Assimilation is neither good nor bad but it is certainly inevitable.
This is a subject, I think, of largely unnecessary emotion. The important norms of the society in question are the ones encoded in and which derive from its constitution, and not what we eat for breakfast or how we dress. You don't in fact need to assent to the former norms as they anyway have the force of law and the fact that they have been dictated by power, whilst obviously true, does not matter since the migrant has consented to live under them and most likely actually preferred them to their own original condition. As the political community evolves they may change but assent to the norms also implies assent to the processes by which they may change. In my opinion those processes include extra-normative ones (civil disobedience) but this takes nothing away from the fact that even engaging in such actions, one accepts (with no other option) the consequences of ones actions.
If only we could focus on the constitution instead of constantly wishing it said other things. The problem is the SJWs who want to replace the constitution with their own views, not the migrants who fail to adopt these rival and contested notions. In my opinion we need to return to a culture of constitutionality and those who want the constitution to guarantee rights that it does not (e.g. the right to abortion) need to make their case according to the means laid down in said constitution rather than taking the law into their own hands. I also wish this right were in the constitution, but it is not. That is not hard to understand.
Interesting angle!
Assimilation is neither good nor bad but it is certainly inevitable.
This is a subject, I think, of largely unnecessary emotion. The important norms of the society in question are the ones encoded in and which derive from its constitution, and not what we eat for breakfast or how we dress. You don't in fact need to assent to the former norms as they anyway have the force of law and the fact that they have been dictated by power, whilst obviously true, does not matter since the migrant has consented to live under them and most likely actually preferred them to their own original condition. As the political community evolves they may change but assent to the norms also implies assent to the processes by which they may change. In my opinion those processes include extra-normative ones (civil disobedience) but this takes nothing away from the fact that even engaging in such actions, one accepts (with no other option) the consequences of ones actions.
If only we could focus on the constitution instead of constantly wishing it said other things. The problem is the SJWs who want to replace the constitution with their own views, not the migrants who fail to adopt these rival and contested notions. In my opinion we need to return to a culture of constitutionality and those who want the constitution to guarantee rights that it does not (e.g. the right to abortion) need to make their case according to the means laid down in said constitution rather than taking the law into their own hands. I also wish this right were in the constitution, but it is not. That is not hard to understand.
More here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_patriotism