- This topic has 8 voices and 27 replies.
-
Posts
-
As Wally said in another thread, geography greatly determines the culture, and I agree. So can any country, regardless of its different religions or nationalities, really claim to be multicultural? If somone moves, in order to be a good citizen or fit in, you have to adapt to the culture of the country you moved to. Segregation, IMO, is not adapting.Would you say 'melting pot' has a different definition?
This is an area of great concern today, and likely throughout all of history. The modern American sense of what multiculturalism is and what its implications are is faulty at best and dangerous at worst. Don't pay attention to it. The idea behind the "melting pot" is that persons of a variety of cultures can come together into a society and subordinate their native cultures to the mainstream culture of the new society. It doesn't mean eliminating one's native culture, but making it secondary for the greater good of the new culture that is developing. Think of the way Irish Americans celebrate St. Patrick's Day and revel in their "native culture" while being relatively indistinguishable from other Americans the rest of the year. I don't think that modern multiculturalism fosters the same ideas that the idea of the melting pot does. Multiculturalism seems to include the idea that society is "better" when the portion of racial or ethnic diversity in participation is increased. I think the rationale behind this is that the group can profit from a range of voices which encompass a variety of circumstances and backgrounds. I think that this rationale can be true in certain cases, but it is not necessarily true. In fact, I think there are cases in which greater homogeneity of thought is more beneficial - the prime case which is mainstream culture. Further, multiplicity of voices can divide a group. When opinions differ to a great enough degree that group can suffer from "balkanization" and each group can decide it wants to do its own thing and break off from the other group. Think about the situation with Quebec wanting to break off from Canada as an example. In the end, there is a difference between "multiculturalism" and "melting pot".
I wasn't saying it was good. It definitely isn't. Like you said, and Quebec is a good example, multiculturalism can lead to demanding seperate governments. Not good! I think people mistakenly use the Roman civilization as an example of multiculturalism that worked. That wasn't it at all. The Romans may have let the non-Romans keep their beliefs and way of life, but they certainly required them to become "Romanized" and subservient to the central government.
I like Degler's Salad Bowl (as opposed to the Melting Pot) idea; he said that while assuming many of the traits of the larger culture, the “Romanization” if you will… groups could also keep some of their old world culture as well. The thing, according to Degler, that would prevent the Balkanization (my term not his) would be subscription to the democratic traditions of the US. These overriding traditions, as delineated and protected by the constitution and the Bill of Rights, are the dressing on the salad… the unifying factor that allows the parts remain individually identifiable but also to be integrated into the united whole.The other side of the issue is when every group retains all of their cultural baggage without any effort to be acculturated into the larger society. Then we get the Balkanization issue.
I like Degler's Salad Bowl (as opposed to the Melting Pot) idea; he said that while assuming many of the traits of the larger culture, the "Romanization" if you will... groups could also keep some of their old world culture as well.
That is interesting since the salad bowl analogy was criticized in something I read about the multiculturalism issue (I didn't know the idea originated with Delger). I think the criticism there had to do with the fact that a "salad bowl" implies America is a mere collection of different cultural groups, whereas the "melting pot" idea implies a gradual loss of former culture in the building of a new culture.
May not have originated with him but he speaks to it in Out of Our Past. I think that as long as the group refrains from becoming Hyphenated-Americans retaining a bit of ones' cultural baggage is okay; we all enjoy having Irish, Polish, or another type “roots”… as long as we aren't more “that” than “this”.For Skiguy: it's okay to have our bias when we study history, as long as we know it's there. Kind of like a filter on a camera lens, that distorts the light for a certain effect; as long as we realize it is there we understand the distortion that is present. If we are unaware we think what we are observing is the real deal... same with bias or our cultural baggage; as long as we know it's there we can deal with it.
Some people today mistake multi-culturalism for assimilation. Phid said it well. It is possible to venerate your heritage while at the same time assimilating into a new society. The New Left thinks this is not only impossible but undesirable even if it were. For some reason they equate assimilation with cultural death. The many ethnic groups in America that are Americans first and identify with their ethnicity second give the lie to the notion that assimilation is impossible.
I think the melting pot is the way to go. Just like a crucible filled with many type of metal can create an alloy that is stronger than any of the individual metals in the pot. This country was the same up through the 19th century. We are a stronger nation with a collection of different cultures melted into the American Culture. But when you get cultures that want to be separate, just like in a piece of alloy, it creates a weakness in the material. Jumping to the idea of multiple language for a second. The NEED for English to be the official language is the fact that we have so many cultures here. If a person of Japanese origin wants to go to Miami for spring break, English is the comon language that both the hispanics in S.Florida and Japanese Americans can communicate with. Same goes for all the nationalitites. English is the language that unites us. Do not destroy the things that unite us.Back to multiculturalism. Everyone has something to add to this country. That is where multiculturalism helps. Being focused on one way and closed to new ideas is not how this country got to where it is. Other cultures broaden out arts and increase our academic pools. And there is a way to recognize all the cultures, wearing green on St Patrick's Day, Hawaiian shirt friday, Sinco de Mayo. I'm sure every sports bar out there would love another reason to have a party, what's yours?
