State multiculturalism has failed, says David Cameron

Do you agree that the concept of 'miluiculturalism' has failed in the UK?

  • Absolutely

    Votes: 164 74.5%
  • Rather agree

    Votes: 27 12.3%
  • On some points yes, on some points no

    Votes: 20 9.1%
  • Multiculturalism has good prospects

    Votes: 5 2.3%
  • Multiculturalism is the only solution for the UK

    Votes: 4 1.8%

  • Total voters
    220
#1
BBC News - State multiculturalism has failed, says David Cameron

David Cameron has criticised "state multiculturalism" in his first speech as prime minister on radicalisation and the causes of terrorism.

At a security conference in Munich, he argued the UK needed a stronger national identity to prevent people turning to all kinds of extremism.

He also signalled a tougher stance on groups promoting Islamist extremism.

The speech angered some Muslim groups, while others queried its timing amid an English Defence League rally in the UK.
 
#2
Completely ignoring the fact that Britain has always been a multicultural state, since before there was a concept of a united 'Britain' in fact.
 
#3
Completely ignoring the fact that Britain has always been a multicultural state, since before there was a concept of a united 'Britain' in fact.
Smartascarrots,

please, expand your opinion, elaborate it.
 
#4
Completely ignoring the fact that Britain has always been a multicultural state, since before there was a concept of a united 'Britain' in fact.
There was nothing 'multiculural' about Britain historically in the modern sense. You were expected to be 'British' and adopt accepted 'British' norms of behaviour.

'Multiculturalism' is yet another left wing idea who's purpose is to impose a tyranny of the minority on the majority like the failed theory of 'Socialism' before it.
 
#5
There was nothing 'multiculural' about Britain historically in the modern sense. You were expected to be 'British' and adopt accepted 'British' norms of behaviour.
Bollocks.

Britain was historically a place where you could go 10 miles down the road and run into a completely different dialect and way of doing things. Do you seriously want to argue that your culture is the same as Gaelic-speaking Outer Hebrideans, the Welsh or the Cornish? Mine certainly isn't.

We're a mish-mash, a hotch-potch and to me the best thing about our 'native culture' was the cult of minding our own business. Shame we've forgotten that particular facet of 'Britishness' in the rush to impose something wholly artificial and mainly imaginary on anyone who looks a bit funny.
 
#6
Bollocks.

Britain was historically a place where you could go 10 miles down the road and run into a completely different dialect and way of doing things. Do you seriously want to argue that your culture is the same as Gaelic-speaking Outer Hebrideans, the Welsh or the Cornish? Mine certainly isn't.

We're a mish-mash, a hotch-potch and to me the best thing about our 'native culture' was the cult of minding our own business. Shame we've forgotten that particular facet of 'Britishness' in the rush to impose something wholly artificial and mainly imaginary on anyone who looks a bit funny.
Multiculturism is a dismal failure, while most cultures have made themselves open to integration within our society, others avoid it at all costs, and now expect the majority to accept their way of life.
 
#7
Bollocks.

Britain was historically a place where you could go 10 miles down the road and run into a completely different dialect and way of doing things. Do you seriously want to argue that your culture is the same as Gaelic-speaking Outer Hebrideans, the Welsh or the Cornish? Mine certainly isn't.

We're a mish-mash, a hotch-potch and to me the best thing about our 'native culture' was the cult of minding our own business. Shame we've forgotten that particular facet of 'Britishness' in the rush to impose something wholly artificial and mainly imaginary on anyone who looks a bit funny.
Rubbish, you all obeyed the same laws, Christianity was the de facto god bothering and the Queen/King was the head honcho.

Trying to nitpick miniscule REGIONAL rather than racial or religious differences in the population of the UK in the past is not going to fly. And bollox did we 'mind our own business' in the past and let everyone get on with it. If Muhammed Al Jihad and his mates had gone for a quick bit of death to all infidels protesting at troops in Luton in 1880, the results would have been terminally bad for them - if they hadn't been lynched by the locals, the Judge would have given them a very long holiday with hard labour.
 
#8
Rubbish, you all obeyed the same laws, Christianity was the de facto god bothering and the Queen/King was the head honcho.
My bold. Wrong on both counts. Scots Law is distinct and unique to Scotland while HMTQ is a member of the Church of Scotland, not its head. The Church of Ireland is legally distinct from the Church of England and the less said about Wales the better (although that’s a good general rule at any time).

Yet, despite the lack of homogenous law and religion across the nation, we managed to rub along well, multiculturally, for the last few centuries.

Trying to nitpick miniscule REGIONAL rather than racial or religious differences in the population of the UK in the past is not going to fly.
Not regional, cultural. You don’t celebrate Burn’s Night and I don’t go Morris Dancing, because those are not parts of our respective cultures. Since we’re both Brits, that rather means Britain is ****-cultural (complete the blanks or blankety-blanks).

People can have a whole host of identities, often at the same time. They’re not always exclusive and IMO focussing on ‘culture’ at the expense of ‘identity’ is a populist flaw.

