# The Curse of Cultural Awareness



## tomahawk6 (8 Jan 2007)

Very interesting article from Strategypage. Cultural awareness is a double edge sword it would seem.Oil countries buy their technical experts rather than creating their own is one obvious problem. Arab countries have fallen behind not only the west economically but also the east. Reversing this will be the salvation for the arab world but not easily acheived.

The Curse of Cultural Awareness

January 8, 2007: The war on terror puts a premium on "cultural awareness." But in the Arab world, being aware of the culture, and reporting on it accurately, can be considered politically incorrect back home. Consider, for example, some of the things that expatriates, working in Arabia, have been reporting for decades, and now thousands of U.S. troops are experiencing as well.


Arabs have a different attitude towards work. While Americans have a thing for "keeping busy" and being entrepreneurs, Arabs look up to the man of leisure. Government jobs, which require little work, are much sought after in the Arab countries. While there are hard workers and entrepreneurs in Arab countries, they are not admired as they are in the United States. This difference in attitudes creates all sorts of "culture clash" problems, as both groups see their attitudes as the natural and normal ones. Each groups sees the others attitudes as alien and odd. However, the lack of hard work and initiative is a major reason why the Arab world has fallen behind other cultures in the last fifty years. Arab countries with oil have used a lot of the money to hire foreigners to do their work for them, rather than investing in their economy and education. Thus countries like South Korea, which has no oil, and was poorer than most Arab countries half a century, is now wealthier than any Arab nation. The South Korean example is one of many similar ones in the Far East and other parts of the world. Arabs are coming to accept that their work habits may have something to do with their shabby economic condition, but this is still a minority opinion. 


Arabs really have a problem with personal responsibility, which is a bedrock characteristic in any strong economy. The cause of this Arab problem is the concept of "inshallah" ("If God wills it.") This is a basic tenet of Islam, although some scholars believe the attitude preceded that religion. In any event, "inshallah" is deadly when combined with modern technology. For this reason, Arab countries either have poorly maintained infrastructure and equipment (including military stuff), or import a lot of foreigners, possessing the right attitudes, to maintain everything. That minority of Arabs who do have the right attitude towards maintenance and personal responsibility are considered odd, but useful. The "inshallah" thing is made worse by a stronger belief in the supernatural, and magic in general. This often extends to technology. Thus many Iraqis believe that American troops wear sunglasses that see through clothing, and armor vests that are actually air conditioned. When they first encounter these beliefs, U.S. troops thought the Arabs are putting them on. Then it sinks in that Arabs really believe this stuff. It's a scary moment. 


Arab loyalties rarely put nation at the top. Family, clan and tribe always come first. This is not unusual, but the lack of patriotism is definitely more pronounced in Arab lands. This also leads to trust issues, since foreigners are considered the ultimate outsider, and someone an Arab is free to exploit any way he can. Building trust with Arabs is difficult. You can do favors, even save lives, and that will get you some gratitude. But friendship in the Western sense is hard to come by, and easily lost. This is further complicated by religious issues. Islam has a strong "us versus them" component. Westerners who are Moslems have a much easier time getting along, but will eventually encounter that Arab attitude that there are Arab Moslems, and then all manner of inferior non-Arab Moslems. 


Arabs are more inclined to believe in conspiracy theories, and weird stuff in general. Many Arabs really believe that the September 11, 2001 terror attacks were all an Israel or CIA plot, and that Arabs had nothing to do with. This despite the fact that Osama bin Laden has publicly taken credit for the attacks. Just go take a look at the English language versions of some Arab newspapers for some examples. Note that the Arab language versions are even more out there. Arabs who learn English also tend to learn that the world is not as wild and fantastical as they were raised to believe, and results in the English versions of Arab media being rather more sedate. 


Islam tends to discourage Western "two points of view" type thinking. Many religions think of themselves as the "one true faith," but Islam is rather more insistent about that point. This is why so much terrorism these days is carried out by Islamic radicals. While only a minority of Arabs are that fanatical, the majority believe Arabs are right, and the rest of the world is not. And there's no room for discussing this matter. This attitude makes compromise difficult. 

Arabs are well aware of the fact that the rest of the world, especially their ancient enemy, the Christian West, but also the rather more alien Far East, have surpassed the Arab world economically, and in many other ways as well. The popular Arab response is that it's all a foreign conspiracy to destroy  Islamic civilization. This sort of thing is alien thinking to most Americans, who take if for granted that Arabs could fix all their problems if they just united and got down to work. But the divisions of tribe and clan, plus "inshallah", makes that very difficult. For many Arabs, it's "them or us," not "them and us." Arabs, more than Westerners, see the current wave of Islamic terrorism as a battle of civilizations. This attitude is slowly changing in the Arab world, but the majority of Arabs still see themselves as blameless victims of Western oppression.


----------



## GAP (8 Jan 2007)

We in the west suffer from our own points of view, to the defeat of most changes we try to instill. What we call democracy, is not how the world views democracy in their own context. We condemn religious view, then listen to a right wing president of the US spout religious rhetoric...isn't the west just as much a contradition?


----------



## tomahawk6 (8 Jan 2007)

GAP said:
			
		

> We in the west suffer from our own points of view, to the defeat of most changes we try to instill. What we call democracy, is not how the world views democracy in their own context. We condemn religious view, then listen to a right wing president of the US spout religious rhetoric...isn't the west just as much a contradition?



President Bush may be right wing to you, but he isnt one to me.Nor does he spout religious rhetoric. Now Iran's leadership spouts religious rhetoric. Personally I dont think the west has a firm religious foundation like we saw in the 40's and 50's. As a result we are ill prepared to confront enemies that have such a foundation. The goal of the islamists is to eventually impose islam on the rest of the world. The big difference between we in the west and the islamists represented by Iran is that they cannot compromise.


----------



## GAP (8 Jan 2007)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> President Bush may be right wing to you, but he isn't one to me.Nor does he spout religious rhetoric.



No disrespect intended, but you are too close to see it. I am viewing it from another (though similar) culture, at a distance, and , pardon me, but he comes across that way. That may not be the way it is interpreted in the US, but from the outside looking in, it sure looks like a duck.

Does he come across like the Islamic Radicals? Not at all, but everything does seem to have a slight religious undertone. Just a point of view.


----------



## tomahawk6 (8 Jan 2007)

Perhaps it seems that way because Canada has lost its religious roots so to speak ? Canada has gone too far down the road to multiculturalism and religion is sacrificed as a result.


----------



## CougarKing (8 Jan 2007)

No offence sir, T6, but I disagree. There is NOTHING WRONG with the multiculturalism first espoused in the 1960s in Canada by PM Trudeau. Religion is not sacrificed as a result of differences, but rather grows stronger because within diversity comes tolerance and thus peace because each other's religious views are respected. For someone who like you who has worked for the govt./military you should be well aware that the seperation of church of state should very well apply not only in our case but in your nation's case as well.

Thus no one can ever go too far down the road to multiculturalism. The diversity of a culture opens people to new ideas and thus makes the adoptive country's culture stronger.


----------



## muskrat89 (8 Jan 2007)

> you should be well aware that the seperation of church of state should very well apply not only in our case but in your nation's case as well.



According to whom?


----------



## tomahawk6 (8 Jan 2007)

In God We Trust is on our money. Our constitution does not say anywhere about seperation of church and state.


----------



## muskrat89 (8 Jan 2007)

> Our constitution does not say anywhere about seperation of church and state



Bingo. The point I was leading up to.....


----------



## GAP (8 Jan 2007)

(trying to get thread back on track)

It is pathetic how little Western forces know about the cultures they are interacting with.
The reverse is also true, but I am focusing on some preception, some personal experience and general observations.


----------



## CougarKing (8 Jan 2007)

Gentlemen,

So you are saying that we just DUMP multiculturalism and GO away all the way with intolerance and just dump the our own Charter of Rights and Freedoms?  Or the Bill of Rights as in the US case?

What are you saying then?


T6,
With all due respect, sir, in spite of all the religious allusions in many govt. symbols, such as the ones you pointed out, and the US President's need to swear an oath on a Bible during his inaguruation, the US govt. is very much a SECULAR govt. and the US is a very secular country since we don't see any Priests or Clerics from any religion attached to any part of the US govt., as it is with the Iranian govt. with the Ayatollahs and the Sharia Council (if I'm not mistaken) with the current Supreme Leader Khamenei (Khomeini's successor) who technically has more power than that jerk President Ahmedijinad. Canada is also a very secular country as well, even if we still recognize the Queen of England as the head of Commonwealth, but we don't necessarily see her as our religous head as the British Monarch is in the Anglican Church.


With all due respect, MULTICULTURALISM is NOT a myth. It works in America pretty much and it works here. We don't have large ethnic civil wars as we saw in the Balkans or some nations in Africa.


----------



## muskrat89 (8 Jan 2007)

> With all due respect, sir, in spite of all the religious allusions in many govt. symbols, such as the ones you pointed out, and the US President's need to swear an oath on a Bible during his inaguruation,



With all due respect, when it comes to things American, you know not of what you speak. I suggest you limit your scope of expertise to things Canadian.

Lots of religious references regarding Presidential inaugurations foung here http://inaugural.senate.gov/history/factsandfirsts/  GWB was no pioneer in swearing on a bible  :


----------



## zipperhead_cop (8 Jan 2007)

Good article and thanks for posting it.  



			
				CougarKing said:
			
		

> No offence sir, T6, but I disagree. There is NOTHING WRONG with the multiculturalism first espoused in the 1960s in Canada by PM Trudeau.



And that is probably the last year that anyone who had to deal with it thought it was a great idea in its unbridled form.  Today's manic fever for appearing "tolerant" has led to much ridiculous policy just to apologize for not being of a European (minus French) based culture. 
As well, the inference of "tolerance" is that you are forcing yourself to tolerate something.  Does that not imply that you find it distasteful, and are forcing yourself to not react to it?  How is that going to help anything?  "Tolerance" has become a byword for "if you don't like it, shut up because it is different and therefore special and precious".  How about we all strive for "indifference"?  As in "I don't care if you are Muslim/Christian/Native/French/Gay/Disabled/Conjoined-Intraspecies Twin".  You go do what you need to do and have fun with it.  Have a festival in a park.  Apply for and conduct a parade.  I just don't care.  Just don't make your differences my problem.  By simply ignoring the differences and working/playing/learning along side all of our diverse citizens we will figure it out on our own.  If we stop highlighting the differences, then it won't occur to anyone that they exist.  I have two kids that are in school who have never once asked my wife or I why someones skin was a different colour.  It just hasn't occurred to them.  Wouldn't it be nice if everyone was that "indifferent"?


----------



## CougarKing (8 Jan 2007)

> With all due respect, when it comes to things American, you know not of what you speak. I suggest you limit your scope of expertise to things Canadian.



Muskrat, 

And with the same due respect to you, don't assume that I don't know about our good American neighbors, having spent high school and finished my undegrad in Poli Sci there before I immigrated here to Canada (I'm not from America or Canada- I won't elaborate).


----------



## tomahawk6 (8 Jan 2007)

CougarKing said:
			
		

> Gentlemen,
> 
> So you are saying that we just DUMP multiculturalism and GO away all the way with intolerance and just dump the our own Charter of Rights and Freedoms?  Or the Bill of Rights as in the US case?
> 
> ...



While this subject would make for an interesting thread in its own right the point is that cultural awareness is one thing dealing effectively with people in say Iraq where there is a culture of corruption.Do you setup rules that government officials can only charge so much for a bribe ? Or do you try to get people to understand the concept of public service ? Corruption is not isolated to arab countries but also Latin American countries and even in the US.


