Ludwig is on the ball. All cultures are a mixture of the good and the bad, and it would be sensible to sift out the better parts of different societies and drop the bad. It is crazy for Australia to drop what has already been achieved in this regard and be almost totally culture-permissive; and carry on with the bizarre practice of fostering the problems we have which are associated with pressures of infrastructure needs from ever-increasing numbers.

We saw an example of 'hard' multiculturalism on OLO last week - the demand that Australia involve itself in the dispute over who has the right to the name Macedonia half a world away. Not our problem.

So Colinsett, what are the best parts of the Afghan, Burmese and Somalian ways of life and how will these unique institutions and cultural practices reward my Australian White children?
Now reverse that sentence and see if the answer is the same.

Like most everything initiated by the WW2 generation multiculturalism has not lived up to it's promises and turned into a millstone for their descendants. I find it amusing that "progressives" accuse their targets of wanting to take society back to the 1950's all the while clinging to the values of old White men whose worldview began to develop in the 1930's. :)

Ludy,
while I agree with your thoughts about high immigration being detrimental to our country, you have lost me in relation to multiculturalism. Al Grazzby's and Whitlm's view of MC was that it would help migrants integrate and yet the opposite has occurred. It divided us into groups each viaing for their handout of funds. That funding also excluded some groups for not being ethnic enough. Fraser further implemented the flawed ideology.

Could you tell me the 'good' aspects of MC because I can only see greater variety of eating places and superficial aspects like children in colourful costumes , dragon parades and beer festivals. On the other hand I can see plenty on the downside.

I do not see us as MC, but as multi-racial as our fundamentals are all derived from the Westminster system and without that glue the whole MC thing would simply fall apart. Government needs to get out of sponsoring MC and promote integration. Just what are the practical advantages of MC?

Thank you for the article, Peter.

But a discussion was already started on your original Telegraph article last Thursday (15 pages of comments so far).
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6145&page=1

Yet again the "ills" of multiculturalism are blamed on Whitey's laws and policies, rather than the immigrants themselves.

There was never any need for "hard" multiculturalism.
We live in a liberal society.
People could already wear what they want, eat what they want, worship the God they want.
No need for special laws or policies.
And no need to spend a fortune on "promoting" cultural deviance.

Even if "hard" multiculturalism is officially dropped, the government is still supporting it with its Asian-biased immigration policy.

2 out 3 immigrants these days are Asian, and 3 out of 4 are of non-European ancestry.

Do 84% of Australians support *that*?
I doubt they even know the true figures.

They probably think the "ethnic" types are just a touch of spice, when they are now the meal itself, and Whites are the seasoning.

I agree with Shockadelic. I would love to know where this 84% approval rating actually came from, and which people were actually surveyed and what questions they were asked. We have a massive immigration policy that is really a huge ponzi scheme and most of the new arrivals are asian with the single biggest source chinese. This is madness beyond belief. chinese people maintain a link to mainland china for generations and have zero intention of integrating or reciprocating in any way. china is rapidly becoming an assertive and aggressive world power and is certainly no ally of Australia so why would we ever import large numbers of people with whom one day we may find ourselves in conflict with? On the other hand, perhaps not, as with this present immigration policy Australia will become another province of china by 2050. Why were we not asked if this is what we want? Lower cases are intentional in this post,; I am not in the least bit concerned if 'multi-cultis' are offended.