Main reason for seeing 'multiculturalism' as a failure

[Mr. Dictator]

Well, thanks for your personal opinion. But do you have any evidence of any actual scholars even suggesting this is the case? Or do you just have sites like these in which to refer?

Islam Watch: The Lethal Combination of Tribalism, Islam & Cultural Relativism

"Telling the truth about Islam"

Bare Naked Islam: FRANCE: Islamic Multiculturalism or Tribalism?

"It isn't Islamophobia when they really are trying to kill you."

Nah, not really my scene.

Perhaps I don't simplistically try to blame all the evils of the modern world on two well-respected religions with billions of adherants, instead of finding criticism with the fringe element fanatics which actually cause the vast majority of the problems?

Nor do I, there are multiple hindrances in this world. But wouldn't those sources above count as fringe element fanatics?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for a disintegration of borders and people mingling, I love gyros, but that's not to say I still hope for the entire world to be secular, not just Europe.

 

[wolfigor]

I agree it's not strictly religion. The Roma appear to be just as despised as the Muslims currently are. It used to be the Jews who didn't "assimilate" with the white Christians. Many of them probably still don't in the eyes of the anti-Semites.

Roma or Gypsies, in the local image, tends to strongly refuse integration, harbors large percentage of criminality, but at the same time pretends a lot from the state (in terms of funds, etc.).
It's typical that they do not respect age limits for children work, and refuse to send their children to state schools (this is against the law in Europe).

Long story made short: their behavior strongly contrasts with local laws and expectations; at least in the eyes of citizens of many European countries.

Again it is not about race and religion.

In other words, keep a low profile and don't provoke the local rednecks?

No.
Actually it's more about: if you behave antagonistically against local people, don't be surprised if they get pissed at you.

I think that is utter nonsense. Most, if not all, of these countries actually had more crime before Muslims started immigrating in larger numbers. Crime in general has decreased over time. Not the opposite.

In absolute terms you may be right (I don't have stats to confirm/deny your statement that I will take as true).
What we have observed in Europe, according to the stats that once in a while get published, is that the incidence of crime in specific immigrants communities has grown very fast.
Another way to see it is that some minorities are a majority... and this is not about having more air-time on TV but about facts.

This is not about religion and not about race and colour.
It's about poverty, cultural background, and low education of many of the new immigrants, that have taken the place of the lowest "classes" in many European countries.

European citizens are tired of a long time of empty promises about integration.
They see, right or wrong they may be, that a lot of troubles come from immigrants and the failure to integrate (assimilate) them.
European politicians have ignored the issue for long time, and now the problems have become bigger and the mutual incomprehension bigger as well.

It's a problem of perception as well, and I admit that sometime politicians exasperate the terms to gain more votes... but ignoring the problem is not the solution either.

And, as others have pointed out, it is largely a class issue. Poor people tend to commit more blue-collar crime than rich people do. The latter typically prefers white-collar crime which goes largely unpunished.

That's what I stated too.
One important point is that what you call "blue-collar crime" is felt mush more strongly by people.
A high-level crime (e.g. accountancy fraud) is felt very far from personal experience.
A robbery in the house is felt much more personally and extremely damaging.
For this reason people tend to be more angry against the "poor" robber than the jet-set robber.
Ignoring this small fact and "forgive" the poor robbers doesn't help.
This is what European politicians have done for quite some time and now they have to show themselves strong against criminality to don't loose votes.

 

[Tee Kay]

Roma or Gypsies, in the local image, tends to strongly refuse integration, harbors large percentage of criminality, but at the same time pretends a lot from the state (in terms of funds, etc.).
It's typical that they do not respect age limits for children work, and refuse to send their children to state schools (this is against the law in Europe).

Lots of crime, anti-government but live off welfare... they're Americans. Just send them back.

Long story made short: their behavior strongly contrasts with local laws and expectations; at least in the eyes of citizens of many European countries.

Again it is not about race and religion.

Yes, yes it is; ultimately, the image of the Roma as you described is still a result of taking the actions of, essentially, individuals and attributing it to the characteristics of members of an ethnic group or race.

 

[wolfigor]

Lots of crime, anti-government but live off welfare... they're Americans. Just send them back.

Yes, yes it is; ultimately, the image of the Roma as you described is still a result of taking the actions of, essentially, individuals and attributing it to the characteristics of members of an ethnic group or race.

