Slightly different as the Catholics you’re talking about are limited to N. Ireland, not Catholics world-wide. This seems like a good argument on its surface, but has nothing to do with world politics. If you were to say Muslims were railing against Isreal on behalf of a Palestinian state, you’d have an excellent point. However, in the name of Allah innocents are dying all over the world. From what I see, mostly for the sake of killing.
Fuck no, I’m an American! I’d just drop a reminder that we saved and/or destroyed them in WW2, and HUZZAH! Game over!
Heh, of course I did. But business travel is hardly a valid comparison; I was never demanding ‘dual language signs’ or any silly crap like that. In Mexico, I picked up Spanish fairly quickly, and that was pretty much that. It just ain’t so different from America. And you damned well better believe that when I got to Italy, I dropped some serious dime so that I could dress in their clothes. To ‘fit in’ better, you understand. Fuck, that was a good time. Brazil? Dunno. That is probably where I ‘stood out’ the most of all the long-term trips I made, but I was having too much fun to care. Don’t let Rashak fool you: Brazil is awesome beyond belief. (Except for the poor parts, but what the hell would I be doing in those parts?)
My concerns are not about the cosmetic crap; Sure, I think people walking around robes in the 21st century look pretty damned foolish, that isn’t was bothers me. What bothers me when I read stuff like this. A major concern? Even if you feel it is not, why wait until it is before doing something about it? Cultural assimilation is the answer, but shit like this isn’t going to help matters:
And that’s different than home-schooling, charter schools, and Catholic schools in the US…How?
:rolleyes:
Bob Jones is our culture, durnit! As for the Urdu, be sure not to mention the habit of talking in tongues at certain churches. 
Considering the strong emphasis Americans tend to put on their cultural heritage (no-one, it seems, is merely American, but rather Irish-American, Italian-American, etc. etc.) it surprises me greatly to see so many people insisting on such wholesale assimilation, but there you go. Brutus appears to want immigrants not only to instantly adapt to their new nation, but to simultaneously completely forget where they came from. He forgets that these are human beings, not automatons, and that the first stage of adapting to a new environment is to make oneself feel at home. Of course, reading articles about extremists and believing they are typical isn’t going to help much; perhaps he simply doesn’t realise that not every Muslim in the UK is a Sheikh Bakri.
Incidentally, Brutus, if you had such a blast meeting the foreigner on his own turf, why do his ways become so instantly repugnant once “over here”? Surely a person’s as interesting as ever no matter where they’re standing. Maybe London would be a more vibrant place if Chinatown didn’t exist, Brick Lane served nothing but Yorkshire Pudding and the most interesting condiment available was ketchup, but you know, I sincerely doubt it.
Your personal little (well, not-so-little) fight against ignorance isn’t going to be helped along much by you ascribing positions to others. I never said anything about ‘repugnant’ or the need to ‘instantly adapt’, among other things. Why some of you insist on assigning a position to someone, then extending it to the most illogical extreme is beyond me. Simple amusement for simple people?
Well, you seem to object to people being taught the language of their forebears, or the religion, and take such examples as being evidence of worrying resistance on the part of immigrants. If you’re not averse to people both preserving and adapting their ways of life, why did the example you gave bother you so much? If you could explain what it is that worries you about people being taught about their own culture, perhaps I wouldn’t have to fill in the blanks as much as I have.
And if you weren’t so insistent on rapid integration, you would not be focussing on first generation immigrants as you do, but rather on the immigrants who have been with us for some time, and are perfectly at home here, as we are with them. I apologise if I’ve ascribed some position to you which you do not hold, but then I live here in London (which houses the vast proportion of this country’s minorities), and can see exactly how much people have integrated. It’s difficult to reconcile this with the picture you paint of cultural resistance, and as such I’m forced to assume that you want something radically different to the already-acceptable situation. The Pakistani guys running the corner shop say hi, chat about the football, and gave us a bottle of wine for Christmas. The halal butchers sells us steak, and doesn’t rip us off or poison us. The call to prayer never wakes me up, sweating as I fear for my culture. The guys in traditional dress on the tube are every bit as pushy as native Londoners, which of course is what they are. Given that you’re complaining about this entirely happy state of affairs, I believe I can be forgiven for occasionally thinking that you must want the moon on a stick.
