Banjo...THANX for that alert re the dirtiest word in the Australian political/social vocabulary and its soon to be demise.."MultiCulturalism"... at LAST.... kill that word as quick as we can hurl stones at it.
Amen x 7 to Integration ! (add some 'assimilation' and the cosmos will again be in balance)

Ronnie... I am flawed by your inexplicable stubbornness re the word 'culture'. Lets just say it is used in various ways, ONE of which is the shared beliefs of people.. hence we have... 'Cultural Anthropoligists' who study those very shared beliefs.
That...is the meaning I am using. Happy now ? (Heres a piece of chocolate if you are)

Your entrenched 'Individual' culture argument wreaks of post modernism and Western decadence where "every man/girl does what is right in his/her own eyes" which is the very last verse in the book of Judges. (loose updated translation of Ch 21:25)

The extent to which 'in their own eyes' has permeated the values of Western Movies, Art,Media behavior (youth oriented FM stations) and general behavior is like a death stench from Aushwitz at the peak of body burning time.

That stench is nothing less than the putrifying odour of our own cultural suicide.

We are weak, because we are so 'individual' in outlook. The Leb Muslim in Sydney I'm corresponding with has 200 cousins ! He regards the grandchildren of his grandparents other brothers and sisters as his cousins. That is clan solidarity. We don't need to go that far but to re-capture a greater sense of extended family past first cousins would be wonderful.

Individual difference... should be to the extent where it jepordizes the moral health or values solidarity of the group. (difference in an enhancing or upbuilding way is ok) If it is.. such a person should leave the group. (Church, Company, Club etc)

Boaz_David,

What is very interesting about the article yesterday, re MC, is:-

a. Will the Government drop MC in favour of Integration. and

b. What stance will Labor take on the issue.

Before Grammae Campbell and Pauline Hanson, both majors had a bi-partisan policy on immigration and related issues because they reckoned that the matters were too sensative for the public. So they kept a closed shop and gave us the mushroom treatment. This could open up a whole new can of worms unless they keep the lid on until after the election.

Time will tell, but I will let OLO know if I hear anything. I will be putting feelers out.

By the way if anyone knows any further developments in the Melbourne taxi drivers issue, I would like to know, and also anything about the Gold Coast attempted honour killing also.

Could be interesting times ahead.

Boaz David. I don't understand your response. You really need to lift your game. You say that you are "flawed". Well yes your debating is very flawed. If you put as little effort into to understanding other posters arguments as do in your responses, then I can see why you fail to respond in an appropriate and sensible manner.

What do you mean "here's a piece of chocolate if you are"? Is that sensible debating or childish patronising nonsense? I think you need to just refute my arguments using the accepted methods. Are your ill-manners an example of Christian culture?


You say: "Your entrenched 'Individual' culture argument wreaks (sic) of post modernism and Western decadence where "every man/girl does what is right in his/her own eyes" … . Boaz you rely heavily on emotional rhetoric when someone disagrees with you. For instance: Your man/girl allusion is irrelevant here.
Explain what you mean by "entrenched" in this context and its relevance. What is your problem with post modernism? And I would really like to know how you come to the conclusion that "western decadence" is a product of "individualism". I was thinking along the lines of it being an individual (like Jesus)to hold firm and refuse to go along with the decadence of western culture. Why do you assume otherwise? Is it because questioning your ideas somehow suggests badness and decadence? Are you that naïve? Boaz you can't refute the argument so you went with emotional rhetoric.

Boaz you say: "The extent to which 'in their own eyes' has permeated the values of Western Movies, Art,Media behavior (youth oriented FM stations) and general behavior is like a death stench from Aushwitz at the peak of body burning time."