Yes, that's the image that Roma/Gypsies have in southern Europe.

Here in Norway, the only Roma you can see are those "seasonal" that hang around the main road of Oslo busy with begging, stealing, and selling light drugs.
This is not something "out of the news", but direct experience both personal and friends (Oslo and Norway are small, in terms of population).

Police don't do much for it because: it's "pointless to arrest them", they are considered victims, it's very hard to deport them, and they are seasonal anyway (only in summer).
Here in Norway, I never seen any of them working in the fisheries (lots of Italian there), or construction (lots of Polish), but a lot on the roads doing mischiefs.

When I was doing social work in Italy (volunteering charitable work) I had a lot of interaction with Roma/Gypsies, mostly involving bringing children to school (instead of their more traditional occupation washing cars or stealing, or prostitution for the more attractive).
It was incredibly sad to see the same bright and happy children from the school time, busy with those "occupations" after school.

It was also sad to see, where the stereotypes came from.

It was also very sad to see how those behaviors were justified as "traditional culture" that had to be respected.

The reality in the field is actually very bad, and I really believe that forcing the respect of law over the respect for conflicting cultural aspects would create better results in the long term.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for a disintegration of borders and people mingling, I love gyros, but that's not to say I still hope for the entire world to be secular, not just Europe.

I agree completely that at least the governments of the entire world should be secular. Perhaps someday it can actually be true, especially in the US.

But I see great danger trying to represent organized religion as being a dangerous entity, especially as it supposedly applies to modern-day Islam. This is what I think most people who claim that "multiculturalism has failed" really believe. It is just yet another attack on Muslims which has become so popular since 9/11.

Roma or Gypsies, in the local image, tends to strongly refuse integration, harbors large percentage of criminality, but at the same time pretends a lot from the state (in terms of funds, etc.).

There you go. They are all clearly a menace for any civilized country, much in the same way that Muslims are. It is another classic example how multiculturalism has failed.

Again it is not about race and religion.

No, I think it's much more about persecuting certain ethnic groups due to broadly stereotyping their behavior and attitudes. Claiming they all must suffer from the same problems which actually only afflict a few of them.

Actually it's more about: if you behave antagonistically against local people, don't be surprised if they get pissed at you.

The blacks in the South learned that lesson all too well. No matter what the whites did to them, they could never attack back or even appear to be standing up for themselves, unless they wanted to end up lynched with a cross burning in their yard.

What we have observed in Europe, according to the stats that once in a while get published, is that the incidence of crime in specific immigrants communities has grown very fast.

Another way to see it is that some minorities are a majority... and this is not about having more air-time on TV but about facts.

You really need a Fox News to keep the locals much more informed about the grave dangers all this represents. You really can't count on the left-wing media to accurately report about such matters. They will likely try to hide the facts by ignoring the real issues. For instance, this has worked quite well in the US to draw needed attention to the serious problem which anchor babies represent.

It's about poverty, cultural background, and low education of many of the new immigrants, that have taken the place of the lowest "classes" in many European countries.

Newcomers to any country are basically all starting from scratch in most cases because their qualifications for much better jobs are typically not considered good enough, especially given a near total unfamiliarity with the new language and culture. So they start at the bottom and work their way up.

Is blue-collar crime more prevalent amongst the poor and the lower classes than it is with the more affluent? Obviously.

European citizens are tired of a long time of empty promises about integration.

What "empty promises" were made about new immigrants? And who made promises about "integration"? That they all apparently agreed to become good white Christian Europeans who largely renounce their former lives?

It's a problem of perception as well, and I admit that sometime politicians exasperate the terms to gain more votes... but ignoring the problem is not the solution either.

I hardly see anybody actually "ignoring the problem" since it is mentioned so frequently by the xenophobes and those who are bigoted towards all Muslims.

I'd say it is just the opposite. It is the inevitable complaining that nativists have always done when new people move into their community. Couple that with the attitudes that 9/11 and other terrorist acts have caused, and you have the recipe for the widescale vilification of a group which is far larger than the Roma.

Yes, that's the image that Roma/Gypsies have in southern Europe.

Here in Norway, the only Roma you can see are those "seasonal" that hang around the main road of Oslo busy with begging, stealing, and selling light drugs.

Then I guess that means they must all do that, since those are the ones you see and read about in the papers.

