is multi-culturalism dead?

[yingers74]

Am not any good at doing links but won't try. Have read a lot of articles including the original (before the bombs) by Trevor Philips(I think, could be wrong) who thought the multi-cultural model had failed. What do people think?

Sorry, it's a bit of a hijack, isn't it? Everyone reallty. Just trying to work out if nuclear fuel is the most sustainable source for the future how can the west deny any country it?

not so sure it is the most sustainable(but possibly the cheapest in monetary terms). I too have trouble with the idea of denying a country the chance to develop something uk etc has.

On another tangent, I personally think that all nuclear power stations should be scrapped and every house, office etc be installed with solar power panels. I did think about installing one myself, but the price ran into four figures.

monkeytrousers - good question !

So Israel develops and according to its whistle-blowers and many sources of intelligence has nuclear warheads.

So Pakistan is the only Muslim country to have secretly developed nuclear warheads.

Both of the above are signatories to the NPT.

So why pick on Iran ? Well, Iran is an "axis of evil" country (although I think Condie Rice has come up with a more "cute" phrase for countries like Iran, Korea, Syria, etc recently ?) and has been the sworn enemy of the USA since 1978.

Pakistan on the other hand has been quite matey with the USA ever since it helped out to get the Commi's and the Taliban out of Afghanistan.

Israel ? Well it is the single largest recipient of US "aid" in the whole world (this is despite the fact that Israeli's unlike Niger's population are not short of food) - and so we can presume got lots of help from the US to develop it's nuclear capability - it is also a signatory of the NPT although it blank refuses to allow the IAEA any where near its facilities.

Israel in fact DENIES having the bomb ! It too is extremly matey with the US because the US of A has a large and well-funded Jewish lobby and many of our Bush-Rice friends the "Neo-Cons" happen to be of the Jewish faith and pro-Israel.

Iran does not have any of the above advantages PLUS it is ruled by bearded Mullah types and therefore has to be forced to give up getting any where near 100 years of developing the bomb ! I have Iranian friends who used to be involved in Iran' military facilities who seem to think that Iran is no where near developing the bomb (certainly the 5 - 10 year estimate of the US is far to optimistic) !!

But then it was George and Tony who told us that Iraq had WMD and more, and it was "15 minutes" away from blowing us all up, right ?? So who can believe anything they have to say on this matter ??

Personally I think Iran has the right to develop nuclear warheads as a defence/foreign policy tool to counterbalance that of the USA and Israel.

If that is the case then surely then a new treaty or vouchsafe should be negotiated to at least try forestall the stockpiling of enriched uranium? Denying developing countries green energy will only escalate global warming past the point of no return..Unless we've gotten there already. Which, if you look at he behaviour of the west, looks like it?s already happened.

Do you think the panic is that the warheads may more easily fall into the hands of extremists in 'unstable' societies? Iran is going through alot of change isn't it, but I'll admit I'm very ignorant on the specifics.

Sorry, I didn't clarify. I think Iran may have the theoretical right to develop warheads, but I don't think that would necessarily be the right thing to do, bearing in mind Israel's itchy trigger finger, which could just pitch us all into annihilation. If they are wise, they wouldn?t provoke Israel.

Israel constantly strikes me as a brutalised child, lost and in search if it's mother. Its pain takes precedence over everyone else?s and it strikes out blindly and indiscriminately. Please don't take this as proof that I have no sympathy for the Palestinian cause. I do.

Sorry for the purple prose, I've has a couple of drinks.

Now, to bed!

Peacedove- You are right about Messrs Blair et al, but please don't think that us Christians necesarily think it is OK to do what he does; it's murder in my book too, any taking of life is, whether by 'war' (unless in genuine defence- war against Hitler was an exception, though not Nagasaki Hirishima), unlawful killing or any form of capital punishment.

MT (sorry for abbreviation !) - I totally agree on the green energy stuff.

I also agree on reviving the NPT or putting into place a new treaty.

Your description of Israel is true to a large extent, unfortuantely as you know its favoured position in the eyes of the USA makes some Muslim counties extremely uncomfortable.

