Talk:Melting pot

Segregationist Excuses
" United States " In terms of immigrants to the United States, the "melting pot" process has been equated with Americanization, that is, cultural assimilation and acculturation. The "melting pot" metaphor implies both a melting of cultures and intermarriage of ethnicities, yet cultural assimilation or acculturation can also occur without intermarriage. Thus African-Americans are fully culturally integrated into American culture and institutions. Yet more than a century after the abolition of slavery, intermarriage between African-Americans and other ethnicities is much less common than between different white ethnicities, or between white and Asian ethnicities. Intermarriage between whites and non-whites, and especially African-Americans, was a taboo in the United States for a long time, and was illegal in many US states (see anti-miscegenation laws) until 1967.[13]" Who wrote this stuff? Why is this section specifically about African Americans, segregation and 'miscegenation'? 83.84.100.133 (talk) 02:22, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Merge into assimilate
Currently, assimilation points to melting pot and assimilate is a separate article on the Borg. I think there should be an article named "assimilation" with "assimilate" and "melting pot" pointing to it. The article on the borg could be its own article. Maybe "assimilation (star trek)" ?

In a broad sense, to assimilate means: "to render similar" "to bring to resemblance or conformity".

Assimilation has various meanings too. We can speak of 1) the assimilation of an individual through voluntary immigration or 2) the assimilation of an entire people by another one, typically in a position of power and numerical superiority. We can speak of cultural assimilation and linguistic assimilation. We can also speak of a person assimilating new knowledge or the conversion of nutriment into the fluid or solid substance of the body, by the processes of digestion and absorption.

There is a lot to develop.

Any objection to this move? Mathieugp 03:30, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)


 * Redirecting assimilation to melting pot is really a silly thing to do. Assimilation absolutely needs a disambiguation page because there are also assimilation (biology) and assimilation (linguistics). Or have they already been taken care of?  11:27, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)


 * I second this suggestion. I thought it was odd when a link from assimilation took me to melting pot. Took me a moment to understand why.Bkonrad 13:22, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)


 * Ok, so if I recap, we would have an assimilation disambiguation page with a definition and links to assimilation (biology), assimilation (linguistics), assimilation (sociology), assimilation (star trek) ? Mathieugp 15:01, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)


 * I think the link to assimilation (sociology) can point to this article, e.g., assimilation (sociology). Bkonrad 16:51, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Less Americanized
I know the term "melting pot" is associated with the U.S., but nowadays it has applications in every developed society. That being the case, I just made some edits and made the article less America-specific. you shouldnt say that it is clearly american and nothing else.

Why assume that America is the "ideal republic". A lot of people would disagree with that assessment.JohnC (talk) 05:07, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Maybe I'm just misinterpreting something, but the reason it looks that way to you is probably because the term for a cultural melting pot was coined and evolutionized in the United States. It's a matter of viewpointRodiggidy (talk) 17:38, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

The term was originated in the USA, apparently. But it is a general term now. The article should clearly distinguish between history, usage in the USA and elsewhere, and general comments.Royalcourtier (talk) 05:53, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Americanize not divide
I'm for immigration and acceptance of new comers wish to be americans. but I dont like pluralism or multi-culti liberals who racialize or divide us for their gain. It's against what I stand for. I'm a 45 years old white man born and raised in the USA. America had to get a melting pot to accept and merge all of its different people into not one race but one nation. The United States of America. I won't put up with p-c crowd insane pleed not to asimilate asians or latinos, cause they lose the right to have a religion, culture or language. So? We have freedom of religion for starters, millions of peeple in america live like their ancestors did, but call themselves americans first and foremost. Enuogh of this tossed salad or meltin' pot talk. Or a pizza or sub sandwich talk. We come in colors, shapes or sizes anyway. Not all americans are alike. We focus on similarity and what makes us americans not the p-c weapon to hate, divide or discriminate. That's why I'm not for affirmative action, the use of the race for job hiring or college admission is odious and a product of the 60s when the law had to step in to stop discrimination. Now what it stands for the majority of people, white americans, is they get left out or not hired. Why a latino or asian, on their way to be american, are said 'people of color'? I'm sure they look different, from other lands, don't speak english, and this hocky dory stuff on need to integrate into american society. Then why throw away the united common majority culture in favor of a silly, messy, doomed to fail, multicultureism? Look we are americans not white people or black people or brown people, and lets not get into whos asian american or arab american or native american anymore. the article said how we never overdo the irish american, italian american or polish american thing. we only can accept so many people, & dont let the left make race or culture an issue. this is whats wrong with illegal imigration or culture tolerance. we need borders as much we need workers. we need to band together, in a melting pot or not. - signed, open-minded conservative


 * The US has never had one single unified culture. I can go to any of the 50 states and fully expect cultural differences. If anything, there has been increased cultural homogenization taking place, with local culture supplanted by generic corporate culture. Why is it that people get upset about Cinco de Mayo, but have no problem with Saint Patrick's Day or a Sons of Norway Parade? We can focus on both similarity and differences. People have the right to live their lives as they see fit. Forcing people to "assimilate" raises problems - assimilate to what? Should the people of Georgia be assimilated to ne just like the people of Wisconsin? Should the people of Wisconsin be assimilated to ne just like the people of Georgia?--RLent (talk) 18:35, 4 March 2009 (UTC)


 * With all due respect, why is this first paragraph still here & for more than 10 years? I assume the second, indented paragraph is someone's response. In any event, I thought the purpose of the talk page was not to editorialize or discuss politics, yet that's exactly what it does. The purpose of talk pages, I thought was to work on improving the main article - criticism, corrections, additions, suggestions, etc. Ileanadu (talk) 23:38, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Melting Pot=Assimilation?
I question the assertion that the "melting pot" metaphor - at least, the popular American version - describes an ideal of assimilation for immigrants, as stated in this article (although I've certainly heard multiculturalist critics make the same claim elsewhere). I know when I was taught about it (in 5th grade social science in an American elementary school), the idea was not that immigrants should "shed their native cultures and become absorbed into the ways of their host society." Although immigrants coming to think of themselves primarily as Americans, and adopt some American customs, was part of it, there was more emphasis on the opposite idea - the idea that customs brought by immigrants would be adopted by other Americans, and become mainstream. It's about the host society being changed by immigrants, as much as immigrants changing themselves to fit into the host society. The Schoolhouse Rock song seems to support this view, with lines like "They brought the country's customs" and "How great to be American/And something else as well." Has anyone else understood the metaphor in this way? 68.226.239.73 05:51, 6 August 2005 (UTC)


 * I just tagged the article for POV for this same reason.


 * My understanding of the "melting pot" is that it brings together different cultures and practices, facilitates an exchange of ideas, and allows the society to learn from each sub-group. The result is, ideologically, a better society due to the expanded "marketplace of ideas". Although it is true that this fusion of ethnic groups leads to a more homogeneous society, I feel that the definition focuses too much on what is lost and not enough on what is gained. Assimilation, in my understanding, is not an equivalent of the "melting pot" but a totally different option. It invovles a dominate culture within which subordinate cultures learn to submit to the dominate culture.


 * Being biased toward the melting pot ideal, I'd like to get more input before I (or anyone else, actually) revise the article. LilianPhoebs 22:51, 20 January 2006 (UTC)


 * More than anything this article probably needs book citations, especially now that the very definition of "melting pot" seems to vary according to different schools of thought. Unfortunately not being a sociologist I cannot provide the citations myself. Eldar 17:22, 21 January 2006 (UTC)


 * The dictionary definition (Webster, online) shows that 'melting pot' is not the same thing as assimilation:
 * 1 a : a place where a variety of races, cultures, or individuals assimilate into a cohesive whole b : the population of such a place
 * 2 : a process of blending that often results in invigoration or novelty
 * In contrast, the relevant assimilate definition is "to absorb into the culture or mores of a population or group". This seems to agree with the description of 'mutual change' described by the IP user above.
 * Antonrojo 12:42, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree w. LilianPhoebs. "Assimilation" and "melting pot" should point to each other but should not be equated with each other.  Has anyone thought of a way of incorporating the WP article's arguably NPOV assertion that in general US society "pays homage to its immigrant roots at the same time it confronts complex and deeply ingrained ethnic and racial divisions?" --209.128.81.201 22:12, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't think that's NPOV so much as a vague statement and an example of WP:AWW. Who 'pays homage' and how? Colorful language such as this, while rampant in most history textbooks, doesn't belong in wiki articles. Antonrojo 12:42, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

--24.68.243.85 21:08, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I think this is a good source to give a look... "Immigrants Shunning Idea of Assimilation"
 * To deal with the POV assertion that 'melting pot' implies integration into the dominant culture, I've reworked relevant sections of the article and removed the POV tag. Antonrojo 22:54, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I want to suggest material on the melting pot as metaphor should be added to the article. It is common for people today to think 'melting pot' refers to cooking, but it more likely refers to metallurgy. Most people lack understanding of metallurgy common in the time the term was coined. One possible metaphor with smelting is how several dissimilar metals are smelted together, not to form a mixed substance, but to form a metal with completely different, new properties, usually stronger or more desirable than any of the constituents. I do not see how a reader can understand the term without knowledge of its metaphorical origin and the processes involved, which touch on the debate about assimilation and the various ideas of how people "merge" into a culture. Folkstreamer (talk) 21:54, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Assimilationists
I don't want to put this up for article creation yet, but it seems like 'assimiliationist' could be its own article from here, and a passing mention could be made from melting pot. Maybe one of the disambiguation pages from assimilation covers this point, but seems to me there's a lot to be said on the topic, especially the links to affirmative action and such. Or maybe the links just need to be made a bit clearer...? Archtemplar 05:21, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the necessity of a disambiguation page, never the less I will stress that assimilation in culture is used as a methafor fo assimilation of nutrient from food. The idea is exactly that a culture can and have to absorbe another culture's behaviors. Just a remark in term of history, the melting pot has been developed as a political project betweeb 1920 and 1930 and in that period the idea of universalism was very strong. The universalism of that period in Western conutries was based upon evolutionism, i.e. western culture was superior and has the duty to civilize other. So, yes the melting pot was based on the idea of melt something but not the WASP culture. As reference I'll suggest H. Bhabha, the location of culture, Routledge, 1994 and I'll also suggest a link to Postcolonial theory page and the studies of Gilroy. Hope this can help Violax

Lyrics are Copyright violation
I have removed the lyrics, as they are a copyright violation, and replaced them with a link to the lyrics. --  BRIAN  0918 18:57, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Salad bowl
I remember reading the term "salad bowl" in the 1970s as a synonym of multiculturalism, as "melting pot" associates with assimilation. However, it never caught on.


 * Well to some extend it did, if you look in just about any sociological or anthroloplogical reference book, it is mention how the new goal of American society is the Salad bowl, how it is the most humane ideology and how it has replaced the melting pot. The problem is that most poeple stop learning bout these ideologies in college and probably havn't look at a Antrhopology textbook since, thus still beleiving in the melting pot idea. Regards,  Signature brendel  19:30, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

§…—


 * Statements such as the one contending that the melting pot metiphor is"largely disregared by most modern sociologists as outdated" or the one opining that the salad bowel of multiculturalism is "the goal for America as seen by most prominent sociologists", in both cases without any substantiation tend to identify a polemic for what it is. Who make up the cadre that includes "most prominent sociologists"? When did modern sociologists vote out the melting pot and vote in the salad bowl? Was there a referendum? A poll? Nonsense and non-scholarship.

Well, speaking of "melting pots" and "salad bowls", there's also the "pizza" concept, which, I think the article kind of does mention (without actually calling it the pizza-concept), where the ingredients are visible (to the naked eye), yet form an inseparable unit. However, as has been mentioned here, all concepts are "in the eye of the beholder" and I am afraid different people might interpret them in different ways. In this respect, the whole issue is more a battle of words and does not really help solve the overall issue. What it does do, at least, is to get people thinking about the whole problem.Crucible the crucible, by aurthur millar was not written in 1908 and was based on a puritan experience of america, not the immigrant integration of New York during the 19th and early 20th centruies. the oragin of the term is most often attributed to political cartoonists.
 * That's correct and I fixed the reference. If you have sources for an alternate origin of the term, you might add it here or to the article. Antonrojo 20:40, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Canada previously a melting pot?
This article implies that for a long time Canada was a melting pot and is just recently adopting multiculturalism. This is vastly untrue. Canada, as I see it, has been supporting multiculturalism for far longer than this. And to be lumped together with the policies of Britain and Australia? How absurd!
 * &#9773; Zippanova  09:03, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

MEXICO
I propose we add a "Mexico" section to this article, given that Mexico has been considered a melting pot by many, including the famous Jose Vasconcelos, in which he explicitly considers Mexico to be the melting pot of the world, where Mexicans have genetic origins that can be traced back to all parts of the world (like Amerindians, Spanish settlers, Filipino laborers, African slaves, and immigrants like Lebanese, Chinese, Italian, French, etc.). In any given case I consider the United States to be a salad bowl because most Americans are not mixed race, as opposed to most Mexicans who are. The races have been kept seperate in the U.S., while they have mostly merged in Mexico. So PLEASE, someone any suggestions? If not, then I'll add it myself (sourced, of course).--Fernirm (talk) 03:53, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * By all means be bold and add Mexico yourself. Eldar (talk) 21:41, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

