nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Higgins sets out his vision of multicultural Ireland

Death and Taxes

Nice to the President taking the lead on this issue.

"President Michael D Higgins has said the Government should, during its EU presidency, encourage “a long overdue understanding” necessary to remove ignorance and misunderstanding that can lead to “incipient forms of racism”.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/1129/1224327258954.html

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Wacker The Attacker

dey tuk ur job.

nice in theory. the practice may indicate otherwise.

This is fine but its should be a two way street. If irish people are to be expected to embrace foreign cultures then the immigrants should be expeced to embrace ours equally

biko

Why does multicultural always mean Islamic? What about the other cultures?

Wacker The Attacker

biko wrote: »

Why does multicultural always mean Islamic? What about the other cultures?

Why do you think?

biko

Why do you yourself think?

El Weirdo

Wacker The Attacker wrote: »

dey tuk ur job.

nice in theory. the practice may indicate otherwise.

This is fine but its should be a two way street. If irish people are to be expected to embrace foreign cultures then the immigrants should be expeced to embrace ours equally

And that's exactly what he said:

He said if we are to “practise equality”, we must understand that “‘belonging’ is not based on imitation or the subservience of one culture to another”.
Diverse cultures should instead “bring about a new sense of human solidarity” and an understanding that “integration is a two-way process”.

biko wrote: »

Why does multicultural always mean Islamic? What about the other cultures?

He was speaking at the Islamic Cultural Centre.

conorhal

WileyCoyote wrote: »

Nice to the President taking the lead on this issue.

"President Michael D Higgins has said the Government should, during its EU presidency, encourage “a long overdue understanding” necessary to remove ignorance and misunderstanding that can lead to “incipient forms of racism”.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/1129/1224327258954.html]

Typically Higgins makes the three classic mistakes that aflict liberal thinking on the matter.

1) "He said there were dangers in “allocating a separate and segregated space to individual cultures” and the “ghettoising of ethnic groups and the erection of cultural barriers, built on fear, prejudice or ignorance”

Here we have the assumption that cultural barriers, built on fear, prejudice or ignorance exist only on one side. It's the general assumption that groups with whom we have very little in common with culturally would integrate 'if only given the chance'.
It doesn't seem to occur to Higgins that actually, they might not want to. It doesn't seem to occur to Higgins that the fear, prejudice and ignorance building cultural barriers might just be a problem for the Muslim community rather then ours (which seems to spend most of it's time bending over backwards to be accomodating).

2) He said if we are to “practise equality”, we must understand that “‘belonging’ is not based on imitation or the subservience of one culture to another”.

Here we have the liberal assumption of moral equivelence as it pertains to cultures. Not all cultures, or cultural practices are diserving of equal treatment, otherwise we'd have no real problem with practices like female circumcision for example.

3) Multiculturalism as expressed by higgins is a failed experiment, it's what creates the ghettoising of ethnic groups and the erection of cultural barriers. It's integration that breaks them down.

[Deleted User]

conorhal wrote: »

female circumcision

The new Godwin.

Shenshen

biko wrote: »

Why does multicultural always mean Islamic? What about the other cultures?

It doesn't... it just seems that that's the culture most anti-multiculturalists seem to have the biggest issues with.
Some understandable, some less so.

I do definitely agree on the "two-way-street" comment he made, forcing people to adapt completely to one ideal lead culture is not fair on the new arrivals to begin with, and not practical for anybody involved, seeing as cultures shift and change constantly to begin with.

Someone who arrived in Ireland 5 years ago, lived in Dublin the whole time, got the accent sorted, and is in all aspects indistinguishable for a born-and-bred Dubliner would still struggle if he had to move to Donegal.
The whole process would have to start from scratch. And that's just geographical differences, there's social differences, age-related differences, etc.

GalwayGuy2

Didn't he call a far-right republican a "typical American wanker?"

Does that not count as bigotry:S

conorhal

Deleted User wrote: »

The new Godwin.

The Nazi's are all (mostly) dead. Over a hundred and fifty girls have been mutilated by female circumcision in Ireland over the last five years. Nobody has ever been prosicuted in this country for a vicious assault on a minor that is happening even today.

Dyr

"human solidarity" and totalitarian structures like Islam are not compatible.

Do not want.

Shenshen

conorhal wrote: »

Typically Higgins makes the three classic mistakes that aflict liberal thinking on the matter.

1) "He said there were dangers in “allocating a separate and segregated space to individual cultures” and the “ghettoising of ethnic groups and the erection of cultural barriers, built on fear, prejudice or ignorance”

Here we have the assumption that cultural barriers, built on fear, prejudice or ignorance exist only on one side. It's the general assumption that groups with whom we have very little in common with culturally would integrate 'if only given the chance'.
It doesn't seem to occur to Higgins that actually, they might not want to. It doesn't seem to occur to Higgins that the fear, prejudice and ignorance building cultural barriers might just be a problem for the Muslim community rather then ours (which seems to spend most of it's time bending over backwards to be accomodating).