I think that the EU has been doing the right thing "engaging" Iran, rather than constantly threatening it like Mr Bush. The new Iranian President is leading Iran into a more right-wing position again which is a dangeropus situation, I agree.

Like you, I don't particularly want any country to have warheads. But it's very difficult to force countries like Iran to "obey". The way forward I think is offering more "carrots" and fewer "sticks".

Yingers - all the threads on multiculturalism seem to end up discussing Muslim countries !!

What is your view of improving race relations in the UK ?

Who are your multi cultural heros? I am inspired, among others, by the writings of
Ghandi,
Martin Luther King,
George Orwell,
Maya Angelou,
and the current (if that is not offensive) Dalai Llama.
I would like to read more philosophy from the middle east but I don't know where to start.

Just want to post that link again because it is not working I notice

news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20050801/cm_huffpost/004923

From news articles I have read - women have been murdered recently for not wearing the hijab. That is a very ugly side to governing people with rigidity. That is a prime example of a civilisation failing. Civilisations that attempt to dominate on a variety of levels - religious or non-religious but with too much muscle fail or bring alot of unhappiness in the meantime.

I have travelled in several muslim countries and the repression of women is more evident in rural areas than cities. Perhaps they don't all cover their faces, but their absence in the street and the leering attitudes I experienced from the male population was scary and distasteful. I remember in Turkey going for a very short walk down the street and having to return to my room quickly because of the men following me down the street - it was most intimidating and threatening. I was not under dressed except I did not have my head covered - my legs and arms were.

peacedove unlike you I see in Blair every sign of a man who was striving to do what was best. Sadam Hussein was a mass murder. The arab world was only too happy to ignore that in the hope of the West intervening to provide an excuse for any atrocity. Why can't the West yet leave Iran - because muslims are blowing up other muslims. Why don't muslims stop murdering each other, trying to impose their religion by force and see that the world can live in peace? And before you say you aren't doing that - some muslims are and the msulim world does not try to stop them. You condone it and I say again - may God forgive you.

You seem to want to live under sharia law to avoid any testing of your faith - is it so weak? We want to avoid sharia law because you will try to physically force us to give up our beliefs.

Peachskin the god of the old testament was a harsher god than the god of the new testament, I agree. But that is why Christ came, to tell us that God doesn't wish us to live that way.

papillon - I am afraid you are makeing HUGE generalisations again about Muslim countries.

You seem to have had particulary bad experineces travelling in Muslim countries as a woman - but that is not every one's experience. I have had fantastic experiences travelling in the Middle East as a woman.

I also think it is extremely offensive to go to any Muslim country and simply sum it up as "bad" or "good" just because a few men stared at your bum ! If the same thing happend to you in Italy or Greece, would you be as offended ?

I have travelled to Iran a couple of times for long breaks and the impression I have come back with is of a wonderful, generous, kind people who are the most hospital I have ever met. Complete strangers will invite you into their homes. The woman are extremely beautiful (even when covered up), the landscape is stunning, deserts and mountains topped with snow all within a few miles of each other. As for the history and architecture, I have never seen anything like it ! That is my lasting impression of Iran and many other ME countries.

I don't support wearing the "hejab" by force. But if women wish to wear it by choice they ought to be allowed to.

Let me pose the question this way: I live in a part of London that is inhabited by a very large Jewish community. There are many synagogues here. I see Orthodox Jewish women with covered hair (usually a hat or scarf tied towards the back of the head). Does this bother you as much as seeing a Muslim woman who may be covered in a simialr way ?

I simply pose the qusetion beacuse I have heard people say they are "offended" by the way Muslim women dress, without ever making any comments about Orthodox Jewish women or any other relgion where "modesty" in dress is important.

Something suddenly occurred to me when I was reading you post Peachskin. That in a world where very many of us find it difficult to show sympathy or solidarity with moderate Israelis (as the extremists hold court and demand the complete cessation of logical debate), that perhaps the US strategy of patriarchal support is the best one and maybe the only one capable of reining the lunatic fringes in? It has ulterior motives of course. But maybe it's also trying to keep the lid from blowing off too. It's just a thought, and maybe a naive one at that. Politics is an extremely subtle business, which isn't a word you'd apply to Bush, et al normally.

