What is British culture and which models of it should refugees seek to emulate? A coke head London ad exec? A skinhead from Leeds? Perhaps a Scottish farmer? Should people born in Britain strive to conform to one of the cultures you’ve determined are British enough?
Nobody was shocked. We just laughed. If they’re really your friends, you’ve no doubt discussed things on an equivalent level to here? If not, they’re not friends, just acquaintances. As I asked in the original thread, where do your friends fit into your ultimate threat of armed uprising?
A country’s culture is neither static nor monolithic so I fail to see why someone should adapt to something so abstract, not to mention ever-changing. I see no reason why anyone should be forced to conform except to the most basic tenets of their new homeland, including a familiarity with its language and an understanding of its laws.
Everything else is unnecessary and, in the end, unimportant.
They said I was nuts, but their opinion is canceled out by their religion. What Muslim would agree to it?
Nothing wrong with that. Isn’t that what this country was founded on? And what happened to that whole freedom to live how you want thing that conservatives babble on about?
Anyway, I’d just like to damn the Italians for not adapting their culture to the United States’ and forcing Italian food on us. Damn them to hell. And the Dutch with their stupid lack of adaptation infliciting Santa Claus and all sorts of other Christmas traditions. And the Germans, Japanese, blacks, Poles, French, Irish, Mexicans, Russians, Spanish, Indians, etc. Damn them for not leaving their culture at home and becoming just like everyone else in America. :rolleyes:
So it’s only by taking it to the illogical extreme that you can make a point?
Why not? Reductio ad absurdum is a great way to make this point. Expecting Italians to assimilate and shed their culture is an illogical extreme and yet asking Muslims to do the same isn’t? Why not?
FWIW, I thought Ryan was offering some outside opinions and stating some concerns. I certainly did not read anything that was worthy of a pit thread, just some comments on the edge of popular sentiment in his country.
The Gaspode: Muslim hoards who will inforce “their way of life”
It’s spelled: “hordes” and “enforce.”
Please carry on this tempest. My teapot will enjoy the action.
Hear! Hear! And the language and laws change with the rest of the culture.
There’s really no point in determining who should adjust anyway. The culture that people adjust to now is quite different from the culture others adjusted to in the 1960’s. And it will be enormously different forty years from now no matter what decisions are made. The mystery is how it will be different.
We can make peace with change and enjoy it or we can whine all the way to the grave. If we choose the later, well…we know where the fault lies, don’t we dear Brutus?
Meanwhile, Ryan is going to be all right because he is willing to reevaluate what he thinks.
I think Paul Fitzroy has put in evidence more bigotry in that thread, and may be more deserving of attention, than Ryan. At least Ryan, after a shaky few pages, admitted the error of his ways and conceded he may be completely wrong in his thinking – all we’ve seen from Paul is desperate attempts to emphasize the evil of Islam by pointing repeatedly to what he calls its “fruits”. Paul has eschewed arguments and clearly hopes that links will do the work for him; at one point he links a cite he calls “Even the dead are not safe from Arab Muslim hatred” (on page 4) that is just a picture of a vandalized grave in France. Nice cite. Someone else then provided a proper link to a story on that topic, which explained how Muslim graves in France were vandalized, among other things with graffiti of swastikas.
Where’s the sympathy and the solidarity? If you are hell-bent on looking for the evil in a situation, that is probably all you will find in it, Paul. Selective bias works like that, and will provide its own reinforcement.
But isn’t this motivation at the core of the free market philosophy that you conservatives love so much? The idea that people will move to places where their economic opportunities are greatest, to places where they feel that their labor might be sold most profitably? Surely such economic freedom of movement is essential for the optimum allocation of global human resources?
If those sorts of motivations are good enough for US companies that decide to ship all their manufacturing jobs overseas, why shouldn’t they be good enough for some third-world denizen?
I just can’t imagine why anyone would be concerned with a culture that looks to Europe as a new safe haven. Hey, got a radical agenda and looking to foment whatever ill you can conceive? Come to Europe! Hell, even if you prove dangerous, we’ll defend your right to be a threat to us! Come on in and bring your buddies! Just don’t let those sneaky Norwegians in on your airline hijacking plans.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/londonnews/articles/10329634?version=1
Um, it’s not cultures that commit acts of terrorism… it’s individual people. Do you think that Americans should have been kept out of Europe after the Oklahoma City bombing? :rolleyes:
Um, when you show me a worldwide network that followed the teachings of Tim McVeigh and Terry Nicholls, you can roll your fucking eyes. And yes, it is a culture. Over the last 30 years name 4 asian groups that have hijacked airliners. Name 3 European groups that have strapped dynamite to themselves and blew up a city bus. Huh, none so far? I’ll end it here since you either know damn well enough this is a Muslim tactic, or you’re just trying to stir up shit.
