4 ms·

> I live in one of the more multicultural cities in the Western world. I have seen little evidence to suggest that even second and third generation immigrants a

> I live in one of the more multicultural cities in the Western world. I have seen little evidence to suggest that even second and third generation immigrants assimilate into the host culture more than superficially. I have seen plenty of evidence to the contrary, which I will not list here due to it being tangential and often mistaken for malice. What city do you live in, exactly? I live in Los Angeles - one of several metropolises that I've lived in on several continents - and the vast majority of second and third generation immigrants I've met have had no trouble assimilating into their host culture. As an immigrant, in fact, I have struggled to find any zero or first generation immigrants that do not bemoan that their offspring are completely detached from their culture. They consider themselves lucky if their grandkids still speak their "native" tongue at a primary school level. What I have seen everywhere, however, is a lot of small minded people who are only capable of differentiating each other by superficial ethnic stereotypes, dominated by skin color and religion. They've always got "plenty of evidence" that they "will not list here due to it being tangential and often mistaken for malice." My apologies if I've got the wrong impression, but perhaps your understanding and methods of "assimilation" are fundamentally flawed.

fearingreprisal 6y ago
> What city do you live in, exactly? I don't want to reveal any information about my personal life. However my post does give away some clues about this. I understand that I might not be able to make convincing anecdotal arguments without revealing this fact. Unfortunately however, I predict people are either going to immediately agree with my post, or never believe. I don't think there's any point in this discussion other than the joy of writing. > They consider themselves lucky if their grandkids still speak their "native" tongue at a primary school level Not all populations approach assimilating into the host society in the same manner. For the purposes of my argument I'll limit the scope of the term 'assimilation' to 'Adoption of the host country's core values'. In my city large large immigrant enclaves have developed over the last few decades to the exclusion of even the host country's culture. You could walk through large suburbs in my city and believe you were in a very cosmopolitan area of Bangladesh or Pakistan. Anecdotally, many sources report that the second generation of immigrants from the Middle East have become more conservative than the first. Adopting much a much more conservative form of Islam, which many view as fundamentally incompatible with Western democracy. Analysis of available statistics from a recent survey on support of same-sex marriage revealed that immigrant communities were among the least likely to support gay rights. This is congruent with the commonly held view that women's rights and LGBT rights do not enjoy a similar level of support within the Islamic diaspora to that of wider Western society. I could go on... Multiculturalism is fine at the scale of a football team. The rules of football are so simple they can be communicated non-verbally. However, extrapolate the problem to the scale of organising society and you'll find that people have fundamental disagreements that simply fail to be reconciled. > What I have seen everywhere, however, is a lot of small minded people who are... My apologies if I've got the wrong impression..." To me, this subtle ad-hominem undermines your post. To me this simply reads as "People who disagree with my world view are small minded." I have made no such insult towards you. You haven't done anything to actually challenge my ( omitted ) definition of 'assimilation', save to assert that my disagreeing with your overall views reveals that it must be "flawed" somehow.
- imtringued 6y ago
  From the perspective of someone who is not living in a large city I think you are primarily talking about the properties of large cities, not about assimilation in general. Large cities tend to form an excessive amount of enclaves because they allow hyper specialization. I always hear about people wanting to live in large cities because you can find a large group of people or go to businesses specializing in what you like no matter how niche your interest is. Cultures are not exactly niche. Millions of people can share the same culture. However, what you seem to fail to grasp is that what you are seeing isn't actually the native culture of these people. It's actually an "americanized" (or localized) version of Bangladesh culture. If you forced them to go back to Bangladesh they would be considered too "americanized" and treated almost like outsiders there.
  - fearingreprisal 6y ago
    > From the perspective of someone who is not living in a large city I think you are primarily talking about the properties of large cities, not about assimilation in general... No, I am talking about assimilation. I'm only concerned with the end product of the immigration. I'm not opposed to large-scale urban multiculturalism on some spiritual basis, I'm opposed to it because I don't believe it produces an actual desirable outcome. It sounds like you've just spoken to my point: That in large cities immigrant populations do not assimilate to the host culture because of the availability of said enclaves. If you're the one immigrant in a village of 100, you may need to make a bigger effort to assimilate into the host community. This is true. Your post seems to agree with me on the point that many immigrants favour large cities because there is less obligation to integrate with the host culture. > However, what you seem to fail to grasp is that what you are seeing isn't actually the native culture of these people... I fail to see the significance of this. I have my own doubts as to its accuracy. True or not, I still don't see the relevance. One possible way of interpreting your post would be that this is their attempt at assimilating into the host culture. If immigrant populations in large cities forming racial enclaves and ghettos that exclude the host culture is the best possible outcome, then why are we obliged to believe this multicultural experiment is a good thing? FYI: I am an immigrant myself, having come to this country as a child.