Hence the comment about it being a two-way-street. I thought that was fairly obvious, really.

2) He said if we are to “practise equality”, we must understand that “‘belonging’ is not based on imitation or the subservience of one culture to another”.

Here we have the liberal assumption of moral equivelence as it pertains to cultures. Not all cultures, or cultural practices are diserving of equal treatment, otherwise we'd have no real problem with practices like female circumcision for example.

No, of course not. After all, our own culture of subservience to clerical authority has provided the grounds on which decades of institutionalised child abuse could occur, with all of society willfully turning a blind eye.
There certainly are aspects in any culture that need to be addressed and cannot be accepted in a modern world, and I think Irish culture provides a good few examples there.

3) Multiculturalism as expressed by higgins is a failed experiment, it's what creates the ghettoising of ethnic groups and the erection of cultural barriers. It's integration that breaks them down.

I'm not sure you understood what he was talking about there...
How does a two-way integration, a breaking down of prejudices and fears and the recognition of cultural contributions lead to cultural barriers and ghettos?

K-9

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

Didn't he call a far-right republican a "typical American wanker?"

Does that not count as bigotry:S

Don't think that was the exact words, but he lost the head with that American right wing Libertarian type who is on Newstalk, in a University debate. Some found it endearing.

SEPT 23 1989

No problem Michael,open the doors of the Aras and we will turn it into another Mosney:D

Dum_Dum

Don't remember voting for multiculturalism. That elephant in the room seems to have slipped in.

K-9

Dum_Dum wrote: »

Don't remember voting for multiculturalism. That elephant in the room seems to have slipped in.

Did you vote against it?

flutered

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

No problem Michael,open the doors of the Aras and we will turn it into another Mosney:D

it would be a lot cheaper to run as well.

Death and Taxes

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

No problem Michael,open the doors of the Aras and we will turn it into another Mosney:D

I think you will find he was arguing against ghettos like Mosney

Dum_Dum

K-9 wrote: »

Did you vote against it?

Never given the opportunity. Obviously the effects of multiculturalism won't effect me because they would have had a referendum on it if it was that important.

Death and Taxes

Dum_Dum wrote: »

Never given the opportunity. Obviously the effects of multiculturalism won't effect me because they would have had a referendum on it if it was that important.

Dont be so silly!
Did they have a referndum on the Household Tax? eh no and that affects everybody!
Governments are elected to govern, I for one would not want to live under a system of perpetual plebiscites.

conorhal

Shenshen wrote: »

Hence the comment about it being a two-way-street. I thought that was fairly obvious, really.

You would think, but most liberal thought rarely applies to the other side of the equation.

Shenshen wrote: »

No, of course not. After all, our own culture of subservience to clerical authority has provided the grounds on which decades of institutionalised child abuse could occur, with all of society willfully turning a blind eye.
There certainly are aspects in any culture that need to be addressed and cannot be accepted in a modern world, and I think Irish culture provides a good few examples there.

This is the typical whataboutery that permeates liberal thought, combined nicely with the peculiar Irish love of self flagellation (perhaps we inherited this from the church too).
We are currently addressing these cultural shortfalls, that is no excuse not to call out the Islamic community on theirs.
Higgins could for example have suggested that in the spirit of cultural understanding that all women present should shrug off their veils.
Until our expectations of those that wish to live in our socety are outlined in no uncertian terms we will contines to ignore elephants in the room by wallpapering overm them with meaningless platitudes of the likes that Higgins spouts.

Shenshen wrote: »

I'm not sure you understood what he was talking about there...
How does a two-way integration, a breaking down of prejudices and fears and the recognition of cultural contributions lead to cultural barriers and ghettos?

I think you've misunderstood me. Multiculturalism does not imply any integration, it implies the recognition of seperate cultures existing side by side in one society, 'seperate but equal'. That ethos creates ghettos.

BensonSlide

I wish the bould Michael would explain what multiculturalism actually is, and how it would be applied/implemented in an Irish context. It's such a vague and wishy-washy term.

Death and Taxes

conorhal wrote: »

You would think, but most liberal thought rarely applies to the other side of the equation.

This is the typical whataboutery that permeates liberal thought, combined nicely with the peculiar Irish love of self flagellation (perhaps we inherited this from the church too).
We are currently addressing these cultural shortfalls, that is no excuse not to call out the Islamic community on theirs.
Higgins could for example have suggested that in the spirit of cultural understanding that all women present should shrug off their veils.
Until our expectations of those that wish to live in our socety are outlined in no uncertian terms we will contines to ignore elephants in the room by wallpapering overm them with meaningless platitudes of the likes that Higgins spouts.

I think you've misunderstood me. Multiculturalism does not imply any integration, it implies the recognition of seperate cultures existing side by side in one society, 'seperate but equal'. That ethos creates ghettos.

