Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Maybe, but New York City comes across as quite segregated to me.

 Cheesecat wrote:
Maybe, but New York City comes across as quite segregated to me.

As someone who lived in NYC for 20 years, I can assure you that you're wrong.

 cincydooley wrote:
Tell me more!

So you're just giving up on contributing then?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 motyak wrote:
As much as I'd love that to be true, when both major political parties for the most recent election were running primarily on 'keeping the scary boat people out', we can hardly lay claim to that title at the moment. Or in the past with the White Australia Policy. There may have been a brief gap in between the two that we did alright, but we've just started heading straight back down in the past few years, since the 'scary boat people' became such a huge threat.

Yeah, and the scary boat people has been a touching off point for a whole lot of racism. It's pretty typical that complaints about refugee in-take will get caught up with all kinds of other issues like population pressures and ethnic crime that don't have anything to do with the few thousand refugees we take each year.

Australia is a multi-cultural nation but that multi-culturalism isn't because we are a welcoming people. There is a lot of racism in this country, and I'm not surprised when people tell me we're much more racist than Americans.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Cheesecat wrote:
Maybe, but New York City comes across as quite segregated to me.

I've never been able to figure out whether, at any given point in time, we're supposed to be aiming for the melting pot or the patchwork. As soon as the melting pot becomes desired, people call it assimilation and talk about it's so much better to have patchwork. As soon as the patchwork becomes desired, it gets called segregation and people want a melting pot.

 Cheesecat wrote:
Maybe, but New York City comes across as quite segregated to me.

I've never been able to figure out whether, at any given point in time, we're supposed to be aiming for the melting pot or the patchwork. As soon as the melting pot becomes desired, people call it assimilation and talk about it's so much better to have patchwork. As soon as the patchwork becomes desired, it gets called segregation and people want a melting pot.

Bullockist wrote:
As a proud member of the most multicultural nation on earth,

I thought you were Australian.

 Cheesecat wrote:
Well, by segregation I meant the kind where people are separated from each other due to not getting along, not so much the kind where people of a certain ethnicity have decide to create their own little area within the city and are accepted by the rest of the city. Personally I feel that Canada's

"cultural mosaic" analogy is more realistic than the US's "melting pot" as being an American is going to mean something different to each citizen also the "cultural mosaic" doesn't require you to assimilate to the host culture (at least in theory, in practice that may not be totally true) it just let's

you continue whatever cultural practice you feel like (as long as you obey the law).

Yeah, but the issue is that segregated and patchwork/mosaic are really just two sides of the same coin. When ethnic groups form distinct communities, there's going to be friction as well as a unique cultural point - pick out the good bits and call it a mosaic/patchwork, pick out the bad bits and call it segregation. Just like the melting pot and assimilation are two sides of the same coin.

Personally I think the whole thing is kind of a false argument. You don't have to choose between a melting pot and a mosaic, you want both and neither can really function well without elements of the other. If there's no distinct community to relate to, then it will be less like a melting pot and more like assimilation for new migrants. And if there's no blending of cultures then relations between ethnic groups will have friction and feel a lot more like segregation than a mosaic.

Sounds reasonable to me so I'll agree with you on that statement.

 Seaward wrote:

Bullockist wrote:
As a proud member of the most multicultural nation on earth,

I thought you were Australian.

I am there are many ,many different cultures here, i myself am part spanish (or something, naughty great grandmother bangin a sailor ).

I love Sydney, every trip home i see all the different cultures walking round and think "feth, i love this city". I think we were declared the most multicultural nation in the last few weeks by some intergovernmental body, please don't ask for a citation I heard it in passing.

Not all Australians are racist fethwits, just Queensland and south Sydney , and 2ue (radio station)

On a serious note, I dont get all this segregation/assimilation crap , by the 3rd generation most people ( born from migrants) will be pretty much similar in ideals to most others , so in the end who gives a feth. This is not always true, but true for the majority. Migrants enrich your culture, not "ruin" it.

Bullockist wrote:


Not all Australians are racist fethwits, just Queensland

Hey! That's...probably true. My state is a bit of a disappointment.

Bullockist wrote:
and south Sydney

Probably true, but they do have a very multicultural rugby team, including (well, not anymore, but who could pass up 4x the existing offer to play Union in Japan) one of the only Asian players in the NRL that I can think of. So yeah. Multicultural that!

There is also a compromise between the patchwork and the melting point, in which immigrants take on some of the culture of the host nation while preserving important bits of their own traditions.

Leaving aside sociological semantics, isn't this what happensens in a practical sense anyways?

 Cheesecat wrote:
Sounds reasonable to me so I'll agree with you on that statement.

Well that's no fun


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bullockist wrote:
Not all Australians are racist fethwits, just Queensland and south Sydney , and 2ue (radio station)

And most of the northern suburbs of Perth. And the western suburbs too, but in a different way.

After what you and motyak posted I think we can safely say that all australians are racist ...in different ways.
Except of course south sydney due to football, not once but twice.

A few years ago there was an asian sydney fc player ,from the south sydney team,who due to his lazy play style used to recieve encouragement from me in the form of a polite 'move your stumpy asian legs' he didnt seem to listen to my direction, but apparently i'm racist towards members of a team I support.

*shrugs* so yes all australians are racist. Funnily enough once he stopped playing I havent laumched a racial epithet again.

Sebster please explain the racism difference in perth, I am truly intrigued.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 motyak wrote:

Bullockist wrote:


Not all Australians are racist fethwits, just Queensland

Hey! That's...probably true. My state is a bit of a disappointment.

Bullockist wrote:
and south Sydney

Probably true, but they do have a very multicultural rugby team, including (well, not anymore, but who could pass up 4x the existing offer to play Union in Japan) one of the only Asian players in the NRL that I can think of. So yeah. Multicultural that!

I wou'ld have to agree with you on queenslanders motyak when i used to work on the phone collecting funds for charity i was really quite unimpressed with the charitable notions of queenslanders.