----------



## GAP (8 Jan 2007)

Gentlemen....when I commented on the religious undertones by the US President, I was referring to him sucking up to the massive religious right contingent. They are an immense voting block in the US.

In respect to other presidents Bush seems to make more comments that seem designed to appeal to this block then I have seen other presidents do. Does it mean anything....dunno...I was just commenting on my perspective of it.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (8 Jan 2007)

CougarKing said:
			
		

> Muskrat,
> 
> And with the same due respect to you, don't assume that I don't know about our good American neighbors, having spent high school and finished my undegrad in Poli Sci  there before I immigrated here to Canada (I'm not from America or Canada- I won't elaborate).



Aw, crap.  Here it comes.   :warstory:


----------



## CougarKing (8 Jan 2007)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> Good article and thanks for posting it.
> 
> And that is probably the last year that anyone who had to deal with it thought it was a great idea in its unbridled form.  Today's manic fever for appearing "tolerant" has led to much ridiculous policy just to apologize for not being of a European (minus French) based culture.
> As well, the inference of "tolerance" is that you are forcing yourself to tolerate something.  Does that not imply that you find it distasteful, and are forcing yourself to not react to it?  How is that going to help anything?  "Tolerance" has become a byword for "if you don't like it, shut up because it is different and therefore special and precious".  How about we all strive for "indifference"?  As in "I don't care if you are Muslim/Christian/Native/French/Gay/Disabled/Conjoined-Intraspecies Twin".  You go do what you need to do and have fun with it.  Have a festival in a park.  Apply for and conduct a parade.  I just don't care.  Just don't make your differences my problem.  By simply ignoring the differences and working/playing/learning along side all of our diverse citizens we will figure it out on our own.  If we stop highlighting the differences, then it won't occur to anyone that they exist.  I have two kids that are in school who have never once asked my wife or I why someones skin was a different colour.  It just hasn't occurred to them.  Wouldn't it be nice if everyone was that "indifferent"?



Well Zipperhead Cop, you do have a point about the indifference. But I see nothing wrong with highlighting these differences from time to time. At least it's not like in Iraq where their ethnic differences are a source of sectarian hatred.


----------



## muskrat89 (8 Jan 2007)

I assumed nothing. Your statement that I did is in itself, an assumption.

I edited my previous post to include a site referencing inaugurations. Your statement that GW did something outrageous by swearing his oath on a bible is erroneous - per history. I also asked you to point out that there was a "separation of church and state" in the US, and according to whom.

Congratulations on your degree.


----------



## CougarKing (8 Jan 2007)

Here's a link that you might find interesting. Please do not infer this as my answer to your "According to whom?" said that "Seperation of Church and State" was in the US Constitution. I'm still contemplating my response.

http://atheism.about.com/od/churchstatemyths/a/phrase.htm

BTW, NEVER did I say or imply that I or the general public found it outrageous that he swore an oath upon a Bible. Isn't that the tradition at every swearing-in ceremony up from the time of George Washington?


----------



## GAP (8 Jan 2007)

CougarKing said:
			
		

> BTW, NEVER did I say or imply that I or the general public found it outrageous that he swore an oath upon a Bible *or a Koran*(as noted by the news at the last swearing ceremony for the new congress and senate). Isn't that the tradition at every swearing-in ceremony?


----------



## tomahawk6 (8 Jan 2007)

Yes it is. Some Presidents have used their own family Bible for the swearing in ceremony. Both the House and Senate have Chaplains.


----------



## CougarKing (8 Jan 2007)

Now that this swearing-in matter at inaugruations is settled, let's get back to T6's topic.


----------



## George Wallace (8 Jan 2007)

Multiculturalism in Canada is a dismal failure.  It has not at all done as Trudeau had envisioned, and he even later admitted to that fact.  What it has done is "Ghettoize" Canada into little enclaves where people do not assimilate into Canadian society.  They don't see the requirement to learn English or French.  They don't see the requirement to learn about Canada or its' culture.  It is in fact destroying Canada's culture.  It has already created conflict between cultures in Canada.  For example look at the second largest language group in the country, centered in Vancouver.  Many Chinese there know little about Canada.  The Triads rule many of the streets and businesses there.  Next we can look at the large Indo-Pakistani community and its' problems.  We have Sihks and their cultural differences.   Many Southwest Asians from the Stans have brought their radical forms of Islam into Canada.  We have seen abuses of Sharia Law, Vaginal Mutilation, and Honour Killings in our major cities.  This is no way to celebrate any success in the idea of multiculturalism in this country.   It has failed.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (8 Jan 2007)

CougarKing said:
			
		

> But I see nothing wrong with highlighting these differences from time to time.



But what is the point?  When has anyone ever responded well to the "some animals are more equal than others" supposition?


----------



## CougarKing (8 Jan 2007)

> Multiculturalism in Canada is a dismal failure.  It has not at all done as Trudeau had envisioned, and he even later admitted to that fact.  What it has done is "Ghettoize" Canada into little enclaves where people do not assimilate into Canadian society.  They don't see the requirement to learn English or French.  They don't see the requirement to learn about Canada or its' culture.  It is in fact destroying Canada's culture.  It has already created conflict between cultures in Canada.  For example look at the second largest language group in the country, centered in Vancouver.  Many Chinese there know little about Canada.  The Triads rule many of the streets and businesses there.  Next we can look at the large Indo-Pakistani community and its' problems.  We have Sheiks and their cultural differences.   Many Southwest Asians from the Stans have brought their radical forms of Islam into Canada.  We have seen abuses of Sharia Law, Vaginal Mutilation, and Honour Killings in our major cities.  This is no way to celebrate any success in the idea of multiculturalism in this country.   It has failed.



You have a point there about the refusal to assimilate. These cultural enclaves are not just a problem one sees in Canada, but obviously in the US (Eastern Los Angeles, Monterrey Park- one of two Chinatowns and a Koreatown downtown as well as how Detroit has a lot of Middle-Easterners) and Britain (The Indo-Pakistanis there as well) as well as many other First-World Nations. However, you have to understand that immigrants to new nations would rather stick with others who share what is familiar to them in order to make ends meet and make their way in the most practical way possible. Their Canadian/US-born children are often the ones who assimilate better since they grow up bilingual and are bridge between the mainstream society and their parent's culture.

Still, if you look at the example of New York in the late 19th century, and early 20th centuries, you had similar enclaves, but those of European descent, like the Eastern Europeans/Slavics/Poles as well as the Italians (many dubbed as "dago" as some Mexicans are now) and even Jewish enclaves and so forth as well as the Irish in Boston- the list goes on- the point is they did assimilate eventually (well the Mafias- Russian and Italian- may be an exception to that).



> But what is the point?  When has anyone ever responded well to the "some animals are more equal than others" supposition?



Well my point in "highlighting these differences" was that I meant the "parades or festivals" which you said one should be indifferent too as long as it's not your problelm- but there's no harm in just being aware of that other group's culture.

However a RELUCTANCE to assimilate DOES NOT MEAN the failure of multiculturalism. It's only been 3, 4 decades since Trudeau espoused that concept and you are ready to say it's a failure?!


----------



## George Wallace (8 Jan 2007)

CougarKing said:
			
		

> Well my point in "highlighting these differences" was that I meant the "parades or festivals" which you said one should be indifferent too as long as it's not your problelm- but there's no harm in just being aware of that other group's culture.
> 
> However a RELUCTANCE to assimilate DOES NOT MEAN the failure of multiculturalism. It's only been 3, 4 decades since Trudeau espoused that concept and you are ready to say it's a failure?!



Yes!  It is a failure.  We are pumping 'welfare' money (not really welfare money, but might as well be) into all these multicultural organizations and events to promote something that we had for years prior to anyone thought of Multiculturalism.  Dauphin, Manitoba, had the largest Ukrainian Festival in North America years before Trudeau entered Politics.  Quebec has celebrated Carnival since the first Frenchman landed in Quebec.  Every city had a Chinatown and Little Italy.  These are not new.  Why do we have to fund them now, and emphasise their differences.  It has totally destroyed all English cultures.......are there any English cultural events?  We have emphasised the differences, but failed to emphasise the similarities.  Canada's social structure is disintergrating.  Common bonds are getting weaker.  Hyphenated Canadians are a mistake.  You should be either Canadian, or not.  Not half and half.  That is a cream.


----------



## CougarKing (8 Jan 2007)

Well, I am not about to give Multiculturalism its epitaph and write it off just yet. Did you read my whole post- especially the part about the practicality part and the bilingual children?

Oh BTW, why are all of you so afraid/possibly resentful of the concept of hyphenated Canadians? Being one myself, I would have thought that multiculturalism would have brought us together in spite of the differences, regardless of whether you're of English descent, Chinese, French or even First-Nations.

You complain of pumping welfare money into these multi-cultural organizations and their cultural events- but do you see the Chinese or Arabs complaining about Christmas or Veteran's Day or Canadian Thanksgiving? Those are the English cultural events you must be referring to. The mainstream English culture still pervades every part of our society and dominates, but the immigrants accept it and don't impose their own holidays on the rest of you like Chinese New Year in late January or early Februrary or Ramadan for the Muslims around November. 

You of course must have noticed that being a hyphenated-Canadian does not decrease one's loyalty to one's adoptive country. You have hypenated-Canadians serving in the CF- even I want to serve in the CF once I get citizenship, being just a landed immigrant for now. 

Also, I'd like to point out that many of these permanent, landed immigrants chose this country as your new home and as long as they respect your laws and traditions, I don't think it's anyone's business what they do as long as they are not betraying the country by doing something such as selling off national, military secrets. The American example of that Chinese physicist at Los Alamos may be a good example of a traitor, since I hear that guy was also a greencard holder there.

The United States has dealt with its own problem of "hyphenated Americans" as well, and I think it unites more often that it divides, at least in more populated, cosmopolitian cities and so-called "blue states" like California and New York.


----------



## muskrat89 (8 Jan 2007)

> BTW, NEVER did I say or imply that I or the general public found it outrageous that he swore an oath upon a Bible. Isn't that the tradition at every swearing-in ceremony up from the time of George Washington?



That was indeed my mistake. From your previous statement 





> and the US President's need to swear an oath on a Bible during his inaguruation


 I thought you meant the current President. Again, my error.



> Now that this swearing-in matter at inaugruations is settled, let's get back to T6's topic


If you don't want topics going on tangents, then don't make comments like this: 





> For someone who like you who has worked for the govt./military you should be well aware that the seperation of church of state should very well apply not only in our case but in your nation's case as well.



It is my opinion that you, living now in Canada - making statements about how affairs should be handled in the US - is in itself arrogant and intolerant of another society's beliefs. You know better than the people who live here? Than the country's founding fathers?


----------



## CougarKing (8 Jan 2007)

muskrat89 said:
			
		

> It is my opinion that you, living now in Canada - making statements about how affairs should be handled in the US - is in itself arrogant and intolerant of another society's beliefs. You know better than the people who live here? Than the country's founding fathers?



Muskrat and all,

I apologize if I came across as arrogant by making that statement to T6 about the "Seperation of Church and State", but I thought I was merely REMINDING him of that core pillar of American society since America has a very secular government IN PRACTICE even if it doesn't say anywhere in the US Constitution about the "Seperation of Church and State". 