...(instead of their more traditional occupation washing cars or stealing, or prostitution for the more attractive).

It was also sad to see, where the stereotypes came from.

I'd say they probably come from sweeping generalizations like these.

And now it is happening with Muslim immigrants...

 

[wolfigor]

No, I think it's much more about persecuting certain ethnic groups due to broadly stereotyping their behavior and attitudes. Claiming they all must suffer from the same problems which actually only afflict a few of them.

There are stereotypes but there is also a reality of very high incidence of crime in groups of immigrants coming from realities that are extremely different from Europe, used to a very violent and degraded background.
Statistic about incidence of crime, when published, are not an opinion.
Why, for example, Polish or Turkish have not such a high incidence of crime , and integrate far much better, then Somali or Iraqi or Pakistani? (talking about Norway now)
Maybe because they come from a culture not so far from European and much more pacific than the others?

There are indeed differences and you cannot always point the finger only against the "locals".

The blacks in the South learned that lesson all too well. No matter what the whites did to them, they could never attack back or even appear to be standing up for themselves, unless they wanted to end up lynched with a cross burning in their yard.

Nice sentence but complete nonsense.
You can't compare the south if USA in those times with Europe today... lets be serious.

You really need a Fox News to keep the locals much more informed about the grave dangers all this represents.

No Fox News, or anything remotely equivalent to it, here.
Again, if you don't know the European or Scandinavian reality, take care of your comments for accuracy.

I'd say they probably come from sweeping generalizations like these.

Based on first-hand experience over several years trying to actually help Roma.
I feel, given such experience, I do have a better view-point on the issue.

 

[Formaldehyde]

There are stereotypes but there is also a reality of very high incidence of crime in groups of immigrants coming from realities that are extremely different from Europe, used to a very violent and degraded background.
Statistic about incidence of crime, when published, are not an opinion.
Why, for example, Polish or Turkish have not such a high incidence of crime , and integrate far much better, then Somali or Iraqi or Pakistani? (talking about Norway now)
Maybe because they come from a culture not so far from European and much more pacific than the others?

Let's see the facts which you base these assertions.

Nice sentence but complete nonsense.
You can't compare the south if USA in those times with Europe today... lets be serious.

Xenophobia, bigotry, and racism is typically essentially the same no matter the current form.

No Fox News, or anything remotely equivalent to it, here.

That's why there are apparently only a handful of Norweigans who actually think this is even an issue worthy of their attention? I really think you need far more propaganda which is claiming it is some sort of dire threat instead of the inevitable result of any immigration, especially one which is so opposed by a segment of the population even before they arrived.

Based on first-hand experience over several years trying to actually help Roma.
I feel, given such experience, I do have a better view-point on the issue.

Apparently not, since you appear to be essentially echoing even the most fanatical anti-Roma.

Again, it is much like the blacks in the US who are characterized by the racists as being slow, lazy, and smelly. While there are likely blacks who fit at least one of those stereotypes, there are far more whites who do. Treat an entire group like criminals and many of them will likely meet your expectations since they have little other choice.

 

[trader/warrior]

Based on first-hand experience over several years trying to actually help Roma.
I feel, given such experience, I do have a better view-point on the issue.

Obviously when you work for a charity in a Roma ghetto you're going to see them at their worst. But do you know if this is the entire picture? To me that seems like working for a charity in some US inner city ghetto and declaring all americans are black single mothers...

Have you considered the "Tatere" or "Reisende", the roma minority that has existed in Norway for 400 years, and their history and their situation today after they were finally stopped being persecuted?

Can you honestly tell wether someone is Roma just by physical appearence? How do you know all the fishery, construction and cleaning workers are eastern, southern europeans or asians and not some of them Roma simply living a normal life? Similarly how do you know the beggars in summer aren't just regular Romanians and people from eastern europe? It's a fact that many of them are.

 

[aelf]

It was also very sad to see how those behaviors were justified as "traditional culture" that had to be respected.

The reality in the field is actually very bad, and I really believe that forcing the respect of law over the respect for conflicting cultural aspects would create better results in the long term.