Perhaps you could explain exactly what your problem is, rather than just linking to stories about foreigners being foreigners and tutting? Why should we feel the need to “do something about” people being taught their own religion and language?
[QUOTE=duffer]
Slightly different as the Catholics you’re talking about are limited to N. Ireland, not Catholics world-wide. This seems like a good argument on its surface, but has nothing to do with world politics. If you were to say Muslims were railing against Isreal on behalf of a Palestinian state, you’d have an excellent point. However, in the name of Allah innocents are dying all over the world. From what I see, mostly for the sake of killing.[/QUOTE
You use the phrase" from what I see", which gives you a big opportunity to back away, should the need arise.
Let me put it like this: Are you saying that there are not terrorist groups, around the world, who share a Christian belief and who are, to some extent, motivated by that belief? Remember that it’s all a matter of perspective. They’re terrorists or freedom fighters depending on which side of the fence you’re from.
Because if we define terrorists as people who use violence as a mean to further an ideological belief, but are not sanctioned by a state, then there are an awful lot of Christian terrorists around. Narrowing it down to IRA, as I did, is not much different from the text in the article you linked to.
I could easily have substituted that for extreme pro-life groups in the US who bomb abortion clinics. Animal rights activists in Europe, neo-nazis, the whole mess in former Yugoslavia, based on a clash between Greek-Orthodox, Catholics and Muslims.
And if we include all brands of religion, we’ll find that there are lots of terrorists/freedom fighters willing to use violence and many of them are not Muslim.
You’re linking to an article, where a small group of people are dreaming about bombing London. That’s terrifying. But they’re four guys out of 1.2 billion. Even considering hundreds, or a thousand such groups in the world, it’s still a very small minority and no reason to condemn Islam.
Because that kind of xenophgobia will only help these groups grow in strength and numbers.
And what exactly is it you think you have answered here? Besides the bits with the Ekstrabladet (which since it’s a left wing newspaper mainly about sport not to mention stupid idiots (not surprising considering their political bend) is hardly my newspaper), Dansk Folkeparti (which considering they’re goddamn socialists are most definitely not my party) and some girl from Venezuela and some confusing bits about European stock (what’re you suggesting here, that Denmark enact immigration laws based on religion and “stock”?) and some other obscurities, you didn’t answer a damn thing. What do you hope to gain that you couldn’t have done better in the original thread? What the heck is the purpose of this thread? Do you think SDMB would be better off without the likes of Ryan?
The bits about free speech are especially amusing considering Sweden’s reputation of actual limitation on free speech. Danes are normally more open to saying what Swedes only think. Which is why the Swedes like to call them racist and which is why they’re generally less racist than the Swedes. Nothing feed racism so much as trying to keep a lid on it. Which is why this pitting is in its small way does more to further racism than to combat it.
So what if it is? If someone moves to a new country for no other reason than that they can provide their family with better nutrition, education, and all-around standard of living, I applaud them: they’re doing right by their family, practicing good family values. I don’t expect them only to move to countries whose pop music they approve of, or whose accent they like.
Do you get pissed off when companies move operations to other countries for no motive other than base economic opportunism? If not, why do you hold human beings to higher standards?
Daniel
I generally agree with you. What troubles me is that certain groups are very vocal regarding their hatred of western (US specifically) cultures and that certain groups show little remorse, symapthy or apology when terrorism from within that group does strike the US.
Terrorism is unethical in any form for any reason. I don’t really have a problem with ‘narrowing’ the search for future terrorism to groups that have committed past attrocities. Common sense being the key factor in determining the necessity of such actions.
You’ll note that i asked Brutus almost exactly the same question above, in post #31. His silence speaks more eloquently on the subject than any blow-hard sophistry ever could.
Look, if you are unable to conduct a grown up debate, even on hot-button subjects that you really can’t agree on, without starting a pit thread so that you can hurl all the insults you’re not allowed to in GD, then perhaps you shouldn’t have got involved in the debate in the first place.