This concept was drummed into my head in freshman year at the US College before I decided to focus on Political Philosophy and Foreign Policy studies as my focus for my Poli Sci major back then. And besides the United States doesn't have any priests or bishops or clerics in a council overshadowing political officials as is the case with the Sharia Council/Supreme Council of Ayatollahs in Iran like Ayatollah Khamenei (Khomeini's successor) who have more power than that jerk President Ahmedijinad.


----------



## chanman (8 Jan 2007)

CougarKing said:
			
		

> Well, I am not about to give Multiculturalism its epitaph and write it off just yet. Did you read my whole post- especially the part about the practicality part and the bilingual children?
> 
> Oh BTW, why are all of you so afraid/possibly resentful of the concept of hyphenated Canadians? Being one myself, I would have thought that multiculturalism would have brought us together in spite of the differences, regardless of whether you're of English descent, Chinese, French or even First-Nations.



Because well... cultures change; I hope Canadian culture takes the best practices of whatever various immigrant groups arive, but some traditions deserve to die quiet unlamented deaths.  Blood feuds Honour Codes, foot binding, the caste system...  I can think of plenty of cultural artifacts that would best serve as examples of madness in history books.


----------



## CougarKing (8 Jan 2007)

But that doesn't mean ALL of those traditions should die, chanman? Dui bu Dui? (Am I right?)


----------



## Nemo888 (8 Jan 2007)

The curse of “cultural awareness” is knowing that your hierarchy of values and beliefs is not absolute. There is a razors path between moral absolutism and moral relativism that is difficult to follow. Few make even a token effort. It is the simple truth that people see things differently. When these views become too extreme they become a dogma, moral absolutism. A set of beliefs that are so sacred as to no longer be assailable by new ideas. Anyone who assails these ideas has “half a brain” or is brainwashed. Moral relativism is no better. The idea everything is equal leads to a degradation of everything. I call it the philosophy of universal mediocrity. 

 People become so sure that their values are universally applicable they just stop thinking. How wonderful to be so full of yourself that you are always right and never have to change your mind.


P.S. The separation of church and state is necessary because religions are notorious for being infallible. Politics is mans creation, with humanities limitations to put it mildly.


----------



## tomahawk6 (8 Jan 2007)

There was no seperation of church and state for Britain.I think our founding fathers would feel that a nation that fails to embrace God is doomed to fail. Each culture has its own idea what god is,I merely reflect on the Christian view of God.Where you have a strong sense of religion the State has a strong moral compass. The ongoing attack on christianity in the US is an attempt to erode the base of US society and replace it with atheism or agnosticism. What is disturbing to me is that in a predominately christian country groups like the ACLU will attack nativity scenes, ten commandment statues, christmas trees but say nothing about religious symbols of any other religion. Of course the ACLU has its roots in the communist movement and has such carries on the communist struggle against the fabric of US society.


----------



## Brad Sallows (8 Jan 2007)

>There is NOTHING WRONG with the multiculturalism first espoused in the 1960s

It depends on what your view is of "multiculturalism".  If it means you get to inflict your own cultural practices on yourself, then fill your boots.  If it means I have to "celebrate" you or contribute treasure to your cultural self-worship, then p!ss off.  "Tolerant" means to put up with sh!t of which you disapprove.  Enforced "celebration" is ultimately corrosive.  And, frankly, if a person openly acknowledges that his loyalties are to family and tribe before anything else, I don't see any reason why it would be rational for me, as member of neither family or tribe, to trust or expect to be trusted - ever - until he changes his value system to match mine, or I become a member of his family or tribe.

>within diversity comes tolerance and thus peace because each other's religious views are respected.

Diversity doesn't foster tolerance.  It just ensures that the density of people who are not members of each others' respective in-groups is increased in any given sample of population.  If people are already predisposed to tolerance - at the extreme, willing to put up with sh!t of which they disapprove or distrust - then the group can sort of get along.  If there are any cultural prejudices - any at all - which lead to one in-group making demands of others or not reciprocating concessions at the social interfaces, then ultimately diversity should be expected to be a pressure cooker for xenophobia.

Multiculturalism of the mutual-respect-each-going-our-own-way variety is just individual liberty (classical liberalism) writ large.  Canadian post-Trudeauvian cultural promotion and favouritism masquerading as multiculturalism is a blot on an otherwise just principle.

The problem with permitting people to practice being diluted forms of Canadian is that they might not adopt all of the core moral and civil principles which made Canada the way it is.  If the country doesn't impose its core values, groups will retain or develop their own.  Changing the degree of observance of the underlying principles will result in a different Canada, and there's no reason it has to be better than the current one.


----------



## CougarKing (8 Jan 2007)

T6,

Sir, please let's not turn into this into a debate about liberals vs. conservatives, or about ACLU's "political correctness tendencies" or even mention communism or socialism. Let's just pleaes focus on Multi-culturalism or culturalism for now.


----------



## Nemo888 (8 Jan 2007)

*"a strong moral compass"*

That is what it is meant to be. Equality, Rule of Law, etc these are arguably Christisn concepts adopted by the State to benefit society. I believe that the egalitarian state came about in the West because of Christianity. I am not knockin' old school religion, it did a damn better job than the new boss. Global Capital stripped of all moral constraints.


P.S. To the pro multiculturalism camp:
Will you tolerate the intolerance(moral absolutism) that many new immigrants from the middle east bring to Canada? I will not.  Killing your daughter for sleeping with someone you don't like for instance. Some values are more equal than others, lol  >


----------



## medaid (8 Jan 2007)

With regards to customs, traditions and mindset...I cant say much for the other cultures but I will say this for my own. Just to clarify, I consider myself Canadian first, and what ever ethnicity second. I do not agree with many of the ideals and beliefs of members of our society of the Asian ethnicity. I too believe that on parts multiculturalism have failed miserably. This is my observations from my everyday life which has pointed to such failures. The lack of ability for a majority of Asians to speak English/french. This is disturbing to me. GREATLY disturbing and really quite annoying. There are many times that I've encountered Asians who are Canadians or Landed Immigrants who do not speak a WORD of English, or extremely BROKEN English after being here for more then 10 years. The elderly are of course NOT included in this population to which I am referring to. 

There are also too many individuals who bring their way of doing things over here and CON yes CON money out of our government. Either through tax evasion, or applying for child support money though loop holes in the system: ie. no employment, or low income. Some of you may say many cultures do this, yes...however, being a member of the Asians community, this borderline infuriates me. Why should MY tax dollars fund their illegitimate ways of life?! Many of you are in the same situation, and I'm sure it infuriates you too. 

I believe that the people who decides to immigrate here or any other foreign nation should think twice before they do so. Immigration should not be a way of escaping crime, heavy taxation, poor environment, just to go to other people's countries and ruin it for them... If you made the choice of immigrating to Canada, YOU WILL LEARN THE LANGUAGE. YOU WILL ADAPT TO THE WAY OF LIFE HERE. You should NOT ruin the way of life for everyone else by bringing your bad habits over here....ie. poor driving skills   

Also...to CougarKing's comment about pushing Thanksgiving and Veteran's Day and such predominantly 'ENGLISH' or WESTERN cultures on to these other cultures...well I say TOUGH LUCK. No one asked you to immigrate here. YOU made that choice, and you can also make a choice to LEAVE when ever you want. Irregardless of WHAT your cultural beliefs are, you have to take it into account that CANADIAN culture comes FIRST because YOU now live in CANADA and not any OTHER COUNTRY. 

Just my 0.02... I apologise in advance if I've offended anyone...


----------



## Nemo888 (8 Jan 2007)

Don't get me going on how some immigrants seem to think Canada is a hotel. My girlfriend is not from Canada and one of her sisters and I always fight about this.


----------



## medaid (8 Jan 2007)

and me and many members of my culture  ;D


----------



## CougarKing (8 Jan 2007)

> Also...to CougarKing's comment about pushing Thanksgiving and Veteran's Day and such predominantly 'ENGLISH' or WESTERN cultures on to these other cultures...well I say TOUGH LUCK



Med Tech,

Let me making something very clear. I PERSONALLY DO NOT COMPLAIN about all these Western/English Traditions like Christmas because I was raised as a CATHOLIC, as the majority of my home country was. In fact, I love Christmas and revere Veteran's Day as well as America's own Veteran's Day as well.

I was only making clear what these other non-Christian, non-Western groups would view all these mainstream celeberations in that other post. I was just responding to George Wallace's statement complaining against all these celebrations of minority groups which I infer he feels should not be continued. What I am trying to say in response to George Wallace was that what's wrong with having these small celebrations when the English/Canadian culture already predominates by having official holidays. You don't have the Chinese/Cantonese telling everyone in Richmond, BC to celebrate Chinese New Year with them in late January or mid-February!


----------



## chanman (8 Jan 2007)

CougarKing said:
			
		

> But that doesn't mean ALL of those traditions should die, chanman? Dui bu Dui? (Am I right?)



Don't assume.  

Due to local dialects and moving around, only a small branch of the family uses Mandarin as a first language, and I'm not one of them. 


As for traditions - well... new ones come and old ones go.  Culture isn't static.

I'm not sure which definition of multiculturalism but I'm guessing it's closer to what's listed in the wiki entry (caveats about wiki aside):



> Multiculturalism is an ideology advocating that society should consist of, or at least allow and include, distinct cultural groups, with equal status. Multiculturalism contrasts with the monoculturalism which was historically the norm in the nation-state.



As opposed to the Merriam-Webster definition:



> : of, relating to, reflecting, or adapted to diverse cultures <a multicultural society>




It seems a silly debate.  Someone could claim that by virtue of immigrant parents, I'm a hyphenated Canadian, but if I head elsewhere in the world, particularly say, China or Hong Kong, the locals pick you out as North American in about two seconds.  They know from body language, attitude, dress and deportment, that whoever or whatever you are, you aren't from around there.


----------



## CougarKing (8 Jan 2007)

Nemo888 said:
			
		

> *"a strong moral compass"*
> 
> P.S. To the pro multiculturalism camp:
> Will you tolerate the intolerance(moral absolutism) that many new immigrants from the middle east bring to Canada? I will not.  Killing your daughter for sleeping with someone you don't like for instance. Some values are more equal than others, lol  >



I NEVER said I condoned such primitive practices. However, that doesn't mean that ALL of these immigrant ideas are as threatening to Canadian mainstream culture as some make them up to be.


----------



## 1feral1 (8 Jan 2007)

CougarKing said:
			
		

> Gentlemen,
> 
> So you are saying that we just DUMP multiculturalism and GO away all the way with intolerance ....
> 
> ...



Multiculturalism has done noting but create a nation of tribes. With them in our countries comes the centuries old hatred and ethnic violence (sucessfully being passed on to new generations), such as honour killings, etc, and many thumb their noses and laugh at our police, justice systems and laws. Many rape our welfare system, using the outragous fraudlent means, and take advantge of western kindness.

I beleive its the minority of such migrants who are really being genuine coming here, and they are truly disgusted as us. 

In my opinion multiculturalism failed dismally, and this comes from experience with dealing with it first handedly.

Serb and Croat clubs in Sydney have been mutuallly attacked, people killed over the past 12 yrs alone. Clubs fortified with barriers, security lights fit for a stadium,  and razor wire, etc. The only threat is from each other.

Sunni vs shiite right in western Sydney.

Asian crime gangs ruling the streets and drug trade, warring with muslim and other ethnic cultures over power.

Extreme islam vs the balance of mainstream Australians, breeding a new terror from within.

