Post: #51

The Guardian is a bad source. In the story of Mohammed consummating with Aisha, she is still playing with dolls.

As people know, Islam forbids depictions of human likeness but they make an exception for dolls for a prepubescent girl. So she was a child.

Post: #52

^ Yeah muslim apologists like MTLer only attempt to fabricate doubt about those things when it fulfills their agenda. The rest of the time people just accept the fact she was a child, that child marriage has been culturally normal with Bedouin tribes, and that 2+2=4.

To people like MTLer, facts are not objective. Facts and reason are merely tools, to be modified and discarded at will to satisfy his pre-decided conclusion. Reality to people like him, is produced by words, not the other way around.

The painting of Islam as a victim is the most truly hilarious bullshit they produce, given Islam's global expansion and successful conquests. No doubt too that the Koran is "a book of peace", and that Islam was always spread "voluntarily". Unless MTLer is a true believer, either leftist or muslim, he has no good reason to believe this fantasy.

Post: #53

I know what you mean. Currently arguing with a Colombian apologizing for Islam too. He even denies that the Spanish reconquista was justified, and is a "proud Colombian".

The contradiction is staggering.

Post: #54

Not to mention that the Guardian's target audience is basically the same as the Huffington Post, generally left-leaning, pro-diversity, "tolerant", SJW type people. They flatter themselves into believing they're being objective about things.

Saying that "it's impossible to know for sure" how old Muhammad's bride was is kind of like idiots claiming that the historicity of Jesus is in doubt. As far as ancient accounts go, there's as much evidence of Jesus existing as pretty much any famous figure from the ancient world, and according to everybody whose opinion matters, the Christ-myth advocates are pretty much full of shit.

Post: #55

(10-16-2015 08:16 PM)MTLer Wrote:  

(10-16-2015 02:40 PM)greekgod Wrote:  Was actually just thinking about this last night. Black people DNGAF about being PC. If Muslims try to create Sharia zones in the US the blacks will fuck them up so quickly. Also, imagine a muslim man attempting to correct a black women on behavior; record high PPV ratings.

Muslims are respected in the US black community, which has a sizable domestic muslim population. Ever heard of Malcolm X? Ali? Kareem?

Also, the thought of "Sharia zones" in the US or in Europe is kind of ridiculous. Most muslims in America don't want it. You'd have to be totally retarded to think that those who would want it, which are a very small proportion of that community, which is itself 1-2% of the population, could ever impose that. It's a kind of irrational phobia that's carefully crafted by the media and designed to focus the attention of gullible people away from the main problems in their society.

The portion of the black community which respects Islam is so small it is inconsequential. Apparently you've never seen a 250 LB welfare queen spout off on the street about her baby daddy not paying her comcast bill on time. These queens effectively destroyed the nuclear black family. They do not yield, they do not falter, and they do not take shit from anyone. The black ghetto is so raw and primal that it fucks up anything it touches. They look for reasons to fight. Something so anti western would never stand a chance in their vicinity.

But please, kind sir, tell me more about my country and educate me more on the demographics of the US.

Post: #56

(10-16-2015 02:00 PM)Veloce Wrote:  she's got more balls than the men who are too afraid to speak out against the migrant invasion.

I agree!

Good call!

Too many men are "keyboard jockeys" and "online warriors", not enough men have the balls the stand up and speak out IN REAL LIFE!

#defendourculture #protectthewest

(10-16-2015 02:00 PM)Veloce Wrote:  Hooray for multiculturalism!

Multiculturalism is red pill.

Think about it...

The natural world is extremely diverse. The wide variety of inter-species diversity is the result of evolution.

"Multi-culturalism" was not created by liberals and leftists. Multi-culturalism is the result of nature, it occurs organically without any interference from man, thus it is a natural truth. It is red pill.

Nature is violent and uncompromising, so, yes, there are some negative and deadly consequences -- But, none the less, variety and diversity within human culture is a result of evolution.

Don't allow liberals to politicize nature. They didn't invent multi-culturism. The universe did!

--

Veloce,

You travel to other countries/cultures. You said were considering moving to Asia.

You enjoy food from various cultures around the world.

You choose to live in a cities that are populated by a wide range of ethnicities.

You bang Asian girls.

Do you really want a world that is only one culture? And, if so, which culture would you choose?