I think this might be one of the central problems that Europe is having with multiculturalism. It's a twofold problem relating to perceptions of the role of culture in social organisation. 'Bad' things can become part of culture. But more than that, conceptions of good or bad certainly have something to do with cultural viewpoints, so it's possible to some extent to attribute differences in moral opinion to cultural differences. Still, there is no serious demand that the laws of the land be tailored to any specific culture. The liberal project may ultimately be impossible to fully realise, but it's still something worth advancing towards - laws should be made as culturally neutral as possible (perhaps an idea the USA has a better grasp of than Europe). Given this condition, I don't see why you shouldn't enforce the law. No one is seriously saying that you shouldn't.

However, there's another side to the issue that pertains to the long term. This is where the cultural dimension becomes important. There needs to be efforts to address the cultural aspects of social problems in order to truly deal with the latter. I'm aware that this is already happening, but it's something that works over a long period of time. It seems to me that in an age of broadcast media, the public has no patience whatsoever for long term initiatives. You just want a quick fix, and if quick fixes don't work then you don't want to handle the problem at all. No wonder we get all this stupidity when it comes to thinking about multiculturalism.

 

[Yeekim]

It's a moral stance not because you explicitly brought any ethical framework into the picture, but because it's normative and driven by a sense of what is good/right. You're not merely describing an existing situation or expounding on an entirely emotivist position, are you?

I would've described it as pragmatic myself, but all right...

If you can't define what exactly your position is about, then it's probably incoherent. The thing is everyone's been trying to locate the central thesis of the anti-multiculturalist argument, but all we've managed to get is paragraphs of apologetics that shift their focus from one social dimension to another, sometimes slipping out of the boundaries of cultural matters entirely.

I have defined my three basic gripes here. I don't think they're terribly difficult to understand. I have no idea how representative they are of "anti-multiculturalist argument" though, as I only intended to speak for myself. But recognizing that the issue is complex or has multiple aspects isn't "shifting focus".

Based on first-hand experience over several years trying to actually help Roma. I feel, given such experience, I do have a better view-point on the issue.

Why can't you just admit yourself for a bigoted, xenophobic racist you clearly are? You can't trick Form! He's seen the US South, so he's seen it all!

I think this might be one of the central problems that Europe is having with multiculturalism. It's a twofold problem relating to perceptions of the role of culture in social organisation. 'Bad' things can become part of culture. But more than that, conceptions of good or bad certainly have something to do with cultural viewpoints, so it's possible to some extent to attribute differences in moral opinion to cultural differences. Still, there is no serious demand that the laws of the land be tailored to any specific culture. The liberal project may ultimately be impossible to fully realise, but it's still something worth advancing towards - laws should be made as culturally neutral as possible (perhaps an idea the USA has a better grasp of than Europe).

Wow, I could have written this. Except: can you really make the laws culturally neutral enough? Always? There probably aren't many as drastic cases left as we've seen in past - let's remind for a moment cultural conflicts Europeans settlers had with American Natives who, as some have argued, entirely lacked the concept of "private property" - but different cultures still don't really see eye to eye regarding many things, yet.

Given this condition, I don't see why you shouldn't enforce the law. No one is seriously saying that you shouldn't.

Law says: Children must attend school. Parents refuse to let children attend school. How many times have you seen mud slinged at Czech Republic who attempted to enforce that law?

However, there's another side to the issue that pertains to the long term. This is where the cultural dimension becomes important. There needs to be efforts to address the cultural aspects of social problems in order to truly deal with the latter. I'm aware that this is already happening, but it's something that works over a long period of time. It seems to me that in an age of broadcast media, the public has no patience whatsoever for long term initiatives. You just want a quick fix, and if quick fixes don't work then you don't want to handle the problem at all. No wonder we get all this stupidity when it comes to thinking about multiculturalism.

You may be on to something here. The thing is, what is best for society over a course of, say, a few centuries, isn't necessary what is best for the current generation.
Take an example: only tangentially realted and hyperbolic, but thats what came to mind right now:
Estonia has a lot less inheritable diseases than Finland. Likely because while Finns have mostly languished in relatively peaceful and incestuous conditions over centuries (apologies guys!), we have been raped in turn by Germans, Swedes, Danes, Poles, Russians, Tatars...name it.
Still, I don't think that this eventually lucky result would make the folks who perished in Great Northern War which wiped away over half (and at places 4/5) of the population much happier...

 

[Formaldehyde]

Why can't you just admit yourself for a bigoted, xenophobic racist you clearly are? You can't trick Form! He's seen the US South, so he's seen it all!