Whole neighbourhoods being transformed into muslim/ethnic ghettos over the past 25 yrs. Wiley Park, Lakemba, Punchbowl, Liverpool, and Auburn just to name a few, are now out of control. Traditional homeowners being forced out, as prices drop on their homes, and then being bought up by, you guessed it.

Our own culture and way of life is really under threat, and we have only the government and the do-gooders to blame. 

Seems many put their former nationality and/or religion before being a new citizen, and show it!

There is nothing wrong with immigration while its kept in check, and somehow regulated, but its got out of control now, and  the new generations of so called citizens are gaining political power, and speed. the real damage is yet to come. Look at Ontario's sharia law problem.

Wake up to reality Cougar, and don't brand me a racist or biggot in this, because it won't wash. In Australia, when I lived in Sydney, I have been a victim of 'reverse racism' many times, and once over the border to the north, I rediscovered Australia again.

At times, I have felt more threatened in western Sydney than I have here.

Now trapped in this endless world of shyte here, each day bringing me closer to home and safety. Being here has made me realise its a such a different world in this neck of the woods, and its best kept here. I've been to four ME countries, and they are all cut from the same mold.


Regards from Baghdad,

Wes


----------



## medaid (8 Jan 2007)

Cougar King,

    Let me make something clear as well. I did not direct that comment towards YOU. I was directing it en masse to those who feel that way. Also, you're quite right, none of the Chinese culture tells everyone in Richmond to celebrate Chinese New Year with them, because 1) This is NOT China or Taiwan 2) Again this is CANADA where an English culture predominates like you said, because get this...this IS a predominantly English/French country. 

Also there is NOTHING wrong with celebrating your own festivals. I was never against that. I was against certain negative behaviour and bad habits. 

Lastly, we dont have Veteran's Day... we have Rememberance Day. 11 November of every year. This is not a MAINSTREAM celebration. It is a day of rememberance and mourning for those who have gone before us, and those who will come after us. If anything else this is the day that EVERYONE should be 'celebrating' because without those who we are Remembering, there would be no Canada. The country which many of these cultures take for granted.


----------



## chanman (8 Jan 2007)

CougarKing said:
			
		

> Med Tech,
> 
> Let me making something very clear. I PERSONALLY DO NOT COMPLAIN about all these Western/English Traditions like Christmas because I was raised as a CATHOLIC, as the majority of my home country was. In fact, I love Christmas and revere Veteran's Day as well as America's own Veteran's Day as well.
> 
> I was only making clear what these other non-Christian, non-Western groups would view all these mainstream celeberations in that other post. I was just responding to George Wallace's statement complaining against all these celebrations of minority groups which I infer he feels should not be continued. What I am trying to say in response to George Wallace was that what's wrong with having these small celebrations when the English/Canadian culture already predominates by having official holidays. You don't have the Chinese/Cantonese telling everyone in Richmond, BC to celebrate Chinese New Year with them in late January or mid-February!




I might note that the Lunar New Year is by no means exclusive to the Chinese, and that Easter is celebrated by Christians regardless of cultural background, hence you could do both.  Or you might be Eastern Orthodox and celebrate the same Christian holidays but at different days owing to the differences in calenders.

Christmas is coopted.  Even without the birth of Christ angle, plenty of people still like to mark the solstice when the day finally stop getting shorter.

You can make the case that non-Western, non-Christian groups may feel out of place, but well... it's a new place, and that's what the local flavour happens to be.  Different places celebrate different things, and we happen to celebrate these ones.


----------



## CougarKing (8 Jan 2007)

Wesley (Over There) said:
			
		

> Multiculturalism has done noting but create a nation of tribes.
> 
> In my opinion it has failed dismally, and this comes from experience with deealing with it first handedly.
> 
> ...



Sergeant,

So what do you suggest we do then for Canada and Australia (and any other First World Western country that has this dilemma)? 

So far I've found Zipperhead Cop's idea of just being "indifferent" to minority cultures as the one of the few things I agree with from the anti-multiculturalism camp.

BTW, Sergeant- I've never called you a bigot. Now, take care in Baghdad, since you really are in a world of **** there and I respect true soldiers like you.

Regards and Happy New Year.

Cougar


----------



## 1feral1 (8 Jan 2007)

CougarKing said:
			
		

> Sergeant,
> 
> So what do you suggest we do then for Canada and Australia (and any other First World Western country thas this dilemma)?
> 
> ...



Mate that might be my rank, but here we are all equals, and my occupation has nothing to do with my opinion.

Honestly, its like closing the gate once the horse has bolted.

We can't do much, and if one tries, he's branded a racist.

In reality, we can enforce the laws created in the post 9-11 world, and even those get challenged.

Vetting of migrants to a new tighter standard, and target tradional sources from NW europe might also help.

Aside from that, you'll grow old to new problems arisng more often in the big centres of population. I can't really see Yorkton Saskatchewan  becoming an ' escape from New York', but I can see Toronto and Vancouver having problems. wait, they are already! Or so I have read. Look at England now! see how mulitculturalism has changed it? 

Regards,

Wes


----------



## zipperhead_cop (8 Jan 2007)

If supporting multiculturalism means I will get Eid, Passover, Chinese New Year, Ramadan, Scotchtoberfest, Chanukah, Kwanza, May Day, Visakah Puja, Hajj, Saturnalia and every other conceivable holiday off or paid at double time and a half as a Stat holiday, then count me in!  
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




Realistically though, things are getting out of hand.  Touching on what Wesley was saying, look at Toronto.  By and large the Jamaican community there screamed and cried "racism" against the police there for decades (Led in part by a guy who is an illegal immigrant, BTW), and now look at the city.  That "unique culture" got what it wanted; no police interference with their lives.  Funny that their community is getting shot to ribbons now, and even funnier that they are calling on those same police to step in and take care of things.  "No, this is what you worked so hard for.  Enjoy the fruits of your harvest."  
There is a horrible convergence in our society of entitlement, lack of personal accountability, special interest advantage pressing, general apathy towards citizenry, and government policies that have been institutionalized by two decades of immigrant vote buying by the Liberals.  People better decide how they want their country to look:  a cluster hump of competing interests that borders on anarchy, or getting a grip on this and setting down *and* enforcing some rules that put everyone on a level field, but does run the risk of giving some precious [anything but a God awful unhyphenated Canadian] citizen some poo-poo feelings.


----------



## George Wallace (9 Jan 2007)

CougarKing said:
			
		

> Med Tech,
> 
> Let me making something very clear. I PERSONALLY DO NOT COMPLAIN about all these Western/English Traditions like Christmas because I was raised as a CATHOLIC, as the majority of my home country was. In fact, I love Christmas and revere Veteran's Day as well as America's own Veteran's Day as well.
> 
> I was only making clear what these other non-Christian, non-Western groups would view all these mainstream celeberations in that other post. I was just responding to George Wallace's statement complaining against all these celebrations of minority groups which I infer he feels should not be continued. What I am trying to say in response to George Wallace was that what's wrong with having these small celebrations when the English/Canadian culture already predominates by having official holidays. You don't have the Chinese/Cantonese telling everyone in Richmond, BC to celebrate Chinese New Year with them in late January or mid-February!



I let the matter drop as I didn't feel it needed to be taken further, but apparently you had a problem reading and interpreting what I said.  You definitely got it wrong.

I said:



			
				George Wallace said:
			
		

> Yes!  It is a failure.  We are pumping 'welfare' money (not really welfare money, but might as well be) into all these multicultural organizations and events to promote something that we had for years prior to anyone thought of Multiculturalism.  Dauphin, Manitoba, had the largest Ukrainian Festival in North America years before Trudeau entered Politics.  Quebec has celebrated Carnival since the first Frenchman landed in Quebec.  Every city had a Chinatown and Little Italy.  These are not new.  Why do we have to fund them now, and emphasise their differences.  It has totally destroyed all English cultures.......are there any English cultural events?  We have emphasised the differences, but failed to emphasise the similarities.  Canada's social structure is disintergrating.  Common bonds are getting weaker.  Hyphenated Canadians are a mistake.  You should be either Canadian, or not.  Not half and half.  That is a cream.



I am not complaining about these cultures having their own holidays and celebrations.  I am saying we had them prior to "Official Multiculturalism" and that there is no real need for the Government to fund them or in any way become involved in promoting them.  They did well and promoted themselves prior to "Official Multiculturalism" and were already recognized.

I did take offence to your comments:



			
				CougarKing said:
			
		

> ...........- but do you see the Chinese or Arabs complaining about Christmas or Veteran's Day or Canadian Thanksgiving? Those are the English cultural events you must be referring to.



Let's see now.  Canadian and American Thanksgiving are North American Traditions, not English.  Christmas is a Christian tradition, not English or North American.  By the way, many are now striving to put the 'Christ' back into Christmas, but the PC crowd still seem to want to take that away and make us all say "Season's Greetings".  No one has said we can't allow others to celebrate Hanaka, Eide, Ramadan or any other Religious celebration, so why the Political Correctness over Christmas?  I don't know how you figure Veteran's Day, or let's add Remembrance Day, has any relevance to your argument, as again they are acts of remembrance initiated by the US and Canada and as such have no other cultural backgrounds.  Unless you are suggesting that newcomers to the US and Canada not acknowledge the significance of their new country's heritage and traditions.  If you are saying that, then Multiculturalism is most definitely a failure.




			
				CougarKing said:
			
		

> -................The mainstream English culture still pervades every part of our society and dominates, but the immigrants accept it and don't impose their own holidays on the rest of you like Chinese New Year in late January or early Februrary or Ramadan for the Muslims around November.




Actually the Left in Canada is so PC, that the English culture is being dismissed and demonized, while at the same time emphasis is being placed on foreign cultures to survive.  This is the failure of Multiculturalism.  By 'Ghettoizing' Canada, we are destroying it.  Prior to Multiculturalism, we celebrated our differences, but also strove to find commonality.  Now we are ignoring the things that make us 'Canadian' and emphasising what make us 'Foreigners'.  The current road that Multiculturalism has put us on, is a very divisive route to take.

I am not against a multicultural Canada or US, I am against Multiculturalism as a Government institution like what the Liberals have brought into affect and the Leftist PC crowd are encouraging.


----------



## GAP (9 Jan 2007)

The US melting pot concept has served that country far better than Canada's multiculturalism. They take the approach that first you are an American, then you celebrate your diversity.


----------



## bilton090 (9 Jan 2007)

+1 George, Multiculturalism is killing Canada !


----------



## CougarKing (9 Jan 2007)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I let the matter drop as I didn't feel it needed to be taken further, but apparently you had a problem reading and interpreting what I said.  You definitely got it wrong.
> 
> I said:
> 
> ...




George,

I did read your previous post earlier and I am quite aware of what you said. I apologize if you were offended. Still, I think Zipperhead Cop may have a point in his "indifference toward other cultures" argument earlier and that GAP may have a point in his recent comment about America's "Melting Pot" culture versus "Multiculturalism" as a government institution. 

BTW, I really should insist that those who keep saying it's the Liberals' fault please tone down their blame-game because it's not ALL their fault. Conservatives, if I recall, believe in free trade and less trade barriers, as opposed to Liberals who believe in protectionism and are pro-union (well in Canada's case that more in the NDP's sphere, as opposed to America where Democrats would also be pro-union). 

