[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Whilst the Labour party might aspire to be this, in reality the Conservative Party is the successful party of multicultarism and well done to them for achieving that. We have a Prime Minister with East African-born Hindu parents of Indian Punjabi descent. A Home Secretary whose parents come from Mauritius and Kenya. And a Business Secretary who described herself "to all intents and purposes a first-generation immigrant".

<SNIP>

Just addressing your first point, which I find to be rather shallow.

1/
Multiculturalism is insufficiently defined in this forum for having a debate that doesn’t talk at cross-purposes. So I’ll attempt a sort of definition so that we can coalesce and/or debate it coherently.

2/
I’ll start with British culture, which is entwined with social structure. Our social structure has been hundreds of years in the making is well understood by British Judaeo-Christians. Brits do not want to lose this.

3/
Which cultures present in the UK do not disrupt nor threaten British culture? Based on observation, the Chinese/East Asian culture, bears no adverse force on British culture. I’ve also observed integration due to inter-marriage. My recent long visit to Australia bears out my benign sentiment.

Next, the Indian culture: There is more than one culture (as in Sikh, Hindu, Tamil etc). More so than the Chinese, they seem to group themselves into community districts where they build community facilities according to their culture. Interestingly, they seek out the best state secondary schools, move into those areas (as diaspora hence potential for greater integration) and then make sure their children study diligently to pass the selection tests. One such school, Kendrick in Reading, is dominated by Indian girls (according to my observation). I personally think that this leads to inequalities because non-Indians are effectively excluded. So this community, if it grows any larger, does potentially threaten our social structure. See Fiji and Mauritius for models.

Next, there are the knife cultures. I won’t name them because it’ll get the woke lefties going - but reasonable people know who they are. They are dangerous, because they are antithetical to British culture, by definition intolerant, and pretty much dedicated to destroying our social order.

4/
Laid out as above, we can be more specific as to which mix of cultures works and which doesn’t. The blanket use of the term is dangerous and polarising. Naming individuals as Andrew has done, holding them up to be examples of good multiculturalism needs to be qualified by the forced bearing down on us from dangerous cultures.