This is a really nasty aspect of SDMB. There’s too many who rarely show their face in GD, but will happily drag any passing debate into the Pit and pick up on trashing other dopers there. If you are incapable of getting your point across in GD, where the OP is, then what makes you think that a Pit post is going to be any more convincing? Because you get to curse out the OP? It’s more a sign of desperation in your part.
I’m not talking about threads that spill into the Pit on unrelated fistycuffs. I’m talking about lifting the OP practically wholesale into the Pit and then working it over with naughty cuss words, cos you weren’t smart enough to address the subject properly in GD.
Ryan_Liam was dead wrong. Utterly and completely misguided and generally clue-free of anything he was talking about. But I didn’t see him do anything that merited a pit thread. The only reason for starting one is so that you could open up the hamper-basket of pit monkeys and begin the pile on. So much for attacking the ideas and not the person… How dare he discuss issues and form opinions around here!! Perhaps this’ll teach him in future!!
And I’m not soley picking out The Gaspode either. There’s plenty others, and worse.
But what if the cultural practises they work to maintain untainted are the very cultural practises that made the poor and forced them to flee in the first place? Or what if they seek not better education, but on the contrary insist on worse education? Do you still applaud them?
A recent survey revealed that there are at all time some 5000 - 6000 (a fair amount for a small country) Danish born second and third generation immigrant children in mainly Pakistan and Somalia for what is commonly referred to as “re-education” in Islamic schools for a period of a few years of for what amounts to daily brainwashing and beatings. The parents send them there to ensure they don’t become too Danish, meanwhile they also ensure they’ll never get a job in Denmark because they learn nothing that is of any value and much that isn’t. If they find Danish culture so abhorrent they can’t stand the thought of their children becoming too Danish and even parting with them for several years is to be preferred, perhaps they should consider leaving.
Companies are not people. There is no comparison.
The very fact that companies are not people means that there is, in fact, possibility for comparison. In case it had slipped by you, the term “comparison” need not be applied to identical entities. Nice attempt to duck the issue, though.
If you believe that migrating people must be motivated by more than base economic opporutnism, but that we should not apply similar criteria to corporations, it’s incumbent upon you to explain why such inconcsistent expectations should be applied.
That’s a dumb question–or did you think that, by applauding their trying to improve conditions for their families by moving, I was thereby approving of every single aspect of their personality and lifestyle?
I approve of people trying to better conditions for their family, and I disapprove of people making other decisions that hurt their family, all other issues being equal. Is that so difficult to understand?
Sorry, mhendo–I somehow completely missed your earlier post.
Daniel
I did not duck the issue (but I noticed you didn’t address any of those I brought up), I thought the comparison was unhelpful. Quite a few things are not people, so I think there has to be a bit more for a comparison to be valid than the mere fact than they’re different. Birds and whales migrate too, yet I do not think they should be subject to the same laws as people. Do you also it incumbent upon me to explain why I think different rules should apply there. Many things migrate and are not people; comets and planets of a sort, letters and parcels, cargo-ships, etc, etc.
In any case, I do understand the parents seeking better opportunities elsewhere. I too would do the same faced with the same situation. This does not mean the host country is obliged to accept or applaud everything or anything the immigrants do. Especially when it’s detrimental to themselves. But if you insist on the comparison, then yes I think companies should respect the laws and customs of the country where they’re located and I think immigrants should respect the laws and customs of the country where they’re living. And the burden of accommodating to laws and customs lies solely on the shoulders of the companies and immigrants.
All in all I think Futile Gesture hit it spot on. This is one sorry pitting.
I have a rebuttal to this, but I have to head out for the annual Bison hunt first. Once that’s wrapped up, and I finish with a bit of dancing to help eliminate this drought, I’ll get right on it. Pass the maize, please.
Well I’m a simple mind–but if that’s your principals we agree completely (though I suspect we may disagree on the details). Also it seems to be a bit beside the point of Ryan’s original worry.
principles
Ahh well in context I suppose the tommies would be the Indians, and if you think this is a valid comparison I suppose you see Ryan’s fears and raise a few massacras and one complete extermination.