German Chancellor says "German multicultural society has utterly failed"

Yes....

 

How do you explain the fact that people of all colors speak English?

 

Only a matter of time before Poland gets invaded.

Again.

 

Why don't you look up the word ethnicity first?

 

My point is that a common language is a feature of a common ethnicity, but is not, as you said, "tied to it". You can have a common language without belonging to the same ethnicity.

 

OK, but my point was that language is associated (maybe I should have used that word) with ethnicity and NOT nationality, which is what this thread was about.

 

I beg to differ. US laws in regard to what you describe as multiculturalism are less stringent than Europe. Consider that we don't have an official language unlike countries like France and Germany. Also France has passed laws regarding the limiting the public display of religious symbols which the US hasn't.

I am not an expert on European laws but I highly doubt that European countries are practicing a totally hands off policy in regard to immigrants. From what I have followed things like honor killings, genital mutilation, spousal rape and other such things are still crimes in Germany, France and the UK.

The problems with multiculturalism in Europe, like in the US, I don't think are a problem with too liberal laws, if anything the opposite creates bigger problems, but problems inherent in the attitudes of both the larger populations and the immigrants population.

In this regard I would encourage immigrants to learn the language of the country where they now live and respect the laws of that country.

Also I will note that a lot of the hand wringing about immigration, both in Europe and the US, is coming at a time of one of the worst global economic downturns ever. In times like these immigrants and minorities have often been a target of scapegoating.

 

Quite clearly, you are not. And neither did you fully read my previous posts in this thread. Check the article from the Guardian.

 

Well, originally, it is associated with ethnicity, but when you have a country with a lot of immigration and various ethnicities, you need to find a common ground to be able to live together, and that starts with the language. Not learning the language of the country you live in clearly shows that you have no interest in living with the people in the country, but at most alongside them.

 

I did but that while that article point out that Sharia courts are being used for arbitration in the UK, something you could do in the US also, I didn't say anything about a complete hands off policy that you describe in your other posts.

IF I am wrong though show me where in German, French, or UK law were genital mutilation, honor killing is allowed.

Also just to add if the US is somehow tougher on multiculturalism than Europe why doesn't the US have an official language unlike France and Germany?

 

Considering your response, I see the logic of Shaw and Sanger.

 

It is not allowed, but it happens, and it happens a lot, and in most cases, law enforcement will never hear of it because of the way "multiculturalism" has been put into practice in European countries - with groups of people living alongside the people from the country (but in many cases collecting welfare benefits) rather than with them, and following their laws and rules.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...ts-destroying-young-womens-lives-Britain.html

English is the de facto official language, and about 90 % of Americans say it should also legally be the official language, so why do you keep harping on that point? It proves nothing other than you clutching at straws to desperately try and prove your oh-so-liberal bent, as so often.

It's a fact that the rules to be accepted as a legal immigrant in the US are based more on selective criteria than in many European countries (how "useful" is the immigrant to our society) and I think the European countries should learn from the US in that respect, but the starting position is different. If you think the US-Mexican border is porous, within the EU, there are no border controls anymore, and the outside borders are an open door. And e.g. in Germany, welfare benefits for someone who contributes nothing to society are more attractive than in the U.S. So, naturally, legal immigrants to the US are on average more skilled and educated, more willing to work to be economically successful and therefore to contribute to society, and you have less problems with immigration. That is not surprising.

But then don't go and think you can lecture me about "problems inherent in the attitudes of both the larger populations and the immigrants population" when you really know very little about the actual situation.

 

Totally agree.

 

That sounds like a failure of enforcement rather than of policy.

But its not the official language under law like French is in France. Its a counter to your argument that European policy are more liberal in regard to multiculturalism than the US.

True the internal borders of the EU are open but the model they followed was the US and the relationship of US states. In that sense there is more inter movement of people between the US States than between European countries. As far as the external borders of the EU my understanding is that on average European countries have a more liberal refugee policy than the US which in that respect it is more open than the US but I would like to see the laws that essentially open the door to anyone to come in.

One other area where the US also is more liberal in their attitudes towards immigrants than Europe is that the US has birthright citizenship to anyone born on US territory. From my understanding most European countries do not have that.

From the evidence you are providing you are actually supporting my point about inherent problems in the attitudes as opposed to laws. Your point about English use in the US is one dealing with cultural and economic attitudes rather than laws, your point about things like genital mutilation are about cultural attitudes (immigrants aren't speaking out) and lax enforcement of existing laws. Again in response to your article regarding Sharia law being used in arbitration in the UK under US law that can happen too so in that case the US is even with the UK.

 

ATW - it is Germany's country, why not kick em back out?

Or give them a grace period to learn the language and take a test about Germany, or send em packing.

DD

 

Me too.

 

I'm no lawyer, but it seems odd to me that British Law would allow a Sharia court to publicly execute an adulterer.

If that is, in fact, the case then I totally disagree with such a practice. Everyone should follow the same law, and lobby for changes in the law where they see fit, and if it's not compatible/possible then they can GTFO.

In the case of Germany though, I don't think this applies. You are correct that there are internal politics and enforcement involved, but that seems to be where the government has failed to do its job. They need to educate people in every community, and also apply the same rule of law everywhere (which may mean more policing in one place than another).

I don't think we disagree too much here. I think you place the problem with multiculturalism or the people forming the pockets. I think the problem that Ms Merkel is referring to has more to do with poor law education and enforcement.

Regarding the language, I think everyone agrees that it's stupid for people to actively avoid learning the language of the country they live in.

 

The goal of the current discussion is not really to kick people out who have already been in the country for a while, it is to avoid mistakes made in integration politics in the past. Also, many have been granted German citizenship. Once that has happened, they have the same rights as any other German citizen, there are almost no valid reason to take away citizenship from someone.

But for the future, yes, they have to pass certain tests if they want to be granted citizenship.

 

From rereading the article it didn't say that was possible but it muddies things up by mentioning how a Sharia court in Iran imposed a stoning sentence. From the article it says that the UK is allowing Sharia court decisions to be used as arbitration, a process by which the litigants agree to a procedure outside of the official courts to resolve disputes in civil cases. In the US that happens frequently too and many contracts stipulate arbitration as a requirement to resolving disputes.

I strongly doubt that British law would allow a Sharia court in the UK to impose a death sentence that would be legally upheld.

 

Germany sprung way too far to the left after WW2, it was embarassing for folks to show German pride.

I never understand why people would feel that way when they had nothing to do with Hitler, his policies or WW2...

I don't feel guilty about slavery, it had nothing to do with me.

Very bizzare cases of overeaction, and over correction.

DD