The middle class makes up the bulk of Australia. We are happy with moderate multiculturalism and most Australians don't have any major dramas with race. Multiculturalism is not the extremist totalitarian beast that its opponents make it out to be, but it isn't a utopia. Its just a reality, because the whole world, including this country, is made up of people from different backgrounds.

As for this pearler:

"the National white Australian, a traditionalist to the work ethic and proud working class, now floundering in a sea of Asian faces, jobless, impoverished and homless."

Get over it. (i) the White Australia policy ended almost 40 years ago. The rest of the country has moved on. (ii) The Asian immigrants are very hardworking and are definitely not jobless. (iii) Anybody who works hard in this country will live well regardless of race or "culture" (I note that you keep conflating race and culture).

<the middle class makes up the bulk of Australia. We are happy with moderate multiculturalism>>

Nice of David Jennings to elect himself spokesperson for middle class Australia!
Mind you, I have often suspected that most of those who talk-up our state sponsored MC have autocratic leanings.

<<Multiculturalism is not the extremist totalitarian beast that its opponents make it out to be>>

Perhaps, but outside of the sugar and spice fetes & festivals MC has acquired some beastly qualities:

As can be seen two cases I've witnessed:

Two employees of a large corp, who while discussing middle eastern politics in the canteen are overheard by a third who claims "offense" ---both were sacked.

Or, the employee who threatened that unless she was the next one promoted she'd scream "racism" --she was quickly promoted

Or this, which Tanveer Ahmed witnessed:

"I have seen such differences, however, when police are asked to intervene in domestic violence cases where ethnic groups such as South Asian or Middle Eastern couples are involved. Police often keep greater distance in such cases, some believing that cultural factors are at play and the families and communities should be left to their own devices. We do not officially have parallel laws for other groups, but variable enforcement can have the same effect."

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/dare-to-accept-we-are-different-20110923-1kp91.html

David Jennings

...The only apology I make David Jennings, is for the ambiguity of the sentence structure:

...I will remove the need for a “transformational trace” in the sentence, by shifting the phrase # now jobless, impoverished and homless # back, to enable the dangling phrase to become more obviously representative of the subject “White Australians”! Now it becomes less racist, all sense of the derogatory is against “White Australians”; and allowable comment under rules of MC, and reads as follows:-

... Multiculturalism stands in stark contrast to the abandonment of the National white Australian, a traditionalist to the work ethic and proud working class, now jobless, impoverished and homeless, floundering in a sea of Asian faces.

SPQR:

...Read your link with interest. The following author has worked it out! RE:

...“After the cosmopolitan?: multicultural cities and the future of racism”. Author; Michael Keith. Available through Amazon.

Basically, those people who are unsuccessful in life and who have failed to prosper hate multiculturalism and blame others for their misfortune. The rest of us, who are happy with our lives, are not as fussed about multiculturalism.

Depends on what is included in multiculturalism, David Jennings. It is hard to argue against it if it just about encouraging people to appreciate other cultures, without denigrating the dominant culture, tolerating human rights abuses, or trying to suppress non-libellous free speech, as with truth-is-no-defence religious vilification laws.

What I find more interesting is why it has been pushed so hard over the past few decades, where it just happened to coincide with really high levels of mass migration. Here is how I make sense of it. The contraceptive pill was introduced in the 1960s, and fertility rates fell sharply. By 1976 the Australian fertility rate was slightly below the long-term replacement level, where it has stayed ever since, with minor fluctuations. (People mostly do like children, in moderation.) Of course, the population continued to grow by natural increase due to demographic momentum and will continue to do so until some time in the 2030s (150,000 more births than deaths last year). However, this growth was insufficient for the tastes of our business elite. High population growth gives them bigger domestic markets, easy profits from real estate speculation and control of other vital resources, and a cheap, compliant work force. Even better if the growth comes from immigration, because they can then get skilled workers who have already been raised, educated, and trained at someone else's expense.

Their problem was that Australia is past the point where high growth is good for everyone or even for the majority of the population. No one disputes that it has been good news for the top 1%. The media and politicians have come up with a number of specious arguments to be sold to the punters, on economic benefits, defence, and dealing with an aging population. The 2010-2011 Productivity Commission Annual Report says (p. 6):

"Two benefits that are sometimes attributed to immigration, despite
mixed or poor evidence to support them, are that:
immigration is an important driver of per capita economic growth
immigration could alleviate the problem of population ageing."

(cont'd)