suzeonline wrote:

>>The 'white' invaders of the day certainly had no problems refusing to integrate into Aboriginal society did they?>>

Absolutely right suzeonline.

Spot on.

I keep hearing the mantra that his is a “nation of immigrants.” It isn’t. It is a nation of settlers. The difference between immigrants and settlers is that settlers intend to supplant the pre-existing culture. That’s what the original settlers did.

Hopefully the heirs of the settlers have the smarts to learn from the fate of the Aborigines and not allow themselves to be supplanted. Otherwise the heirs of the original settlers may find themselves sharing the fate of the Aborigines.

Just to be clear, the heirs of the original (White) settlers need not be White. Race has nothing to do with it. They simply need to share the liberal, secular democratic values that the heirs of the original settlers have embraced.

So will the heirs of the original settlers be smart enough to avoid being supplanted in their turn?

Only time will tell.

But thank you suzeonline for making the point with such crystal clarity.

suzeonline,

"yet some of their descendants today are upset about having peoples from other countries/religion/cultures emigrate here today?"

Yes some people are, however that's not relevant to the discussion about multiculturalism as an institution. I don't care where immigrants come from, or what their culture is, so long as they respect our democratic institutions. There is evidence some immigrants have absolutely no intention of doing so, that's why I'm sceptical of bureaucratic 'multiculturalism'.

I find it difficult to understand why you and others misrepresent the arguments against institutionalised multiculturalism, after all, most have been presented clearly enough. Don't you understand the difference between 'multiculturalism' as social engineering and multiculturalism as a liberal democratic principle?

If you haven't read the earlier comments,do so.

suzeonline,

Just to re-iterate what mac says:

In one respect "multi-culturalism" is simply the right of every citizen in a liberal secular democratic state to practise any element of any culture so long as it does not conflict with the law of the land. We have that right now in Australia. It has been that way for a long time.

So explain to me, suzeonline, why we need a whole multi culti bureaucracy.

grateful and suzeonline
Some good points but it does not change the fact that some cultures do practice behaviours or acts such as FGM, sanctioned rape and honour killings even if it is a political/cultural perversion of a religious text.

How do we as a nation say NO that is not acceptable - we can only do that via legislation and punishment. It will take a while for some newer cultures to integrate in some areas but that is to be expected. However as it has been said much of 'traditional Austrailan' culture does not come up glossy either in relation to attitudes towards women.

Integration is not a bad word, it is about accepting long held values of a secular democracy as a right.

It is not about having to change or deny one's cultural or religious heritage. Many immigrant groups, Greeks, Italians, Vietnamese etc have kept strong their cultural heritage but embraced those other values. Ultimately governments should be concerned with maintaining the framework for those rights not interfering in people's private and cultural lives outside of those protective laws.

However, most new immigrants do seek those same freedoms and values that Australians have come to expect. It is as always, the behaviour of a minority who blur the lines and which leads to generalisations about any particular culture.

What is happening now is similar to the early experience of immigration from Europe. Same fear different brush stroke.

I remember as a child, all the adults of the day carrying on about the 'boat people' Vietnamese refugees, just like many do today about the current crop of asylum seekers.

The same arguments were used about these 'communists' coming to our shores and commencing an 'Asian invasion' that would take over our predominantly European way of life.

It never happened. Eventually most of these people did integrate to a certain extent, while still practicing their own culture in their new country.

Not ALL Muslim immigrants will refuse to integrate, or give back to our society. We have have good and bad people in every race, religion and culture.

Are the bulk of posters to this thread happy enough with the level of multiculturalism this country has thrived on since the 1700's up to now, but just don't want Muslim immigrants?

If so, that is called racism.

Pelican
<<Some good points but it does not change the fact that some cultures do practice behaviours or acts such as FGM, sanctioned rape and honour killings even if it is a political/cultural perversion of a religious text.

How do we as a nation say NO that is not acceptable - we can only do that via legislation and punishment. It will take a while for some newer cultures to integrate in some areas but that is to be expected. However as it has been said much of 'traditional Austrailan' culture does not come up glossy either in relation to attitudes towards women. >>

The answer should be obvious. Say "No" and discuss in a civilised manner. I remember seeing a pamphlet 15 years ago issued by the NSW Islamic Council stating genital mutilation is against the Shariah. And if the Shariah conflicts with Australian law then (by the Shariah) Australian law takes precedence. Inciting hatred against Muslims with lies (propagated by people with a political agenda) damages relations particularly when it leads to abuse and violence.

People, at least those who really do desire the truth, should ask of any author on the topic about their sources and their credentials for speaking on the subject. In the words of Yusuf Islam "let truth be your armour and justice be your sword" (words i know well because the kids love to listen to the song, a rewording of Cat Stevens Lady D'arbanville")

By the way, my 6 year old daughter came to me 3 weeks ago to say that a man said some "bad things to Mummy" when they were in the car park. This is not uncommon for my wife. I was once threaten on a train with castration (using polite language) because of a perception that Islam oppresses women (honour killing, etc). Something to think about for those who want to think.