obviously

The issue here is multiculturalism, immigration and refugees are separate issues. But I will digress.

142,930 immigrants this year, up from 120,060 from last year. About 4,000 refugees.

This is Howards "smoke and mirrors" trick. While dramatically increasing immigration each year since elected he has pandered to the anti-immigration mob by being tough on refugees. Guess what the dills have bought it.

I don't know where you live but I suggest any percieved increase in crime is due to economic factors not african refugees.

(Digression (parekbasis in greek, egressio, digressio and excursion in latin) is a section of a composition or speech that is an intentional change of subject) :)

B-D EVERYBODY wants to rule the World! - Didn't you hear Tears for Fears??

It is up to Australians to show them they have another think coming if they want to rule Australia - that is the job of all Australians - or at least the ones some of us vote for to do it on our behalf. ( for now, for now - but come the revolution - KA-POW!)

Ev - thank you for your opinion - forgive me I thought this was an OPINION forum? I exercised mine as freely as you and Obviously may do - if anyone actually learns something from it all well and good. Unlike Obviously, i don't use spellcheck and when i type i infrequently hit ' l' before 's' - or any one of a number of similar errors and do not always pick them up before posting. I wrote hoarde originally but knew that wasn't kwite rite. Having to listen to an 18 yo tell me and everyone else why (in their entirely UNhumble if 'polite' opinion) our arguments in favour or anti the topic are wrong when it is clear that they do not posses the ability to correctly understand the 'youse' (sic) of some words- simple basic words (to and to equals? - you really would need to read ALL Ob's posts to understand why i was being so patronising and smug) - was more than i could 'bear'. Your opinion (and i see it has a shred of cred) has been duly noted. I stand by my decision to exercise mine in Obviously's case - thats who the hell i think i am - wanna make something of it?? Obviously obviously didn't - maybe that should tell you something? Or are you his Mum?

Banjo - well said - a voice of reason! If only there were more like you.

Rainier,
What makes you think that I want you, or anyone else, to be like me? And I'm facinated to know why you think I am a monocultural xenophobic?

I have a right to my assesment of our present culture. Was some of the examples I gave incorrect or was the assesment accurate and you simply did not like to be informed that we are not multicultural.

Can you name one group of people from overseas that do not have to alter their culture somewhat when they come to live here. How can we call ourselves multicultural if we do not allow others to practice ALL their cultural aspects. Spaniads, for example, cannot conduct bull fights here even though it is very much part of their culture.
After I wrote my last post, I realized that Kiwis do the Haka before football matches and we don't and they say "fush an chups" when they mean "fish an chips", so I guess we are a bit different.

People from other cultures can still have their different cusine, which I enjoy at times, hold Dragon parades, beer festivals, maypoles with children in colourfull costumes. You know all the nice things we were promised when multiculturalism was imposed.

Perhaps you would like us to be multicultural. If so what cultural matters would you allow to let migrants feel more at home? What about child marriages, FGM, carry firearms in public place, prevent young women from higher education? I really would like to know just where multiculturalists draw the line on cultural practices.

I am not fearfull of foreigners and I do not care about ethinicity, but i do care about community cohesiveness and to continue to push Multiculturalism will never acheive that.

A Jakubowicz,

PART I

Multiculturalism protects passive and active racists from fair criticism, and thereby from overcoming the grip of their herd instinct.

By “racism” we mean the tendency of one to identify as primordially a member of some ethnic/moral collective rather than as individuals whose sense of collective patriotism is held not for any transitory and contingent customs but for a particular State constitution, rooted as it is in universal ethical principles that lie beyond the grip of the ethno-herd instinct. This goes for all members of the State, new and old, regardless of their length of time as patriots.

Those within the State of “Australia” who cannot get their minds off their “ethnicity” (e.g. Irish, English, Vietnamese, Greek, Lebanese, etc.) are to be deemed “racists”, since it is such people who typically herd together into separate suburbs, employ only their own kin, never join the armed services or other such essential service jobs (police, fire, ambulance), nor partake in volunteer activities that benefit those beyond their ‘community’, and in general foster division via the moralising and victimisation of identity politics.

We believe that “multiculturalism” is unjust to the principles of such a constitutional patriotism, in that it promotes the divisive herd instinct of the “customary self” over the prosperous “ethical self”, the self that FOSTERS ASTRONOMICALLY MORE DIVERSITY, TOLERANCE, AND CONSIDERATENESS THAN DOES MULTICULTURAL IDENTITY POLITICS.

Identity politicians like you, Andrew, are in my opinion the most ethnocentric people of them all. You conflate class with ethnicity to garner support for your unsupportable argument that places the blame of the problems associated with “minority” integration entirely onto the white-anglo-saxon members of the community, when all the evidence points to it being totally internally generated.

Take your claim that “We live in a world now where unease about the ‘other’ has escalated dramatically”.

From my perspective, assuming that by “world” you mean “earth” (rather than “West”), your statement could only be true if by “other” you mean “white-anglo-saxon”. But since I know you mean everybody BUT white-anglo-saxons, your assumption here reflects your ethnocentric bias which prevents you from ...

PART II

... even considering the possibility that it could be otherwise.

And what do you mean by: “a complex society has to see everyone as having an equal stake in its success if it is to prosper”?

From my perspective this is best achieved by promoting integration, which is not a cultural genocide but just an overcoming of xenophobia. Whist there is truth in saying that “Australia was a society with a racist past seeking to prevent or avoid a racist future”, there is also truth in saying that those like you who cannot get their minds off their ethnicity and who are thereby oversensitive about it, are the identity politicians who foster “Cultural hierarchies that force obeisance of some to others, that corral [not so much] minorities [but individuals] into ghettos of hate and poverty, and that demand a singular consciousness”. (Even at the mild end of the spectrum we have "Woglife" forums: http://www.wog.com.au/forum/default.asp)

You say: “multiculturalism has not had its day, though there are those who fear change in themselves and will do everything in their power to ensure it disappears from the political lexicon”.

From my perspective IT IS YOU WHO FEAR CHANGE in yourself, for you cannot, like the vast majority of white-anglo-saxons, get over your being rooted in your ethno-soil. It is identity politicians like YOU who cannot overcome your sense of alienation, no matter how subtle, when away from your kin.

You attack all fair criticism of your politics by religiously demoralising it as “truly evil”, because in your opinion it is “advancing an agenda of supercilious and corrosive superiority”.

From my perspective it is you who has the sense of superiority, for to assume that “constitutional patriotism” amounts to a blind cultural conformism is to miss the point entirely. Nobody has EVER asked you to jettison your precious “heritage” UNLESS it conflicts with the very principles that sustain the possibility of diversity and tolerance. Ghettoisation IS a potential problem in this regard, and we will not stop being critical of it because of your threats of our “disregard for the consequences”.

abyss - 5 star's