Using the same absurd tactics to attack the poster by deliberately strawmanning his opinions, instead of even trying to address the real issues? What a surprise.

Clearly not everybody who believes this is a "bigoted xenophobic racist". But I would contend that many of them are. And that many of the rest were likely deceived by all the propaganda the xenophobes so frequently generate to rationalize their own views.

Take trying to classify Muslims as a "tribal society", for instance. I still haven't seen that from any sort of reputable site or professed by acknowledged experts in that field. Have you?

 

[Loppan Torkel]

Sweden is the better at managing integration than other European countries, the United States, and Canada, according to a study published on Monday by the British Council and the Migration Policy Group.

Sweden's score of 83 gave it the highest rank among countries included in the study. Portugal ranked second with a score of 79, followed by Canada (72).

Neighbouring Finland claimed the number 4 spot (69), with Norway coming in seventh (66) and Denmark trailing its Scandinavian neighbours in 14th place (53).

According to the index, derived from an analysis of 148 different factors, Swedish integration policies are deemed offer favourable conditions for migrants to participate in society, including finding employment.

Also highlighted as strengths were Swedish laws pertaining to family reunification and anti-discrimination, while laws related to housing, education, political participation and citizenship were considered no less advantageous.

Henrik Nilsson, a start-up coordinator and member of the Red Cross, Sweden's national partner to the study, attributed much of Sweden's high ranking to the right mix of policies and willing volunteers.

“Sweden's first place shows that good forces can combine to produce results. We have a Parliament that passes laws giving newcomers the right to instruction in Swedish…and thousands of volunteers who support new arrivals when they enter into Swedish society,” Nilsson said in a statement.

“At the same time there is much we can do better in the practical work at the local, regional and national level in terms, such as health.”

The long-term study, known at MIPEX, puts Sweden's ability to deal with the challenges of integration above efforts in place in all other European Union (EU) member states, Norway, Switzerland, Canada and the US.

A collaborative effort between the British Council, the Migration Policy Group and national partners, the MIPEX study compares and contrasts integration policies across 31 countries in Europe and North America, surveying what various governments are doing to promote integration of immigrants and refugees with residence permits.

For the purposes of the study, immigrants are defined as non-EU nationals who enter their countries of destination legally. Asylum seekers, refugees, the undocumented, and intra-EU migrants and people will immigrant backgrounds who haven't themselves immigrated are therefore not included in the analysis.

MIPEX also benchmarks whether governments grant equal rights, responsibilities and opportunities for all residents according to international standards agreed upon by EU member states.

“While change is happening at a very slow pace, there are still many obstacles to how immigrants live, work and participate in our societies,” the British Council said in a statement.

The findings revealed that great disparities exist in how Europe is integrating its 20 million immigrants who legally reside in the region.

“Most countries are creating as many opportunities as obstacles for immigrants to become equal members of society,” the British independent government agency said in the same statement.

Sweden best at integration: study

Spoiler :

Gothenburg municipal officials described Sweden's integration policy as a "fiasco" to the US embassy, according to a document published by WikiLeaks.

* Justice minister caught in WikiLeaks 'net wars' (9 Dec 10)
* Two Swedes jailed for plotting Somalia attacks (8 Dec 10)
* Reinfeldt keen on housework: US embassy (7 Dec 10)

Prior to a 2008 visit to Gothenburg by officials from the US embassy in Stockholm, Bill Werngren, head of the city secretariat's information group and now Gothenburg's election director and the husband of municipal executive board chairwoman Anneli Hulten, made contact with the embassy, according to newspaper Göteborgs-Tidningen (GT) on Friday.

He sent the embassy a series of articles from newspaper Göteborgs-Posten (GP) published in 2007 about the integration challenges in and isolation experienced by the city's Somali community.

He wrote in a memo that the situation in Gothenburg reminded him of the phrase, "Houston, we have a problem."

He also described the articles as "interesting and quite horrible reading" and welcomed the visit as a vehicle for engaging community leaders in dialogue.

Moderate Party member Abdirisak Waberi, who was elected to the Riksdag in September 2010, was invited to meetings with US embassy staff in his role as the principal of the Römosse school, a publicly funded, privately managed free school in the Gothenburg neighbourhood of Gårdsten.

According to the cable, Waberi was pessimistic about the situation for fellow Somali-Swedes.