Serious questions.. Thanks

Post: #57

(10-18-2015 12:38 AM)greekgod Wrote:  

(10-16-2015 08:16 PM)MTLer Wrote:  

(10-16-2015 02:40 PM)greekgod Wrote:  Was actually just thinking about this last night. Black people DNGAF about being PC. If Muslims try to create Sharia zones in the US the blacks will fuck them up so quickly. Also, imagine a muslim man attempting to correct a black women on behavior; record high PPV ratings.

Muslims are respected in the US black community, which has a sizable domestic muslim population. Ever heard of Malcolm X? Ali? Kareem?

Also, the thought of "Sharia zones" in the US or in Europe is kind of ridiculous. Most muslims in America don't want it. You'd have to be totally retarded to think that those who would want it, which are a very small proportion of that community, which is itself 1-2% of the population, could ever impose that. It's a kind of irrational phobia that's carefully crafted by the media and designed to focus the attention of gullible people away from the main problems in their society.

The portion of the black community which respects Islam is so small it is inconsequential. Apparently you've never seen a 250 LB welfare queen spout off on the street about her baby daddy not paying her comcast bill on time. These queens effectively destroyed the nuclear black family. They do not yield, they do not falter, and they do not take shit from anyone. The black ghetto is so raw and primal that it fucks up anything it touches. They look for reasons to fight. Something so anti western would never stand a chance in their vicinity.

But please, kind sir, tell me more about my country and educate me more on the demographics of the US.

Ripped apart.

Post: #58

(10-18-2015 01:36 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  Multiculturalism is red pill.

Think about it...

The natural world is extremely diverse. The wide variety of inter-species diversity is the result of evolution.

"Multi-culturalism" was not created by liberals and leftists. Multi-culturalism is the result of nature, it occurs organically without any interference from man, thus it is a natural truth. It is red pill.

Nature is violent and uncompromising, so, yes, there are some negative and deadly consequences -- But, none the less, variety and diversity within human culture is a result of evolution.

Don't allow liberals to politicize nature. They didn't invent multi-culturism. The universe did!

Well that's an argument straight out of Stormfront. You're basically talking about Darwinism here and if you want to go there ok...

The general consensus on evolution isn't that species interbreed. You don't see Tigers fucking bobcats out in the wild. Evolution occurs through very gradual adaptations and mutations.

Species inbreed, and may the strongest candidate win. This is where we get into Stormfront territory; are you going to promote multiculturalism when there are certain races, groups, ethnicities, religions, that are demonstrably lower in IQ and/or more prone to violence?

Me personally, I don't really give a shit at this point. My comment, "Hooray for multiculturalism!" is simply pointing out the irony. Liberals may not have invented liberalism, but they sure like going around saying how black people can't be racist, and that only white people can.

If I really got into my own personal preferences, then immigration and multiculturalism should be controlled, just like it was in the past. When the U.S. opened its borders in the past, it only let in certain people. Let's bring in Europeans, East Asians, and Colombian women. Fuck the rest. Let's allow people in this country that have a solid work ethic, that keep their front yard clean, that don't have a predisposition to religious zealotry, or that have great asses. To me it just seems like common sense but I guess what I just wrote is racist by mainstream standards.

Quote:Veloce,

You travel to other countries/cultures. You said were considering moving to Asia.

You enjoy food from various cultures around the world.

You choose to live in a cities that are populated by a wide range of ethnicities.

You bang Asian girls.

Do you really want a world that is only one culture? And, if so, which culture would you choose?

Serious questions.. Thanks

My post above answers this pretty well.

Basically this isn't a black or white issue (Ha ha)

It's not either we all inbreed, or we let in every immigrant on Earth. There's an in-between here. Let's have a selective immigration policy. We've done it before and the immigrants assimilated within a generation.

Mixed race couples often produce smarter, better-looking offspring. Diversity can be a very good thing. But there are restrictions and rules to follow. You can't just have this idiotic leftist notion that the world is this bright and shiny happy place where everyone gets along with each other and everyone else is "just like you and me."

Post: #59

^Tigers do not fuck Bobcats, thank god I am not a tiger. I can fuck any girl I want too, but I guess I should only fuck black girls according to you.

Just a question, I am not attacking you.

Post: #60

(10-18-2015 01:36 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  Do you really want a world that is only one culture? And, if so, which culture would you choose?

