Go to a family birthday party and everybody has an opinion about immigrants or 2nd and 3rd generation worker immigrants. That same opinion somehow evaporates when it is discussed in most other situations, because we don't feel as secure about the opinions others have about us, our roles are still uncertain and can change.
On SG people are scared because they need something from the people here other than just conversation, so here even less people have an opinion on...anything. :P

It's hilarious I'm getting blacklists from this thread. I honestly don't care XD

Belgium

Commenting, then deleting before I get to read it. C'mon now, be a man.

Sorry, it worked me, maybe it was cached in google or something. Try this link: http://www.business.gov.au/business-topics/employing-people/diversity-in-the-workplace/Pages/default.aspx

The other link was better though

because it's kind of a tabboo, most people won't want to talk about it and the ones who do will do so carefuly

Unlike the guy from the video I know firsthand what is was like living in soviet satellite country. True, these were ending days ('80s)
I'm sure that it existed in Estonia too, albeit to lower extent. Afterall you were part of USSR and ruled by them a lot longer than warsaw pact countries. And one of the priorities of every police state/dictatorship is breaking trust between people, so that opposition groups cannot form.

It's not even about freeloaders, they are in every community/system. More about entitlement mentality. People stop taking responsibility for their surroundings and later for their own life. Every problem is solved by "government/somebody should do something about it" and left at it

+4WL, +1BL so far. But it's not the only thread I've posted in.

How dare are you? Thats not very neutral for a swiss :-)

The vid in your sub topic starts with pictures of a minaret and oriental music, a methapher (rubicon) which is associated with caesars legion walking towards an inevitable fight, and theres not even the name of this "black pigeon". This is far away from good information. That´s propaganda. People like "black pigeon" who share their free opinion are the first who were faced with the wall, maybe he could ask some north korean to swap their locations....I am not a fan of how this is handled,but , I am no nazi nor the holy pope ;-)
My grass is green on both sides of the fence I should be the swiss guy I think :-)

And to be honest I don´t think an international forum where people are gifting games is the best place to discuss a topic which ends in discrimination of other peoples religion, origin, or sth else.

The most important thing I noticed ... Crypt of the NecroDancer is on sale ヽ(ﾟДﾟ)ﾉ

Bump for solved

and so, trying to go back to a more Ethnocentric society is impossible, we should try to shed these evolutionary hindrances, and diversity is one of the ways we can do that.

In the case of american countries, each and every one originated by gaining independence from an european power, that normally is achieved by war.
And after that many countries found themselves with not very cohesive populations, some managed to create a national identity strong enough to keep the state united but others are still strugling to do so. In the case of the US, from an outsiders perspective, they look more like an empire built over sheer miltary stenght than a republic.

TL/DR: The whole immigration thing is extremely complex, there is no comparison to other countries or easy solution to that, because the circumstances in which this mass emigration occurred are unique. On the long part I'll talk about just a little few problems (not taking into account desertification or advanced geopolitics for example).

You can't control current Europe immigration, mostly because there is "no government" (in Syria there's one but it's total war and missiles flying around) on the other side. People just flee their countries, and you can do nothing to stop them. Well, you can shoot them or build a Game-of-Thrones-like huge wall around all Europe (sea included)...
In Canada/Australia/Japan/etc people come from poor countries as well (not "nothing to eat" or "no shelter to call home" countries though) but they have a lot of sea to travel to get there, getting to Lampedusa (IT) from Tunisia instead they just need to use rafts (that usually stop midway and sink).

Are you suggesting to let them die in the sea? If you ever went out on a boat you'll know that dying alone in the sea is one of the worst things you can ever imagine and no sailor will ever leave someone sinking alone out in the sea.
If not, are you suggesting to bring them back to their homes (which they will flee once again as soon as possible)?

