|
Post by betahat on Mar 24, 2010 17:40:13 GMT -5
One of my professors has an interesting article on this, comparing the border region of Kenya and Tanzania. The socialist Tanzanian government made a concerted effort to build and inculcate a national Tanzanian identity, while the Kenyan government did not - in fact it was often driven by political coalitions based on tribal/ethnic divisions. Interestingly when you compare the border regions, you see that ethnic diversity (in terms of language, tribe, etc.) in Kenya does impeded the production of public goods - things that benefit everyone but that no one individually necessarily wants to pay for - while it did not in Tanzania.
What I took away from that article was that things aren't hopeless - even with great diversity there is the possibility of inculcating national identity/pride and shaping the culture so that the benefits of people feeling included in a broader community, like the ability to provide public goods or private transfers to the less fortunate. And make no mistake, ethnic ghettoization hurts disadvantaged minorities the most because social programs targeting class or economic opportunities lead to resentment by the ethnic minority, the US being a major example with white/black relations.
So things aren't hopeless. On the other hand, Tanzania had the big advantage of a dictatorial/socialist government - those tend to be quite good at dramatic social change, papering over ethnic identities and appealing/coercing people to follow common ideals and unity - and being a new country, without a settled "old" identity. Thus the Kenyan identity - or for that matter, the Singaporean identity - could be built up to be inclusive and multi-ethnic. Europeans and Americans have a harder time with that I think.
In any case, I'd like to hear more about people's thoughts on solutions to the problem of ethnic ghettoization, assuming you agree with the premise that it has some undesirable aspects - let's focus on giving people options rather than enforced assimilation.
|
|
palavore
Full Member
I put my pants on just like the rest of you -- one leg at a time. Except, once my pants are on, I make gold posts.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Posts: 298
|
Post by palavore on Mar 24, 2010 20:15:26 GMT -5
^ Eliminate national borders and you can demonstrate the same effects of national identity. Or if you drew national borders around tribal/ethnic divisions (and quasi-states that exist in some countries) you could say that they function quite efficiently. When people who haven't been working together suddenly have to work together there are going to be impediments--though not so much with cultural identity as it is with time. It seems like language is the place to begin, as it makes the possibility of integration easier. I wonder whether the fear or concern native speakers have for immigrants is really justified though - wouldn't they just learn the language if there was enough of an incentive for them? Why is it so important to us that they speak our language? After all, that's why they made menus with pictures on them. Language follows trade. It made English the modern day lingua franca. If two communities fail to exchange language or culture, economic barriers (high unemployment) might be a factor. You can't blame immigrants for not "integrating" if you won't hire them because of their funny names. Then you feign surprise when they riot because of the adverse economic conditions it creates (looking at you France). And so one wall, a cultural wall, gets built along another wall, the economic one. Anywho, I don't pay attention to the "they won't learn another language" argument. It's baseless. In the U.S., the majority of children of native Spanish speakers forget how to speak Spanish by the 3rd generation. So the complaints aren't really about assimilation or integration never happening. It's a century too early to start complaining. It is happening, just not at the pace the person complaining would like. I wonder, since it has been a while for Jews and Gypsies if they might try Gabare's patience. Jews might be a successful example of unassimilated integration. Gypsies (Roma) might be the more unfortunate example.
|
|
|
Post by Ganbare! on Mar 25, 2010 2:13:59 GMT -5
Your comparison is flawed, minorities in France have lower educational/financial attainment than the local population while it's different in the New World because of selective immigration barriers. Integration is a far more difficult process for a population whose education doesn't go further than high school.
That said, were there no riots in Canada, the US or Australia? Europe does not have the monopoly on integration failures regardless of assimilationist or multicultural models. You are running out of examples to illustrate communitarianism as a superior solution to integration or assimilation not that I'm promoting the latter.
|
|
palavore
Full Member
I put my pants on just like the rest of you -- one leg at a time. Except, once my pants are on, I make gold posts.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
Posts: 298
|
Post by palavore on Mar 25, 2010 7:36:31 GMT -5
You are running out of examples to illustrate communitarianism as a superior solution to integration or assimilation not that I'm promoting the latter. Yah, I think that's how you want to set me up. I've already said enough to the contrary--that because it is matter of choice, there is no "superior solution". Given time, nothing can remain in complete opposition. This is my last attempt at explaining my position. You're a lost cause, Ganbare. Also, you don't take the time to define your terms. The word "integration" can mean different things to me--which I took the time to define. You use it sporadically to be in specific in opposition to "communitarianism" (also means different things) which describes your concept of integration as some set physical spacing between members of the same ethnic group--far less than you are alluding to. Also you make some bizarre statements that don't logically flow from what was previously said or non sequiturs. I did not compare France to any unnamed country. Minorities that have perpetual lower educational and financial attainment is an economic barrier--not a contradiction to what I stated. This isn't different anywhere, be it the "New World", France, or Disneyland. Aye, I don't see anyone who is poor and uneducated as being properly "integrated" within society--no matter their culture or citizenship.
|
|
|
Post by Ganbare! on Apr 16, 2010 13:51:19 GMT -5
Peeking at old Korean friends' Facebook profiles made me shiver: 90% Asian friends with a majority of fellow Koreans, everything written in Hangul, most groups or pages related to their home country, few mentions they live in Canada excepted University or current location even though they were born there.
It's like they mentally live in Korea, it's even worse for other communities like Mexican-Americans. I understand that middle-aged immigrants can show some resistance to integration but born and bred 2nd generation acting the same way indicates there is something wrong with the whole process, a significant part of minorities refuse to integrate and thanks to enclaves it's easy for them to do so.
I'll never understand, I've always managed different cultures, kept my mind open, this is just too much to bear for my poor universalist brain. Do any of you actually interact with that kind of segregated people or do you defend them because it's PC to protect them?
|
|
|
Post by Ganbare! on May 4, 2010 8:40:23 GMT -5
Funny how people avoid replying a simple question. I'm not PC when it comes to politics, truth needs to be told.
Honestly, when I read palavore say second or third generations are necessarily integrated, I can't help but laugh, everyday I see segregated locally-educated 2nd generations, that have jobs, know the local language but simply refuse to integrate. Anyway, good luck to Californians, you guys will realistically need to brush up your Spanish fluency in a near future considering the permanent influx of Latinos.
Belgium is in the process of seperation, remember the independence of Kosovo two years ago? French-Canadians have failed to do so for a few decades but they will probably never achieve it as they are rapidly marginalized demographically by immigrants, subjected to the growing domination of English in the globalisation of economies and even in their own metropolis, sadly it probably explains why racism is so ordinary in Quebec nowadays, they will soon be a relic of the past.
Social conflicts have a religious basis for many European Muslims, the latest case of magnitude are the Muhammad caricatures, an increasing fringe claim their identity is Islam not their host countries'. Most minorities are driven to industrialized nations for financial reasons, by segregating and demanding too many exceptions they put their host countries' culture and unity in danger.
Who here can claim identitarian resurgence is not occuring in the West?
|
|