Serious questions.. Thanks

Quite the opposite - it's by dissolving all the things that separate cultures that you, by degrees, make them indistinguishable from each other. It's precisely because I love other cultures that I would see them preserved. It would be a sad day if Japan decided to let in 30 million Western Europeans.

That's not to say that tourism, controlled immigration and even a few "melting-pot" cities can't be good things, but the primary purpose when evaluating them should be the benefit of the natural and naturalised citizens. A nations obligation to people outside this group should be as far removed as a parents obligation is to random children on the street compared with their own children.

The real reason this is so important goes far beyond preserving the "vibrance" of different cultures: multiculturalism, like the destruction of the family unit, is by its very nature part of a sinister trend since the start of the industrial revolution to destroy every institution that exists between the individual and the state. That's why it has a tendency to divide people so precisely along left-right lines in politics.

Post: #61

(10-18-2015 05:15 PM)Veloce Wrote:  Me personally, I don't really give a shit at this point. My comment, "Hooray for multiculturalism!" is simply pointing out the irony. Liberals may not have invented liberalism, but they sure like going around saying how black people can't be racist, and that only white people can.

I meant to say "liberals may not have invented multiculturalism". Brain fart

Post: #62

(10-18-2015 05:49 PM)rudebwoy Wrote:  ^Tigers do not fuck Bobcats, thank god I am not a tiger. I can fuck any girl I want too, but I guess I should only fuck black girls according to you.

Just a question, I am not attacking you.

No, as I said in my post genetic diversity has been shown to be beneficial.

My point was more about cultural backgrounds, hence the post about multiculturalism.

This isn't about skin color, it's about what people consider right/wrong

Post: #63

(10-18-2015 06:35 PM)Ocelot Wrote:  

(10-18-2015 01:36 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  Do you really want a world that is only one culture? And, if so, which culture would you choose?

Serious questions.. Thanks

Quite the opposite - it's by dissolving all the things that separate cultures that you, by degrees, make them indistinguishable from each other. It's precisely because I love other cultures that I would see them preserved. It would be a sad day if Japan decided to let in 30 million Western Europeans.

That's not to say that tourism, controlled immigration and even a few "melting-pot" cities can't be good things, but the primary purpose when evaluating them should be the benefit of the natural and naturalised citizens. A nations obligation to people outside this group should be as far removed as a parents obligation is to random children on the street compared with their own children.

The real reason this is so important goes far beyond preserving the "vibrance" of different cultures: multiculturalism, like the destruction of the family unit, is by its very nature part of a sinister trend since the start of the industrial revolution to destroy every institution that exists between the individual and the state. That's why it has a tendency to divide people so precisely along left-right lines in politics.

This is spot on.

Lets take it a step further and imagine the world as a food court(simplistic, I know, but bare with me). Fifty years ago you could go to the food court and have 150+ options of diverse, rich, and unique options that all stemmed from origins with deep roots. There was so many options and they were so different from one another. It made the world beautiful for the open minded person. You could experience so much as along as you were willing to be tolerant and EMBRACE ANOTHER CULTURE on THEIR TERMS. They defined what made "them" them. Two "restaurants" right next to each other could be so vastly different yet so simultaneously enriching to anyone that cared to put the effort in. Germany and France signify this. What amazing cultures and people yet so vastly different.

Now, we have a movement that wants to get rid of these 150+ options and condense them into one. If successful, we are left 150 store front but at best one or two menu's. What a lifeless, tasteless, and unremarkable food court we are left with.

And why do the owners of the food court want this? To cull options, making everything the same and ensuring that patrons become so used to a limited menu that they never ask for more. They can save on costs by enhancing economies of scale and have more "power". All that has to be sacrificed is everything that made the food court special to begin with.

For my soccer fans here, its analogous to the showing up at the world cup and having every player, style of play, team sing along, and celebration be the same. "Oh you sang the same song as me, mate" "Yeah but I support Team 3 from Unit 4" "Oh, I heard Unit 4 is a great place to visit" Yeah, its great, very similar to unit 1,2,3,5,6, &7" That sucks, there is no compelling reason to be interested.

I don't believe anyone in their right mind is an advocate for completely ethnic homogeneous populations. Hell, my best friends dad who grew up in Iran, was a very influential figure in my life and I am glad that I got to have such a strong, demanding person in my life. However, the reason he was let into this country is because he is intelligent, adds value, and shared american values/ideals. He owns a multi million dollar business and is a true american success story. We want more of this and to work, it must be on a limited scale.

