Thanks for your support divine_msn.

Ironic that she advocates restrictions on freedom of speech, then suddenly is telling us a lot less about herself.

One might imagine all sorts of explanations.

...I believe our author has severely underestimated the degree of racial disharmony presented here as opinion by removing, unannounced, elements of her personal introduction at the header. Multiculturalism is a worldwide phenomenon which has outlived its usefulness. When politicians turned to the left in the 70’s, Australians stayed firmly to the right, at the little “white light” and were happy to stay comfortable in their “blue” and conservative heaven.

...The old order policy of the white Australia, was a unifying and evolutionary political mandate designed to dovetail neatly into a rich historical backdrop, naturally acceptable to white Australians with their unique culture. Multiculturalism has, on the other hand, proved to be a wedge designed, more apparently, for the higher purpose of economic growth which, as it is proving to be, of limited benefit, to an evolving majority of Australians left behind in poverty.

...Australians are increasingly enlightened to the facts of multiculturalism. A multiculturalism rightly described above as a “tool”, (is weapon too harsh a term?): A plaited whip of guilt, opportunism and plunder, used to effect in the reduction of the traditions of our National culture, to the irrelevance it has become, by social divisiveness and casting of scorn onto the host.

Diver dan,
I see multiculturalism as a socialist tool to bring disharmony to western societies.

A philosephy that rates original culture ahead of national loyality.

An ideology which fosters seperate ethnic development of a federation of ethnic cultures, not one community.

The biggest untruth is the catchcry of 'Unity in diversity'

This social engineering was trendy in the 70s but, as you say, people are now realising its downside. The people were never consulted.

Ken_H, there is nothing to explain really. She asked for her biography to be changed so I changed it. We normally describe authors how they want to be described.

Graham,

As your online pleas for contributions indicate, OLO has trouble attracting sufficient high quality contributors, so the quality of articles is highly variable.

An author bio note is a guide to whether one should spend time reading the article or whether it's yet another adolescent activist.

In this case, Alice's original bio suggested she might have enough knowledge, experience, a point of view and writing skill to make the effort worthwhile.

Turns out the article ignored recent international experience, was internally contradictory and proposed restrictions on freedom of speech. One might argue that anyone proposing restrictions on freedom of speech should not be published, of course, but there's also an argument for letting us know what they are up to, I guess.

However, to take down the bio while the article was "live" and comments still coming in was, in my view, disrespectful to those whose comments had been informed by that bio note: indeed, some quoted it.

"Alice Aslan is a writer" tells nobody anything and similarly is disrespectful to readers.

To say, as you have done, that "She asked for her biography to be changed so I changed it. We normally describe authors how they want to be described." without explanation of why she wanted it changed midstream or even mentioning that it had been changed, is also disrespectful, in my view.

It's got nothing to do with respect Ken, apart from respecting the wishes of an author. If you're looking for disrespect try this post from divine_msn http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12865#222051.

I didn't ask Alice why she wanted to change the biog, but I wouldn't mind betting that posts like that one which instead of dealing with the article deride the author, were one reason.

We don't have any particular problems attracting suitable articles, but if we did I wouldn't be surprised given the nature of some of the comments that are made about the authors. It's not limited to OLO, but it's something I don't approve of when I find it here.

Graham