I immigrated to Canada on an investor's visa due to my father's investing in one of your banks, which made my family and I automatic landed immigrants.  These investors' visas is the kind of "free trade" encouraged  by Conservatives. If the NDP or the Liberals were actually buying the immigrant vote as you were saying, those immigrants who came on investor's visas would not be here because of Liberal/NDP protectionism/unionism. And these investor immigrants are JUST AS LIKELY to have the same bad habits you hate as those who immigrated due to work sponsorship or marriage (or those who came illegaly  and refuse to leave). For example, (I'll use an American example), a Korean girl I knew from my US college told me her mother owns a huge business in New York, but the mother doesn't speak a word of English and doesn't seem interested in learning!

It may seem to you that I am shooting myself in the foot by pointing out this fact even though I have Liberal leanings. But still, my only point is that it's not all the Liberals'//NDP's fault and I thus want to point out the investor immigrant visa example as something that contributes to  your seeing "multiculturalism" as problem. Still, I am NOT ungrateful to the Conservatives that I was lucky enough to come to Canada and not ungrateful to them for encouraging this type of "free trade" immigration, in spite of my liberal leanings, which I have had since I was a foreign student in the United States.

George,

Perhaps you are right, perhaps it should not be a govt. institution, but more of a latent value, that does not need to be highlighted. However, we should not dismiss it altogether as a value/concept similar to America's melting pot concept.


PS 
If you any of you are still curious, for one to immigrate here on the business/investor visa status, they must pay $400,000 Canadian and invest it in a local bank, without interest, for up to five years. This is in contrast to the United States, where one must invest US $1 million dollars in an urban area or US $500,000 in a rural area and they have further criteria such as that your investment "must generate jobs for at least ten US citizens". Look up USCIS rules www.uscis.gov if you don't believe me about the US rules.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (9 Jan 2007)

I was referring more towards people who come here on thin or false refugee claims.  If someone comes here with $400 000 to spend, I can't imagine them being a burden to our society.  
Where the Liberals and NDP get ripped is because they are so bloody concerned with everyone elses "feelings".  There is no _reason_ to continue flogging this politically correct agenda, yet they push it for the sake of pushing it.  Conservatives tend to be more along the lines of "let's see what you have to offer, then we'll see what to think of you".  
I can't stand hearing people getting wrapped around the axle about "they should feel welcome here".  Why?  When I started my job, I was greeted, but not welcomed.  I had to grab a big slice of STFU and just blend and learn.  Once I had proven that I was worth my salt, I found acceptance from my peers.  I think that is what bugs a lot of people about this push for multiculturalism.  Jimmy Immigrant comes here and settles into his new life.  Great.  Welcome. Good Luck.  But at such time as Jimmy says "I'm not a Christian and I don't want the school that my kids are going to (that I don't pay taxes for, because I am new and on the free ride) to sing Christmas carols in class, because they might feel excluded" that is when the rest of us say "whoa!  Dude, you just got here.  Step off!"  But then you have some Liberal/NDP type who (out of white mans burden, or just to be a self righteous arse) step up and say "Hey!  You have to respect that persons culture!"  So then, unless you are outspoken and/or hold strong views, people go "Jeez, I don't want to seem like I'm disrespectful" and they back off.  And little by little people don't speak up, and people don't make a stand.  All of a sudden, all of the front line bureaucracy is so terrified of getting A COMPLAINT!!  OOOO!  Not a complaint!  God no!  So they jump the gun "just in case" and put rules in place and change traditions to appease.....who?  I just don't get it.  Somebody has to be willing to tell people to go pound it.  Politely, but firmly none the less.   Everyone (and not just different cultures) needs to get their heads around the idea that maybe, just maybe, from time to time they may have to somehow deal with the crushing reality of not getting appeased.  Denial of gratification is the hardest thing to teach children.  Why are we allowing adults to forget too?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (9 Jan 2007)

Multi-Culturalism succeeds because of the Canadian Culture, if you allow the Canadian culture to become to suppressed in a effort to be inclusive you will destroy the binding agent that keeps the other cultures in check.

Canadian Culture has to be dominant, while allowing and defining what other cultures bring as good and acceptable, in essence it becomes the rule book for the other cultures to play by. Our problem is that certain elements in Canada want to throw the rule book out as they see as “oppressive” or old-fashioned or colonistic. To do otherwise is to ignore human history and to live a dream world with no basis in reality.


----------



## CougarKing (9 Jan 2007)

Colin P and Zipperhead Cop,



> Canadian Culture has to be dominant, while allowing and defining what other cultures bring as good and acceptable, in essence it becomes the rule book for the other cultures to play by. Our problem is that certain elements in Canada want to throw the rule book out as they see as “oppressive” or old-fashioned or colonistic. To do otherwise is to ignore human history and to live a dream world with no basis in reality.



Well not all immigrants see Canadian culture as a threat to their own. Most embrace it. I DO AGREE that it's frustrating that some members of MINORITY cultures who do settle here are THEMSELVES NARROW-MINDED and refuse to accept the host culture. I've encountered Hindu-Pakistani (No offence to any of that origin in this forum) people over the phone who don't know a single world of English who live in Surrey, BC.  I've encountered Chinese (No offence meant again- I'm not inconsiderate of others' feelings) in the US who've are US-born, but have such a strong accent and such a lack of command of English that it makes me wonder whether they spent their whole life in Chinatown (like those in San Francisco or Monterrey Park/Alhambra near Los Angeles). 

But still, I do agree it's important that Canadian culture must predominate, but still insist that we have at least keep multiculturalism AS A PRINCIPLE OR VALUE if not an institution so that any patriotism might not be twisted by bigots (whether minority or not) into a future form of racism or even reverse-racism.  I'm NOT asking for a Canadian version of Affirmative Action in my advocating multiculturalism, just saying it's a value that keeps a diverse community united and cohesive in spite of all those differences. Just the very concept of being Canadian- the duality of French and English culture- is multicultural in itself.




> Multi-Culturalism succeeds because of the Canadian Culture, if you allow the Canadian culture to become to suppressed in a effort to be inclusive you will destroy the binding agent that keeps the other cultures in check



Ditto, Colin. I couldn't agree with you more.


----------



## Centurian1985 (9 Jan 2007)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Multi-Culturalism succeeds because of the Canadian Culture, if you allow the Canadian culture to become to suppressed in a effort to be inclusive you will destroy the binding agent that keeps the other cultures in check.
> 
> Canadian Culture has to be dominant, while allowing and defining what other cultures bring as good and acceptable, in essence it becomes the rule book for the other cultures to play by. Our problem is that certain elements in Canada want to throw the rule book out as they see as “oppressive” or old-fashioned or colonistic. To do otherwise is to ignore human history and to live a dream world with no basis in reality.



+1!

Havent heard it expressed in those words before but 'binding agent' sounds like a pretty good description...


----------



## Brad Sallows (9 Jan 2007)

>but still insist that we have at least keep multiculturalism AS A PRINCIPLE OR VALUE

I have a novel idea.  Let's refer to it (the principle/value) as "freedom of belief" and "freedom of association" and "freedom of expression" and "freedom to pursue self-fulfillment", write those into a Charter of Rights, and repeal all other legislation mentioning "multiculturalism" so that we shrink the unfathomable volume of laws (for which ignorance is no excuse of violation) and no-one gets any weird ideas about who should pay for what.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (9 Jan 2007)

Copyright, fair dealings, yada yada:

http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnis...8/1638909.html
(link no longer works)

Divided loyalties
Sociology prof warns multiculturalism 'creates nations within a nation'

By Licia Corbella

Dr. Mahfooz Kanwar recently attended Calgary's largest mosque for a funeral.

At one point in the proceedings, a man Kanwar has known for more than three decades led the prayers.

"He was saying in Urdu (the official language of Pakistan): 'Oh, God, protect us from the infidels, who pollute us with their vile ways,'" recalls Kanwar, a professor of sociology at Mount Royal College in Calgary.

"I stood up and grabbed him by the lapels, which was shocking even to me because I have never done anything like that in my life and I said: 'How dare you attack my country.' And then I addressed the crowd and said: 'I have known this man for more than 30 years and he has been on welfare for almost all of those years.' "

Kanwar chuckles at the memory.

"Then I said to this semi-literate man, 'you should thank me and those you call infidels.'

"He asked me why and I said: 'Because the taxes I pay are putting food on your table as are the taxes of the so-called "infidels.' " 

Most Canadians and many Muslims would applaud Dr. Kanwar's righteous outburst. But guess which of the two men is no longer welcome at the Sarcee Tr. S.W. mosque?

Not the intolerant, hate-spewing semi-literate. No, it's Dr. Kanwar who's persona non grata.

That, says Kanwar, is just one of numerous instances he has experienced as a result of the culture of ignorance and intolerance that permeates so many mosques in Canada and throughout the world.

In light of the arrests two weeks ago of 17 young Muslim Canadian men who are alleged to have planned terrorist attacks against their fellow Canadians that included attacking Parliament, seizing the CBC and beheading the prime minister, Kanwar says it's vitally important for Canadians to start making more demands of those who immigrate to this country.

Kanwar says we now know one of the 17 accused was allowed to spew hatred and calls to violent jihad at a Toronto-area mosque and he was never once told by the leadership there to stop.

Six of the young men who listened to him are also charged in the plot.

Kanwar is pretty certain, if he spoke up at that mosque, however, with his message that Canada's culture is better than the culture found in any Islamic-based country, he'd be kicked out.

"The policy of official multiculturalism is a disaster," says Kanwar, who ironically once headed a government-funded multicultural organization in Calgary in the early '70s.

Every year, Kanwar's organization would host a large food and crafts festival in the basement of the Jubilee Auditorium.

"There were 52 tables, each with two flags on them -- Polish and Canadian, Ukrainian and Canadian etc. When the Alberta minister in charge of funding the festival showed up, I asked him, 'why is there not even one table here with a single flag -- why is there no Canadian table?'"

Kanwar has been questioning the government-funded official multicultural model ever since -- most recently through his 2002 book: Journey to Success, which is used as a sociology textbook at Mount Royal College and other post-secondary institutions.

"Multiculturalism creates nations within a nation and divides the loyalty of people," says the 65-year-old Pakastani-born Kanwar, who immigrated to Canada in 1966.

"It allows people to marginalize themselves. It endangers us all as these recent arrests show."

Because of Kanwar's open and published opposition to Ontario's proposal last year to consider allowing sharia law for arbitration purposes in that province, Kanwar says he has been issued with fatwahs -- not the death-threat versions made famous by the one issued against Salman Rushdie for writing the novel The Satanic Verses -- but more like a shunning.

Kanwar, a devout Muslim, says he has essentially been excommunicated by Calgary's mosques because he is too tolerant of others.

Homa Arjomand, who lives in Toronto and headed Canada's successful campaign of the International Campaign Against Sharia Court in Canada (www.nosharia.com), says like Kanwar, she too once embraced the idea of multiculturalism.

Arjomand, who calls herself a "victim" of sharia law -- a strict set of rules based on Islam's holy book, the Qur'an, that subjugates women, as well as allows for the chopping off of hands for theft etc. -- says part of the reason she decided to immigrate to Canada was because she had heard about official multiculturalism.

"I thought how wonderful, but not anymore," she declares.

"I came here for Canadian values, not sharia values. I fled Iran on horseback because the values there threatened my very life. If people want to live under sharia or the way they lived back home, let them go back," she said.

Kanwar agrees. He says the time has come for the Canadian government to tell new immigrants "once you're in Canada we expect you to be totally devoted to Canada -- no divided loyalties."

"This country," added Kanwar, "is a democracy and democracy is founded on Christian principles.

"Canada is -- like it or not, take it or leave it -- a country founded on Christian principles where the vast majority of citizens are Christians," said Kanwar.

