German multicultural society "has failed" -- Chancellor Merkel

Um, I don't think anyone said that multiculturalism (as distinct from immigration, which can be encouraged for purely economic reasons) is about money so much as about tolerance worthy of a progressive society. That's why all the Nazi comparisons were made, because the Nazis were an extreme example of intolerance.

Don't blame the multiculturalism when you guys simply fail at it.
Purely theoretical question for you: Should a "progressive society" tolerate Nazis?
 
Purely theoretical question for you: Should a "progressive society" tolerate Nazis?

The fact that this is completely unrelated aside (unless you are attempting to make some ridiculous comparison between Nazism and Islamic conservatism), it depends. If some people are simply privately Nazis, then yes. But if they acted on their beliefs, then no.
 
But if they acted on their beliefs, then no.
So we agree that "progressive society" actually needs to determine whom it can tolerate, meaning that "universal tolerance" actually is not a workable thumb rule.

Why is then every attempt to question whether any particular group of people is welcome and beneficial addition to "progressive society" met with instantaneous a priori ridicule? First few replies to OP make a perfect example, I believe.

EDIT: To make this even clearer: all that Merkel had to do was say that immigrants who won't bother to integrate even as much as to learn German need to do more and first four people pull a Godwynn on her. I believe, being so progressive and enlightened must have felt really good. However, I might say that such knee-jerk reactions coupled with blind conformance to some dogma actually has an eerie reminiscence to Nazism all of its own.
 
So we agree that "progressive society" actually needs to determine whom it can tolerate, meaning that "universal tolerance" actually is not a workable thumb rule.
Who in Christ's name ever said that it was? :huh:
 
I don't think anyone is arguing that immigrants should stop eating certain foods that they like. But to demand that customs hostile to the host country's culture are dealt with is not unreasonable.

Without citing something which is illegal, please name three such "hostile" customs.
 
So we agree that "progressive society" actually needs to determine whom it can tolerate, meaning that "universal tolerance" actually is not a workable thumb rule.
I think it is quite simple. People should be held responsible for their acts, not their thoughts.

And no, I really have no problem with nearly universal tolerance in this regard. Someone who ascribes to Nazi beliefs should be just as tolerated as someone who ascribes to Christianity, or even (god forbid) Islam.

I might say that such knee-jerk reactions coupled with blind conformance to some dogma actually has an eerie reminiscence to Nazism all of its own.
Ironically, you could be speaking of Merkel's position in this matter as others have already pointed out.
 
Without citing something which is illegal, please name three such "hostile" customs.
1) Regarding work as something that is beneath true man.
2) Rejection of education in favor of custom and tradition.
3) Unwillingness to learn or use the language of host country.
I think it is quite simple. People should be held responsible for their acts, not their thoughts.
A good guideline in criminal justice. Not so much in immigration policy.
I could argue that most crucial difference between the most and the least corrupt country in the world is in how people there think.
 
So we agree that "progressive society" actually needs to determine whom it can tolerate, meaning that "universal tolerance" actually is not a workable thumb rule.

What Traitorfish said.

Yeekim said:
Why is then every attempt to question whether any particular group of people is welcome and beneficial addition to "progressive society" met with instantaneous a priori ridicule? First few replies to OP make a perfect example, I believe.

Are there militant Nazis trying to migrate to Germany? Or known Islamic militants/terrorists?

If not, then you should be able to see why you get ridiculed. Because you're either making ridiculous judgements about whose values are superior and "needed" or you're simply labeling a whole group of people as violent.

Yeekim said:
EDIT: To make this even clearer: all that Merkel had to do was say that immigrants who won't bother to integrate even as much as to learn German need to do more and first four people pull a Godwynn on her. I believe, being so progressive and enlightened must have felt really good. However, I might say that such knee-jerk reactions coupled with blind conformance to some dogma actually has an eerie reminiscence to Nazism all of its own.

Trying to link Nazism with a tolerant "dogma" has got to be the stupidest thing I've seen in a while on this forum. In any case, if you think this really is just an issue of language, then you're either naive or willfully blind. I mean, why is multiculturalism even being brought up if that were the case? Surely the problem could be much more easily solved than having to try and restrict immigration (which inevitably hits whole sections of immigrants, not just those you really dislike)?
 
No dice, Yeekim. The first two can hardly be attributed to migrants (and education is compulsory in most sensible countries). Hell, most of the time migrants work harder than everyone else. Since that's what they're in a country to do.

The third is not an issue - the people who don't learn a language in a new country are mostly the older folks who can't. They also don't tend to migrate much, unless it's with their children who do learn the language.
 
