If mc means equal opportunity for all...with more than enough of whats wanted/needed to go around...then I dont think this issue will be raising its head...

Problems arise when there is not enough to go around, or unbalanced self interested groups just want more than they need, when picking off the weaker and vulnerable becomes the first targets...

So what is driving this...

mc works...all ethnics, and this word includes anglo-saxons, can walk our streets without a feeling of rejection from any quarter...why act to change this good thing...when we judge each other on the higher level of the person we are ie our personality and character (gaita in romulus my father gives a good explanation from page 101 to these words)

And when one sits back and thinks about it... a mc society that works well together is more capable of dealing with society stresses that may arise than a society at war with itself...

The white Australia policy worked for a while because english anglo-saxon held the balance of world power for that period...and so took the cream of spoils as any conquering group can/did in history...nothing wrong with that. Now, the world has become a smaller place and population dramatically exploded and no ethnic group hold such superior power over all others...so mc is the only way forward...afterall what we call mc is actually a cultural diversity that developed over thousands of years of society...lets celebrate that...while we all keep our eye on keeping Australia sustainably balanced now, particularly ensuring our children grow with a healthy psychological responses(a lot harder than one realizes) and a healthy future takes care of itself...

Sam

Sam...

we don't need any policy other than 'equality' for people to have equal opportunity. We don't need to mention anything about 'culture' or 'multi' culture.

As soon as we mention 'culture' along with 'multi' we are basically admitting that Australia had no culture of its own, or..that if it did, its just one of many, and all others have the same chance to re-shape it in terms of their own.

That is the result of a 'multi' cultural policy.

Far better, is that policy aims at simply protecting equality of access, employment, services etc. The limit of people not knowing English is only a hint to provide some extra help with language, but NOT culture. More preferable in terms of Australian cultural solidarity and cohesian, is an approach which clearly INFORMS would be migrants that Australian culture is such and such, and it is expected that ALL migrants to this great country will seek to assimilate themselves to it, and support it, and share in it.

If they happen to have a religion which is problematic in terms of assimilation, this should be pointed out, and if neccessary, advice given that Australia may NOT be a desirable destination for such people.

Its all about 'us'. Remember the song ? "What about me, it isn't fair, I've had enough, I want my share" Well.. that's human nature. The sooner we realize this the better, and shape our policy around such a reality.

The true greatness of Aussie culture and attitudes are manifest at a footy game. You DON'T find mobs of supporters out for the blood of the other teams supporters. (Croats/Serbs) Fair Dinkum Aussies can take defeat or victory goodnaturedly.

I think we need to have a system of 'points' demerits. If any offspring of migrants are involved in 'racial/tribal history' related violence, and accumulate sufficient points, some kind of penalty or fine should be imposed. (I'd apply this to Irish/English as well)

FranfGol, one question for you, since you obviously believe you have all the answers. How do we, as white Aussies, reconcile the cultural traditions of indigenous Australians that are in conflict with the UN statement on the rights of children? I'm referring to the issues of arranged marriages and the age of consent that are discussed in the Little Children Are Sacred report circa p76. The report acknowledges confusion in aboriginal thinking on this issue.

Myyyyy goodness Frank :) that was so good it bears repeating (and scrutiny)

"it's a pinko/leftist/ABC/Fairfax/union/Muslim/feminist/gay/green/chardonnay swilling/latte sipping/humanities lecturers'/Marxist/state school teachers'/ Howard-Haters' conspiracy."

could not have put it better myself :) 'my work is done' and Frank did it.

Ok.. joking aside. There is an 'element' of truth in that little diatribe, but clearly it is not across the board. But Frank, there is sufficient truth in that grouping to demand our attention.

Its probably as true as "Right Wing extremist, Howard loving, Bush worshipping, Muslim hating, Christian hyper fundamentalist,Gay bashing/Aboriginal neglecting.....etc" are on the other end of that political/social spectrum.

I think its more accurate to say that there are 'elements' which reflect those extremes in existence. It may also be true to say they control or drive a significant degree of the agenda. They may be the loudest voices.

SOLUTION. We need to remove ourselves from these extreme and entrenched positions, and actually look at the concept of MultiCulturalism:
a)In its documented theory
b)Its practiced application.
c)How it is perceived (rightly or wrongly) and used by vested interests.

Just because a bloke might whack you with his Bible from time to time, does not mean all his views about potential ethic conflict and weakened social cohesian are by default 'wrong'. What matters is:
a)Social Evidence
b)Anthropological evidence of 'how societies function'

Regarding "b" above, the nature and cause of social change is the area of greatest importance. I've referred to the Cape York situation, but there are many others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_change

Opinion leaders/Vested Economic and Religious interests and their manipulation of opinion leaders etc are all important.

Ev,

I find it assuming that you have nothing else to add to the debate other than to pick up on a mistake....

Perhaps the authors simply got John Howard and Edmund Barton confused. That's a very likely story.

Culture is constantly changing. It tends to change slowly in mono-cultural societies and faster in multi-cultural societies like Australia. Australia has become multi-cultural over time.

I am a 54, third generation Australian with Irish ancestry. I've seen huge changes in Australia over the last 40 years. My teenage years in Melbourne in the 60's was with a peer group who had mums and dads who fought in WW2. A few of my friends were sons of German and Italian migrants. They got a verbal beating whenever we discussed the war, but they were our mates and their parents played their part introducing new engineering skills and culture into a somewhat barren cultural landscape.

In the 80's, I worked in an Aboriginal community in Queensland bringing in the transition from patriarchal mission rule to self determination through local government.

Today I live in Blacktown, Western Sydney with residents from over a hundred different national backgrounds. My partner is from Ghana, West Africa and I have neighbours from Lebanon, Samoa, Sudan and China. They're all wonderful people. I see students walking to school and I'm delighted to see how relaxed they are with each other.

Racial tensions do exist. We have neo-nazi supporters and white supremacists. They recently held a public meeting in the heart of Blacktown where they protested about the intake of thousands of African refugees into Blacktown. They raised the specter of a United States scenario evolving here with armed drug gangs of black youth ghettoizing Blacktown.

In fact, the Africans have been model citizens, low crime rates, embracing the opportunities for education, work opportunities, cultural and sporting activities. Their biggest challenge is coping with racist attitudes from prospective employers and harmful views expressed by some state MPs about disease and in our shallow current affairs media about taking ozzie jobs. They set up stereotypes for supremacists to persecute with hate. Sadly some Africans have escaped war only to meet a violent death here at the hands of these racist low life. Our politicians should be taken to task for their actions.