And bollox did we 'mind our own business' in the past and let everyone get on with it. If Muhammed Al Jihad and his mates had gone for a quick bit of death to all infidels protesting at troops in Luton in 1880, the results would have been terminally bad for them - if they hadn't been lynched by the locals, the Judge would have given them a very long holiday with hard labour.
They would have been prosecuted under the prevailing law. Nobody would have felt the need to go inventing new laws just to ‘get’ them. If they’d been doing nothing illegal then their private habits would have remained private and not the subject of anyone else’s lawful interest.
 
#9
(Devils Advocate)
Did the Muslim protesters at Luton break the law or even represent a majority of inhabitants ?
I know lots of people from all over the UK who couldnt give a toss about soldiers or Islam or the Gvmt.
 
#10
I think it depends what part of history you're talking about, bearing in mind that we've been invaded by the French, Italians, Germans, Scandinavians and God knows who else over the years.

You also have to be careful to indicate the difference between 'race' and 'culture' with regards to this subject. Trying to determine someone's identity with race is a somewhat superfluous exercise due to the inevitable mixture in breeding. Everyone is related at some point and the only real discrepancies you could make are; caucasian, indian, asian, african or mixed race. You can't really pin someone down as being ethnically Egyptian, Russian or British because these are man made cultural identities. The idea of a modern nation state is also a relatively new concept. England only came into being 1000 years ago and Britain has only been about since 1707, this is really quite an insignificant time period in the greater scheme of things. A few hundred years pass and the next thing you know everyone's sipping tea and talking about the weather when essentially the whole sense of national identity is really just a tribal philosophy.

At the end of the day it is pointless trying to defend a national indentity because it will change. 20,000 years ago the earth was unrecognisable compared to today and 20,000 years in the future countries of today probably won't even exist. In reality we are all part of the human race, a product of energy and the strange fluctuations of atomic matter, living on an insignificant rock in an obscure galaxy in a mysterious universe which as far as we can tell has no particular purpose. Because that's the way it really is.

The problem arises when new cultures enter our sphere and we have to decide which one should adapt to fit the other and whether it's really that important anyway. For me the Western philosophy, the freedom of religion, the rights of man and equality in law and democracy are the important parts. Whether we can protect this in the face of mass immigration and religious differences is less certain.

DC
 
#11
just seen this on the news and the showed clips from the EDL protest in london and somone in the protest was wearing a para reg beret and cap badge , is this a real para ? or just an EDL para walt
 
#12
Completely ignoring the fact that Britain has always been a multicultural state, since before there was a concept of a united 'Britain' in fact.
I'm reminded of one of Bernard Cornwall's books...

"Alfred wanted peace, but the Danes came. And the Norse. And so Alfred had to fight, and peace fled from him.

And when Alfred was dead and England was powerful, still more Danes came, and more Norse. And the Britons marched out of Wales. And the Scots howled down from the North and what can a man do but fight? For his family, his land, himself.

And so I know this: as long as there are people on this wind-swept island, there will be war."
 
#13
I see where you are coming from Carrots, but if you don't mind I will challenge you on the definition of "Multicultural"..

You are quite right in your contention that we have many cultures in these islands, however to suggest that this was never a problem is clearly wrong. From your last post you appear to be a wog of the porridge tribe..? I would therefore ask you to to consider the goings on of 1745 et al!

The solution was the invention of "British" culture, which was basically "We will allow you all to have another culture, however we are all allowed to take the piss, because at the end of the day we are all British". Now I know the Irish did not play this one with a straight bat, however it was a formula that generally worked... But not without a considerable letting of blood over many years..

This is NOT what the New Labour version of "Multicultural Society" was about. This was a reversal of the above in that "You are all British, however nobody seriously believes in this anymore, so you can continue to consider your old culture as the governing one and ignore the fact you are a citizen of another country, including following any laws you do not agree with."

A whole generation of politicians and bureocrats have lived on the back of this principle, giving themselves huge power and influence at the cost of the countries long term stability. What we do not have is integration, "Modern Multiculturalism" is about pandering to pressure groups and handing out political backhanders. Different cultures CAN get along, provided you do not empower groups of "cultural spokesmen" who then emphasise differences rather than common values..

It is stupid, short term political expediency like this that led to the extermination of Jews in Europe, Croats in Bosnia, Ibos in Nigeria and almost every other mixed society punchup you can name.


DON'T get me started on the Scottish Parliament...
 
#14
I see where you are coming from Carrots, but if you don't mind I will challenge you on the definition of "Multicultural"..

You are quite right in your contention that we have many cultures in these islands, however to suggest that this was never a problem is clearly wrong. From your last post you appear to be a wog of the porridge tribe..? I would therefore ask you to to consider the goings on of 1745 et al!
I never suggested that it had never been a problem, just that it wasn't a new problem. Hell, even mass immigration isn't a new problem - not even mass peaceful immigration as aside from on the coat-tails of an invasion. The Jews and Hugenots are just two examples of wholesale immigration that spring to mind.

We've found a solution to these same problems in the past (please, nobody make with the Godwinesque allusions) and it was largely founded on getting on with our own business and letting others do the same. I don't see the sense in pretending we're facing some new and apocalyptic threat from a few nutters who don't even have the support of their own.
 
