Simple question: what do you think about multiculturalism. The world is a much smaller place now that we have instant communications and relatively fast travel. Meaning if you have the money, you can talk with anyone anywhere, and at the same time, you can relocate to wherever your heart will be content. However, there are darker aspects of this: people smuggling, cramming in families in barely-sea worthy floating boxes that can capsize at any moment, and taking their money for the privilege. Millions of people are displaced due to war, famine and plague. And death too, those horsemen are arseholes.
So what do you think about it? Here are some questions:
Is multiculturalism a good thing or a bad thing, or sometimes both? Is monoculturalism a good or bad thing, or sometimes both?
Do you force people to conform to the new country's culture, or do you amalgamate theirs with yours? Or do you set up ghettos to throw the immigrants in?
What about illegal immigration? This topic has been controversial in my country for the last few years. Some people want the gates open, some people like what we're doing now, some people think we should be doing something more, something less etc. What do you do? Obviously you punish the smugglers if they are in your waters. But say they 'make it!' to your shores, and the people get off: well, what do you do?
What about things like their religion? Do you allow, say, Sharia law to be practiced in Muslim communities? Do you disallow the cooking of dogs and cats even if it's acceptable in certain cultures?
1. Multiculturalism is good, because it allows people to see outside of their own box and view things from others' perspectives. Of course, that is a mere subjective value judgment; it's worth shit in matters of public policy.
2. If you don't want to accomodate their cultures, fine. But it is probably profitable to do so.
3. Punish smugglers, but don't prosecute the immigrants themselves. The reason is, if you recognize them as citizens, you can force people to pay them minimum wage, thereby eliminating an unfair incentive to hire immigrants over natives.
4. You enforce on them the law that they accepted to be under when they entered the country.
The law must be enforced equally on all. That is really the only issue--culture is just a set of ideas and concepts and people should be free to hold them. But just like one can be free to hold the idea that they don't have to pay taxes, yet of course they will still have to, if someone holds the idea that it's OK to mutilate the genitals of their daughters or stone to death an unfaithful wife, that is against the law, and the law should be applied to them just as vigorously as to anyone else.
If it is not, there is no point to the law and rule by violence is the only recourse.
The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. -- Wikipedia's No Original Research policy page.
What about illegal immigration? This topic has been controversial in my country for the last few years. Some people want the gates open, some people like what we're doing now, some people think we should be doing something more, something less etc. What do you do? Obviously you punish the smugglers if they are in your waters. But say they 'make it!' to your shores, and the people get off: well, what do you do?
It's illegal, barring special circumstances they ought to be sent back. I have no problem what so ever with legal immigration. Obviously those that make it ought to be considered on a case by case basis so far as is possible. Genuine political refugees and such should be allowed in, even if they came illegally.
What about things like their religion? Do you allow, say, Sharia law to be practiced in Muslim communities?
I allow them to worship freely in so far as they do not violate human rights nor force and/coerce them against their will into their religion. The second they break the law or use force to maintain that law, then it's stopped.