The real issue here is that people talks about "Germans", "Europeans", etc, but a Turkish immigrant that was born in Germany, went to school in Germany, works in Germany, etc is actually a German. If Germany (or Europe) will have more Muslims than Christians then be it, there's no difference between Muslims, Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Atheists, etc as people of the same secular country (I hope secular is the right word here, I'm not a native speaker).
Not to mention that the current Germany population is a mixture of Goths, Huns, Celts, Romans, Lombards, etc, lately we just increased the range of the blender.

Of course there are huge problems right now because you can't just inject people month after month and expect to maintain the same welfare, but in EU headquarters they are definitely trying to mediate between the needs of these people and the needs of us, people of the "invaded" countries.

I'm very aware of what's going on in the EU.

The more interesting thing isn't that it's the original immigrants that are intolerant, it's the 3rd and 4th generation children of the immigrants that are problematic. The EU in general made two mistakes:

1) assumed that guest workers were eventually going to leave, so therefore no effort was made to integrate them
2) a live-and-let-live attitude, whereby it seemed wrong to try to force western culture onto the newly arrived immigrants.
Keep in mind that this was all against a backdrop of having just emerged from the second world war (and the first world war before that), which, combined with mass communication and travel, changed the individual identities of each country (and parts of those countries) into a much larger, broader, "european" identity.

This meant that the immigrant population was mostly left to fend for themselves, only integrating to the extent necessary to survive. Their grandchildren, thereafter, were no longer connected to the land of origin, but also not fully part of the homeland. Their children suffered an identity crisis, being neither here nor there, one nor the other. They passed this on to their childen, 3rd and 4th generation, whose identity is one of not belonging.
note that I'm generalizing, and plenty of individuals were able to integrate properly into society, but many were not

The immigrants who, several generations later, were not properly integrated, felt rejected by the adopted country, and therefore look for a way out, a way back to the old country, the old way of life. However, people who are not satisfied with the present, will either dream of an idealized future, or an idealized past.

not a TL/DR: I don't feel like writing more.

What "leftist media"? As far as I'm aware, leftist media (i.e., not mainstream and anticapitalist) don't generally talk about diversity, since it's a largely irrelevant distraction to the more fundamental problems of society. The only media which typically talks about diversity are center-left social fascists social democrats and those to the right of them who like to pay lip service to social liberal identity politics.

You failed to give concrete definitions for those two crucial terms.[1] Unless you object, I'll just assume "diversity" means demographic heterogeneity as defined here; and I'll assume "social cohesion" means group cohesiveness as defined here. Given those definitions, how does demographic heterogeneity ("diversity") destroy or erode group cohesiveness ("social cohesion")? By what intrinsic mechanism does diversity cause the dissolution of social cohesion?

Else its still labeled as that certain country, but with an overwhelmingly different populace and their respective culture/ethics will change the country drastically in the future. > Germany today > Germanistan tomorrow ... to put it very plainly

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here.

If you know better, or have a clear example of one particular country feel free to contribute.

A clear example of what, exactly?

[1] – I may be mistaken, however, in which case please correct me. Perhaps I misunderstood you, and you're defining "diversity" as a population in which <50% are natives to that country ("native" presumably meaning a citizen whose country of origin is their current country). If that is the definition you're proposing, then you seem to be arbitrarily limiting the definition of "diversity", but I don't mind operating under that narrower definition.

if you're talking about Zwarte Piet, it IS racist. Just because it's a centuries old tradition, doesn't mean it isn't wrong

Nope. First the Soviet Uninon, later Turkey dammed the rivers Tigris and Euphrates. Those two rivers have been the reason this region has been civilized for the last 3000 years. Do you think Alexander the Great waged one of the greatest military campaigns in history just to steal goats? Those countries were not rich but they had somewhat of an agriculture in the 1960-1980. Now there are only cold graves and barren lands.
Don't get me wrong, I don't believe in gods (dispite the fact that officialy I should be categorized as christian) but Islam does not mean "undeveloped savages". The Otoman Empire, although sometimes cruel, has an important role in Europe's cultural development.