#15
I never suggested that it had never been a problem, just that it wasn't a new problem. Hell, even mass immigration isn't a new problem - not even mass peaceful immigration as aside from on the coat-tails of an invasion. The Jews and Hugenots are just two examples of wholesale immigration that spring to mind.

We've found a solution to these same problems in the past (please, nobody make with the Godwinesque allusions) and it was largely founded on getting on with our own business and letting others do the same. I don't see the sense in pretending we're facing some new and apocalyptic threat from a few nutters who don't even have the support of their own.
Forgive me for pointing out that in the past we haven't been attacked by suicidal mass murderers while using the public transport system of our capital city, neither did we have someone who would visit a scandinavian country and blow himself up in order to reflect his disattisfaction with how his religion is treated in that country. NB all these people were members of one type of religious community, and were extremists to the certain knowledge of their religioous peers, who singularly failed to identify the extremism in their community to the forces of law and order.
 
#16
I never suggested that it had never been a problem, just that it wasn't a new problem. Hell, even mass immigration isn't a new problem - not even mass peaceful immigration as aside from on the coat-tails of an invasion. The Jews and Hugenots are just two examples of wholesale immigration that spring to mind.

We've found a solution to these same problems in the past (please, nobody make with the Godwinesque allusions) and it was largely founded on getting on with our own business and letting others do the same. I don't see the sense in pretending we're facing some new and apocalyptic threat from a few nutters who don't even have the support of their own.
I don't think we've ever seen mass migration on the scale we've had since 1997
We have litteraly had an influx of millions of people from all four corners of the world (of all creeds and colours) who don't actually wish to integrate.
Cameron is right and action is long overdue.
 
#17
Forgive me for pointing out that in the past we haven't been attacked by suicidal mass murderers while using the public transport system of our capital city, neither did we have someone who would visit a scandinavian country and blow himself up in order to reflect his disattisfaction with how his religion is treated in that country. NB all these people were members of one type of religious community, and were extremists to the certain knowledge of their religioous peers, who singularly failed to identify the extremism in their community to the forces of law and order.
Do you honestly think that suicidal fanatics are a product of the last Labour government, or is that just another convenient stick to beat them with?

Do you think that not dobbing yer mates in to plod is restricted to immigrants, or even immigrants of any one particular affiliation?

Do you think that mass murder is anything new to this island's shores?

My answer to all three questions is 'no' and yet miraculously we've managed to survive.
 
#18
I don't think we've ever seen mass migration on the scale we've had since 1997
We have litteraly had an influx of millions of people from all four corners of the world (of all creeds and colours) who don't actually wish to integrate.
Cameron is right and action is long overdue.
I don't particularly care if they integrate or not. It's none of my business what they get up to. All I care about is that they obey the law. If they don't, they get dealt with as ordinary law-breakers and no need to go making new laws up just for their special case.

Cameron mentioning 'multiulturalism' is dog-whistle politics. He knows damned well that it has no consensus meaning and is read as everything from 'letting them pakis get away with it' to 'oh god, I don't feel that my ilk is in control anymore!' depending on audience.

We ran the world's largest empire (incorporating people from all four corners of the world) on the basis of all its subjects being equal under law regardless of background and one of whose tenets was freedom of movement within the empire. If it was ch a successful model for so long, then multiculturalism cannot by any stretch of the imagination be considered a failure. That's just either ignorant of history or a deliberate untruth.
 
#19
Do you honestly think that suicidal fanatics are a product of the last Labour government, or is that just another convenient stick to beat them with?

Do you think that not dobbing yer mates in to plod is restricted to immigrants, or even immigrants of any one particular affiliation?

Do you think that mass murder is anything new to this island's shores?

My answer to all three questions is 'no' and yet miraculously we've managed to survive.
Where did you get that I placed the blame for the bombers at the door of the Labour Party, true they relaxed the controls on immigration and have probably done lasting damage to this once great nation by doing so, but I did not blame any particular party in my earlier posts, but now that you mention it they do have a lot to answer for with the Multiculturism crap.

On your other points, its not "dobbing in", for if that particular community is going to assimilate they need to be seen to be acting to get these extremists out of their midst, not merely shuffling them around.

Of course mass murder is nothing new in this country, but since we became a "civilised" nation we have left that job to our enemies, and a mad few, and at the end of the day the "mad few" didn't indiscriminately murder and maim over 50 people in one day. No, if multiculturism was a success 7/7 would have been stopped before those murderous 4 got onto the train, and those who tried to follow it up within weeks would have been captured mixing their chemicals, and a certain scandinavian gentleman would be residing somewhere in Broadmoor.
 
#20
Carrots,

What's your opinion on why we never hear of say... Chinese immigrants in the UK feeling disenfranchised and protesting about it? Also, what political pressure / lobby groups / "empowered" community leaders do say Chinese or Sikh or Jew or Albanian or...have in proportion to say another group.

Would you deny that most of the squeaking seems to come from one wheel - and that that wheel invariebly recieves most oil?

I'm firmly of the opinion that this is not about race, or indeed culture. It's all about religion and it's influences on certain cultures and the grey area in between.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top