Just like pussy, that which is gained for free isn't valued. The migrants don't value the opportunity they are afforded, they just value the free western altruism and welfare while demanding their culture is respected above all else.

What we don't want is to sacrifice culture solely to be tolerant and accepting while allowing others to export their shit and dull life for everyone. We want 150+ unique store fronts not 150 store fronts selling the same malaise.

Post: #64

(10-18-2015 01:36 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

(10-16-2015 02:00 PM)Veloce Wrote:  she's got more balls than the men who are too afraid to speak out against the migrant invasion.

I agree!

Good call!

Too many men are "keyboard jockeys" and "online warriors", not enough men have the balls the stand up and speak out IN REAL LIFE!

#defendourculture #protectthewest

(10-16-2015 02:00 PM)Veloce Wrote:  Hooray for multiculturalism!

Multiculturalism is red pill.

Think about it...

The natural world is extremely diverse. The wide variety of inter-species diversity is the result of evolution.

"Multi-culturalism" was not created by liberals and leftists. Multi-culturalism is the result of nature, it occurs organically without any interference from man, thus it is a natural truth. It is red pill.

Nature is violent and uncompromising, so, yes, there are some negative and deadly consequences -- But, none the less, variety and diversity within human culture is a result of evolution.

Don't allow liberals to politicize nature. They didn't invent multi-culturism. The universe did!

--

Veloce,

You travel to other countries/cultures. You said were considering moving to Asia.

You enjoy food from various cultures around the world.

You choose to live in a cities that are populated by a wide range of ethnicities.

You bang Asian girls.

Do you really want a world that is only one culture? And, if so, which culture would you choose?

Serious questions.. Thanks

One of the problems with multiculturalism is that it doesn't increase diversity- it drastically reduces it. Multiculturalism and globalism (which leads to a global mono culture) are two sides of the same coin.

Distinctive cultures and ways of life are basically being assimilated into anglo culture.

Post: #65

(10-17-2015 06:59 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  

(10-17-2015 09:23 AM)H1N1 Wrote:  The woman in question has now been arrested for a 'racially aggravated public order offense'. The whole concept of an offense being more serious because feelings were extra hurt as a result of it, or that a crime is somehow worse because of the motivation behind it, should offend the good sense and reason of every thoughtful member of our society.

In a country which allows known Muslim antagonists to protest troops coming home with "behead all infidels" I'd say its on point.

I'm not sure I understand you. Are you suggesting that the reason for which you are beheaded somehow makes the crime of beheading you more serious? Is it a worse crime to behead you because a jihadi thinks you are an infidel, than it is for some bloke off the street to behead you because he thinks you're a plonker?

I'm not a big one for rainbow nations, and I have a particular contempt for Mohammedism, but to suggest that a crime, against which the law already provided an adequate defence, is worse because there are hurt feelings involved is something that any proud and intelligent man, whatever his colour, should find offensive.

Post: #66

(10-18-2015 05:15 PM)Veloce Wrote:  Well that's an argument straight out of Stormfront.

That doesn't make the argument untrue.

It might make the argument unpopular, but it doesn't make the argument untrue.

(10-18-2015 05:15 PM)Veloce Wrote:  Hooray for Multiculturalism!

*Sarcastic

(10-18-2015 05:15 PM)Veloce Wrote:  Diversity can be a very good thing.

(10-18-2015 07:39 PM)Veloce Wrote:  genetic diversity has been shown to be beneficial.

(10-18-2015 05:15 PM)Veloce Wrote:  Mixed race couples often produce smarter, better-looking offspring.

In the same thread, you are both making fun of multiculturalism and singing its praises.

That is why I asked you to clarify your point..

- You travel to other countries/cultures.

- You bang Asian girls.

- You enjoy food from a variety of cultures.

- You choose to live in cities that are ethnically diverse.


You seem to be enjoying multiculturalism, that's why I thought it was strange that you would make fun of it.

Anyhow, thanks for the detailed response.

Post: #67

Jesus fucking christ I come back after a weekend, this escalated quickly.

Just my two cents, no I don't think me or any of my family want to impose sharia law . More like we mind our own business, make money/pay our taxes, and enjoy our lives.

