Multiculturalism is a sham, says Angela Merkel


#1

The speech that followed, however, may have surprised supporters of her policies: "Multiculturalism leads to parallel societies and therefore remains a ‘life lie,’ ” or a sham, she said, before adding that Germany may be reaching its limits in terms of accepting more refugees. “The challenge is immense,” she said. “We want and we will reduce the number of refugees noticeably.”

Although those remarks may seem uncharacteristic of Merkel, she probably would insist that she was not contradicting herself. In fact, she was only repeating a sentiment she first voiced several years ago when she said multiculturalism in Germany had “utterly failed.”

washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/12/14/angela-merkel-multiculturalism-is-a-sham/

A nation without a national identity is no nation at all.


#2

Spot on but Merkel is a liar


#3

I thought it was *already *stated that she was a politician :confused:

:wink:


#4

Why did she invite all the refugees crossing from Syria to Greece to come to Germany? Her open invitation caused the chaos in all the European countries in between as the refugees took her up on her offer.

Now she is retracting her offer.


#5

“Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you were a member of Congress; but I repeat myself.” - Mark Twain

:wink:


#6

I love Germany…but by that measure I guess the US is a failed experiment in multiculturalism. :confused:


#7

Wrong. The U.S. was successful as long as it professed a national identity, rather than apologizing for it, diluting it, making excuses for it, suppressing it, censoring it, and being embarrassed by it in the name of “diversity.”


#8

I was expecting such a response. In my reading of US history there has always been fear that the new group would not integrate. There were also always people trying to speak up for these new groups. Nothing’s really new here other than maybe we’ve gone from it being politically correct to beat p on the new comers to it not being.

Look, you may not like what change is happening, has,happened, and always will happen in this country; but the fact remains, integrating and learning English will remain the ticket to success here. …and that happens here much better than many other places on earth.


#9

I’ve always thought that American “identity” is more about “constitutional patriotism” rather than “nationalism” (which I don’t like FYI). The Nativists would surely be the U.S. equivalent to European Nationalists?

You call your forebears in the Revolutionary War the “Patriots”, no?

I find it strange that Catholics on this thread are waxing lyrical about “national identity” when it is a secular enlightenment concept that came to the fore with the French Revolution. It’s an explicitly anti-Catholic idea in origin.

Patriotism, by contrast, is as old as the Roman Republican love of “patria”.

Constitutional Patriotism has become prominent in post-war Germany. Nationalism is too loaded a historical term, for obvious reasons, in that country:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_patriotism

The concept of constitutional patriotism originates from Post-World War Two West Germany: “a ‘half-nation’ with a sense of deeply compromised nationality on account of their Nazi past.”[12] In this context, constitutional patriotism was a protective and state-centered means of dealing with the memory of the Holocaust and militancy of the Third Reich…

In the United States of America, constitutional patriotism is primarily based on two documents: The Constitution and The Declaration of Independence. Expectations of political behavior are outlined in the Constitution and the ideals embodied by them both have encouraged civic empowerment.[1] The United States demonstrates the ideas of constitutional patriotism in that Americans find a source of unity in their constitution which is able to supersede other cultural influences, forming a broader American identity.[4] The principles of the Declaration of Independence contribute to the basis of constitutional patriotism in America because, as William Kristol and Robert Kagan say, they are “not merely the choices of a particular culture but are universal, enduring, and self-evident truths.”[36] These documents have both validated government action and citizen response…

Throughout the country’s early history the Constitution was used as the basis for establishing foreign policy and determining the government’s ability to acquire land from other nations. In the country’s inception, government officials broadly interpreted the Constitution in order to establish an archetypical model for foreign policy.[38][39][40][41]

The battles, political and physical, over slavery are also demonstrations of constitutional patriotism in the United States, as they demonstrate the alteration of norms and values.[2] In the mid 1780s. hundreds of thousands of slaves served as the cornerstone of American production.[42] The constitution’s defense of the rights of slave owners created a rift in the values of America:half of the country adhered to the Declaration of Independence’s belief that ‘all men are created equal’ while the other half adhered to the constitution’s ruling which allowed slavery. The rhetoric of many anti-slavery protesters appealed to the Constitution and Declaration of Independence in order to resolve this split in interpretation. Frederick Douglass stated that “the Constitution of the United States, standing alone, and construed only in the light of its letter, without reference to the opinions of the men who framed and adopted it, or to the uniform, universal and undeviating practice of the nation under it, from the time of its adoption until now, is not a pro-slavery instrument.”[43] Similar rhetoric led to the 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution and a universal anti-slavery constitutional patriotic view, changing the norms and values of society, which were then reified in the Constitution.


