Is multiculturalism bad or good?

>I can't wait
It already is

They like their gibs for now, but they would rather be in charge, which will happen very soon.

multiculturalism is great but why can't we be more like the white, nordic bicycle-riding socialists?

Attached: wipipo.png (709x599, 494K)

Its bad when a certain ppl seem to just fuck things up where ever they go all through out history. Things like honor killings and female circumcision werent even a thing when i was a kid but here in ontario canada these things happen now. Pretty sure its even a crime now to say anything disparaging about islam. Fucking bullshit here man.

You'll know when it's fully tipped, when you have a Mexican governor. Still have that creepy super villain guy right now.

Yup.
And the white people nearly exterminated all the Native Americans.
And now the black people and Arabic people are exterminating all the white people.

America is proof you fool

It's the reason we rule the world

>now the black people and Arabic people are exterminating all the white people.
No.

Germany is extremely multicultural. So is China. Both are doing pretty ok.

no, the reason we were successful was because many skilled immigrants from Ireland, Germany, Italy, etc. cam here and assimilated into the American culture.

Now you have the left saying it is horrible to expect Mexicans and Muslims to assimilate in any way. Not only that, but Mexican culture and Islamic culture is actually SUPERIOR to there evil white American culture.

I'm white. My wife is black. Actually she's an Indian / Paki / African mix. My brother's wife is Asian. Natural multiculturalism works. Forced doesn't.

China is not multicultural at all. Germany is fucking history.

If you have not joined the best Yea Forums discord in the world yet you are gay. You dont wanna be gay do you?

discord.
gg/zGbGvV

91h

Attached: image0.jpg (828x1028, 292K)

Dangerous.

Opposing cultures and traditions inevitably cause friction and violence. Simply due to the nature of man, coexisting isn't a sustainable option.

If all states are ethnically homogeneous. Then inter-tribe friction is generally kept to borders. The inevitable clashes are contained, wars are fought by soldiers, casualties can be better prevented, treaties are signed etc.

But multiculturalism internalises the problems of opposition. The friction and fire isn't on the borders, it's in schools, streets, pubs and cities. And the casualties aren't soldiers, they're women, children and general civilians.

It's easier to secure a single international peace agreement, than a million interpersonal peace agreements. You get me?

Naturally occurring intermixing is harmonious and agreeable. Forced integration can be severely damaging

I don't give my data to kikes.
Also, Anglos don't like Italians.

Multiple cultures is fine, multiple races is a fucking mess. Find me a country, no, a continent where multiple races live harmoniously and compliment one another leading to an improvement of life.
Cute bait

this user borders

Multiculturalism works in some countries and not in others. It depends on a lot of factors including the 'host' culture and the degree that expatriated cultures respect their hosts.

Generally speaking, it seems to work better when immigrant cultures co-exist without trying to impose excessive cultural shifts for the host.

For example, the Chinese communities in Europe/USA generally tend to keep amongst themselves whilst slowly assimilating and influencing compatible parts of western culture.

Going fucking rogue and attempting to impose a clash of cultures on your host like (for example) Sharia law in Europe, will only end in hostility.

> TLDR : depends if the immigrants act like a twat or not

this

>Anglos don't like Italians.
That's not true at all.