Secondly, I don't hear much about it besides some loony wannabe muslim (fort hood, the dude with the machete, the art shooting, boston). We have more crazy mass shooters doing more damage.

Third, Islam is a threat, yes, especially in European countries. (We're already seeing it with en masse immigration)

Someone posted saying the HB-1 curved the amount of idiotic and ignorant muslims that came to the states. That is absolutely correct, they're here to make money and progress their careers. I'd also like to say 9/11 kept most Muslims in check. (Whatever your theories about 9/11 may be)

I just don't see this crazy threat in the US like some people claim is happening, I'd be more concerned about the intake of Somalis in the states more than anything.

Post: #68

Here’s my opinion on multiculturalism. I think that it’s good for most countries to have a small percentage of the population that is not native, because it adds a bit of colour to things. You can get some international food and pussy.

However, there should be a hard limit on the amount allowed in. You never want so many immigrants coming in that the native culture is displaced, and the native culture should always come first.

Immigrants should know that they are guests in the country and that they should do their best to keep their new house in order. Anybody who makes anti national remarks should be deported.

I was raised with a "when in Rome" mentality, and my father mentioned to me often that I'm not "Indian", I'm British. Just about all of the people from my community drink and go to the pub etc., so there's no issues with mixing with white British people. I’m so British that I've taken a couple of American friends to British pubs in Los Angeles so that they can eat stuff like Scotch Eggs, Shepherd's Pie and Sausage Rolls for the first time.

Some communities do assimilate over time, my late father had this formula about British born Indians...

• Born in 60's 75% Indian 25% British mentality
• Born in 70's 50% Indian 50% British mentality
• Born in 80's 25% Indian 75% British mentality
• Born in 90's 100% British mentality..they just look Indian
  

I like things to be mixed. I remember speaking to a guy in India who had visited Southall, which is an Indian part of London. I asked him what he thought of the area - he said that the British Indians have ruined it because they are turning it into another India.

Now if you compare this with a lot of the UK Pakistani community it kind of goes like this:

• Born in 60's 75% Pakistani 25% British mentality (trying to fit in, bought up in liberal sufi Islam. Not religious. No head scarves)
• Born in 70's 75% Pakistani 15% British mentality 10% Arab mentality (Goes to college, links with Islamic Groups)
• Born in 80's 60% Pakistani 30% Arab mentality 10% British mentality (Follows Arab traditions because they are “true” Islam, might watch the odd British TV show)
• Born in 90's 50% Pakistani 50% Arab mentality (Wears Arab dress, niqabs, avoids non Muslims, no TV or images allowed in household. Raises kids to distrust non-Muslims)
  

The youngest generations are more into “true” Islam and have now shamed the older generations to be Islamic. The older women now cover their hair too. So how does the Pakistani identity I listed above fit in with western culture? It doesn’t. They emulate Arab culture, which has produced mostly jack shit for hundreds of years. If it wasn’t for oil/tourism/religious pilgrims many of Arab countries would be third world shitholes.

There are some Pakistanis who are forward thinking and open minded, but sadly their numbers seems to be declining.
--------------------------------------------------------
Some cultures are so unique that immigration to them should be tiny because it would irrevocably change the culture e.g. Japan – if a lot of Chinese moved into Japan, it would fuck things up. Thankfully for the Japanese, their government is very aware of this.

China has historically had a lot more immigration over the centuries but they have killed Arabs on a few occasions:

Yangzhou massacre (760)

Quote:The massacre took place during the An Shi Rebellion. Arab and Persian merchants in the city were massacred in the thousands when Tian Shengong's (T'ien Shen-kung) 田神功 rebel soldiers entered the city. The merchants were targeted for being foreign and for their wealth.

Guangzhou massacre

Quote:Arab and Persian pirates raided and looted warehouses in Guangzhou (known to them as Khanfu or Sin-Kalan) in AD 758, according to a local Guangzhou government report on October 30, 758, which corresponded to the day of Guisi (癸巳) of the ninth lunar month in the first year of the Qianyuan era of Emperor Suzong of the Tang Dynasty.

