Splinter: Hating Muhammad

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

Mohammed "eliminated" undesirables by including them.

e.g. constitution of Medina, which includes both Jews and pagans.

Rather different from "collateral damages", "human shields", "multiculturalism", "islamofascism", "evil Jews", and whatever other euphemism is au courant for justifiable genocide.

Multiculturalism is a euphemism for 'genocide'? How so?

I thought you were for separate but equal cultures in the name of 'multiculturalism'? And that integration and assimilation were 'bad' for traditional ethnic groups?

 

[S.A.M.]

Perhaps its more accurate to say anti-multiculturalism than multiculturism. We have an Indian culture which integrates other cultures into itself. The Parsis are not a separate culture, they are a distinct aspect of Indian culture. I doubt they have much in common with Iranians.

 

[DiamondHearts]

I doubt they have much in common with Iranians.

Parsis have absolutely nothing in common with Iranians, in fact regardless of what they propagate, they have become thoroughly Indianized and lost even most of their Zoroastrian religion.

 

[S.A.M.]

Parsis have absolutely nothing in common with Iranians, in fact regardless of what they propagate, they have become thoroughly Indianized and lost even most of their Zoroastrian religion.

Not most of it. Though even I was surprised to see how many Hindu customs they have adopted.

 

[DiamondHearts]

Muslims of Pakistan, Afghanistan, and India have a lot more in common with Iran than the Parsis. Most of us can speak Farsi and at least in Pakistan and Afghanistan, many people have visited Iran or have had some contact with Iran. The Parsis are essentially becoming obsolete.

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

So in fact Indian multiculturalism is successful due to integration

Something that doesn't surprise me.

 

[EmmZ]

What do you mean "if"? We do, we just let you bloke run your egos all over the place thinking you do

No, no I'm just kidding. I like blokes I do. Saves me a shed load on batteries.

 

[S.A.M.]

So in fact Indian multiculturalism is successful due to integration

Something that doesn't surprise me.

Its the kind of integration where Parsis/Anglos/Jews/any group can choose what they want to wear and worship, not one where political parties come to power based on which undesirables need to be eliminated. Except for our brief foray into the BJP-Shiv Sena cesspool.

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

No one speaks of elimination but you. No on speaks of integration meaning an end of worship or traditional dress but you. In this respect you've allowed hysterical paranoia to block your hearing faculties.

 

[S.A.M.]

Lets hear you define "my group" as you use it.

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

You would have to use an example of where I use the term 'my group' for me to define it. In itself the term is meaningless.

 

[S.A.M.]

Sure, here:

No. Compassion and acceptance is a disposition, an attitude. I can have compassion and acceptance as long as they belong to my group. The Americans didn't tackle racism by going on about compassion and acceptance you can talk about that while someone is petrol bombing your home. You have to force the common ground, that is how they got rid of separate but equal. You have to let them know that they are not in Bangladesh or Pakistan anymore, especially since they have been in the country for generations. If they want a pakistan they can go back to pakistan. How else can you build a common heritage, legacy and common goals and not simply think in terms of ones stupid little group?

http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2281823&postcount=306

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

Sure, here:

That was posted in relation to your insistence that one group should be able to not integrate, care nothing for those around them and then wonder why there is exclusion and miscomprehension not to mention resentment. You see the rights of one group without any thought of perception on the part of a host society then there is no reason for members of the host society to INCLUDE them. Therefore its 'my group' as opposed to 'your group'. Which is what took place in Blackburn. A failure to integrate produces this. As I said 'How else can you build a common heritage, legacy and common goals and not simply think in terms of ones stupid little group?'

 

[S.A.M.]

my issue is one of choice. People should have the freedom of religion, language and culture. itts not something i see as up for debate

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

my issue is one of choice. People should have the freedom of religion, language and culture. itts not something i see as up for debate

Again you are the only one referring to lack of freedom of religion. But if one wants to integrate into a host culture they need to adapt to language and culture because if where they came from is more important than where they are from there is no argument to remaining in the society they have chosen to remain for a few generations. Its strange to fly a flag of a foreign nation and not even have the flag of the new nation stand by its side. Its a sign of lack of solidarity with the host culture. If they consider themselves Pakistani then they should live in Pakistan.