"Death stench from Aushwitz"; "body burning time" you say Boaz. Trying to evoke a bit of emotion there too Boaz? And the quotation marks around “in their own eyes” suggest I used these words in this context. This is not he case. Hardly methods of a serious and sensible debater interested in broadening our understanding of society in an honest manner

You say: "That stench is nothing less than the putrifying (sic) odour of our own cultural suicide." This is just silly David. Maybe you need to be a little more of an individual and hold to good Christian manners instead of trying to appease those that are looking for unrealistic and often fascistic solutions.
.
You say: “We are weak, because we are so 'individual' in outlook.” No Boaz in the end it will be the individual who resists decadence. I think individualism in the face of others flawed ideology and cultural mores is a strength. Hence my earlier reference to Jesus.

You say: "Individual difference... should be to the extent where it jepordizes (sic) the moral health or values solidarity of the group." No Boaz - your "moral health" is very subjective and the "values solidarity" of a group may be very unhealthy for society in the term. You have written a meaningless sentence in the context of a discussion on social cohesion.

You say: "(difference in an enhancing or upbuilding (sic) way is ok)"

If it is..(I assume you mean isn't) such a person should leave the group. (Church, Company, Club etc)"

Your punctuation is confusing. Nevertheless, the problem is only such because often difference is seen as a negative for political, personal reasons when in fact a persons' individual slant on things may be a positive. To suggest that a person with a different position should leave a group goes against the principles of democracy. Tell me what do you do when an individual who doesn’t fit your mould and refuses to leave? Can't you see the Aushwitz signs in the distance here too?

To deny the individual and impose your groups culture (even in your narrow sense)is to start down the track of monoculturalism and that will lead to evil. It really floors me that you can see that David.

David is your position representative of the Christianity?

Banjo...I'll keep my ears to the ground :)

Dear Ronnie

I mean't 'floored' rather than 'flawed' ... but I do have my faults as you diligently sought to point out.

I was simply responding to your stubborn intransigent insistence about the meaning of 'culture'.

My use of colorful language is deliberately intended to wake up the frog as the temperature in the beaker approaches 'critical' and it dies without even realizing. No apologies for that.

"in their own eyes" is a quotation from Judges 20:21.

It simply illustrates that without a common cultural base line, or traditions agreed to by all, people will do their own thing, and often that 'thing' will be quite harmful to the group.

I don't decry individualism per se, it is a good thing, but only where it benefits the group rather than tearing it apart.
All groups have opinion leaders. If those opinion leaders take the group down an unhealthy path, they are culpible.

Economic and Immoral (in my view) interests, go to much effort to influence our 'group' for their own benefit. This needs to be exposed and extricated.

One example is where the parents of Bilal Skaf tried to re-characterize the rape victims as 'sluts' and to portry him as their beloved son who can do no wrong.

cheers.

Benjamin,

I did not realise people thought of Greeks as non-white Europeans! How funny..

In response to your view, this is my own personal experience.
My father is Greek, he was born in Greece and yes he is proud of this fact. He came to Australia as a little boy, with my grandparents (who define hard-working) and for 4 years worked where ever the Australian Government told them without complaint and let me tell you, it was no walk in the park. They were happy to be given the opportunity to try and make a life for their family.

My father and my uncle studied hard learnt the language and became prominent specialist doctors who have given much back to the community. This is also despite much racism, and yes, it was REAL racism.

Does he resent Australia? Does he regard this as a bank, to educate his kids? No way, Australia is his heart and his home. Yet, he still calls himself a GREEK-Australian. Can you really not understand this?

My grandparents LOVE Australia, they have lived here for 40 years and will not go back to Greece. I ask them why, and they say this is their home. But they still consider themselves Greek-Australian.

In honour of their culture and my heritage how proud I am of them and my family, if someone asks about my last name, I call myself Greek-Australian as well. Now you may put this down to an “embarrassing sense of Greek Nationalism”, but its more than that.

My mother was born here in Sydney, she is Australian (of WHITE European background).

Her father gave distinguished service in the Australian Army for all of her life and experienced much atrocity for our nation. My mother and aunty and I proudly go to the Anzac Day memorials and shed a tear for him. I have been to Gallipoli and my heart ached and still does ache for the Australians who died.

So what does that make me?