The Instigator
sputnick1
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
StalinIncarnate
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Multi-Culturism

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/28/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 697 times Debate No: 72505
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

sputnick1

Con

This debate bears special significance to me as I am Canadian and Canada was founded upon values of Multi-Culturism [mostly just to get Quebec to co-operate.]. I have had a couple small discussions about this with some of my piers but never got to go to in-depth with it as it may insult someone [con of Multi-Culturism #1]. Any way, I am unsure about Multi-Culturism for the most part but have developed some negative views about it. Mostly because of the annoyance of Quebec [aka the Canadian Texas]'s desperate attempts to maintain their culture, which I can sympathize for as I would't want to lose my culture either, but the methods they use to do so, usually involve instating power to Quebec over other provinces or separating from the rest of Canada.

Before I begin my opening argument I will define Multi-Culturism as 2 or more distinct cultures being in close proximity of one another, under the same government or being part of the same nation,country, domain or state etc. examples include above mentioned Canada, USA, the EU and the entire world.

My primary argument entails that Multi-Culturism hinders progress. An example of this includes the constant political stalemate of pre-1867 united province of Canada which encompassed present day Ontario and Quebec.No political decisions could be made in the United Province of Canada because the English Protestants of upper Canada [Ontario] and the Catholic French of lower Canada [Quebec] refused to agree or come to a mutual understanding on virtually every issue. This stigma still exist to day and it is a little known fact that Quebec drivers tend to be more hostile to those with Ontario license plates and vice-versa.
StalinIncarnate

Pro

Hey, hailing from Canada, I think I can see what you mean. But of course, Let me present my case.

CONTENTION 1. Multi-culturism Combats ignorance

Societies with an Increased acceptance of Others individuals are naturally more open, and kind. Take our Home country, Canada for instance. Canada has the Most diverse society for a G8 Country. (G8 consisting of the most advanced, economically leading countries(1)) This diversity has created one of the most peaceful, Stable, and as stated advanced societies in the world, So I find it interesting your against it.

CONTENTION 2. It sustains peace

Accepting and open-minded groups of peoples are naturally more peaceful, kind, and helpful. Ever heard a Bad Canadian Stereotype? I haven't. You know what people say, all Canadians say "eh", Canadians say "sorry" all the time, and for the most part in my home town of New Westminster(By Vancouver), I can say those are quite justified. Canadian History proves the most peaceful.

This list takes many variables into consideration. Levels of Organized conflict, armed service personnel, weapons imports, military expenditure, jailed population, and like 15 more.
Europe Dominates this list, But the Canada comes close. And correlating with ethnic diversity, Canada is at the top.(2)
Interesting how the 3 most peaceful countries outside Europe are Japan, New Zealand, and Canada. (2)

If you need more proof, just ask.

CONTENTION 3. It Creates economic and International Stability

Lets Review the Top 10 most peaceful countries as stated on the list.

1. Iceland
2. New Zealand
3. Japan
4. Denmark
5. Czech Republic
6. Austria
7. Finland
8. Canada
9. Norway
10. Slovenia

Now, each country stated is Financially secure, Not in Debt, and most importantly ethnically Diverse and accepting.

REFUTATIONS

"This debate bears special significance to me as I am Canadian and Canada was founded upon values of Multi-Culturism [mostly just to get Quebec to co-operate.]. "

I can't tell if you're making a joke, or being satirical. That's not true at all.

" Any way, I am unsure about Multi-Culturism for the most part but have developed some negative views about it. Mostly because of the annoyance of Quebec [aka the Canadian Texas]'s desperate attempts to maintain their culture, which I can sympathize for as I would't want to lose my culture either, but the methods they use to do so, usually involve instating power to Quebec over other provinces or separating from the rest of Canada."

That's a Bold statement to say there the Texas of Canada, for whatever reasons you say.
I'm sorry, are you really Canadian? What province where you born and reside?
Anyways, I don't agree with Quebec trying to separate, I makes little sense to me, so we have common Ground.

"Before I begin my opening argument I will define Multi-Culturism as 2 or more distinct cultures being in close proximity of one another, under the same government or being part of the same nation,country, domain or state etc. examples include above mentioned Canada, USA, the EU and the entire world."

Fair Enough.

" My primary argument entails that Multi-Culturism hinders progress. An example of this includes the constant political stalemate of pre-1867 united province of Canada which encompassed present day Ontario and Quebec.No political decisions could be made in the United Province of Canada because the English Protestants of upper Canada [Ontario] and the Catholic French of lower Canada [Quebec] refused to agree or come to a mutual understanding on virtually every issue."

Okay, so you're against Multi-Culturism because of events that Happened Before Canadian Confederation, and Between the Church's? Is that your main argument? No offence, but that's very weak and Irrelevant to todays society.

"This stigma still exist to day and it is a little known fact that Quebec drivers tend to be more hostile to those with Ontario license plates and vice-versa."