I think the melting pot is the way to go. Just like a crucible filled with many type of metal can create an alloy that is stronger than any of the individual metals in the pot. This country was the same up through the 19th century. We are a stronger nation with a collection of different cultures melted into the American Culture. But when you get cultures that want to be separate, just like in a piece of alloy, it creates a weakness in the material.
On the other hand, veggies and dressing in a blender makes glop....
Jumping to the idea of multiple language for a second. The NEED for English to be the official language is the fact that we have so many cultures here. If a person of Japanese origin wants to go to Miami for spring break, English is the comon language that both the hispanics in S.Florida and Japanese Americans can communicate with. Same goes for all the nationalitites. English is the language that unites us. Do not destroy the things that unite us.
One common language as part of the dressing (along with the Const. and Bill of Rights) makes the the salad work. 😉
Back to multiculturalism. Everyone has something to add to this country. That is where multiculturalism helps. Being focused on one way and closed to new ideas is not how this country got to where it is. Other cultures broaden out arts and increase our academic pools. And there is a way to recognize all the cultures, wearing green on St Patrick's Day, Hawaiian shirt friday, Sinco de Mayo. I'm sure every sports bar out there would love another reason to have a party, what's yours?
If we really believed in NAFTA, we'd have taken the Victoria Day Weekend off; eh? ;D
What is lacking in this discussion is a definition of what multiculturalism is, absent such a definition any discussion is meaningless. I propose the following definition for multiculturalism: It is the notion that somehow, it is possible for people of different cultures to live with and amongst each other without there being a clash of different cultural values. This is patently not the same thing as assimilation, in which people of different cultures move toward accepting a single set of cultural values while at the same time remembering, even celebrating the cultural heritage of their ancestors while allowing others of different cultural heritage to do the same. Assimilation is represented by people of all cultural backgrounds celebrating St Patrick's day, Cinco de Mayo, etc. In a truly multicultural society only those of the ethnic group of the thing or event celebrated would do so, while everybody else not of that ethnicity would be excluded from the celebration.Learning and using English as a common language is not a sign of multiculturalism, that is a sign of assimilation. Speaking Spanish to Hispanics and Russian to Russians while they do not have to learn the common tongue is multiculturalism. Multiculturalism says that My culture must be accepted by the majority and goes against everything this country was founded upon. It decisively destroys the concept of majority rule because it says that minorities not only have the same rights as the majority, they actually have more. Multiculturalism is contributing to the Balkanization of America, where assimilation contributes to a strong unified country because everybody ascribes to a unified set of common core values and traditions while being open to the addition of new ones as well. Assimilation builds on a cultural foundation where multiculturalism attempts to tear that foundation down to bedrock to rebuild it in a completely new manner.
Ok now that you have spelled that out. Multiculturalism will NOT work for THIS country. It must not be forced on us even from those within that think its a good idea. If we do, some other culture will set up shop in this country and grow until it is the dominant culture. Then once it has enough power to provide enough votes, our nation could be irrevocably changed. I cannot let that happen.
Ok now that you have spelled that out. Multiculturalism will NOT work for THIS country. It must not be forced on us even from those within that think its a good idea. If we do, some other culture will set up shop in this country and grow until it is the dominant culture. Then once it has enough power to provide enough votes, our nation could be irrevocably changed. I cannot let that happen.
There is a culture that is already doing that. I find it curious that my wife, who speaks German and English fluently, is not considered bilingual for purposes of employment. She was told many times when looking for a job that bilingual is only when you speak Spanish.
Ok now that you have spelled that out. Multiculturalism will NOT work for THIS country. It must not be forced on us even from those within that think its a good idea. If we do, some other culture will set up shop in this country and grow until it is the dominant culture. Then once it has enough power to provide enough votes, our nation could be irrevocably changed. I cannot let that happen.
IIRC this is in line with the argument presented in the Federalist Papers which said that small factions within the nation will not present problems because they essentially cancel each other out; rather, large factions would. In our time these factions (taking shape in the form of cultural groups) need to be assimilated so they don't hurt mainstream culture. I recall that Louis Farrakhan once suggested that Black America be given three states or so for African Americans presumably so they could create their own nation apart from the United States. Fortunately this idea did not catch on but you can see the problems with that kind of thinking.
