This "racial hatred" is so ridiculously exaggerated it isn't funny. Every conflict, every crime that is committed by a minority is chalked up to this problem - and how can you argue against it, except to say, that perhaps other factors are more signficant?

This article is hardly revolutionary material. It is referring to the soft and friendly kind of MC.

Sure, there are real problems associated with political correctness giving too much sway to minorities in some instances. I won't argue against that, because it's true.

But to attack this article? Come on, attack it if you will for being too mushy. Because despite the title, that's what it is.

But for goodness sake, if you're seeing demons in this pretty warm and fuzzy piece of writing, I suggest you calm down a little.

And Online_east: "TRTL, if I was a non-Muslim immigrant, I would be offended by your comparison of their teething problems with those of the Muslims."

Well, if they're insulted they can speak up... although it isn't really relevant, I happen to be a non-muslim immigrant myself.

In Japan there is an interesting phenomenon- all major crime is perpetrated by the gaijin (foreigners)- with white people seen as a major problem. Just ask a local- they can probably quote chapter and verse about how disrespectful, untrustworthy and plain criminal most gaijin are.

Mostly it’s a crock- like anywhere (even Australia) most crime is committed by locals but that doesn’t sell papers. Lurid spreads about the general perfidy of white people does. It makes everyone feel better about their own little prejudices.

But what is most interesting is that there is a grain of truth in there. Having lived over here for almost 3 years I think that I see why.

Like every culture, the Japanese society is built on a common understanding. They expect everyone to act in a certain way with social taboos built in at a subconscious level. Their legal, financial and social systems are built with those taboos in mind.

The problem is, because the taboos are instinctive and everyone is assumed to have them, they become blindspots. Why guard against something if no one is going to violate it? Even better- how do you guard against something that you cannot even see?

Now- add the gaijin. Raised in a completely different social dynamic with different taboos built in, they look at the Japanese system and see the blindspots- clear as day. You can see it and play the locals against their own assumptions. Understandably, when these schemes are discovered they have a greater impact on the reputation of the gaijin. Because not only were the schemes taking place, but the gaijin were acting in a way that was an anathema to the local culture.

Exactly the same situation must happen in Australia. Foreigners are able to see the weak spots in our own systems simply by using our own assumptions of civilized behaviour against us.

CONT…

CONT…

In this situation, rather than closing our eyes to other cultures, we actually should be actively engaging the responsible members of our ethnic societies to help us close those holes. We should embrace multiculturalism at a legal, political and social level for no other reason that to make us more bulletproof.

A classic example has got to be the current disaster in Iraq. A complete lack of understanding of the basic social dynamics of the region led the overconfident US into a quagmire. Why? Because they assumed everyone would act the way they would. In hindsight it is a ludicrous position but they fell into it anyway. Why? Because there was a complete lack of anyone available to tell them that they were stepping into the quagmire in the first place!

O/S companies working in Japan fall victim to the same mentality all the time. The locals run them around in the most comic fashion because they fail to understand the basics of the culture. Simple things such as understanding that ‘hai’ does not necessarily mean ‘yes’, but could also mean ‘I understand you’. That kind of thing makes every difference when negotiating a contract!

Imagine how strong Australia could become if we build into our political, economic and diplomatic systems the understanding that not only is everyone different, but everyone is both weak and strong because everyone is different. Imagine how strong you can be by confronting and eliminating the blindspots in our own systems. By embracing and focusing the advantages that come from having direct access to multiple cultures we can make ourselves unbeatable.

No- multiculturalism could be something much more than just ‘mush’

mylakhrion

Thank you for that interesting, intelligent and well-reasoned contibution. You argument for multiculturalism is likely to appeal to those Australians who can see that it is their best interests. That line of argument would appeal particularly to people who want to do business with diverse groups.

I like your approach too because it suggests that culltural understanding really is a mutual activity. Smart people tune in to the 'other' without assuming that moral superiority or inferiority is related to difference.

While I suport your rationale I am also comfortable with a human rights rationale - that multicultural policies - set in a framework of Australian law - preserve the rights of people to maintain languages, cultural practices and religious beliefs while at the same time ensuring that Australian services (e.g. health and education) are accessible to newly arrived people. Moreover, it's pragmatic in that people who have those rights are both more likely to settle in successfully and more likely to give a commitment to Australian law and democratic values.

Yes, I agree with the likes of CJ Morgan and Turnlefteft. Lets all get together and get all sensitive and talk about how we should all give the good old muslims etc a fair go. After all, we are all decent, fair people aren't we? All those other places in the world with their loving religions are wonderful utopias, and we want to transport some of the love here, don't we. We wouldn't want to be seen as rude, or intolerant, that would be the ultimate insult. I think we should go a little further and make foreigners feel at home, especially Muslims, by importing a few of their own little home grown rules. Lets start with financial penalties for non christians / anglo Australians in the form of higher interest rates etc, force women to uncover their heads, then remove any form of religious worship except for Christianity. Surely these laws would be great for Australia, because Muslims do it, and we can't utter a word against these poor misunderstood souls. We should get together, CJ, TRTL and other likeminded, wonderfully humane people, and have a peace rally against the rednecks!

FrankGol wrote: "Why do you and they continue to trumpet the old myth that Multicullturalism and 'Western' values - what I call universal values - are at odds? Like you, I believe in democracy, freedom of speech and religion, and the rights of the individual - AND I believe in multiculturalism. Let's have no more of these false and deceptive dichotomies."

FrankGol, your ardent support for multiculturalism reveals a simplistic and overly optimistic view of human nature. Are you honestly asserting that Western values are universally accepted by other cultures? Do you even accept that Western culture and values exist? Are you claiming that mainstream Australia should simply disown its values, culture, and heritage in favour of cultural relativism?

I wholeheartedly agree with Gunnar K. A. Njalsson is his assessment that multiculturalism is an oddity confined to a Western urban environment and cannot survive as an ideology outside it. Some variants of multiculturalism, he argues, may equip non-egalitarian cultural groups with power and influence. This, in turn, may alter the value system of the larger society.

In short, Western civilisation is the product of a culmination of experiences by our ancestors, for example the Enlightenment. In comparison, non-western cultures are not merely different, but should be viewed as backward. Australia, as a Western nation, should therefore promote its own values and culture over those of non-Western minority groups in this country. Yes, and the means an acceptance of Australia's overwhelmingly European heritage.

Paul Scheffer, a Dutch critic of multiculturalism, notes that homogeneity and integration are necessary for a society. He states:

* a huge influx of people from diverse cultural backgrounds, in combination with multiculturalism, resulted in spontaneous ethnic segregation.
* multiculturalism and immigration led to adaptation problems such as school drop-out, unemployment, and high crime rates.
* a society which does not respect itself also has no value for immigrants
* immigrants must always lose their own culture - that is the price of immigration, a "brutal bargain" (quote from Norman Podhoretz)

Multiculturalism is the antithesis of nationalism. As a firm believer in the nation-state, I find this unacceptable.