Reading through this thread has only re-affirmed my opinion that multiculturalists are either overly naive or intellectually dishonest. They are glaringly unable to confute the evidence from both Australia and abroad which indicates that multiculturalism encourages the ethnic balkanisation and cultural de-Westernisation of the host nation. Rather than deal with the inconvenience of reality, proponents of multiculturalism imply that opposition to their ideology is motivated by xenophobia and even racism, effectively using ad hominem attacks to stifle substantive debate. So much for the intellectual underpinnings of multiculturalism.

Oligarch.. be encouraged.

If you feel the pro multiculturalists are causing their 'enemies' to cringe in intellectual or moral fear at their 155mm verbal Howitzer shells of xenophobia and racism then you have not been following my posts :)

I relish such charges so they can be shown for what they really are "Personal attacks in the absense of sound well evidenced argument"

Multi-Culturalism has now been relegate to its rightful place 'cult' and is we are now being 'intervened' and deprogrammed from its pernicious mythology.

It will take time of course, but it will go in the end.

"Multi" neglects to recognize 'predominant' and suggests all cultures are deserving of equal treatment. This is clearly not the case or we would have every langauge of every race and culture in Australia being one of many national languages.

Respecting other cultures must ALways have the proviso that "as long as it does not conflict with the prevailing culture" otherwise there will be cultural anarchy.

"In those days there was no King in Israel, And every man did what was right in his own eyes" Josh 21:25

So, there is always need for a 'king' in cultural terms, to keep the princes and princesses in line, and that pesky Nobility.
One thing about Nobles, they tend to forge alliances with "outside" forces in order to advance their own royal aspirations. Always has been, is now, and always will be.

CITIZENSHIP means learning how Australia ticks. Learning how to be an "Australian" of Chinese ancestry, not a "Chinese Australian" It means knowing that when the emergency services come to assist you at an accident, they will NOT be encumbered by some need to refer to their 'cultural awareness handbook' before deciding on how to treat the women and children and men. They already KNOW, because they are "Australian".

It is for those and many similar reaons that the REACTION IS SO STRONG by Aussies against "Multi" culture-alism

Oligarch,
You are spot on and put it in a nut shell.

Yvonne,
I am aware what the legislation on MC states about having respect for other cultures. What happens when one or more cultures do not have respect for others? Answer:- The whole MC ideology breaks down.

For example, Croats and Serbs riot and fight each other, culmunating in cars being torched and shots fired at buildings. Thats respect?

By their actions, Leb muslims show no respect for us, our laws or justice system, even though we welcome immigrants with open arms and that is dissappointing.

MC can only work when ALL cultures respect ALL other cultures. There also has to be respect for the host countries laws and social standards.

MC is a philosophy that fosters seperate ethnic development, ideally a federation of ethnic cultures, not one community. It rates original culture ahead of national unity. Unity in diversity is a bad joke.

The leb gangs clashing with the asian school kids the other day is another example why it will not work.

It is clear that the anti-multiculture factions on this forum fear being dominated, overtaken, overrun, etc. etc.
by people they perceive as "others".

This is of course fair enough.

Fear is a significant motivating factor in many aspects of human behaviour. Some would say that it is the biggest.
From the manner in which we happily allow successive governments to erode our freedoms in return
for protecting us from perceived harm, I would be inclined to agree.

However, it is unrealistic to conduct a debate of this type without considering a viable alternative.

The only one presented with any frequency on this forum is Boaz's "Ein Reich, ein Volk, ein Führer" society,
an addled mixture of xenophobia and tokenism.

But at least he has thought about an alternative approach, even if he is still in the same puddle as rest of the antis,
who believe that you can simply wish away the past and step into a bright (in their eyes) new future,
without any pain, sacrifice or hardship.

To bring about a monocultural society in this country will require the overthrow of the existing democratic
underpinnings of our nation. I cannot see this occurring without bloodhsed
- freedom is still too precious in our eyes.

But if it does occur, it will then be necessary for the overthrower to impose their unique version
of monoculture on their fellow citizens.

After all, by definition there can be only one.

But whose will it be?

Not only will I have a problem if that imposed vision is Boaz's, but I suspect I will not be alone.
Sufficiently not alone, in fact, to be able to wage a continuous war against the dictatorship it represents.

As an alternative to this, I would support the further development of a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic,
multi-faceted, multi-coloured nation, whose citizens would be free to choose.

The minute - no, the millisecond - we turn into Boazland, I'm outta here.
Fortunately, I think Australians have far too much common sense for me to have to make this choice.

Pericles... for a fleeting moment there I also thought we had progress.. only to be dissappointed with you "ein reich" blather.

Your point about fear is fair enough and the danger of NOT taking a pro-active approach to fostering a vibrant Australian culture is that this fear you refer to will explode in another Cronulla but next time it will be on Turbo.

You keep taking what I did NOT say, and presenting it here as if I DID say it..

You are suggesting my position is "Ein Reich_ein Volk_ein Führer" which being translated means
"ONE State, ONE people, ONE LEADER"

But I said:

"ONE Nation, ONE Race, ONE culture"

$5 to anyone who can spot the IMPORTANT difference even in the headline, which was clearly designed (as the rest of the post explained) to grab attention.

BLENDED SOCIETY
From that headline, I proceeded to develop the idea of a blended society, where racist attitudes are broken down, such that people of various cultural and racial backgrounds feel FREE (not forced) to intermarry and thereby move as many tributaries towards a new 'Australian' identity which comprises the best of all the contributing cultures.

This idea included NOTHING about any 'one leader' as you so persistently portray me as promoting. Now.. you are the one doing the rabble rousing here, by deliberately misrepresenting what I actually said.

You mention 'imposed' quite a lot.. and I mention 'choose' hmmmm methinks there is another motive going on in Pericles mind.. could it be FEAR of your children marrying outside your racial comfort zone ?

My major point is this. Stop funding difference, and if funding is there at all, allocate it to unifiying measures rather than divisive.

Public Service Department heads will no longer have to submit reports on how much they have done to foster DIFFERENCE, no..they will now have to submit reports indicating what they have done to promote UNITY and cultural harmony. GEEEE..that sounds terribly scary doesn't it ?

That alone will achieve my own vision. The rest will follow naturally.

The only barriers to inter-marriage are RACIST by nature.

Pericles that's exactly right. Because even if it were possible to impose a monoculture humans being what they are, will find a reason to create an other to fear and/or hate. Protestants vs Catholics vs Pentecostalists vs atheists etc. The sky's the limit really, even amongst peace loving Western civilised Christians. (I'm being a bit sarcastic here-I don't think Christians are particularly peace loving or necessarily civilised)

Banjo, because there are people or even groups of people unwilling to play by the rules so to speak, is not exactly a reason to abandon those rules. We've had laws against murder and stealing since time immemorial in every single culture and still that rule gets broken very frequently everywhere and there are people who get away with it too, but I haven't heard anybody argue we might as well drop that because it isn't stopping crime anyway.

The freedom that comes with a democratic and multi-cultural society requires vigilance on the part of all citizens. It should never be taken for granted by anybody. It requires constant nurturing and education. Modeling respectful behaviour at all times is more instructive than mirroring a slanging match back. Living in a dictatorship is so much easier. Just do as you're told and believe as you're told. It keeps ignorant prejudices simmering behind closed doors, then when that dictator dies all hell breaks loose. See the Balkans and Iraq.