and the terrible things that might happen to sinners.

There's no doubt that both religions have their roots in the shared scriptures of the OT. Fat lot of good that does. Sharing the long dead prophets, whose exploits are described in the politically written testaments of their time has no meaning now. The nearest we have now is the Ten Commandments that make up a large chunk of of our culture and protections in law. The militant Muslims have no regard for the Ten Commandments and in order to maintain power in the UK when the Muslims have 51% in Parliament, it will be the militants who will be calling (and issuing) the shots.

EDIT. The statistic your link pointed me at is pretty desperate. At the time of Irish, Catholic immigration, families >10 were not uncommon. Due to Papal edict regarding contraception this continued into my mother's generation. Have we been overwhelmed by Catholics or Catholic culture? Your statistic presumably covering first and second generation Muslim immigrants points out families being one child larger than those of existing populations. I suggest that as we move into wholly second and third generation Muslim immigrants that the difference in fertility pointed out will narrow due to factors I suggested previously. We also don't know what will happen regarding indigenous fertility either. Econo0mic outlook can change things, e.g., the Blair years of economic prosperity and improving public services produced a wave of births that has only recently left our school system.

You are comparing the Catholic sub-culture (which dominates across much of Europe) with a culture that demonstrates different values. Today's Catholics are part of our cultural family. But then you argue that 2nd/3rd generation 'Muslim immigrants' fertility will narrow and thus, by implication, their birth rate will fall - in 50 years time when it's too late. Maybe - but only if their children attend Madrasas in significantly lower numbers. I'm a conspiracy theory person who believes that Saudi Arabia is busy paying for this religious attendance.

You've sort of blamed the Blair years for the birth rate now being seen. The point is that immigration, part of the Saudi plan, has led to the dangers we are now seeing here, in France, in Germany and Sweden.

The 2.8 million Muslims in the UK can turn out 10% of their number in demonstrations that cannot be safely policed. These demonstrations hardly hide their aim of wiping Israel out. Is this a case of multiculturalism working?

Originally Posted by roughbeast

I am encouraged that you place a lot of store in history. That should prevent you from making classic historical mistakes.

You appear to know Islam well, so you will know that at its height, during its golden age, there were more Christians living in Muslim territories than Christians living in the Christian world. There were more churches in Muslim lands than in Christian lands. These were, compared with our times, pretty barbaric for the ordinary citizen, but it was the norm for Christians to be left to get on with their lives peacefully. This was a time of fantastic cultural and scientific exchange between Christian and Muslim academics and artists. No doubt you will find exceptions, but from the Prophet down to all Muslims, tolerance of Christians and Jews, as People of the Book, was at the core of managing subjugated peoples. We hear of the holy wars, but these were driven largely by zealots and power mongers of the Christian world wishing to reclaim Jerusalem metaphorically and actually.

You quite rightly point out the excesses of Hamas and its supporters, much as we might point out the excesses of the Taliban, the Ayatollahs, al Qaeda and ISIS. President Biden, to the fury of the Israeli government, said one sensible thing recently. He said that the Hamas attacks of 7th October did not happen in a vacuum. How right he is!

I would suggest that the resurgence of Islamic extremism this last 60 years has been triggered or is the result of three main factors.

1. The carving up of the Ottoman Empire, including Greater Syria, into badly drawn countries, such as Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine. These were inherently unstable because they ignore ethnic, religious and cultural differences.
2. The imposition of a virtual European colony, on the indigenous peoples, the Arabs of the Holy Lands, i.e, the Jewish State of Israel.
3. The continued interference, by the west in Muslim lands, largely to secure oil supply but also in support of Israel. Even though, since 1967, it has chosen expansion over security the west has unconditionally supported Israel.

It is easy to see why extremists in Muslim lands might gain traction and to begin to gain the upper hand in so many countries. During 1973, I travelled by land via Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan to India, Sri Lanka and Nepal. Through Muslim lands I was met with great hospitality, interest in my views of life, and a readiness to talk about religion and politics. Apart from the occasional threat of bandits I felt safe and welcome. In the streets of Baghdad, Tehran, Kabul and Lahore I saw many local women and school girls dressed western-style without even a hijab. You don't need me to tell you that something has changed.

I must be careful here, not to make the historical mistake of comparing contemporary times with those of the ancients, the Middle Ages and early modern times, but we should not ignore the brutality of the Christian world right through to the Enlightenment and on into the period of brutal and evangelical European colonialism. You speak of Islam as being especially unable to integrate, but Islamic history compared with Christian history doesn't suggest that.

Both religions have their roots in the shared scriptures of The Old Testaments. They share the same prophets - Moses, Abraham etc. A deep dive into those scriptures reveals a blood thirsty approach to sinners and enemies. The new scriptures deriving from the Prophet and the life of Jesus, whether we regard them as the word of God or not, were written in the context of the times derived from the moral imperatives of the time. The New Testaments and the Quran contain passages of great beauty proposing love, peace, charity, respect for other races and care for the natural world. Yet, with a nod to the stoics of the time, both sets of scriptures contain homophobic stances and the terrible things that might happen to sinners.

Despite the overwhelming proposals for love and peace in the scriptures, the extremist, profiteers and preachers of hate in the Christian, Muslim and Jewish world find plenty passages and verses to in their shared and discreet scriptures to justify great violence and exploitation. For example, the Christian slave trade, contrasting with the ancient slave trades, was justified by a passage in the Old Testament that suggests that black Africans were an inferior sub-species to whom Christian ethics of fair treatment did not have to apply. This philosophy was preached from the pulpit across English-speaking lands and at home. I believe our culture has not recovered from that wrong.

I give these examples and apply a picture of the past with a rather large brush, only to illustrate that your view of Islam is taken from a very narrow perspective that fails to take into account a wide historical perspective, only focussing on evidence supplied by modern extremists.

EDIT. The statistic your link pointed me at is pretty desperate. At the time of Irish, Catholic immigration, families >10 were not uncommon. Due to Papal edict regarding contraception this continued into my mother's generation. Have we been overwhelmed by Catholics or Catholic culture? Your statistic presumably covering first and second generation Muslim immigrants points out families being one child larger than those of existing populations. I suggest that as we move into wholly second and third generation Muslim immigrants that the difference in fertility pointed out will narrow due to factors I suggested previously. We al;so don't know what will happen regarding indigenous fertility either. Econo0mic outlook can change things, e.g., the Blair years of economic prosperity and improving public services produced a wave of births that has only recently left our school system.

Quoted in full because everyone here should read it at least twice. Thank you.

[Russ]

I’m sure I’ve asked this before, didn’t get a straight answer then and I doubt I’ll get one now.

Why did I never get any hassle from the many many Muslims I lived and worked alongside when I lived in Leicester for 4 years?

Maybe I intimidated them too much do you think?

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Chris

Quoted in full because everyone here should read it at least twice. Thank you.

Agreed.

Two exceptionally informative and well-argued posts from Rough Beast.