#10

If I may:

“…We have besides these men—descended by blood from our ancestors—among us perhaps half our people who are not descendants at all of these men, they are men who have come from Europe—German, Irish, French and Scandinavian—men that have come from Europe themselves, or whose ancestors have come hither and settled here, finding themselves our equals in all things. If they look back through this history to trace their connection with those days by blood, they find they have none, they cannot carry themselves back into that glorious epoch and make themselves feel that they are part of us, but when they look through that old Declaration of Independence they find that those old men say that ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,’ and then they feel that that moral sentiment taught in that day evidences their relation to those men, that it is the father of all moral principle in them, and that they have a right to claim it as though they were blood of the blood, and flesh of the flesh of the men who wrote that Declaration, and so they are. That is the electric cord in that Declaration that links the hearts of patriotic and liberty-loving men together, that will link those patriotic hearts as long as the love of freedom exists in the minds of men throughout the world…”

— Abraham Lincoln, address to Chicagoan abolitionists, (July 10, 1858), Chicago, Illinois.


#11

The UN seems to want to turn every nation in the world into a multi cultural Babylon.


#12

The UN is a Commie septic slime bath full of corruption and its bottom feeding offshoots like Amnesty are Marxist cults, again providing their leaders with serious money. All of these organisations are disgusting and their aims are to make their members very rich by exploiting people’s labour, emotions and gullibility


#13

American Identity is about much more than it’s government. It is about self-determination, fierce ruggedness, strong suspicion of authority, etc.

I find it strange that Catholics on this thread are waxing lyrical about “national identity” when it is a secular enlightenment concept that came to the fore with the French Revolution. It’s an explicitly anti-Catholic idea in origin.

No, it’s not. A nation is a group of people with a common descent, history, and culture over a span of land. The Old Testament is full of talk of the nation of Israel, leaders betraying their nation by collaborating with foreigners, and the nation losing it’s identity as a people of God. This way true both when their government was a group of judges, a monarchy, and were conquered by another people. They certainly would not be called multiculturalists. The nation is separate from it’s government.

A nation is not a State, but they can be entwined. For example, Iraq is a State but not a nation. Poland is a nation and a State. States are created from a nation, not the other way around. The French revolution tried to coerce the people from the top down and usurp the common people’s religion, customs, and united history, in essence destroying the nation and the State replacing it with their government. The Communists tried to do the same.


#14

Diversity and Perversity are being forced upon us.


#15

The members of her party have had a serious conversation with her. Her program of bringing in hundreds of thousands of refugees has backfired spectacularly, and support for her and her party has plummeted. She’ll be out of power soon if she doesn’t get it stopped soon.


#16

Read Genesis 11:1-9. Multiple cultures were the result of sinful pride. I am not saying the story was historical fact, but it teaches that the inability to live in peace was only one of the results of sin.


#17

Our parish has been served by priests of many countries, including several from Nigeria. Several years ago, one of the wisest of them told me that Nigeria has around 5,000 native languages and dialects. People from some villages are unable to speak to people in neighboring villages and language is the largest factor in developing a culture. Is it any wonder that Nigeria has so many internal problems?

This year that same priest returned to us for a visit. He is now an auxiliary bishop in Nigeria, which makes him a prime target for Islamic terrorists.

I also have a sister-in-law who is now retired as a teacher in a Chicago suburb. When she began her career she only had to deal with English speaking children. When she retired she had students with 28 different native languages. Test scores are way down and stress levels for teachers are way up.


#18

America was not traditionally described as multicutural, but a melting pot. America was never meant to have a racial national identity, such as the nations of Europe, but an American identity nonetheless. Off the boat one day, and fully accepted as American the next, people from across the globe, ‘your poor, your fired, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free’, were accepted as American immediately, and expected to adopt the existing values of their American community regardless of any previous identity that they had.

Multiculturalism assumes that there is no existing culture and no existing set of values that immigrants are entering into when they enter into a host country. That of course is going to cause resentment on behalf of the people of the host country, who naturally are, and should be proud of their values and their culture, enough to where they might expect people wanting to immigrate into their countries would to want to emulate those values too.
And ironically, or rather tragically, by not stressing the existing culture, but instead stressing that each group keep their own cultures on the basis that all cultures are equal, multculturalism keeps the new comer in the status of permanent outsider, never fully accepted by the larger culture, and always in a position where there will be conflicts between the different sets of people.
Multiculturalism does not lead to diversity. It leads to ghettoes.
The melting pot of a common people with a common language and common values leads to true diversity, where everybody brings their assets to a common table and a common purpose.


#19

were accepted American immediately, and expected to adopt the existing values of their American community regardless of any previous identity that they had.

catholics were not welcome in america until after the 1940s. even kennedy was held with suspicion. i think you are looking at our history through rose colored glasses.

the only thing that is required for immigrants is to respect the culture they’re in and not “melt” into a larger homogenous culture. the big problem for the american catholic church is that it has lost its culture and identity. if anything, we want to make america more culturally catholic.

God loves diversity, not domination and assimilation into the borg.

the problem is that fundamentalist islam doesn’t respect other cultures and attempts to force others to live under sharia law.


#20

You know, the irony in all this complaining about multiculturalism is that people had no issues stomping out the original cultures of this continent.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.