After a few generations its not normal to shirk sending ones kids to a school that only has children from their group and is taught in their language leaving English or Danish as a second language. India is India its not Denmark or England.

But if this group decides this isn't necessary then they should not complain if they are treated as outsiders and parasites.

 

[S.A.M.]

But if one wants to integrate into a host culture they need to adapt to language and culture because if where they came from is more important than where they are from there is no argument to remaining in the society they have chosen to remain for a few generations

Thats the part where you and I will disagree. I think that everyone needs to be accomodating, not just the immigrants. If white people move out of immigrant neighborhoods or feel angry when immigrants [or blacks or Asians or Mexicans] move into their neighborhood because it "brings down" the value of their homes, then any discussion on immigrant integration is moot.

I'm one of the people who has been shown to the door for being too brown or refused an apartment for being Muslim. And although I'm an educated cosmopolitan woman with liberal views, this would not suppress ethnocentrism in me, it would reinforce it.

As for language and culture, go to Florida :shrug:

Can't get too far without speaking Mexican.

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

Thats the part where you and I will disagree. I think that everyone needs to be accomodating, not just the immigrants. If white people move out of immigrant neighborhoods or feel angry when immigrants [or blacks or Asians or Mexicans] move into their neighborhood because it "brings down" the value of their homes, then any discussion on immigrant integration is moot.

I'm one of the people who has been shown to the door for being too brown or refused an apartment for being Muslim. And although I'm an educated cosmopolitan woman with liberal views, this would not suppress ethnocentrism in me, it would reinforce it.

As for language and culture, go to Florida :shrug:

Can't get too far without speaking Mexican.

We are not referring to Florida or the States for that matter which is a nation of immigrants and has been from the very beginning. Integration takes a little time but usually after a two or three generations this occurs as people become more active in their new society. If they do not become active in their new society there is no way for integration to take place. Because a white person moves if someone of color moves in is no reason to keep ones child in a school that only teaches in Urdu and sport the pakistani flag outside of ones home and have parades through other communities without carrying banners they cannot understand. I find it interesting that you never seem to address these behaviours and yet focus on what the 'other' does or does not do. This shows bias on your part. You feel its the host societies responsibility to accommodate but place no responsibility on the immigrants. These are not new immigrants you do realize these are people who have been there for a few generations. If they are 'exclusive' don't be surprised when there is an 'exclusive' political party response to it. So your bias and their bias creates a situation where people fall back to their own group and integration does not take place. Its the immigrant's responsibility to make sure their children integrate into the host society so they can forge their future into that of the host society.

Can I move to Saudi Arabia and become a citizen and then insist I want to walk around in shorts and a bikini top and open a bar right down from the mosque? If not why not? They should be accommodating.

 

[Xylene]

Gulags :shrug: I don't have a stat, do you?

/QUOTE]

The figure I heard for the dead of the 20th Century, just in the Soviet Union, was ca. 60 million.

 

[S.A.M.]

Can I move to Saudi Arabia and become a citizen and then insist I want to walk around in shorts and a bikini top and open a bar right down from the mosque? If not why not? They should be accommodating.

Yes they should. Do you really agree with their present policy?

This shows bias on your part. You feel its the host societies responsibility to accommodate but place no responsibility on the immigrants.

Yeah, its probably because of how we Indians view guests. But I agree with you, a country that is not ready to integrate with foreign cultures should not take in immigrants.

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

Who would I be to change their policy? I know that if I wanted to stay there I would comply to whatever social and cultural standards are expected to harmonize with the society or leave. Its there country and they have a right to uphold certain cultural standards if they choose to. I also have to mention that when I lived in Bangalore I didn't wear a sari but did wear a punjab since most of the western women who sported jeans and a t-shirt were systematically touched and harassed by men walking down the street. It wasn't a place for a short skirt or shorts so even though I thought it was a welcoming country I wasn't as free to behave the way I would in Cambodia for example. I learned that there was less harassment when I wore the salwar than when I wore my western clothes.