Ima-whatever,

" When the islamic crusades began Rome was too weak to resist, fell & the dark ages began."

The events you relate occurred 200yrs BEFORE the rise of Islam.

Good grief!

suseonline,
"If Australia was still a mono cultural society, then there would only be Indigenous Australians living here. "

If so it would still be multicultural because when Cook arrived there wasn't a monoculture but myriad cultures and languages, not to mention spectacular levels of warfare, misogyny, infanticide.

I know that among the kumbaya-set it was paradise before Cook but in the real world these were stone age people living short brutish lives. And we can be sure that a good number of them were also immigrants/invaders. If we want to pretend that only the original settlers were indigenous then probably the Tassie aboriginals are the true indigenous group having been forced out by later invaders, who in turn were forced out by still later invaders. (What happened to the Bradshaw people?).

That we are multicultural is self-evident, irreversible and probably beneficial.

But that's not the same as having multiculturalism. At its essence this is a government invented, sponsored and financed policy to assure all the various cultures that they are equally relevant and valuable and that no one culture is better or worse than the other. And that's falling apart.

Personally, I don't care to argue that one culture is better per se than another. If your culture finds it necessary to cut the clitoris of little girls, I'm not going to get into an argument as to whether that is a superior or inferior one to a culture that doesn't.
But I will say that our culture is better for me and my country. You think your culture is better for you and your country - fine I don't care. here, however you are welcome to come and even to practice your little national quirks, so long as you respect the basic tenets of our culture, law, traditions.

The west has lost respect and love for its culture and needs to find it again.

We could do worse than remember Napier, an British leader in India:

To Hindu priests complaining to him about the prohibition of Sati religious funeral practice of burning widows alive on her husband’s funeral pyre.

“Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs.”

mhaze,
You put your finger right on a bug problem with MC, and I am glad you chose FGM as an example as I see another couple have been charged with FGM offences. We encourage immigrants to retain their culture and those that engage in FGM, forced marriage, underage marriage and other practices that are illegal are deliberately thumbing their nose and are contemptuous of our laws. A woman doctor that runs a migrant womens advisory centre, in Sydney, not long ago said she could name 100 underage marriages at any given time.

The problem is that the laws are not enforced. For example, for FGM hospital records need to be made available to police and the 'at risk' girls undergo medical examination to determine if they have been cut. If so the parents are charged. France does this and has a big reduction in FGM. Our politicians are to weak for this and are chasing the ethnic vote. It is our politicians that let us down time and time again.

Yuyutsu
<If groups of people seek autonomy, whatever be their reason (religious, tribal or otherwise - especially otherwise) and your national/universal state opposes it with force then no wonder the outcome can descend into terror and bloodshed>

your comment assumes that wars are about intolerance.
this is the fallacy taught in our universities.

The two causative factors, present in all wars.
are tribal bloodlines-(in muddy the waters academic speak,ethnic groups)and control of countries and land(territory)
The reason for wars is biological not physcological.

observe the racist like behaviour of a lion when another lion
comes onto it's territory, it acts with aggression,intimidating
behaviour and extreme dislike.

But it is not the other lion that it hates, no matter that it is
a different colour. It is the other lion being on it's territory,
that provokes the aggression. And we all know whats at stake for the
lion or a any species that loses control of its terriroty.

Well, the same rule of nature applies to the human species as well.
And the reaction by the lion is correct at the survival level.

Also people of other tribes coming to someone else's land
are also being territorial in their behaviour, because they
immigrate to gain access to the territorial wealth.
they couldn't care one bit about the people already there.
it's not the people they come here for.

And Isis and terrorists don't attack us because of any religion,
although that is the excuse they use to justify the murder.
No, the attacks are racially,territorially, motivated, and they are not terrorist attacks. It is classic guerrilla warfare.
You may say they run from war. Usually from overpopulated
countries, where war is basically caused by poverty or lack of
access to abundant,territorial resources.

The Japanese didn't attack Australia because of their racial hatred
of Australians, they attacked because they wanted the land, so they could live in prosperity for generations.

Dear Cherful,

<<your comment assumes that wars are about intolerance.>>

I was referring to internal suppression of freedom, not to wars. It can descend into civil wars.

Indeed, modern science has gained significant knowledge about the way genes operate, including how they drive lions and cause blood-line relatives to support each other against other blood-lines. As Richard Dawkins pointed in his depressing book, "The Selfish Gene", genes are there to serve themselves, not us!

The question arises, why don't we who are intelligent enough to be aware of the genes' mischief, rebel against them?!

Regardless, please don't confuse nationalism with tribalism or the mischief of the genes: having such a large "family" which includes that many blood-lines and when one doesn't even know and couldn't recognise 99.999% of the others, is simply unnatural!