That Stigma against different church's doesn't exist. I have yet to here any Modern events that Pit the English Protestants against the Quebecois Catholics.

FINAL STATEMENTS

Con exemplifies a very Narrow and Old fashioned view of Canadian Society, and Justifies him being against Multi-Culturism because of events that Happened before Canadian Confederation (1867), and between the Church's.
I feel I've provided enough evidence to refute his claims.

Back to you, Con!

(1)(http://www.google.ca...)(2)(http://www.google.ca...)
Debate Round No. 1
sputnick1

Con

Unfortunately, your entire argument is a fallacy. Those nations you mentioned, they are not peaceful, open minded and financially stable because they are culturally diverse, they are culturally diverse because they are more peaceful towards other cultures , more open-minded towards other cultures and financially developed enough to allow multi-culturism to thrive. If something is cold and damp, it is not because moss grows on it, moss grows on it because it is cold and damp.

Rebuttals of your rebuttals
1. [Quebec-Texas]-Yes, I was making a joke. It is not that I consider Quebec the Canadian Texas but many people do.
2[pre-confederation] No my entire view-point is not as a result of this one incident, it was just an example of multi-culturism hindering progress
3.[ Protestant vs Catholic] Again this was just an example but there is still tensions between religion to day. Before getting to deep in this religion thing, I would like to state that religion is a part of culture and way of life, therefore by having multiple religions in close proximity, a single state or country, or governed by the same government is multi-culturism. Religious conflicts have plagued us for eternity. The crusades, the Spanish Inquisition and execution of Incas for not converting, Christian persecution of the pagans, Roman persecution of the Christians, 9/11 and ISIL are all examples of bad deeds and conflicts that resulted because of there being multiple religions, and therefore cultures.

Before I let my contender rebuttal my points, I would like to clarify that we are debating whether multi-culturism is beneficial or not towards humanity, not whether a society that forces other cultures to assimilate is better than a society that doesn't. I am not making any accusations , I just thought the argument might spring up and wanted to make it clear that argument is irrelevant.
StalinIncarnate

Pro

"Unfortunately, your entire argument is a fallacy.'

Lol, I feel like Phoenix Wright would Say something like that xD.
Why is my entire Argument a Fallacy, pray tell?

"those nations you mentioned, they are not peaceful, open minded and financially stable because they are culturally diverse, they are culturally diverse because they are more peaceful towards other cultures , more open-minded towards other cultures and financially developed enough to allow multi-culturism to thrive."

Ah, This is where you attempt to misconstrue my arguments. I didn't Say it was because but Rather Coincided. Each Nation Mention had a Stable Economy, Peaceful Government, and Multicultural society. Is that Really Coincidental.

Allow me to bring up Various places in History where Multiculturalism was Restricted and Opposed.

CONTENTION 1. South Africa and the Apartheid Regime

They enforced the Segregation of Whites and Coloured peoples throughout the Nation, in many cruel Ways.
They Had Separate Bathroom Facilities(The ones for Coloured peoples were usually non maintained and dirty), Separate Water Fountains, Coloured peoples had to ride the back of Public Transportations, and they would even divide sports stadiums into areas for Coloured people(1).

Sounds like Jolly Good fun to me.

CONTENTION 2. Nazi Germany

They Enforced the Opposition and Genocide of the Jewish Race, Homosexuals, Gypsies, and Disabled. I don't need to mention the atrocities committed during that time, but I believe 3 words sum up my discontent.

Auschwitz-Birkenau, Dachua, and Treblinka(2)

CONTENTION 3. All Nations against Religions

Most nations at one Point or Another Have outlawed certain religions or practices.

"Before I let my contender rebuttal my points, I would like to clarify that we are debating whether multi-culturism is beneficial or not towards humanity, not whether a society that forces other cultures to assimilate is better than a society that doesn't. I am not making any accusations , I just thought the argument might spring up and wanted to make it clear that argument is irrelevant."

Thanks for Clarification.

Overall My opponent has provided no evidence to any point in History where MultiCulturalism Hindered or damaged anything, anyone, anywhere.

To the Contrary, I've provided overwhelming evidence to why MultiCulturalism is Good, Along with Various societies that Practiced Racial segregation.

Con, you Brushed Off almost everything I said and Provided to you, with little actual refutation. Please provide new and Relevant points to your argument, I shouldn't have to tell you.

(1)(https://www.google.ca...)
(2)(https://www.google.ca...)
Debate Round No. 2
sputnick1

Con

"Ah, This is where you attempt to misconstrue my arguments. I didn't Say it was because but Rather Coincided. Each Nation Mention had a Stable Economy, Peaceful Government, and Multicultural society. Is that Really Coincidental"

Yes, you are right, it isn't not coincidental. If you read my argument, it clearly says that these nations are multi cultural because they are accepting of other cultures, non-hostile to other cultures and have a stable economy as to attract other cultures.

