[lit-ideas] Re: Alternate Views of Multiculturalism
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 08:25:13 -0800
I value old cultures. We have some old cultures here in the U.S., Indian
cultures, and anthropologists see them slipping away too quickly; so they
talk to all the old people about their old stories, legends and experiences.
I've read about anthropologists living with pigmy tribes in Africa and
strange tribes in the Amazon rain forest. We do want to learn from these
people before their cultures pass away, as pass away they will unless we
create something like an animal park for them; which doesn't seem desirable.
Here in Southern California we have La Raza. The idea is that Mexicans will
come across the border, legally or illegally until they are in the majority
in Southern California, Arizona, and Texas and then they will vote
themselves independence or if that doesn't work drive the gringo out of
their region so that they are in effect a separate nation. I don't see that
working because all the Mexicans I know seem happy to lean English and
become American. They find our culture more attractive than the one south
of the border. Their loyalty is to America and not to La Raza.
That sort of thing is happening in Europe on a much larger and more
effective scale. Fundamentalist Muslims became citizens of European nations
with no intent of integrating into those nations. It was stupid of those
nations to allow this. You don't allow an enemy into your house. If he
subscribes to a philosophy that says you are an infidel and deserve to be
killed if you don't convert to his point of view then you do not want him to
become a citizen of your nation. The La Raza Mexicans don't go that far.
They just want to drive us gringos out of Southern California, not kill us.
They don't go in for blowing things up, especially not themselves. We are
not making any headlines here, so we can forgive you if you don't know the
plans of La Raza. But what excuse is there for not knowing the plans of the
Islamists?
I suppose one big excuse is that no one studies them. Who has the time?
Who are they? What do they believe? How dangerous are they? David
Selbourne devotes the first chapter of his book, The Losing Battle with
Islam to this issue. These people are not Terrorists, they adhere to a
religious position that is accompanied by a militant political position that
is very aggressive. They don't want to become British. They want the
British to become Muslim. We Christians have contented ourselves with
peaceful evangelism to gain our converts; not the Islamists. If they are
not in power they intimidate and use terror. Once they are in power they
imprison, torture, rape, execute until they get a homogenous society that
subscribes to their ideology.
This is the multiculturalism that I hope has had its day. No European
nation should accept an immigrant who does not wish to become a loyal
citizen. If he is an Islamist, a Fundamentalist Muslim, then you have
enough information to know that his ideology forbids him to become a loyal
citizen of your nation. Don't let him in.
Allowing cultures to exist parallel to yours may be okay in some cases, but
it isn't okay if that culture is Militant Islam. And it wouldn't be okay
with La Raza if La Raza really worked.
Lawrence
_____
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Eternitytime1@xxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 1:22 AM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Alternate Views of Multiculturalism -long as usual
Hi,
[clip]
In a message dated 2/18/2006 5:09:53 P.M. Central Standard Time,
lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
Multiculturalism has had its day and it doesn't work.
Lawrence, I'm not sure that your definition of multiculturalism is the same
as mine (since you place that sentence in the context of the rest of what
you wrote)
Would you mind defining 'multiculturalism' as you see it?
If you look at the definition of multiculturalism the way that *I* see and
understand it, then it has certainly NOT had its say. But, in the small
bits and pieces of where it has been existing, it has had a say and it is
healthy and leads to appreciation of the Other.
When I read the article talking about the percentage of British Muslims
desiring a return to Sharia Law--it made me try to go a bit deeper in to the
question of 'why' which was partially answered by this:
"Overall, the findings depict a Muslim community becoming more radical and
feeling more alienated from mainstream society, even though 91 per cent
still say they feel loyal to Britain."
To me, and Omar will hopefully correct me if I am mistaken, the desire for a
return to Sharia might stem more from a desire for a self-Identity that they
desire to be dramatically identified and different--and 'special' as well as
because of the same type of 'fortress mentality' that LH was talking about
in regards to immigration policies...