Oh, and please try to defend the fucktards in my link.
Are you channeling or speaking in tongues? I find your bizarre brand of Christianity disturbing and worthy of the authorities’ attention.
Where the hell did Chritianity enter this? Quit pulling shit out of your ass and join the argument. :rolleyes:
Gah! Gaspode you seem to have acquired a tendency to pit people not strictly following the party line. I know this is a particular Swedish speciality, but I wonder what it is you actually hope to gain by it. What possible good do you think will come of pitting him that couldn’t have come of engaging him in a levelled and intelligent discussion in the original thread - except of course for a bit of grandstanding, polishing your own halo? Nothing like signalling to friends that you’re on the right side eh?
I tell you, I expect immigrants to Denmark to adapt to and accept many Danish customs beyond what is expressed in laws. Such as no more arranged and forced marriage. Equality of the sexes. Education for all. Religious tolerance. Freedom of expression. Participating in society. Sexual tolerance. No more anti-Semitism. No more FGM. No honour killings. No more homophobia. No dancing in the streets in celebration of terrorist attacks in New York. No demonstration in support of killing Salman Rushdie. No demonstration in support of Bin Laden. Etc. etc. Basically the same I expect of Danes. It is pretty stupid fleeing from a country if you only insist on bringing on all the baggage that made the country you fled from such a piece of shit and made you flee in the first place.
Right, but this is to my mind little more than bluster; of course immigrants adapt, and we adapt to them. There are large numbers of all sorts of second and third generation immigrants all over the country who are just as British as I am (probably more so, in fact, but that’s another story). Adaptation/integration is inevitable, and happens quite naturally on its own, thank you very much. However, it has been seized on by xenophobes, who seem to demand their integration much faster than is natural. Of course the refugees fresh off the plane haven’t integrated completely yet; what do you expect, for them to instantly don bowler hats and plus fours then toddle off to watch some cricket? How about giving them a little time, hmm? And this insistence on changing people to “our ways” doesn’t help either; it has quite the opposite effect.
Here, try this. Let’s assume Kerry wins the election and you’re forced to seek asylum in France (I know, I know, but never mind). The locals can either:
a) Mostly leave you alone, giving you incomprehensible directions as necessary and occasionally asking you to feed their goats, or
b) Surround you, shrieking “EAT ZE FUCKING CROISSANT, PROCESSED-CHEESE EATING SURRENDER-SINGE!!! INTEGRATE!!! INTEGRAAAAATE!!!”
Which of these two scenarios is more likely to allow you to settle in your new country, and which to form self-protecting enclaves of people like you?
Brutus, when you were living in other countries, did you integrate yourself into the local cultures?
This is going to be very regional, but I do feel a need to answer Rune, who seem to use Extrabladet (Danish tabloid) as a source of knowledge about Swedes and the rethorics of Dansk Folkeparti (Nationalistic lite) in his views about furriners.
I might show what you wrote to the Danish guy who recently moved into my apt. building, with his Venezuelan girlfriend, trying to arrange residency for her so they can live together. Sure, she’s Christian and of European ‘stock’, but hey, those weird Catholics from S. America are just so strange and should be kept out of our pure paradise, huh?
Your accusations about halos, grandstanding and following the party line are just stupid. Which party? What Swedish speciality? Calling the Danish on their collective xenophobia and hygge? It’s an ugly thing to see, but you know what? I do the same for Swedes who say and act the same. The basic freedoms you talk about - freedom of religion, freedom of speech, are not only for views we like, but especially for views we don’t like.
Sure. But it was when I opened that other thread and found him saying similar things again - that thing about profiling people of ME descent (Jews too? Koptic, Armenian?) - that I thought that he was an insincere and ignorant fool. And I didn’t want to argue with him in both those thread. It was a cumulative thing and dishonest of him.
This kettle made two typos/spelling errors. And this is pertinent, why?
Brutus - yet again I see you argue for the sake of argument. Whenever someone shows up and argue a stance that you perceive as faintly liberal, you will automatically take the opposite view, even if it makes you look like a tool.
Duffer - That article could be re-written, using Irish names and IRA and would look about the same. Will you condemn all Cathlics because of this. Should there be profiling of the Irish or a ban for them to enter the country, because they might overturn the government and institute a ban on abortions and divorce?
Because that makes about as much sense as blaming Muslims in general for what those idiots are saying.