Notice in your list of places where multiculturalism was RESTRICTED and OPPOSED, multiculturism was not ABSENT, only RESTRICTED and OPPOSED. If multi-culturism was not present in these situations there would be no other cultures to RESTRICT and OPPOSES . If there were no Jews in Nazi-Germany then there would be no Jews to exterminate. These situation you have supplied us are just more examples of multi-culturism's destructiveness. I find it funny you mentioned the religion thing because if you read the entirety of my argument, I used the religion example to support my argument.

"To the Contrary, I've provided overwhelming evidence to why MultiCulturalism is Good, Along with Various societies that Practised Racial segregation"

Yes, thank you for providing me with this extra fire-power

.
"Con, you Brushed Off almost everything I said and Provided to you, with little actual refutation. Please provide new and Relevant points to your argument, I shouldn't have to tell you."

Actually if you read my argument I did provide refute your argument, you just " brushed off everything I said."
To the part about me not having enough evidence I say:
1. I did make new points in my second argument. Did you not read the part about religious wars.
Before refuting my argument it would probably help you if you read my arguments.
2. I should't have to make any new points now that you've explained why multi-culturalism is harmful to society for me.

In conclusion, my opponent "brushed" my arguments off then accused me off "brushing his arguments off."
StalinIncarnate

Pro

"Yes, you are right, it isn't not coincidental. If you read my argument, it clearly says that these nations are multi cultural because they are accepting of other cultures, non-hostile to other cultures and have a stable economy as to attract other cultures."

.....Thanks for Agreeing with me? I pointed out how there's a Connection between Multi-Culturalism, Peace, and Economic stability. Alright.

"Notice in your list of places where multiculturalism was RESTRICTED and OPPOSED, multiculturism was not ABSENT, only RESTRICTED and OPPOSED. If multi-culturism was not present in these situations there would be no other cultures to RESTRICT and OPPOSES . If there were no Jews in Nazi-Germany then there would be no Jews to exterminate. These situation you have supplied us are just more examples of multi-culturism's destructiveness. I find it funny you mentioned the religion thing because if you read the entirety of my argument, I used the religion example to support my argument."

This is the Xenophobic thinking that leads to Blind ignorance and Racism. You cannot remove Other Races or Cultures simply to Prevent war and Problems, Removing them would actually cause problems!

"If there were no Jews in Nazi-Germany then there would be no Jews to exterminate"

"You know, you're absolutely right! If there were no Jews, none would've died. But there were unfortunately, and 3 Million were murdered.

"These situation you have supplied us are just more examples of multi-culturism's destructiveness"

That Statement shoots Red Flags through me. No, Multi-Culturism is not the Cause of this insurrection, but the Victim. Evil men and Governments arise, and Attempt to construct a "Utopia" in their own view. This is what you're saying.

The Holocaust wasn't the Nazi's fault, it was the Jews, because if they weren't there they wouldn't have been killed.

The Cambodian Genocide wasn't Pol Pot's fault, it was the Cambodian Population because if they weren't there they wouldn't have been killed.

The Abuse and Oppression imposed on the North Korean people isn't the Government fault, it's the North Korea peoples because if they weren't there, they wouldn't be under those conditions.

Solid Argument, Con.

"I find it funny you mentioned the religion thing because if you read the entirety of my argument, I used the religion example to support my argument."

I also Find it Humourous, Considering that your Only example to why your against Multi-Culturalism.

" Yes, thank you for providing me with this extra fire-power"

Your Welcome, are you Going to Refute them or just act Sarcastic?

" Actually if you read my argument I did provide refute your argument, you just " brushed off everything I said."
To the part about me not having enough evidence I say:
1. I did make new points in my second argument. Did you not read the part about religious wars.
Before refuting my argument it would probably help you if you read my arguments.
2. I should't have to make any new points now that you've explained why multi-culturalism is harmful to society for me."

Religion is a Small part of Culture, and not a reason to Say Multi-culturism is terrible. Even then, I'd argue for the Great things Religion has done, Even through the Evil that has arose from it.

"2. I should't have to make any new points now that you've explained why multi-culturalism is harmful to society for me."

Ok, Thank you for Conceding. You don't have use Ad Hominem and Sarcasm to do so, However.

"In conclusion, my opponent "brushed" my arguments off then accused me off "brushing his arguments off."

Thank you for the Intellectually stimulating and Challenging debate. As of now you've Conceded all My Contentions from the First round, and my examples of how Combatting Multi-culturism has been unsuccessful and a Tragedy. I've Refuted your one Reason to why it's bad, and have been awaiting new arguments from the First round.

New Contentions, Con. Debate is not simply Refutation.
Debate Round No. 3
sputnick1

Con

sputnick1 forfeited this round.
StalinIncarnate

Pro

Interesting Debate, although my opponent offered little to why Multi-Culturism is a Detriment to society. Vote Pro!
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
You're the first Canadian I've seen to be against multi-culturalism...
No votes have been placed for this debate.