Are there militant Nazis trying to migrate to Germany? Or known Islamic militants/terrorists?
No. Say there are simply people who tend to express at least one type of behavior of the 3 examples I brought to Arwon.
If not, then you should be able to see why you get ridiculed. Because you're either making ridiculous judgements about whose values are superior and "needed" or you're simply labeling a whole group of people as violent.
Please stop putting words into my mouth.
No dice, Yeekim. The first two can hardly be attributed to migrants (and education is compulsory in most sensible countries). Hell, most of the time migrants work harder than everyone else. Since that's what they're in a country to do.

The third is not an issue - the people who don't learn a language in a new country are mostly the older folks who can't. They also don't tend to migrate much, unless it's with their children who do learn the language.
I am not trying to attribute this behavior to any group. For this, I lack sufficient data. However, do you agree that if there were such people, their behavior could be described as "hostile, yet not illegal"? I was replying to the question you asked, mind you.
 
No. Say there are simply people who tend to express at least one type of behavior of the 3 examples I brought to Arwon.

I don't really intend to debate such absurd simplification because it's not worth anyone's time. Either you're interested in approaching the issue in a sophisticated progressive manner or you will see it in such polarising and extreme terms with the result that nothing but getting your way would satisfy you. Certainly, someone would have to deal with what people like you say, but this forum is not an effective medium.

Yeekim said:
Please stop putting words into my mouth.

So please tell me how you "attempt to question whether any particular group of people is welcome" without doing either one of the two.
 
A good guideline in criminal justice. Not so much in immigration policy.
I think it could be fairly said that intolerance of other cultures merely because they are different is the epitome of bigotry. Take the Jews in Nazi Germany, for instance.

I could argue that most crucial difference between the most and the least corrupt country in the world is in how people there think.
What do you consider to be the "most and least corrupt country"? And what does that possibly have to do with this topic?
 
:lol:



Indeed, it has a lot do to with class, but with the added ingredient of segregation.

If you concentrate a lot of low-class people who share one thing in common: their immigrant ancestry, it's a no brainer that they'll get a "Us" vs "Them", which is a failure of the multicultural society.

Yared my dear, you are spot on.
Let's try an example:



"Immigrant cluster"? Certainly. But "ghetto"? :huh:

Ok so this is where we must be specific. No one has ever said anything bad about Chinese immigrants, they do not cause trouble. It is Muslim immigrants that people are angry about, especially the recent Homegrown terror plots of German-Muslims.
 
I am not trying to attribute this behavior to any group. For this, I lack sufficient data. However, do you agree that if there were such people, their behavior could be described as "hostile, yet not illegal"? I was replying to the question you asked, mind you.

I don't view work ethic or language skills or conservatism as "hostile to society".
 
Ok so this is where we must be specific. No one has ever said anything bad about Chinese immigrants, they do not cause trouble.
You mean like what happened to Chinese in the US where they were forbidden to even emigrate until the 60s, even after they were treated like subhumans while building our railroads?

It is Muslim immigrants that people are angry about, especially the recent Homegrown terror plots of German-Muslims.
It's always some group. Isn't it? It used to be the Jews. It's always been the Gypsies. Who's next?
 
No dice, Yeekim. The first two can hardly be attributed to migrants (and education is compulsory in most sensible countries). Hell, most of the time migrants work harder than everyone else. Since that's what they're in a country to do.

Even the OP has evidence to support that most of the people with foreign origins migrated to Germany to enjoy welfare.

The study - by the Friedrich Ebert Foundation think-tank - also showed that roughly the same number thought that some 16 million of Germany's immigrants or people with foreign origins had come to the country for the social benefits.
Foreign workers
 
Ok so this is where we must be specific. No one has ever said anything bad about Chinese immigrants, they do not cause trouble.

Surely you jest.

These prejudices aren't new. Oh but I'm sure this group of foreigners is different, and really really are scary and dangerous.
 
You mean like what happened to Chinese in the US, where they were forbidden to even emigrate until the 60s, after they were treated like subhumans while building our railroads?

It's always some group. Isn't it? It used to be Jews. Who's next?

.... 50 years ago everybody treated everybody like subhumans ....
Even the Angela Merkel dosen't want to treat Muslims badly, just wants them to put a sock in their complaints! They came to germany of their own free will! If they hate it so much they should just leave. I think germany has been more then generous enough with them.
The same applies to the Chinese, they were not forced to go to America. but being treated like a subhuman in America was still better then being in China.

And leave the jews out of this!
 
Top Bottom