“Those who have immigrated to Sweden ‘will never feel like Swedes’ which created a sense of alienation,” reads the report of the meeting.

The US Embassy later sent a report to Washington about its conclusions regarding its visit to Gothenburg.

"The discontent immigrant community leaders expressed at the discrimination faced by Muslim job seekers was matched by the frustration of city officials who, in the words of one official, feel that 30 years of programmes aimed at integrating Muslim immigrants 'have not worked,'" the leaked cable stated.

'Integration a fiasco': Gothenburg official - Wikileaks

We're no.1, but it still goes to hell, probably because we're all racists and bigots over here.

 

[holy king]

multiculturalism stoled my camera and my pants!

 

[Arwon]

For the purposes of the study, immigrants are defined as non-EU nationals who enter their countries of destination legally. Asylum seekers, refugees, the undocumented, and intra-EU migrants and people will immigrant backgrounds who haven't themselves immigrated are therefore not included in the analysis.

That's kind of important.

I'm going to play with this data today and see what they say, I have my suspicions about an index concocted from 148 different variables, but the constitutent parts of the data could prove interesting.

Edit: Interesting that "letting residents vote" is considered one of the dimensions. I wasn't aware that any countries did that.

Oh and hey:

"The discontent immigrant community leaders expressed at the discrimination faced by Muslim job seekers was matched by the frustration of city officials who, in the words of one official, feel that 30 years of programmes aimed at integrating Muslim immigrants 'have not worked,'" the leaked cable stated.

Look who's blaming local attitudes.

Seriously it sounds like people are complaining about a few thousand Somalis, who arrived recently, not acting like normal Swedes and then going "they're not acting like normal Swedes there's no hope letting foreigners in is a failure!"

 

[Singularity]

Look who's blaming local attitudes.

Seriously it sounds like people are complaining about a few thousand Somalis, who arrived recently, not acting like normal Swedes and then going "they're not acting like normal Swedes there's no hope letting foreigners in is a failure!"

You know you're quoting a US Embassy cable to Washington right? Hardly a quality source. Most of the stuff "leaked" through wikileaks is so weak and just constitute informal banter between offices that never gets elevated above the level that it was intercepted on when it was snatched by whoever leaked it.

I'm sorry that you're trying to pick asunder post above yours instead of admitting that there are currents in the multiculturalism debate that hint at an inherent flaw of it as a concept instead of a systemic flaw of the host culture.

Hell, I would go as far and say that none in this thread would give an identical definition to what 'multiculturalism' is, that is how weak and relative in nature it is. Both from the eye of the beholder and in relation to what host nation we're talking about trying to embrace it.

 

[Arwon]

Hey, I'm not the one who posted the silly thing, just pointing out it doesn't say what I think LT thinks it says.

But hey. Please, define the "inherent flaw of the concept" because every attempt so far has failed. A lot of what's been posted in this thread, as aelf has pointed out, has just been inconsistent complaints about foreigners and attributing individual bad things to entire social groups.

Personally, I'm running with our Immigration Minister's definition (I mean, hey, we and Canada invented the idea of multiculturalism as official policy, in response to mass migration), particularly in his careful delineation from the avowedly non-multicultural approaches of, say, France's assimilationist approach and Germany's "guest worker" approach. I've posted his speech a couple of times already. It's recognition of multicultural reality on the ground, pluralist respect for different cultures, insistence on adherence to the law (including sex equality and individual autonomy), and support for people with different needs and interests due to their cultural background. Really not a difficult concept - the difficulty is in understanding what, exactly, the "opposition" wants or expects to be done.

For example, I don't know where the hell people get this "segregation" crap from. In practice, in reality, in the experience of the countries which actually fully embrace the pluralist and individualist values of multiculturalism, people mix together, new elements are added, hybridisation occurs, new synthesises emerge within different families and individuals. If the core culture and population allows it, of course.

 

[Formaldehyde]

If the core culture and population allows it, of course.

Bingo.

This topic should actually be: Why is Europe as nativist as anyplace else, and will any of them ever stop being so.

 

[Quackers]

..and what is wrong with being nativist? The opening summary of that wikipedia page was quite reasonable...

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Because you have refused to integrate into the modern multicultural society.

 

[Formaldehyde]

If you keep reading, you will see that you are not supposed to refer to yourself as a nativist but as a "patriot".