Boaz_David

"1/ Dominant culture being Anglo/Brit"

We have that and always will.

"2/ Controlled numbers to avoid ghettos and any one minority becoming a threat."

Ghettos won't occur when migrants are welcomed and assisted to participate and integrate into Australian society. We need to do a lot more in this regard.

"3/ We remain in total control of our immigration and settlement policies."

Once again, we are and always have been.

"4/ SELECTIVE immigration"

Once again, this has always been the practice, though of course not to the extent that you would like. In reality, the policy you descibe would be little different to White Australia. This was a discriminatory and racist policy, and was eventually condemned as messy, unwieldy and counter-productive. Besides, who's to be the arbiter of the national interest? Many would argue that it is not at all in Australia's interests to turn our back on the world as you are suggesting. What an arrogant message to send to the world - you can only come in if you are just like us. That would really enhance our international reputation and bring stability to the region wouldn't it?

While disagreeing with the content of your post, I did appreciate its tone - until I was told to join the "real" world. I am in the real world, David, I just happen to view it from a different perspective to you, that's all. My view is no less valid than yours and no less real and if you want to debate me in future you'll just have to cut out the bullying because I won't respond.

BRonRyn:

Presumably you would want to define precisely what you mean by multiculturalism, the dictionary meaning versus the operational definition that has its adherents and detractors.

- a richer and broader culture
- a more diverse and interesting population mix

This is the same point split over two lines, trying to pad things like that is sneaky.

They are true by default and if you think it constitutes a benefit then you have to justify it. Diversity for its own sake is one thing, showing it to be beneficial is another. Introducing a pack of paedophiles into a kindergarten play group will make it more diverse.

- innovative and different ideas

Ideas do not require immigration to be passed on. We are taught to read for a reason, this is why academics publish instead of requiring a green card. Modern communications make this argument even less persuasive than it might once have been.

What percentage of ideas are worthy of changing the demographic makeup of a country for. And in terms of the perspective you choose to adopt in asserting this, how many Nobel laureates does it take to account for how many mediaeval peasants in the mix. What is the correct ratio to make for a net gain?

Any proof that innovation is a race based occurrence. And by that I mean you have to come up with something more substantial than one of those SBS moments, Morris dancers in traditional dress cavorting about a maypole. Specifics would be nice.

- access to new markets and sources of capital

I am not an economist. If you are then I am more than happy to defer to your better and more informed judgement. Otherwise, we could both agree not to talk about things we do not understand.

Perhaps you could elaborate with some specific real world examples.

- willing workers where needed

This is to fill skill shortages and not relevant to the current question. See the comments about Egyptian doctors in earlier posts.

- an ability to share with and learn from others

Padding things again, this was innovative and different ideas before.

Learning and sharing (or not) occurs between humans, from birth and as a consequence of being alive. Irrespective of race. To claim it as a pro for the immigration debate seems a bit opportunistic on your behalf.

Of course if there is something to be learned from other races, but not your own, then that would be an admission that there are substantive differences between the races. I am sure that this is not a claim you would feel comfortable defending.

- an international reputation for fairness and decency

This is very flimsy, like the noises they make in one of those corporate video puff pieces.

Apparently the Cronulla situation has caused inestimable damage to Australia's prestige (according to some) and this is directly related to multiculturalism. Personally I feel David Hicks did a lot of damage to our national reputation, but he was nothing if not willing to embrace different cultures. Remember it is real benefits that you are meant to be showing, not rhetoric.

- and much more

This is lucky because I am still waiting for something realistic to start with.

As to the question you asked me. I am not making the claim that there is an alternative to multiculturalism. It is a moot point, there is no choice. Then again I am not doggedly defending it, despite good evidence that there are serious flaws. This is a shame as it makes a fine platform from which to berate people for their lack of humanity and so on. But then that would be too easy.

Dear Bronwyn,
bullying involves exclamation marks, not smileys. I hope that somewhere in the recesses of this debate there is room for a humorous prod and poke. I welcome them. Sterility and hyper strictness remind me more of the 'fundamentalism' which you appear to dislike so much.

That aside, thanx for understanding my tone, which was meant to address the issue constructively.

SELECTIVE IMMIGRATION=WHITE AUSTRALIA POLICY ?
No.. not at all, but simply selective based on the criteria I outlined in the previous post. I would include those from Islamic traditions at the absolute bottom of the scale. (while agreeing totally there are many nice and wonderful muslims) I do so for very sound historical reasons. Given the theology of Islam, and the very observable fact that the larger the community, the greater the number of radicals (yes.. just at the extreme end) who are willing to murder in the name of Islam if you exercise your rights to produce a controversial movie, or pen a cartoon which may draw some humorous attention to the prophet of Islam.
I assure you, that if Sasha Cohen (Ali G) had given Islam the same treatement he did to Christianity and God in his blasphemous "Da Gospel according to Ali G" he would probably be dead now, or at least have people hunting him down.

You might respond with "But his sounds like collective punishment for the crimes of a few" well..no, its collective exclusion from the right to immigrate here. Thats not a punishment, its the withdrawal of a privilege by a soveriegn country. You might respond with reference to the UN conventions which we are signatories to, to which I reply, the sooner we either withdraw from them or add numerous 'exceptions' the better.

I am very much in favor of socially positive discrimination and reject totally the idea that 100% non discrimination is a social virtue. I think I have history on my side.

Another issue. Fundamentalism and Racism ? sorry. No connection.
Ring the KKK for that one. Could only ever be based on incorrect theology.

G'day Bronwyn, bit late, very busy

-This is an arrogant and narrow-minded statement don't you think?

No I didn't say that my culture was better than theirs. I stated a fact that you can learn what not to do from other cultures. For example the desert aborigines used to sub incise their penises, slash them from base to tip. Not a good idea. At school I was told endlessly that all cultures where equal, however through directly experiencing other cultures and talking to some of the women in those cultures I see otherwise.

-In any case, many would argue that a culture that exploits and dominates its environment in a totally unsustainable manner.

You may be interested to know that many of our immigrants come here to do just that.

-One day, Western societies will be forced to learn from some of those cultures you disparage as "backward".

Western societies already have learnt much from the backward ones.

-we will have no choice but to learn from those who have managed to live in harmony with their surroundings for thousands of years.

I would love to live in peace and harmony with the world, the Moriori of the Chatham Islands did just that, then in 1835 the Maori arrived.

I knew the noble savage argument would come into this somewhere along the line.

Did you take Gender Studies at uni?

-Why should people have to forgo all of their cultural traditions?

They don't, I just don't want to subsidise or make special allowances for them. It's racist to do so and infantilises them.

-It is a sure recipe for social instability.

And the current ingredients Bronwyn? Look around you, you often complain about how more has to be done to help them assimilate. Do you realise how much effort goes into keeping this whole machine cranking over? Effort that could go into ventures truly worthwhile. I don't think you do.