It IS easier to maintain one's own identity or culture when one is
completely not connected or even touching another one--especially if one
does not know how to do it in a healthy manner. (I would suggest that the
concept of 'religious freedom' that is, you let me live mine and I let you
live yours' is not the same as 'religious tolerance' [not sure that really
is the term that I mean by what I mean <sigh>]--which would be 'you live
your religious culture and I'll live mine, but let's see what they have in
common...just for kicks and grins and because it is interesting and kind of
fun and also will lead to a higher appreciation so that we can tolerate the
aspects of each other's culture/religion that we don't much understand or
see the value in...)
A bit like Wendell Berry's
"Culture preserves the map and the records of past journeys so that no
generation will permanently destroy the route.
The more local and settled the culture, the better it stays put and the less
the damage. It is the foreigner whose road of excess leads a desert."
SIDENOTE: Might some of this be what has happened within the whole Christian
Community--and why people are voting for things/decisions/people who are
actually creating situations which are counter-productive to their own
health and well-being?
Might this not be the same thing, then, that is happening/could happen in
Britain within the Muslim community?
Question: What are the ages of the majority of the militant Islamic folk?
Are they mostly of Baby Boomer age? Does anyone know? Particularly (since
we were talking about Britain--what is the age of those leaders who are
pushing their hubs of people towards Sharia Law, I wonder?)
HOPE
Now, I grant you--the Emergent Movement within the Jewish world, Christian
world and Muslim world is one (I think) that is primarily made up of those
within GenX. (Gen X is basically what? 1966 or so to 1986 or so...) and
so, as a portion of the population, it is actually pretty small. However,
what most people are not aware, the Baby Boomers are not larger than
GenY--which is entering college or the work force this year or so--and they
are going to be an incredibly strong generation in many respects.
But, again--GenX is not what you hear much about as they have not really
moved too much into positions of power in great numbers (there just are not
that many of them to begin with) and because they also tend to be somewhat
skeptical ... but they have been changing, quietly, ways of thinking about
things of Spirit.
The beginning of this year was one of the first official Emergent meetings
with Christians and Jews. There is, coming up, one which will be of
Christians, Jews and Muslims--in LA.
One piece of information which came out within the discussion between the
Jewish Emergents and Christian Emergents was how Christians in the US
(particularly) tend to identify themselves as such with a particular set of
beliefs. That did not seem to be (necessarily) so with the Jews present. I
wonder if perhaps this is what is happening to the Muslims in Britain (and,
perhaps, elsewhere) If the culture in which we are is such that we are
blending in too much--how do we identify ourselves? Maybe by our beliefs,
then, rather than our culture? Somehow, perhaps because they have had to
travel so much in their history/culture, the Jews have managed to come
through to the other side on the path of the Traveler that Wendell Berry was
talking about--
and so, maybe we (ie Christian, Jew, Humanist [they are part of the Emergent
Movement, too] and others who need/desire Identity--could learn from them on
this matter.
Multiculturalism to me is what is happening here--an awareness that we are
none of us 'finished' yet. Our faith is a process--and knowledge is a
process--and since we cannot and do no live separately--and we would not
want to--we need to focus on what is similar and appreciate those
similarities--and well, this from the summing up of the meeting (there is
lots more on this site: http://synagogue3000.org/synablog/?p=20#respond )
kind of speaks to this thought:
One of the key articles that might be of interest to those curious about the
value of multiculturalism WHEN it is introduced in a healthy context (not
the 'you have yours and I have mine and let's just agree to that' versus an
understanding of the value of shared but also separate cultures and faiths--
(Aristotle is mentioned <g> for those who only want to read philosophy--and
is one of the 'common grounds' mentioned...)
It's on the site of the Islamic Center of Southern California and is written
by Jacob Bender, an American Jew in NYC... He focuses on how Aristotle
influenced Ibn Rushd the Muslim, Rabbi Musa the Jew and Thomas Aquinas the
Christian and talks about by focusing on the common values within each
tradition, each faith--they actually have more in common then those on the
fringes of each faith...
http://www.islamctr.org/article2.asp
Best,
Marlena in Missouri
hoping the conference is in the early in August after the 4th...
Other related posts:
