Keith Kennelly gives us another topic about the policy of multiculturalism and adds his imprimatur. Topics on the policy of multiculturalism seem a bit de trop here at OLO.

"The freedom of all Australians to express and share their cultural values..." That cherished freedom to express ourselves at the ballot box on issues like multiculturalism didn't exist at all.

"For the last 28 years our multicultural policy has been an outstanding success." I would hope so. Starving our health budget, roads budget, education budget and other budgets in order to pump funds into multiculturalism should make it a brilliant success. The publication "The Cost of Multiculturalism" put the cost at AUD$7.2 billion per year. OUR money is spent on things like:

Association of Bhanin El Minieh - Australian Arabic Community Welfare Centre Inc.

"Settlement services to Arabic refugees, humanitarian entrants and newly arrived migrants in Auburn local government area"

Provide settlement services to newly arrived migrants,refugees and humanitarian entrants of Arabic backgrounds in the Auburn Local Government Area, consisting of casework, information and referral, group work, community development and facilitating clients' access to mainstream services.

Does anyone know what that means? Does that mean escorting migrants with no English language skills to the nearest CentreLink office?

While this nonsense is taking place Mrs Brown has to wait 11 months for a hip replacement operation.

It's lunacy.

Dear Keith

If you view some of my comments within the Multicultural posting by Danny NALLIAH you'll note that I am basically opposed to multiculturalism. I am a strong proponent of multi-ethnicity, however. I despise racial hatred.

I now go to the definition of multiculturalism: have we lost the ability to define concepts? If I don't know what an apple is, then why in the explanation & definition of an apple would that word "apple" be almost pivotal in the attempt to gain clarity.

The definition begins: "Multicultural" is a term that describes the cultural and linguistic diversity ..". That almost assumes that I don't know what the word "multi" means. The confusion is actually in the word "culture".

You & others might specifically care to read my post at 8:48:03 AM 30/1/2006 to Rancitas from "Are we deceived by multiculturalism?". However, it is important to put things in context by reading all the other postings.

The dilemma that Australia faces by promoting a "multicultural society" is that culture doesn't just stop at the semantics of language, the traditional clothes worn or the food eaten. it is much more entrenched into philosophical concepts, & includes behavioural pattern & the adherence to perceptions of right/wrong & legalities.

One can't separate the desire to follow, say Sharia law, from the culture of a Koranic-believing Muslim, than we can for their desire to isolate themselves into self-proclaimed ghettos. Therein lies the problem. There are the exceptions, sure. And I elude to those.

I will not seek an " automatic notification" to this site.

Cheers

I do not agree with Keith and find his comments or the lack of - naive and somehow irritating. The propaganda exercise is not the way to remedy a disfunctional social issue.

Multiculturalism is a name given to a social phenomenon after the facts. It was not a planned process (by government) - more like an experiment without clear guidelines or definite objectives.

As a nation we are not 'tolerant' - but accepting and pacifists. Australians - like any other human beings - are racist. No one is comfortable with difference. Someone chatting loudly in a train or restaurant in a different language is a sure way to attract a unpleasant stare or even “Why don’t you speak in English..” remark.

Yes there are many advantages: economic, cultural, and of course culinary, BUT this is in spite of multiculturalism and not because of it. These factors have often been used to celebrate MC disguising all its other problems.

Wrong legislations like Anti-vilification laws for example are sure to put a great damper on integration and tolerance. The already limited freedom of expression within MC – namely speech – is being severely compromised; much more so when a cultural expression and its own religious beliefs are deeply intertwined

Keith, for someone supposedly so widely travelled, you certainly have a very narrow view of world reality

“One of the "hidden" benefits is how we look at our Indigenous people.”

I may be putting my foot in it here, but I haven't seen that. The attitude to indigenous people here is coming about by education and the reality, of how some have to live their lives in a modern society like ours.

Multiculturalism has given some ideologies recruitment rights, that are turning some indigenous people into religious warriors, in their attempt to get the recognition, services and power they desire. Sadly they will just become cannon fodder for relgious advancement

“It is remarkable how there has been so little tension between the great diversity of communities within Australia over the last 30 years.”

You must live in very narrow small world to believe that, cultural tension has been growing constantly for the last 30 years, not diminishing. I don't know what sort of business you are in, but mine, hospitality and tourism, gives indications completely the opposite to yours.

My clientel is very multicultural, as are my travels. I was in Europe recently and asked many from varying cultures, how they felt we were coping in this country. All of them said, we were making a big mistake in believing that multiculturalism will work here, considering the debacle it is in Europe and the depth of anger and fear it is causing.

Maybe Keith, you haven't been to suburbs in this country where the majority of shop signs are in a foreign language.

Coach, you may be racist, but we aren't all like you, luckily.

The point of the article is essentially summarised by the author's claim:

'For the last 28 years our multicultural policy has been an outstanding success.'

To examine this, we must ask to what extent the Government's multicultural policy 'addresses the consequences of this (cultural and linguistic) diversity in the interests of the individual and society as a whole.' The policy 'recognises, accepts, respects and celebrates our cultural diversity.' The term cultural diversity here is vague, considering the broad range of interpretations of the noun 'culture'. Does cultural diversity include religion? Of it course does, you might say.

If cultural diversity includes religion then, do Islam and its followers comply with the Government expectations layed out in the paragraph 'The freedom of all Australians..'?

Firstly, 'an overriding loyalty to Australia and its people' - No. Their overriding loyality is to the teachings of Islam and to other Muslims.
Secondly, the Constitution - No. Islam teaches that all legal structures except those born from Islamic scriptures are completely illegitimate and worthless.
Thirdly, parliamentary democracy - No. Not under the 'rule of Allah' therefore redundant.
Fourthly, freedom of speech and religion - No. Islam teaches that no-one is allowed to question the truth of its scriptures, and that all other religions are enemies and must be challenged by Jihad.
Fifthly, English as the national language - Preferrably not. Arabic is the preferred language of Islam.
Sixthly, the rule of law - Yes, but not Australian law. Only Islamic law is considered truly relevant.
Seventh and eighth, acceptance and equality - No for both. Only Islamic practices are acceptable. The only people considered equal to each other are Muslim males. Everyone else is offically inferior.

So out of the 8 principles of Multiculturalism as outlined by the Australian Government, which everyone is expected to adhere to, Islam and its proponents recognise a total of: None.

Even if the author's claim is generally accurate, the glaring exception must be the integration of Islam, since Islam is fundamentally opposed to the Australian nation. The self-proclaimed purpose of Islam is to establish a global, all-powerful Islamic state.

I'm constantly amazed by the sweeping generalisations people on these forums make about 'Islam'. I know some Muslims. None of Ev's claims accurately describe them or their beliefs, any more than Fred Nile is representative of the nation's Christians.