Huang Chao revolted against the declining Tang dynasty after failing the Imperial Examination many times. He rebelled in 875 and led his army across China to Guangzhou in Lingnan. Guangzhou was called "Khanfu" by the Arabs, and another name for Guangzhou is Canton.
…
Foreigners have at different periods settled in China; but after remaining for a time, they have been massacred. For instance, Mohammedans and others settled at Canton in the ninth century; and in 889, it is said that 120,000 foreign settlers were massacred

Post: #69

Simone Joseph admits viral racist bus rant

Quote:A woman has admitted screaming racial abuse at a pregnant Muslim woman after footage was posted online.

Simone Joseph, 36, of Willesden Green, branded Hanane Yakoubi and her two friends "Isis bitches" on the 206 London bus in Brent on 13 October.

She also threatened to kick pregnant Ms Yakoubi in the stomach so she would "never have children again".

Joseph pleaded guilty to causing racially aggravated distress at Hendon Magistrates' Court.

She will be sentenced on 13 November.

The court heard the mother-of-three accused the women of having "bombs up their skirts" and shouted at them to go "back to your own country".

In a statement read to the court, Ms Yakoubi said: "As a consequence I find it difficult to sleep and cannot take medication because I'm pregnant.

"Every time I go out I'm afraid I might find myself in this situation as something similar has happened on a bus on another occasion because I am Muslim."

Prosecutor Darren Watts said the verbal abuse, described as constant swearing, continued for about five minutes with other passengers "shocked and distressed by the footage".

The driver stopped the bus to try to stop Joseph but she carried on, the court heard.

Mr Watts said the incident was reported to the police after the footage was posted on social media.

Tony Meisels, representing Joseph, said: "She is appalled, shocked and disgusted by what happened on that day. She wants to convey her regret to the victims."

Post: #70

Yeah saw this on Worldstar the other day. The irony was not lost that this women is stereotyping and being very hateful towards this women while at the same time showcasing the exact stereotype that her own race has.

Post: #71

The debate behind multiculturalism is a false dichotomy.

It's not either Aryan-pure nations or Liberal open-borders multi-cult utopia.

There is an in-between. All things are good in MODERATION. A bit of mixing, a bit of immigration, is good and healthy. Just like there is a difference between having a glass of water (healthy) and trying to drink a lake (you'll drown).

The real casualty in this political war is good sense and reason. Why can't we have things in moderation? Why do liberals push the false dichotomy so much? Either you're for total open borders and forced-race mixing or else you're a nazi.

Don't let the liberals set this bullshit frame.

Post: #72

Read the Daily Mail online and these "attacks" happen monthly in the UK.

Yesterday, another one was recorded.

The black lady sees herself as British, since she was probably born there. She has a problem with certain Muslims not adapting to the British way of life.

When I grew up there in the 70s, I never heard of the Muslim religion and i certainly did not know what a mosque was.

Post: #73

Your talk about 'multiculturalism' reminded me of this article I read a couple months ago. It's not an accurate term, its 'deculturalism'. It's designed to sound appealing by the left but all it really is is the destruction of native culture.

http://www.thisblogisdangerous.com/the-s...-the-left/

The real effects of the use of Western civilisation as a dumping ground for third worlders is not a parallel array of different cultures existing in harmony, but ever-increasing conflict, crime and more restrictive laws being tabled in order to shoehorn incompatible people together. Coupled with declining European birthrates, the European people and their cultures are slowly disappearing. Massive third world immigration is not producing vibrant side-by-side multiculturalism, it is producing a festering swamp of discontented people with no connection to one another, their ancestors, or the soil on which they stand.

The Word You Are Looking For Is Deculturalism

No attempt to persuade people that immigration is a problem will work while the argument is still constrained within the language of the left. Third world immigration is not multiculturalism, it is deculturalism. Use the right tool for the job, and use the right word for the right situation. We do not debate with the left and we do not use their made up words. Do not use the term multiculturalism, not even derisively or in jest. We need to stamp out this word. It is a deliberately inaccurate word, designed by the left to make Europeans accept third world immigration and the destruction of their nations. Third world immigration does not produce multiculturalism, it produces a toxic decultured soup. Europe is being decultured by the tidal wave of assimilable blacks and Muslims from the third world.

When you talk about the demographic fallout from third world immigration as deculturalism, people will begin to understand the nature of the problem we face. For many political moderates, multiculturalism is a positive word as it does not immediately imply the erosion of our own identity. The problem with deculturalism is obvious from the language itself. Multiculturalism is not a cause worth fighting against. Deculturalism however, the dismantling of our culture to accommodate others, is an existential evil that people will rally against.