---

The only opponent towards multiculturalism is SEPARATISM. Whilst living a multicultural society, one is typically exposed to otherwise alien cultures and forced to adapt.

---

When I argue against multiculturalism, I advocate this very thing.  Different cultures are brought into the mix.  People are exposed to them and learn from them.  This, on the broader collective level, creates a single overall culture of which all participants in creating that culture assume.

Multiculturalism, while it may promote exposure to different cultures, advocates the preservation of these cultures.  In doing so, they advocate that everybody retains their original culture to keep it pure and very little intermixing occurs.  I am staunchly against this mindset.

---

From almost conception, I have been surrounded by cultures that aren't exactly like my own. In that sense, the "foreign" cultures that may exist within your mind don't necessarily phase me. Multiculturalism is the near direct opposite of separatism.

---

Again, how do you preserve a culture and intermix at the same time?  The two are complete opposites as one is promoting separatism to keep a culture "pure" and the other is integration.  Multiculturalists often believe that they should preserve these different cultures, which requires separatism.  You cannot have it both ways.

---

Europeans typically list "perserving culture" as a means to justify xenophobic views on immigration. The only real alternative to cooperative and reasoned habitation between peoples of different cultures is to resort to something more sinister.

---

You're talking deportation?  Anti-immigration laws?  Or even genocide?

I'll admit, preserving one's culture is a pretty closed minded view, and it's this very view I find so many multiculturalists trying to advocate.  I, personally, only oppose immigration when it's illegal, not beneficial to the country economically, or (on a more individual level) when a specific immigrant refuses to do something such as learn the lingua de franca of the country they choose to reside in, thus refusing to interact and integrate with the society.  Otherwise I believe the interaction between different groups of people is a great thing and am all for immigration.

---

I believe that there is no better alternative nor no greater honour than to be part of a multicultural society. In Canada, we are listed as a cultural mosaic. As an immigrant, you are expected to arrive in our country and maintain your cultural values/mannerisms.

---

Of course. That's what being part of a mosaic is all about, right? Identifying yourself with what part of the mosaic you are first, and then identifying yourself with the whole mosaic second. This by its very essence promotes separatism for it encourages people to define themselves as different from everybody else. When you intermix, you're doing the very opposite of what embracing a mosaic suggests.

---

You are piece of our country's mosaic. When we speak away from the mosaic, we see it in its entirety. Our country, our people.

---

Indeed, yet you have blacks defining themselves as black first, American second.  You have Asians identifying themselves as Asian first, American second.  You'll even find many whites identifying themselves as white first, American second.  Different group of people eye each other with suspicion.  They interact, but they don't intermix liek I said.  Gradually, to my relief, this has been improving and more intermixing has been occuring.  They are much better examples of separatism than anything else, and more than anyone else, I find multiculturalists embrace this, all as a means of preserving one's original culture and embracing the part of the mosaic they are.

Post edited at 12:33 am on June 18, 2008 by Bud2400