fearingreprisal 6y ago

> What city do you live in, exactly? I don't want to reveal any information about my personal life. However my post does give away some clues about this. I understand that I might not be able to make convincing anecdotal arguments without revealing this fact. Unfortunately however, I predict people are either going to immediately agree with my post, or never believe. I don't think there's any point in this discussion other than the joy of writing. > They consider themselves lucky if their grandkids still speak their "native" tongue at a primary school level Not all populations approach assimilating into the host society in the same manner. For the purposes of my argument I'll limit the scope of the term 'assimilation' to 'Adoption of the host country's core values'. In my city large large immigrant enclaves have developed over the last few decades to the exclusion of even the host country's culture. You could walk through large suburbs in my city and believe you were in a very cosmopolitan area of Bangladesh or Pakistan. Anecdotally, many sources report that the second generation of immigrants from the Middle East have become more conservative than the first. Adopting much a much more conservative form of Islam, which many view as fundamentally incompatible with Western democracy. Analysis of available statistics from a recent survey on support of same-sex marriage revealed that immigrant communities were among the least likely to support gay rights. This is congruent with the commonly held view that women's rights and LGBT rights do not enjoy a similar level of support within the Islamic diaspora to that of wider Western society. I could go on... Multiculturalism is fine at the scale of a football team. The rules of football are so simple they can be communicated non-verbally. However, extrapolate the problem to the scale of organising society and you'll find that people have fundamental disagreements that simply fail to be reconciled. > What I have seen everywhere, however, is a lot of small minded people who are... My apologies if I've got the wrong impression..." To me, this subtle ad-hominem undermines your post. To me this simply reads as "People who disagree with my world view are small minded." I have made no such insult towards you. You haven't done anything to actually challenge my ( omitted ) definition of 'assimilation', save to assert that my disagreeing with your overall views reveals that it must be "flawed" somehow.

imtringued 6y ago
From the perspective of someone who is not living in a large city I think you are primarily talking about the properties of large cities, not about assimilation in general. Large cities tend to form an excessive amount of enclaves because they allow hyper specialization. I always hear about people wanting to live in large cities because you can find a large group of people or go to businesses specializing in what you like no matter how niche your interest is. Cultures are not exactly niche. Millions of people can share the same culture. However, what you seem to fail to grasp is that what you are seeing isn't actually the native culture of these people. It's actually an "americanized" (or localized) version of Bangladesh culture. If you forced them to go back to Bangladesh they would be considered too "americanized" and treated almost like outsiders there.
- fearingreprisal 6y ago
  > From the perspective of someone who is not living in a large city I think you are primarily talking about the properties of large cities, not about assimilation in general... No, I am talking about assimilation. I'm only concerned with the end product of the immigration. I'm not opposed to large-scale urban multiculturalism on some spiritual basis, I'm opposed to it because I don't believe it produces an actual desirable outcome. It sounds like you've just spoken to my point: That in large cities immigrant populations do not assimilate to the host culture because of the availability of said enclaves. If you're the one immigrant in a village of 100, you may need to make a bigger effort to assimilate into the host community. This is true. Your post seems to agree with me on the point that many immigrants favour large cities because there is less obligation to integrate with the host culture. > However, what you seem to fail to grasp is that what you are seeing isn't actually the native culture of these people... I fail to see the significance of this. I have my own doubts as to its accuracy. True or not, I still don't see the relevance. One possible way of interpreting your post would be that this is their attempt at assimilating into the host culture. If immigrant populations in large cities forming racial enclaves and ghettos that exclude the host culture is the best possible outcome, then why are we obliged to believe this multicultural experiment is a good thing? FYI: I am an immigrant myself, having come to this country as a child.