Maybe the hijab comes up for so much debate as the media have very often used it as a lazy symbol of oppression, while creating false dichotomies of 'good' and 'bad' regimes in line with national interests. As a result, it's probably ingrained into the western consciousness as that symbol and lacks any nuance.

MT - an excellent thought as usual!

I don't know what the answer is to the mess in the world (I just like to philosophise, like you !!) but I wish the US could have a more benign influnece over it clients as well as it's enemies.

I do think that with a more intelligent and less obviously racist US administration we could get somewhere (or is that just too naive ?).

If the US is going to be around as the one and only Superpower, I would like to see Presidents who have intelligence, simple common sense and who are more "diplomatic" when it comes to dealing with the ME.

I think I would personally take the US a bit more seriously if the US public could vote in someone other than a former B-Movie Star like Reagan or cowboy oil types like Bush.

I was beginning to take Clinton a bit more seriously until he went and ruined his career by chasing after women half his age

How about hillary for president?

Hymn Of Man, The
by: Kahlil Gibran (1883 - 1931)

I was,
And I am.
So shall I be to the end of time,
For I am without end.
I have cleft the vast spaces of the infinite, and
taken flight in the world of fantasy, and drawn nigh
to the circle of light on high.
Yet behold me a captive of matter.
I have hearkened to the teachings of Confucius,
and listened to the wisdom of Brahma, and sat
beside the Buddha beneath the tree of knowledge.
Behold me now contending with ignorance and
unbelieving.

I was upon Sinai when the Lord showed Himself
to Moses. By the Jordan I beheld the Nazarene's
miracles. In Medina I heard the words of the
Apostle of Arabia.

Behold me now a prisoner of doubt.
I have seen Babylon's strength and Egypt's glory
and the greatness of Greece. My eyes cease not
upon the smallness and poverty of their works.
I have sat with the witch of Endor and the priests
of Assyria and the prophets of Palestine, and I cease
not to chant the truth.

I have learned the wisdom that descended on
India, and gained mastery over poetry that welled
from the Arabian's heart, and hearkened to the
music of people from the West.
Yet am I blind and see not; my ears are stopped
and I do not hear.

I have borne the harshness of unsatiable
conquerors, and felt the oppression of tyrants and the
bondage of the powerful.
Yet am I strong to do battle with the days.
All this have I heard and seen, and I am yet a
child. In truth shall I hear and see the deeds of
youth, and grow old and attain perfection and
return to God.

I was,
And I am.
So shall I be to the end of time,
For I am without end.

That's it I am afraid, I can only see any start to solving any race relation issues when we all learn to look upon our shared culture as more important than our differences. That in itself involves a massive shift in education and media policy.

Whoever it is, I think anyone who takes the job has to be prepared to make a moral compromise. My DP posed and excellent question about this when we went to see Alistair Campbell in his talking tour after resigning. He didn't bother asking him, as he knew it was unanswerable by someone still so close to the government. But he would've liked to ask "Where does real politik end and culpability begin?".

The nuclear issue is a tinderbox. If extremists ever did get their hands on a warhead there?s no doubt in my mind they would detonate it.

MT I agree about the warhead thing, the moral code of extremists would be that it was wrong NOT to detonate it in an 'infidel' area, so we cannot apply our own codes to the issue.

(Have highlighted extremists, as wanted to show I used that word and NOT Muslim!)

The whole world is an infidel area PC, everywhere a legitimate target.

Was more than just looking at someones backside behaviour Peachskin - generalisation is a matter in opinion and I think you exaggerate my viewpoints. I was 'lucky' I suppose when in Egypt that I was not as volumptious as my girlfriend because she was touched on the breast and backside frequently because she was a fuller breasted bigger women.

Of course I meet many polite and beautiful people like in all countries it takes all sorts. And when a culture has a more strict clothing criteria then I know to expect staring and wear alot more clothing coverage, but touching and threatening group behaviour is crossing the line for me.