The above writer obviously watches no Mexican television, where the stars of the soap operas and most of the news anchors look like they just flew in from Madrid. POOR Mexicans are mixed race. The upper class would be horrified if you told them they were mixed race. MarkinBoston (talk) 18:41, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

^Your argument is invalid, soap operas are not really based on reality, and have a tendency to perpetuate white cultural standards of beauty. However, don't discount the whole nation just because the ten percent of rich white Mexicans were more insulated from mainstream culture. Judging a whole nation by its smallest margin, rather than largest is rather prejudiced and unfair to the nation. Some white Mexicans are racist, and others are not, don't stereotype everybody. It would like calling everyone in the Southern portion of the United States a bunch of backwards racists, even though there people like that, not all of them are. About 70 percent percent of Mexicans are mestizo, and have a rich culture based on Spanish, and Native American traditions. Our religion may be European, but the Virgen of Guadalupe that many Mexicans venerate, is rumored to be a former Native American goddess. Our cuisine is one of the last remnants of indigenous expression. Tamales, tacos, nopalitos, and guacamole are definitely not part of Spanish cuisine, but do incorporate Old World ingredients like beef, or lamb. That's what makes our food, and ways rather unique. We speak Spanish, but some of our words have indigenous origins, and some of our expressions are distinct from Spain and the rest Latin America.

I will agree with the statement that the previous user before you has made, the Americans made no effort in including the Native peoples into their culture. The Spanish may have considered the Indians to be of a lesser race, but did not seek out to exterminate the Indian completely (although criminals like Columbus went against the wishes of Queen Isabella) like the Americans did with their local tribes. The one drop rule persists in the states to the point that people of mixed race have to identify with the darkest colored group. Indians in the states that are 1/2, or 1/4 are still considered Indian, and culturally usually remain Indian, because of a long history of segregation. Mexican mestizos were allowed to blossom into a diverse culture that included Western and Indian traditions, we can claim heritage to both, rather than having to deny one over the other. We can claim being a melting pot literally, since there are many mixed races, and culturally. Sure being called an Indian is an insult, but I believe that comes from misinformation, and internalized racism from the old Spanish peninsulares. Any educated Mexican know that some of the Indians were quite civilized, sophisticated, and intelligent. The Mexicas built aqueducts in a city in the middle of a lake for crying out loud, but some Mexicans are completely unaware of that history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dalex4991 (talk • contribs) 18:01, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Removing Increasing segregation section
This section has no secondary sourcing on which to support it's inclusion in the article. Unless some secondary sources can be produced which indicate this is an important topic as it relates to Melting pot it is wp:undue. I'll remove the section in due course if robust sourcing cannot be provided. aprock (talk) 21:27, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'll be removing this presently. aprock (talk) 21:49, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Afghanistan
I see no evidence that the term 'melting pot' is used in Afghanistan. The fact that different ethnic groups may be mixing has nothing to do with the term itself. Unless someone can come up with a citation for Afghans using the precise term, I'm taking down the section. MarkinBoston (talk) 01:07, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Argentina
People, I believe that a perfect example of a melting por of cultures has been left out and gone entirely unmentioned; Argentina was and is the second largest case in america after the us, being 97% of its population descendant from foreign migrants, as it recieved some 6 million migrants between the years 1870-1914, being its previous population no more than 200.000 people, thus making it (alltough in lesser quantity) the biggest american melting point by percentage. Consequently I think it should figure on the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mariano Menéndez (talk • contribs) 00:15, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

ALL NATIONS IN THE WORLD ARE MELTING POTS There is no exception. All nations in the World are melting pots from different ethinc groups. If we talk about the Englishmen, they are traditionally a melting pot of Angles, Saxons, Celts, Italos, Jutes, Danish, French (later millions of immigrants from former British colonies were added)...French are traditionally a melting pot of Celts (Gallic), Italos, Franks, Basques (later millions of immigrants from former French colonies were added) etc, etc.

