grn, hurling abuse at people who, you anticipate, may disagree with you is hardly a useful contribution to this important discussion. Moreover, it won't deter people putting another side of the argument.

So, here's my disagreement. Your "own impression" that our multicultural society doesn't "work" because in Sydney "there isn't much obvious racial friction" seems like a contradiction. That Sydney can be so diverse and yet have so little racial friction seems to be an indicator of a successful multicultural society.

Your explanation is a different one: you claim that it's due to "the fact (sic) that people of different cultures and races don't mix that much".

The fact is that your "fact" is wrong. Multiculturalism encourages diverse people to mix, but not surprisingly it takes time. ABS official data that show that at least two-thirds of all second generation Australians marry outside their ethnic grouping.

While it is too early to collect data on the rates of intermarriage of recently arrived ethnic groups, the data show that where there is a third generation from Lebanese, Chinese and Indian origin, they have an intermarriage rate of above 70 per cent (Siew-Ean Khoo, "People & Places", Vol. 12, No. 2). An awful lot of mixing must be going on beyond your field of vision.

Your claim that the most "multicultural" areas of Sydney are "the most unattractive, crime-ridden and socially dysfunctional" while the "best places are the most homogenous" is snobbish and superficial. You would need to look at why recent arrivals settle first in which areas and who is involved in crime or social dysfunction.

So, I'm afraid that your conclusion: "That's really all you need to know when evaluating the legacy of this failed social experiment" would not earn a pass on a Year 12 exam.

Grn, as a non-Sydneysider I can only take your word for it regarding the situation there, but the situation is markedly different in Melbourne. Certainly the North-Eastern area where I lived is marked by both relative affluence *and* a distinct variety of ethnicity. Ironically, it is the area represented by Mr Andrews federally! Yet I've never noticed the slightest racial tension in the area.

FrankGol, you are being utterly misleading in your selective quoting of ABS stats.

Go to the link below and read section and table 4.3, "Intermarriage with persons of Australian ancestry". As you can see, the ABS sees this as an "indicator of the social interaction
between the ethnic community and mainstream Australian society." The percentage of non-white spouses citing a partner with Australian ancestry is extremely low, low single digits mostly. Even after the third generation.

http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/free.nsf/0/3382D783B76B605BCA256E91007AB88E/$File/20540_2001.pdf

The supposed success of multiculturalism is the Great Lie of our generation, sustained because some people want it to be true, not because it is. Our future is more ethnic segregation, not less. Just look at many US inner cities and the north of England to see where our future lies.

Australia today is no longer simply an "Anglo-Saxon" country.

I wonder how many people know for example that more than 80% of teachers in Australia are of Anglo-Australian origin? This can impose quite a burden, when their training has not been adequate to prepare them for classrooms containing children up to 100% non-Anglo Saxon.
Sadly of the thousands of teachers in Australia only 10% have undertaken language and cultural courses to equip them to handle multi-cultural classes. So, despite educational policy statements at both national and state level, the evidence is that many schools and teachers still believe that their major task is to assist 'migrant'
children to 'assimilate' swiftly into the Australian way of life.
My Howard and Mr Andrews are not the only ones who strongly feel that
"God is Anglo-Saxon" so everyone should recognise it and conform.

We have to have a new impetus in the sphere of formal education as well as community education programmes to introduce Australians to the many different communities that make up this country today.

By the way, facts such as the European settlement of this country should also be taught, as opposed to the myth of "Anglo" early settlement. How many people know that the First Fleet, arriving on January 26th, 1788, was commanded by an Anglo-German, who was to become Australia's first Governor, Arthur Phillip, R.N., who also held a commission in the Portugese Navy. The soldiers under his command included a detachment of Germans, the sailors manning the Fleet came from every continent, and the convicts, while overwhelmingly English, included a number of West Indians, Irishmen, Italians, and Jews. That the immigrants for the next 200 years came from half the world.

In this century it should be the right of ALL Australians to use their language and enjoy their culture and heritage. The Prime Minister and the Immigration Minister, as well as the Institutions of any nation should serve all of its people, instead of serving only one section, as has been the case in the past...

Actually grn, I don't think I've meant anyone who explicitly "wants" multiculturalism to work. But I see it working around me all the time. If it can work here, why can't it work everywhere?
And of course multiculturalism means a certain amount of ethnic segregation - how could it be otherwise? Obviously the ideal is for it to become less entrenched and more spontaneous and voluntary with time, but that's largely what tends to happen with each new wave of migrants.

The main thrust of the pro-multicultural stance appears to downplay the significance of Australia's British heritage. Australia will always have an overwhelming influence from British culture, especially since all the minority groups are to small to be sustainable. A speaker of Sinhalese will only have a few thousand fellow speakers in this country for example. So in light of this, it seems appropriate that teachers can prepare NESB students to survive in a predominately Anglo culture.

The neo-colonial dogma of multiculturalism does not seem to want to disappear. They say multiculturalism is successful. Since it is so high maintainence, this stance is questionable. But at least it has the backing of the establishment, keen to convert Australia into the teeming masses of potential consumers from who cares what nationality.