My point regarding the Hijab has been that yes many females might be happy wearing it, but some don't wish to and have been attacked or worse murdered. That is terrible.

I like Kahlil Gibran and have often quoted him on MN.

Peacedove asked earlier why civilisations fail? I think domination / overcontrol brings alot of distension in the ranks of people of any country. The US imo lacks diversity in its political system - basically two parties to vote for and alot of political dishonesty.

It happens in mediterrean countries also that men like to touch a women they don't know. I find it very disrespectful.

That is my feelings I am not an object for groping.

Re: Nuclear weapons - considering that humanity is become more advanced and knowledgeable about weaponary I wonder if it is it just nuclear that we will have to worry about. Nicola Tesla said this a long time ago

We are confronted with portentous problems which can not be solved just by providing for our material existence, however abundantly. On the contrary, progress in this direction is fraught with hazards and perils not less menacing than those born from want and suffering. If we were to release the energy of the atoms or discover some other way of developing cheap and unlimited power at any point of the globe this accomplishment, instead of being a blessing, might bring disaster to mankind... The greatest good will come from the technical improvements tending to unification and harmony, and my wireless transmitter is preeminently such. By its means the human voice and likeness will be reproduced everywhere and factories driven thousands of miles from waterfalls furnishing the power; aerial machines will be propelled around the earth without a stop and the sun's energy controlled to create lakes and rivers for motive purposes and transformation of arid deserts into fertile land...''

PS - yes it does seem to be the case but I guess it is the topic of the moment and the focus of much reporting being about young disaffected muslim men in Britain.

I read an article some time ago which argued that disillushionment and isolation was largely a male problem in regards to the muslim community. Would be interested to know whether muslim mnetters agreed or not.

papillon - I totally agree that aggressive male behaviour towards a woman is totally unacceptable.

What I object to is the demonisation of Muslim men and Muslim countries in particular.

I have heard and read the kind of experience you have had in Muslim countries from other women. However, I think that such behaviour needs to be put into context.

As British people I don't think we would be very happy if a tourist came to our country, went to a local pub, was groped by a drunken slob wearing a Union Jack t-shirt, and then went back to her own country and said "I hated Britain, it was full of disgusting men" and then said absolutely nothing good about Britain at all ??

I have known Brits to be absolutely horrified and offended when foreigners tell them they have shit food, shit weather and that the British are cold and unfriendly. There may be an element of truth in this particular description of Britain, however, we find it offensive any way, right ?

I think someone from the ME reading your description of your travels in that region would have been equally offended.

Sorry, this thread is about "multi-culturalism" so I am just trying to promote the topic as much as possible !!

Pakistan, India and Israel are not signatories to the NPT, hence they have got away with development of the bomb.

It hasn't helped with the US and UK developing newer versions.

Nuclear energy is extremely unsafe, because of the long life and volume of the waste.

Solar panels are the answer, as is Hydrogen fuel, but there are vested interests involved.

Papillon, I agree with you that there are other dangers, too.

Try to look at it this way: Humans have a tendency to go to the extreme. Hence I am very wary of laws and inventions. I think not enough thought or time is given before implementing a technological advance.

Were we to follow what God has told us, humanity would have a better chance to propser and to avoid disasters. But then again, we are to be tested, and this why apparently religious people have turned extremists as well.

The US won't be around as the only Superpower. Its economic base is eroding.

MT, it is wrong to think that the US support of Israel is to hold back the extremists.

tatt, you are entitled to think of Mr Blair as Saint Blair. Good luck with your rose-tinted glasses. I agrre with Galloway that the man is an actor and a fraud.

As for Saddam, he was a creation of the CIA, like many others. The modern marketing strategy is to have built-in redundancy, just like your TV or mobile or personal computer. Many tyrants are created, when they overstep the prescribed line, or condititons demand a new face, suddenly they become unacceptible, and all their misdeeds are highlighted. Why? Because of the built-in redundancy factor. A new model of tyrants is required.