[QUOTE=cityhog;8756534]How come you don't even know how to quote?

Because it doesn't matter!!!

And how come you don't know better than to say "some colored folks"?

Waiting....................

Well if her post is correct and both of you disagree and or disapprove then I can say that it is a good thing. Multiculturalism is state sponsored social segregation. When you start to wish for people to remain pigeon holed and stereotyped based on ethnicity, appearance or parts of origin, then that represents failure in the highest degree. IMO you both sound racist.

My comment was about the difference between multiculturalism and assimilation. The post I quoted was talking about assimilation pretending to be muliticulturalism - and that the former was considered 'better'. Not sure where the state or segregation came into this? I have no wish at all, merely tolerance. I do however strongly object to being called racist.

It gets thrown around a fair bit. I think assimilation and coming together as one culture is better. The problem I have with multiculturalism is the suggestion of keeping to ones own. It is racism by default.

Absolute crap

Really? Tell me again what you think multiculturalism means then.

Ha ha ha. That sounds like a good Ali G impersonation.

Who should do the assimilating?

And which cultural aspects do you retain? All of them? A selection? Language? Beliefs? Religion? Clothing? Living arrangements?

If culture, for example = the set of shared attitudes, values, goals, and practices that characterizes groups of people, would you happily take on parts of Sharia Law, if you are a Canadian born Christian? If you choose not to, ensuring multi-culture remains, does that make you racist?

I'm comfortable with it as it is so obviously wrong. An effective slur needs to have a hint of truth about it.

To the contrary, it's not a consequence of sponsorship, rather of letting people get on with being who they are and living where they're comfortable. The government doesn't say that people of Greek origin have to live in Greektown but people who speak modern Greek may choose to live there because they like having a bilingual Greek/English day-to-day life. And so one with the other hundred and whatever languages and cultures represented in Toronto.

I don't wish them to but if they so choose, then good luck to them. I chose to live in the Beach in part because it's an Anglo-Irish ghetto, I pigeon holed myself, if others choose to do the same then I see nothing wrong with that. If there's failure to be had I suggest that it's in giving up one's culture in order to assimilate to nothing in particular; aspiring to be a character in magnumpi's resort video.

There's more of it than I thought, I've only tried the section that starts in Grand Valley, that's more motorway than trail.

Again, which city in the UK is your basis for comparison? London is multicultural, Bradford is multicultural, Belfast not so much.

Multiculturalism
I don’t think I actually equated the term 'multiculturalism' with 'integration'. If you re-read my post you will see I made the point that 'integration' was perhaps more important than the term 'multiculturalism' (ie the total number of cultures existing in a society). I stress the term more important and not equal too.

Of course the argument is largely based on semantic mis-interpretation , so just for clarity I must make the point that by claiming that Canada does multiculturalism better- I didn’t mean that Canadian immigrants are better at abandoning all previous social and cultural values. Having for example greek towns or little indias, or even anglo-irish districts is for me one of the great things about ‘Multiculturalism” for me.

I meant that in my opinion Canadian society is a) more multicultural in the true sense of the word-see TLR’s post for statistical evidence, and b) Canadian society and government is generally more accepting and welcoming towards immigrants than in the UK, c) Perhaps as a consequence of (b), Canadian immigrants appear more integrated into society and there appears to be less racial/cultural tension and less segregation. I think I made the point previously about Eastern European workers in the UK- where often highly educated immigrants were doing the poorly paid agricultural jobs that no one else want to do in England. This what I mean by a lack of integration. The Birmingham 2005 Bradford, Oldham, Burnley 2001 race riots also serve as an indication of the northern racial tensions in Britain.

Of course I am not saying that the UK does not do multiculturalism well at all, infact our adoption of curry as national dish is one good example of how the UK does it well. And London is pretty good too. I think maybe the UK’s role in the Iraq war though set us back a bit, and increased racial tension in some Northern towns. Of course the whole flag flying thing in the UK has been done before on expats forums, but to me the fact that if you fly the George cross or Union jack in the UK some people may interpret this as a slightly zenophobic or racist gesture, is an indication of the levels of racial tension back in blighty.

In my opinion it is easier and more common in Canada to find immigrants who manage to both maintain their cultural identity whilst also absorbing Canadian cultural values. I like the term ‘hyphenated’ that dbd33 used, I agree that is the good thing about Canadian multiculturalism. Two sporting examples of this include cars during the world cup displaying both a Canadian and a Spanish flag, and Hockey night in Canada in Pujabi! I don’t think we have as much of this sort of thing in the UK.

Finally, I didn’t interpret either of db33 or Imartin999 arguments racialist in anyway!

Fair enough, I think we generally agree. I specifically agree with this:

"Having for example greek towns or little indias, or even anglo-irish districts is for me one of the great things about ‘Multiculturalism” for me."

Here is Lord Vader trying to be funny (Ali G racialist): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRGC-5LjJ2M