"Yes, there's separation of church and state but even that was a principle founded by Christians and Christianity.

"If Muslims, or anyone else, doesn't like living in a land filled with Christians or in a democracy they should get the hell out."


----------



## medaid (10 Jan 2007)

wow... I like Dr. Kanwar... he expresses my sentiments...exactly.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (10 Jan 2007)

MedTech said:
			
		

> wow... I like Dr. Kanwar... he expresses my sentiments...exactly.



+1.  Another great article you will never see in the MSM.


----------



## CougarKing (10 Jan 2007)

Well those guys who didn't welcome Dr. Kanwar back to his mosque are just the example of the "narrow-minded" immigrants who refuse to embrace or at least respect the Canadian culture- rather the nation- that they have made their new home.  Reverse-racism, as Wesley or George W. would say. But still, just because there are a few immigrants who take advantage of "Multiculturalism" to illicit ends doesn't mean that it should dropped altogether as a principle. There are many immigrants who don't fall into that category of the same people that Dr. Kanwar scolded. I thus stand firm on this point by reiterating this quote from one of my earlier posts:




> Well not all immigrants see Canadian culture as a threat to their own. Most embrace it. I DO AGREE that it's frustrating that some members of MINORITY cultures who do settle here are THEMSELVES NARROW-MINDED and refuse to accept the host culture. I've encountered Hindu-Pakistani (No offence to any of that origin in this forum) people over the phone who don't know a single world of English who live in Surrey, BC.  I've encountered Chinese (No offence meant again- I'm not inconsiderate of others' feelings) in the US who've are US-born, but have such a strong accent and such a lack of command of English that it makes me wonder whether they spent their whole life in Chinatown (like those in San Francisco or Monterrey Park/Alhambra near Los Angeles).


----------



## RangerRay (10 Jan 2007)

I can't remember his name, but an author of East Indian and Trinidadian descent called official multiculturalism, as praciticed in Canada, "apartheid with a smile" or "friendly apartheid" or something like that.

Edit: the author I'm thinking of is Neil Bissoondath.


----------



## 1feral1 (10 Jan 2007)

I think I can sum it all up by saying. Its our country, Canada invited you, NOT the other way around. Are you Canadian or simply someone else from somewhere else living in Canada!

Get your priorities right and straight. Love it or leave it!

For those new and from other cultures, once citizenship is granted, be a Canadian citizen before anything else, which includes your religion or previous nationality. Canada and all of what it is, must come first. I don't think thats asking too much. Do you?

Look at me, I spent the first 35 yrs of my life being Canadian, left for greener pastures, and found them. I've been an Australian citizen for 10 yrs now, and I love my adopted country as if I was born there.

I am an immigrrant too, started fresh in Australia with only two barracks boxes, and at the time a 4 year unhappy marriage which was about to shyte itself.

I celebrate Australia Day, ANZAC Day, and the Melbourne Cup. I have earned my right to vote, and I have served my new country during peace and war. I enjoy keeping touch with my Canadian past, but my loyality is where I am now, not where I once was.

However, I never forget my past, my heritage, both from my Saskatchewan roots and my forefathers from Northern Ireland. In Australia, 01 Jul is just  another winter's day, but I know its Canada Day. I am not a part of the Canadian Australian community, nor the RC Australian community, but simply an Australian with Canadian heritage, Nothing more.

I am not out there demonstraing against Isreal, or for Palestine, not out there, whinging about Serbia and creating more problems with people bringing their baggage and previous prejudices to our shores. This does nothing but tarnish our own beliefs, yet it is allowed to go on. Its a democracy right? I tell you, nothing disgusted me more than to see news shot in Australia of islamic youths, faces wrapped in those scarves, smashing and causing over a million dollars damage in Sydney's CBD a while back. Yes most are Australian born, and look what or who they seek for identity. No faded blue singlets and bordies. Plain refusal to adopt a new culture and way of life, enforcing their own hatred and beliefs, terrorising other Australians. Disgusting behaviour!

Now if only people from many other countries who migrate to Canada could also have the same attitude as I did and still do (many do mind you, but it seems more than many do not either), rather than creating satellite countries from whence they came in ours, maybe things would be different, as the gap is widening betwen generic westerners and others from islamic countries. 

Shyte, I hope I am making some sense. At least I've vented a bit 

If our governments could be more hard lined rather than appeasing the migrant vote based on ethinicity. In 2003, Sydney spent more $$ on Chinese New year then on Christmas celebrations for the entire city.

Cheers from Baghdaddy,

Wes


----------



## GO!!! (10 Jan 2007)

Neil Bissoondath covers this very topic at length in his book _Selling Illusions_.

It is not lost on him that if he were a white anglo writing such a book, he would be quickly branded a racist, intolerant redneck, and held up to ridicule.

He also discusses, in depth, the "cult of the exotic" that we so espouse here in Canada, where it is almost passe to be of western European descent, and definitely not something to be proud of. All people must be hyphenated Canadians with ties to an ancestral homeland which they may never have visited or even liked in the first place to play the "role of the ethnic".

The crux of the argument is he presents, which I agree with, is that highlighting cultural differences serves only to fragment an already divided nation, and the cynical political goals and ramifications behind it.


----------



## 54/102 CEF (10 Jan 2007)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Very interesting article from Strategypage. Cultural awareness is a double edge sword it would seem.Oil countries buy their technical experts rather than creating their own is one obvious problem. Arab countries have fallen behind not only the west economically but also the east. Reversing this will be the salvation for the arab world but not easily acheived.
> 
> The Curse of Cultural Awareness .........



Tomahawk 6 - you sure kept lots of Toque Headed Troopers (herein after THT) wacking each other with Lacrosse Sticks about Canadian perceptions of multi culturalism - or lack there of  

Would you or anyone know if the Strategy page article that started this all off has footnotes? Without footnotes I'd say its quite inflamatory - despite that - indicators leading to lack of accountabilty - reponsibility are readily available at this link http://www.amazon.co.uk/Arab-World-Competitiveness-Report/dp/1403948011

Thanks in advance


----------



## Exarecr (12 Jan 2007)

In the news this morning a story about Washington telling Canadian defence contractors they are not permitted to employ people from countries they deem unfriendly or a risk to their National security. Cue the CBC who of course tracked down one of the 24 individuals mentionedand suprise,,suprise,suprise. The man they interviewed{he has lived in Canada 20 years}, could not speak one word of English! Multiculturalism at its best.


----------



## FredDaHead (12 Jan 2007)

Exarecr said:
			
		

> In the news this morning a story about Washington telling Canadian defence contractors they are not permitted to employ people from countries they deem unfriendly or a risk to their National security. Cue the CBC who of course tracked down one of the 24 individuals mentionedand suprise,,suprise,suprise. The man they interviewed{he has lived in Canada 20 years}, could not speak one word of English! Multiculturalism at its best.



Did he speak the other official language? You know, French?


----------



## Exarecr (12 Jan 2007)

Yikes! Forgot about that aspect,but the dude was speaking Arabic.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (12 Jan 2007)

RangerRay said:
			
		

> I can't remember his name, but an author of East Indian and Trinidadian descent called official multiculturalism, as praciticed in Canada, "apartheid with a smile" or "friendly apartheid" or something like that.
> 
> Edit: the author I'm thinking of is Neil Bissoondath.



My wife says that Canadians are the nicest people to stab you in the back!!! She prefers the upfront racism of Malaysia, where at least you know when people dislike you.


----------



## DBA (14 Jan 2007)

S_Baker said:
			
		

> I think it is important to note that CDN defense contractors can hire whomever they want.   However, when it comes to equipment being exported to the U.S., paid for by the U.S. taxpayers the workers can not hold dual citizenship.



That is not true. The actual issue is getting licenses to use US equipment and information which is covered by International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) and administered by the US State Department. Information available here at DDTC Homepage / ITAR Index. An example would be technical data and maintenance information for avionics systems in new aircraft so they can be maintained by contractors in Canada. To get a license for the information requires that the receiver accept certain restrictions on who can handle the information. 

Added: I worded some of that wrong, the license requirement is actually for the US based exporter and it's needed before they can send information and/or equipment to Canada.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (21 Jan 2007)

This is another kitchy internet thing that goes around, but has some food for thought:


Subject: Immigrant Changes

I'm sure this is true for the U.S. as well. 
So many letter writers have explained how this land is made up of immigrants.  Maybe we should turn to our history books and point out to people why today's Canadian is not willing to accept the new kind of immigrant any longer.
Back in 1900 when there was a rush from all areas of Europe to come to Canada, people had to get off a ship and stand in a long line in Halifax and be documented. Some would even get down on their hands and knees and kiss the ground. They made a pledge to uphold the laws and support their new country in good times and bad times. They made learning English and French a primary rule in their new Canadian households and some even changed their names[don't agree with that part] to blend in with their new homeland. They had waved goodbye to their birth place to give their children a new life and did everything in their power to help their children assimilate into one culture.
Nothing was handed to them. No free lunches, housing, medical assistance, no labor laws to protect them.
All they had were the skills, craftsmanship and desire they had brought with them to trade for a future of prosperity.  Most of their children came of age when World War II broke out.  Canadians fought along side men whose parents had come straight over from Germany, Italy, France, Japan, Czechoslovakia, Russia, Sweden, and so many other places. None of these first generation Canadians ever gave any thought about
what country their parents had come from.  They were Canadians fighting Hitler, Mussolini and the Emperor of Japan.  They were defending the Freedom as one people.  When we liberated France, no one in those villages was looking for the Ukrainian-Canadian or the German-Canadian or the Irish-Canadian.
The people of France saw only Canadians, and we carried one flag  that represented our country. Not one of those immigrant sons would have thought about picking up another country's flag and waving it to represent who they were.
It would have been a disgrace to their parents who had sacrifice much to be here. These immigrants truly knew what it meant to be a Canadian. They stirred the melting pot into one red and white bowl. Now here we are in 2006 with a new kind of immigrant who wants the same rights and privileges. Only they want to achieve it with a different set of rules, one that includes a Canadian passport, and a guarantee of being faithful to their MOTHER country. I'm sorry, that's not what being a Canadian is all about.  Canadians have been very open hearted and open minded regarding immigrants, whether they were fleeing poverty, dictatorship, persecution, or whatever else makes a person adopt a foreign country.  And I suppose when we say adopt, we think of those aforementioned immigrants who truly did ADOPT our country, and our flag and our morals and our customs, and left their wars, their politics, and their desire to become good
Canadians was foremost and unbridled.
I believe that the immigrants who landed in Canada in the 1900's deserve better than that for the toil, hard work and sacrifice in raising future generations to create a land that has become a  beacon for those legally searching for a better life.  I think they would be appalled that they are being used as an example
by those waving foreign country flags, fighting foreign battles on our soil, trying to oblige Canadians to change to suit their religions and cultures, often from which they fled to refuge in Canada; and wanting to change our country's fabric by claiming discrimination when we do not give into their demands.


----------



## niner domestic (30 Jan 2007)

This article appeared today addressing what so many people think should be done to end the silliness of PC: 

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/canada_stoning_col

From the article:
"We wish to inform these new arrivals that the way of life which they abandoned when they left their countries of origin cannot be recreated here," said the declaration, which also says women are allowed to drive, vote, dance, write checks, dress how they want, work and own property.


"Therefore we consider it completely outside these norms to ... kill women by stoning them in public, burning them alive, burning them with acid, circumcising them etc."