In America, there is clearly a melting pot under the Anglo-American culture which is assimilating millions of people from all the World. White Americans can be considered, like the Afrikaners in South Africa, a Germanic ethnicity (English, Afrikaners, Dutch, Germans, Flemish, Americans, Swedish, Norwegian...) Black Americans are even more properly a melting pot; first, they are a melting pot of different African ethnic groups who have been so much mixed and assimilated that the overwhelming majority of "Afro-Americans" cannot even say from what country their ancestors came from so they don´t say "Yoruba-American", or "Zulu-American" but just "Afro-American" which is not an ethnicity. In fact, 20% of genes of "Afro-Americans" are white, so the English tribe is part of the Black American melting pot as much as any African tribe (like the Yoruba), or more because the language and religion of Black Americans is closer to the English than to the Yoruba.--83.32.84.197 (talk) 18:59, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Melting pot
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Melting pot's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "ref2": From Argentina:  From Immigration to Argentina:  

Reference named "ref1": From Native Americans in the United States:  From Immigration to Argentina:  From Argentina:  

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:53, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Melting pot. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://docentes.fe.unl.pt/~satpeg/PapersInova/Labor%20and%20Immigration%20in%20LA-2005.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100108073617/http://www.cdtradition.net:80/historical-references.php to http://www.cdtradition.net/historical-references.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II <sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS"> Talk to my owner :Online 01:44, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Melting pot. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090919230812/http://www.argentina.gov.ar/argentina/portal/paginas.dhtml?pagina=1669 to http://www.argentina.gov.ar/argentina/portal/paginas.dhtml?pagina=1669
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cels.org.ar/Site_cels/publicaciones/informes_pdf/1998.Capitulo7.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110716170650/http://www.wales.com/en/content/cms/english/wales_and_argentina/wales_and_argentina.aspx to http://www.wales.com/en/content/cms/english/wales_and_argentina/wales_and_argentina.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131109003252/http://www1.cbs.gov.il/www/publications/pw32.pdf to http://www1.cbs.gov.il/www/publications/pw32.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:22, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Melting pot. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20120802031739/http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/ahr/108.5/hollinger.html to http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/ahr/108.5/hollinger.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110807164904/http://www.library.eiu.edu/ersvdocs/4455.pdf to http://www.library.eiu.edu/ersvdocs/4455.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cels.org.ar/Site_cels/publicaciones/informes_pdf/1998.Capitulo7.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://themeltingpotnyc.com/home.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:43, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Are "African-Americans are fully culturally integrated into American culture and institutions"?
The "United States" section says:

"Thus African-Americans are fully culturally integrated into American culture and institutions."

From what I've experienced in my life, I'd argue that African-Americans are almost fully culturally /separated/ from American culture and institutions. That's why they develop their own culture, own "laws," and own music and then scream about cultural appropriation. So, at a minimum, the quoted sentence from the "United States" section should have some type of citation, or at least an explanation of what is meant by "fully culturally integrated," when they are so apart and isolated from the rest of the nation.

I'd also argue that "intermarriage of ethnicities" doesn't apply to the "melting pot" metaphor as is normally taught in the U.S. school system. This should probably have citations to back up that claim too, i.e., "melting pot" is as taught is purely cultural, not inter-racial. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.54.0.181 (talk) 00:43, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Cultural amalgamation
I stubbed an article on this term, used in academic works, but it seems very closely related to the "melting pot" term, which is better known. I wonder if they are synonymous and ca article (stub...) should just be merged&redirected here? --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:41, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

The United States celebrates immigration like no other country
Disagreeing with a remark above, it's not true that all countries are melting pots. Every country has immigrants, but some have lots and others only a few. Some countries welcome immigrants, at least sometimes, but most don't want them. More than any other country, the United States has celebrated immigration, and at least some people at some times saw and still see the diversity of the immigrants, including descendants of black slaves, as a source of national strength and something to be proud of. The United States is the ethnic and cultural melting pot.

To say that Colombia or Argentina or Chile are melting pots because they are made up of diverse ethnic groups is missing the point. No country in Latin America celebrates or honors its natives as an ethnic group. Nowhere do they have the recognition, the legal protections, or the economic strength (casinos, in some cases) that they do in tbe U.S. Nowhere else celebrates its minority of African origin like the United States does. I know Brazil well and it's no exception.

What I'm getting at, is that "melting pot" pertains to the U.S., and only the U.S. deisenbe (talk) 03:25, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
 * The status of Native Americans is mostly OUTSIDE the melting pot. They are protected in many ways that keep them separate (eg reservations, separate schools, separate medical services, casinos, special protection for historic religious holy places). Furthermore US every so often (eg 1790s. 1850s, 1920s, and today in 2020s) goes through an anti-immigrant anti-melting pot mode. We are in it today. Canada is a rather better metling pot than USA. Rjensen Rjensen (talk) 04:38, 17 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Is someone proposing an edit? WP:NOTAFORUM MartinezMD (talk) 12:58, 17 September 2021 (UTC)