You want Muslim women who chose to wear a Burka to be forced to shake it off! Are you for real? presume that you are aware that most Muslim women actually do choose to wear it!

conorhal

WileyCoyote wrote: »

You want Muslim women who chose to wear a Burka to be forced to shake it off! Are you for real? presume that you are aware that most Muslim women actually do choose to wear it!

After a lifetime of brainwashing.

The Bhurka is offensive and culturally incompatible with our society, which takes a dim view of those that cover their faces.
We believe in open communication, when 90% of communication is conveyed through body language and facial expression the Bhurka removes 90% of a woman’s ability to communicate effectively (when she's allowed to speak of course).
The Quran only mentions that women should dress modestly, it seems a small consideration towards integration on the part of the Islamic community to exclude the veil from the concept of modest dress, as is the case throughout the majority of the Islamic world.

hooradiation

Dum_Dum wrote: »

Never given the opportunity. Obviously the effects of multiculturalism won't effect me because they would have had a referendum on it if it was that important.

You seem to think we live in a direct democracy.
We don't.

Shenshen

conorhal wrote: »

You would think, but most liberal thought rarely applies to the other side of the equation.

This is the typical whataboutery that permeates liberal thought, combined nicely with the peculiar Irish love of self flagellation (perhaps we inherited this from the church too).
We are currently addressing these cultural shortfalls, that is no excuse not to call out the Islamic community on theirs.
Higgins could for example have suggested that in the spirit of cultural understanding that all women present should shrug off their veils.
Until our expectations of those that wish to live in our socety are outlined in no uncertian terms we will contines to ignore elephants in the room by wallpapering overm them with meaningless platitudes of the likes that Higgins spouts.

I think you've misunderstood me. Multiculturalism does not imply any integration, it implies the recognition of seperate cultures existing side by side in one society, 'seperate but equal'. That ethos creates ghettos.

Definition :

adjective

relating to or containing several cultural or ethnic groups within a society

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/multicultural

You might be reading a little too much into the word there.

Of course Higgins could have asked the ladies present to remove their headscarves.
And next time he's talking to a nun, he could do the same.

There is no "whataboutery" about any of this. I pointed out that all cultures have undesireable traits, and to merely point the finger at one is highly disingenuous. They all need improving.
Being polite and recognising that there is no need to demand assimilation of others is a first step.
To demand that others give up everything that's not "native" to Ireland, not because it's hurting anybody, but just because some people aren't comfortable knowing not everyone is the same, is impractical and - frankly - ridiculous.

conorhal

Shenshen wrote: »

Definition :

adjective

relating to or containing several cultural or ethnic groups within a society

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/multicultural

You might be reading a little too much into the word there.

Of course Higgins could have asked the ladies present to remove their headscarves.
And next time he's talking to a nun, he could do the same.

There is no "whataboutery" about any of this. I pointed out that all cultures have undesireable traits, and to merely point the finger at one is highly disingenuous. They all need improving.
Being polite and recognising that there is no need to demand assimilation of others is a first step.
To demand that others give up everything that's not "native" to Ireland, not because it's hurting anybody, but just because some people aren't comfortable knowing not everyone is the same, is impractical and - frankly - ridiculous.

Where did I say headscarves?

It absolutely constitues whataboutery. I didn't suggest for a moment that other cultures don't have undesirable traits, what I said was, multiculturalism has, for too long, been an excuse not to address them in minority comunities.

"...recognising that there is no need to demand assimilation of others is a first step."

You've gone from 'two way street' there to 'no need to integrate' in one short step. I never said they had to give up everything, but I do want the obviously incompatible elements of Islamic culture to clearly addressed.

Chuck Stone

conorhal wrote: »

It doesn't seem to occur to Higgins that actually, they might not want to. It doesn't seem to occur to Higgins that the fear, prejudice and ignorance building cultural barriers might just be a problem for the Muslim community rather then ours

You seem to be focussing on Muslims here. Higgins was talking about Multiculturalism yet you focus on Muslims. Why?

(which seems to spend most of it's time bending over backwards to be accomodating).

Lol.

2) Not all cultures, or cultural practices are diserving of equal treatment, otherwise we'd have no real problem with practices like female circumcision for example.

Who's saying they are? Most people in Ireland are extremely uncomfortable with genital mutilation of both boys and girls.

3) Multiculturalism as expressed by higgins is a failed experiment, it's what creates the ghettoising of ethnic groups and the erection of cultural barriers

Source?

It's integration that breaks them down.

The vast majority of non-typical Irish are integrated.

juan.kerr

that Islam was now “our fastest-growing religion”.

:eek: Lock up your daughters.

At least there will be less traffic on the roads.

juan.kerr

K-9 wrote: »

Did you vote against it?

I don't remember being given the opportunity to vote against it.

Maybe Michael D should push for a referendum before he jumps to conclusions.