----------



## Colin Parkinson (30 Jan 2007)

niner domestic said:
			
		

> This article appeared today addressing what so many people think should be done to end the silliness of PC:
> 
> http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/canada_stoning_col
> 
> ...



Good lord these town folks must be so racist and intolerant!!

I have met people living in Vancouver who were astounded that I would “allow” my wife to go out alone and that if she did I should beat her. I upset one strict Muslim by serving my wife before myself. I met another that was moving back to his home country because Canada was infecting his wife and daughter. Apparently he was offended that the rights and freedoms we offer also applied to the rest of his family.

1400 years Mohammed tried to increase the rights of women, the irony is his religion is now used to oppress them. The fact that his first wife ran her own business empire and his 7th wife had to kick butt and lead his army into battle seems entirely lost on people.


----------



## Centurian1985 (30 Jan 2007)

Those who oppose what the townspeople have said appear to have forgotten WHY the townspeople made their statement - because these typoes of incidents have been witnessed in immigrant communities. The question of stereotyping would depend on how frequently does this happen.


----------



## FredDaHead (30 Jan 2007)

Also bear in mind the situation in Quebec: "accomodement raisonable" is becoming quite a contentious issue. Between the examples mentionned in the article (frosted windows for a gym and policewomen being told not to talk to certain religious groups) there is also the issue of a town hall having removed the nativity scene from under it's Christmas tree, and putting a HUMONGOUS menorah on top of said tree, and other such events. All in all, Quebec is basically bending over backward to accomodate minorities, going so far as removing the rights of white christians (non white, non christians, too, just using white christians as an example) in favour of minorities.

It's not so much a question of the townspeople being racist, as it's a reaction to the percieved "counter-racism" (the PC way of saying "racism against whites") of certain government agencies and administration decisions.


----------



## Centurian1985 (30 Jan 2007)

Isn't refusing to acknowledge a female peace officer an illegal act in the first place according to the Canadian Charter?  Aren't these 'new Canadians' supposed to abide by the rule of our country of risk being sent home?

I mention this because my wife is from another country and moved here when she was 18.  She is constantly shocked by the crap people get away with, when her family was threatened with deportation back to their home country if they broke any Canadian laws during their first few years of residence... 

Somebody needs to hand these people a rule book and say, 'hey, if you want to come here to live, this is what you will have to agree to...'.


----------



## neko (30 Jan 2007)

I found this portion of the article interesting

Salam Elmenyawi, president of the Muslim Council of Montreal, said the declaration had "set the clock back for decades" as far as race relations were concerned.


"I was shocked and insulted to see these kinds of false stereotypes and ignorance about Islam and our religion ... in a public document written by people in authority who discriminate openly," he told Reuters

or perhaps hypocritical would a more apt term rather than interesting, coming as it does from a man whose religion largely discriminates against women, at least in so far as it is often practised.  And his use of the word false boggles me as we see on the news such things occuring frequently by people who practice Islam.  Who does he think he is fooling, considering some practitioners of Islam have even tried to introduce Sharia law here. I believe that it was Quebec courts who first struck it down.


----------



## geo (30 Jan 2007)

Funny thing is that Herouxville does not have anyone asking for accommodations - there are no new immigrants looking to settle in that town.  The town wanted to draw a reasonnable line in the snow & saying we're not going to go beyond.... here!

All I can say is.... good for them!


----------



## zipperhead_cop (31 Jan 2007)

Centurian1985 said:
			
		

> Isn't refusing to acknowledge a female peace officer an illegal act in the first place according to the Canadian Charter?



No.  People can ignore us all they want, male or female.  Strangely, we do seem to find ways of attracting and holding those same peoples attention.... ^-^



			
				Centurian1985 said:
			
		

> Aren't these 'new Canadians' supposed to abide by the rule of our country of risk being sent home?
> I mention this because my wife is from another country and moved here when she was 18.  She is constantly shocked by the crap people get away with, when her family was threatened with deportation back to their home country if they broke any Canadian laws during their first few years of residence...



Pretty much the only way to get punted is to get convicted of an indictable offence.  And since the legal system is a joke, no charges that are dual rarely ever get proceded with by way of indictment.  And even when they get drilled for something like murder or manslaughter, they find a way to get someone pregnant and generally end up staying anyway.  
Immigration policy:  "Just get here.  We'll do the rest".   :


----------



## neko (31 Jan 2007)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> Pretty much the only way to get punted is to get convicted of an indictable offence.  And since the legal system is a joke, no charges that are dual rarely ever get proceded with by way of indictment.  And even when they get drilled for something like murder or manslaughter, they find a way to get someone pregnant and generally end up staying anyway.
> Immigration policy:  "Just get here.  We'll do the rest".   :



This must be a special deal for they have on for criminals so they can't be accused of discriminating against morally-challenged people. My friend from Israel has had to jump through hoops to be able to remain here for a few years while she went to university and even more crap to be able to work. She's off shortly to Australia which has, so far, been more welcoming to her to do her master's.


----------



## niner domestic (31 Jan 2007)

Well don't give up hope quite yet on the use of deportation.  The War Crimes Unit has been using it since the Finta case to punt war criminals.  IMHO, I think it was quite a brilliant move to utilize that aspect of the Immigration Act to get around the moratorium on prosecuting War Criminals.  

http://dsp-psd.communication.gc.ca/Collection-R/LoPBdP/CIR/873-e.htm


----------



## Colin Parkinson (31 Jan 2007)

neko said:
			
		

> This must be a special deal for they have on for criminals so they can't be accused of discriminating against morally-challenged people. My friend from Israel has had to jump through hoops to be able to remain here for a few years while she went to university and even more crap to be able to work. She's off shortly to Australia which has, so far, been more welcoming to her to do her master's.



I know quite a few immigrants who are packing up and leaving because Canada treats them like dirt, they go elsewhere where their degrees are worth something. If you not willing to play the system and would rather be honest and hard working, they will screw you.


----------



## neko (31 Jan 2007)

Colin P said:
			
		

> I know quite a few immigrants who are packing up and leaving because Canada treats them like dirt, they go elsewhere where their degrees are worth something. If you not willing to play the system and would rather be honest and hard working, they will screw you.



My friend had no end of hassles with immigration, and alot of it was due to different people in immigration telling her completely different things, and a few were actually rude to her.  I won't go on as this is a bit off topic.

It is a pity that there isn't a list of offenses that, if you are found guilty of committing, would just automatically get you sent back to your country of origin, and that this would be enforced regardless of what country you came from.


----------



## Bigmac (1 Feb 2007)

> 02-01-2007, 11h51
> 02-01-2007, 11h51
> HEROUXVILLE, Canada (AFP)
> 
> A Quebec town has banned stoning, female circumcision, wearing of burqas, and even halal meats, in a controversial signal to immigrants about the limits of Canada's renowned tolerance.



      I think this is a great idea letting new immigrants know that settling into our country also means they must obey our laws. If you are not willing to follow the Canadian laws then don't come here. Canada has always respected the cultures of new immigrants but certain customs will not be tolerated here, such as mutilation of young females, honor killings, etc. As long as they are informed up front then they can have the option of settling somewhere else if they are not willing to follow the rules.

     Remainder of article on link below.

http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?id=161192


----------



## geo (1 Feb 2007)

A second town in Quebec (St Roch) has published it>s own manifesto - pert well saying the same thing.

Oik..... can see that some people will take this the wrong way.

Too bad


----------



## Centurian1985 (1 Feb 2007)

Did they actually call it a 'manifesto'?  Perhaps 'guidelines' would be a better term...


----------



## geo (1 Feb 2007)

In truth, it"s a town council "resolution"


----------



## zipperhead_cop (1 Feb 2007)

From the article:

http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?id=161192



> Henceforth, newcomers to Herouxville are forbidden from requesting halal meats, which are prepared in the manner prescribed by Islamic law, from a local butcher.



Not lawfully enforcable.



> They must not "publicly stone women to death" nor "burn women with acid"



We kind of already have a thing that covers that.  It's called the Criminal Code of Canada.


```
nor circumcise them,
```

I was curious about this one.  If it is not unlawful, the by-law is once again redundant.  I do find myself unaware as to the legal postion of female circumcision.  



> and wearing a veil is strongly discouraged, the municipality declared.



Also toothless and useless.  

This, coming from a province that constantly renews it's notwithstanding clause under the Charter of Rights in order to ignore anglophone rights to language.  Perhaps Quebec wants to follow in the footsteps of France in creating an alienated Muslim population.  
I think there are better ways to try to remedy our countries manic obsession with political correctness than singling out a particular religion and attacking it.


----------



## niner domestic (2 Feb 2007)

Female circumcision is held to be misconduct by governing bodies of Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons. A doctor performing such a procedure will be reported to the agencies that are authorized under the Child and Family Protection Service and dealt with in accordance to those Acts.  

Statement No. 111 - Female Circumcision
     Female circumcision is not an appropriate medical practice under any circumstance and if performed by a physician, represents professional misconduct.  If a physician is aware of a proposal to perform female circumcision on a child, the incident must be reported pursuant to the requirement to report child abuse set forth in The Child and Family Services Authorities Act . 


Reference: 


Daya, S. MB, MSC, FRCSC. Female Genital Mutilation - A Call to Abandon This  Traditional Custom. J SOGC 1995;17:315-8. 


First Print     L&E/02/92
Revision       EXEC/11-01 


            A statement is a formal position of the College with which members shall comply.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (2 Feb 2007)

Yeah, but that only applies to legit doctors.  That wouldn't deter some mosque appointed butcher from going at it "old school".  To me, it is aggravated assault, pure and simple.  But then again, you could argue that about male circumcision (not intending to intiate a hijack on the pro's and con's of male circumcision) 
In the absence of a victim/complainant, there is no way to prosecute.  And by the time a girl would be old enough to be able to get the idea that she had been mauled, she would have been that way all her life.  Would you go after your parents or just the doctor?


----------



## GO!!! (2 Feb 2007)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> Would you go after your parents or just the doctor?



All of the above. 

On the other hand - maybe this could be a method for devoutly muslim women to prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt their strict adherence to cultural practices as they interpret them from a holy book - _voluntary_ female circumcision. 

When a woman is 18, allow _her_ to make the choice. I wonder how many who currently insist on not shaking hands with male colleagues and covering their faces in public would make such a personal choice to be snipped and stitched? I suspect they prefer more superficial methods of trumpetting their differences from the mainstream.


----------



## niner domestic (2 Feb 2007)

ZC, you are correct in your observations that it is often too late by the time any professional who is mandated to report such an act finds out and reports it.  It unfortunately tends to fall under the category of child abuse and although it is sexual in nature, it doesn't quite meet the threshold to be called a sexual assault in a criminal context.  Why, because of the documentation of religious and cultural practices.  It can only be deemed an extreme case of child abuse and only if the child appears to have suffered (I have always had great difficulty with this rationale as an infant child of tender years is ill equipped to articulate whether they suffered when they barely have a spoken language in their grasp.)  I also agree with you on the assault, providing that those responsible for bringing about the charges can reconcile the legal tenent of you can't consent to being assaulted (R. v Jobidon) with those rights of a parent to practice their cultural and religious ideologies and customs (Re: Baby Beena B).  I have also had a huge problem with why this remains a grey matter and is not forthwith dispatched into being contrary to the CC.  

This part of the resolution may or may not stand as there are provisions in the Child and Family Service Acts to prevent and apprehend children who are in need and who are at risk - question is, is it strong enough to carry this particular act.  On the other hand it may not survive based on the Alberta case of prostitution where the city was found to be ultra vires the Feds on enacting a bylaw to deal with a matter that was clearly a federal (Crim Code) jurisdiction.  Personally, I think the Child and Family Services Act will support the town's resolution.


----------



## geo (2 Feb 2007)

Zip,
I agree that the Herouxville & St Roch resolutions are vague & redundant BUT,  I think it was their way of saying that while they are more than happy to welcome immigrants into their community, the continuously growing list of accomodations (and even then - many are still nt happy) is driving everyone batty.

WRT the Hallal & Kosher meats from the local butcher .... given that the butcher is neither Jewish or Muslim,  he couldn't meet the standard - no mater the quality.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (2 Feb 2007)

I think they could have gotten the same thing achieved by stating what they would do, and not try to say what others can't do.
Such as:
"We resolve that Christmas will be observed in overt and traditional manners as people choose.  No trees, nativity scenes, or decorations will be taken down, and no schools will be dissuaded from Christmas pageants.  The City will also allow displays of other recognized faiths.  Other Christian holidays will also be observed (notably Easter) but again other festivals of recognized religions are welcome. "
Then, if anyone had a problem with a display, they could try to fight it in a city counsel meeting, and then try to launch a law suit if they were that lame.  

Considering how hyper-persecuted some Muslims choose to feel, all they have done is created just another friction point.  It would be pretty hard to see that counsel order as anything but trying to discourage Muslims from living in that town.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (2 Feb 2007)

I know that many of the Sunni Muslims here in Vancouver will not eat “halal” meat prepared by a Shiitte. Since the majority of Muslims here are from Iran, the Sunni are SOL. Under the Hadith’s a Muslim can eat Kosher and in order to preserve their health can eat non-halal items including pork if required. The devout Muslims have a tendency to try to out do their neighbors in piety, even if it means harming themselves, which Muhammad told them not to do.  :


----------



## zipperhead_cop (2 Feb 2007)

Kind of like a Muslim version of Keeping Up With the Jones' ?
Keeping Up With the Abbas' ?


----------



## chanman (2 Feb 2007)

Colin P said:
			
		

> I know that many of the Sunni Muslims here in Vancouver will not eat “halal” meat prepared by a Shiitte. Since the majority of Muslims here are from Iran, the Sunni are SOL. Under the Hadith’s a Muslim can eat Kosher and in order to preserve their health can eat non-halal items including pork if required. The devout Muslims have a tendency to try to out do their neighbors in piety, even if it means harming themselves, which Muhammad told them not to do.  :



Huh, news to me.  I was under the impression that the big Muslim communities were from South and Southeast Asia.  (Might depend on where in the GVRD you are, I guess)


----------



## Colin Parkinson (2 Feb 2007)

49,000 Iranians in Vancouver.

The Muslim community here is quite a mix bag of everything, something my devout brother inlaw from Malaysia was amazed at as Malaysia does not encourage Shiites and it is against the law there to practice/preach any other form of Islam than Sunnism.


----------



## geo (14 Feb 2007)

A group of muslim women met the town council last weekend.....
After having compared notes, the town has ammended it's MOU

It is now "acceptable" to stone women in Herouxville.  (though Illegal)


----------



## Colin Parkinson (14 Feb 2007)

Who would have thunk, woman protesting about a town banning the mistreatment of woman......... :


----------



## Cliff (16 Feb 2007)

CougarKing said:
			
		

> Gentlemen,
> 
> So you are saying that we just DUMP multiculturalism and GO away all the way with intolerance and just dump the our own Charter of Rights and Freedoms?  Or the Bill of Rights as in the US case?


I think there's more intolerance among different groups today than there was 35 years ago. And I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I think we had more freedom. Today, there is simply too much micro-management on all fronts, and from what I recall our military had a strong Christian foundation = which I thought was good. Oh well, cest la vie


----------



## CougarKing (20 Feb 2007)

Cliff said:
			
		

> from what I recall our military had a strong Christian foundation = which I thought was good. Oh well, cest la vie



Well what do you mean by that? You saying a govt. arm like the military should be party to any single religion?  

Shouldn't having uniformed military chaplains to serve the servicemen who are members of each respective religion be enough? I'll defer to Trinity or anyone else who's better qualified to say this.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (20 Feb 2007)

I think that comment was inferring that Christianity as a whole is more apt to allow other religions/groups to feel free to do what they want.  As opposed to some of the groups who go after Christianity and try to tear down our traditions ie) anti Christmas


----------



## CougarKing (20 Feb 2007)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> I think that comment was inferring that Christianity as a whole is more apt to allow other religions/groups to feel free to do what they want.  As opposed to some of the groups who go after Christianity and try to tear down our traditions ie) anti Christmas



ZC,

Well not all Christianity as a whole has always been like that, since we're all aware of all the religious wars that gripped Europe during the 1500s and the 1600s (those following the Reformation in Germany, the massacre of the Huguenots in France, and so forth).

Then you have the Spanish conquistador's conquest of the Aztec Empire, the Inca Empire and the Philippines, where they pillaged the first two and burned the local idols of the local Filipino pagan tribes; then you have their constant war against the Muslims in the Southern Philippines which has continued through the American occupation and has lasted till this day when Filipino Catholics still fight against Muslim extremists such as the Abu Sayyaf Group, though they are certainly a lot more tolerant of Muslims who live peacefully in the South. Thus, in all 3 cases, the Spaniards used Catholicism as one justification for pacifying and subjugating the local peoples they conquered.

By Christianity, I do not differentiate between Catholicism, the various Protestant denominations as well as the various Eastern Orthodox Churches of Eastern European countries. I am aware that Canada has both a strong Anglican tradition stemming from the British influence as well as a strong Catholic foundation from the Jesuit missionaries from France that settled Quebec and Acadia and helped educate some of the First Nations tribes they encountered.

Buddhism is also just as tolerant, though it depends on the context. Chan Buddhism in China was generally tolerant of other thought such as Daoism. From my view, when it was brought to Japan, where it became Zen Buddhism and was worshipped alongside Shintoism, it was not as tolerant, as evidenced from Shogun Ieyasu Tokugawa's persecution of Japanese Catholics in Nagasaki who had been converted by Portuguese missionaries; many continued to practice their faith in secret in Japan for the next centuries, until the late 1800s when the first the Catholic missionaries to be allowed in Japan beyond the trading port of Daeshima found Japanese Catholics in secret caverns praying the same Latin prayers their forefathers had been taught in the 1600s!

In fact some Buddhists- forgot which sect- are even encouraged to attend  masses of or become members of certain Christian denominations but still retain their Buddhist teachings. I am unsure of this applies to Mahayana  (more secular )or Hinayana  (the more extreme, ascetic sects) sects of Buddhism.

My point is that Christianity does not have the monopoly of being tolerant towards other religions.


----------



## geo (20 Feb 2007)

The christians are in the year 2000
the muslims are in year +/- 1600  (= to the Inquisition era)

Give em another 400 years and they should be good to go.


----------



## CougarKing (20 Feb 2007)

geo said:
			
		

> The christians are in the year 2000
> the muslims are in year +/- 1600  (= to the Inquisition era)
> 
> Give em another 400 years and they should be good to go.



Well the Sunni Muslims in Malaysia (which has close to a 1st-world standard of living) are pretty tolerant of the other cultures in Malaysia such as the Chinese minority population; the same goes for those in multi-cultural Singapore (a very prosperous, urban city-state). Not all Muslims are as ignorant as the Taliban or Al-Qaeda.


----------



## George Wallace (20 Feb 2007)

CougarKing

I would tread softly when you begin to explore that part of the world.  There are several radical Islamic Terrorist groups in that part of the world, all with ties to Al-Qaeda.


----------



## CougarKing (20 Feb 2007)

Well I am well aware that there are several Islamic radical groups in Southeast Asia such as:

Indonesia-based Jemaah Islamiyah

Philippines-based Abu Sayyaf and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front

Malaysia-based KMM

Thailand-based Pattani Liberation Organization (in the majority Muslim provinces of Thailand, such as Pattani and Narithiwat).

This is what I recall from reading CNN correspondent Maria Ressa's book "Seeds of Terror" as well as my own research in this internship I did in Washington DC for my alma mater.


----------



## geo (20 Feb 2007)

CougarKing said:
			
		

> Well the Sunni Muslims in Malaysia (which has close to a 1st-world standard of living) are pretty tolerant of the other cultures in Malaysia such as the Chinese minority population; the same goes for those in multi-cultural Singapore (a very prosperous, urban city-state). Not all Muslims are as ignorant as the Taliban or Al-Qaeda.



From my perspective, when left on their own, pert much all indigenous groups will be fairly peaceful BUT, throw in something different that challenges the basis of their society and..... presto, voila, you have a new beast... IMHO


----------



## Colin Parkinson (21 Feb 2007)

CougarKing said:
			
		

> Well the Sunni Muslims in Malaysia (which has close to a 1st-world standard of living) are pretty tolerant of the other cultures in Malaysia such as the Chinese minority population; the same goes for those in multi-cultural Singapore (a very prosperous, urban city-state). Not all Muslims are as ignorant as the Taliban or Al-Qaeda.



The influence the radicals have had on the otherwise laid back Malay's is rather frightening considering the short time it has taken to force them into complying with the Saudi vision of Islam, my wife's family is a mix of devout and not so devout Muslims, the less devout complain privately about the increasing restrictions and the religious police. The government is aware of the problem but being cautious, they play a delicate juggling act between the different ethnic groups. There are also some interesting court cases coming up testing the government's secular policies and the existing Sharia laws.

the good news is that the Malays would quickly relax once the radicals leave as they are pretty friendly and open by nature.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (22 Feb 2007)

Colin P said:
			
		

> The influence the radicals have had on the otherwise laid back Malay's is rather frightening considering the short time it has taken to force them into complying with the Saudi vision of Islam, my wife's family is a mix of devout and not so devout Muslims, the less devout complain *privately* about the increasing restrictions and the religious police.  The government is aware of the problem but being cautious, they play a delicate juggling act between the different ethnic groups. There are also some interesting court cases coming up testing the government's secular policies and the existing Sharia laws.
> 
> the good news is that the Malays would quickly relax once the radicals leave as they are pretty friendly and open by nature.



See, IMO that is a big part of the problem.  Why don't more moderates speak up?  Why do so many people cater to the lowest common denominator?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (22 Feb 2007)

Because they have been taught to defer to authority since they were young, also they could also be charged with “insulting Islam” or “creating religious tension” also Malay Muslims are subject to Sharia Law as determined by the Islamic courts (there is a court case there presently testing this). On a social level, people critical of the current flavour of Islam, are shunned, harassed, business boycotted, vandalized, threats intimidation,etc,etc. coupled with a semi-corrupt police and Judiciary, people tread carefully. As far as conflicts between Malaysians rights under their secular constitution and Shaira law, the government has always found technicalities not to hear the cases or rules on technical details so as to avoid dealing with the clearly oblivious breaches of the citizen rights by Sharia law.

The fundamentalist rule/ruled in 2 states and despite promising not to impose Sharia law on no-Muslims, the first thing they did was just that. This caused a furor in the opposition alliance and there is no a deep divide between those parties in opposition that represent the Chinese & Indian populations as opposed to those that represent the Muslim Malays. (PAS)

A list of the players
       http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_Malaysia


----------



## zipperhead_cop (22 Feb 2007)

Fair enough.  That explains Malaysia.  But what is everyones problem with stepping up that is within Western culture?  Nobody in Castle North America has any excuse for not speaking their mind, unless they really don't mind.


----------

