Tristan,
In 2007 the previous government dropped the term multiculturalism and the present government has continued along the same way. In fact the term multiculturalism is seldom used at all. The reason for this is that finally the politicians realised that MC was a flawed ideology and had failed in that it divided us into tribes, rather than unite us. The slogan 'Unity in Diversity' is simply a big lie. As you pointed out some groups hold long standing hatreds of others and others deliberately flout our laws and social standards. For example with FGM and forced marriages.

I think we should recognise that some groups will not integrate, even after 2-3 generations, and that our society would be better off if we stopped allowing those groups to migrate here.

Early in this governments term, there was talk of 'social inclusion' and was to be headed by the Deputy PM, but have heard nothing of that lately. The term conjures up some interesting thoughts and am wondering if you know anything further?

What foxy said about education being the key is correct, but not teaching kids about other cultures. To keep social harmony, we need to emphasize our social norms and teach Australiana, so that we become one community. If some parents want their kids to know about their heritage then that is their business, it is not the business of our educators.

Banjo:

Again I return to the idea of "nested" and "overlapping" communities.

Multiculturalism can work so long as it is in this context. That the national community is inclusive - and involves recognition and preservation of liberal and democratic principles, and of social rights.

Those same principles are themselves the means of reconciling different cultures within a national and international community.

But yes: this is not an 'anything goes' approach to multiculturalism.

Yes we should recoginise the liberties of citizens: even to say things with which we are uncomfortable. But at the same time a liberal social democracy needs to defend itself as well.

So indeed we need to discourage bigotries and hatreds which comprise a potential threat to liberal social democracy.

Importantly, though: this is not to say migrants must forsake interest in their place of origin; or for it to factor into their indentity; and for them to wish to see justice in the lands of their anscestors.

Tristan,
Firstly, it is good to be able to talk to the author of a posted article and for that I thank you.

I think you may be expecting too much if you think we can simply encourage some ethnic groups to forget their bigottries and hatreds as they have been handed down for many generations. Take the violence between the Croats and Serbs, for example, their hatreds have been going on for generations and even after 3 generations here they are still violent to each other. Third generation Lebs still consider themselves Lebs and not Aussies.

I note that we now have multicultural racial violence. This involves ethnic groups picking on and fighting individuals of another ethnic group. Indian students have been the main victims of this but not exclusively so. A few months ago there was much violence between Sri Lankans which included an home invasion where acid was poured on the victim. I doubt if simple encouragement will stop this.

I notice that you did not touch on 'social inclusion' which I would like to find out more. I have yet to see any practical application.

Could you please expand on what you deem to be 'international communities' as that escapes me. I see only citizens havinmg rights in a county, others are simply visitors and guests.

Banjo: "International Communities" can take many forms - especially in the age of the internet. They can be based on ideology or interest. They could - for instance - take the form of international workers' organisations, or internationally-focused publications and forums. Again these publications and forums could be based on ideology or interest. Or we could refer, here, to international religious communities. Or maybe even a 'community' that arises around games, or music, or any type of shared interest. All these could comprise communities in one sense or another.

For me 'social inclusion' means everyone should 'have a seat at the table'. All manner of interests need to be engaged in the process of making policy. And all manner of communities need to be empowered in a public sphere aiming for maximum participation.

re: The peoples of the former Yugoslavia - I think there was a problem that - in the wake of the atrocities of the WWII period - and brutual and indiscriminate reprisals which followed - the seeds of future hatred were sown.

There should have been a long and rigorous process of truth and reconciliation which followed: to make a socialist union of southern Slavs - which overcame past tensions and hostilities - possible.

Failure to engage with - and face - the past - ultimately led to a boiling over of hatreds - and the disintegration of Yugoslavia which follwed. And with the atrocities of the most recent Balkan wars still scorched into the minds of those who suffered - we are still far from the truth and reconcilation we need to guarantee lasting peace and mutual recognition in the region.

Tristan,
It seems your 'international communities' are unreal, as they are not here physically, so do not count in any real sense. I have an interest in family history, but do not consider myself as part of any international community. I have an interest that some others may share, that does not give me any rights.

As far as the former Yugoslavia is concernerned, they may well have reasons to hate each other but that does not concern us. I am however concerned about them bringing those hatreds here and causing social unrest.

If they can't come here and leave their old hatreds behind, then I believe we should not allow them to migrate here.

That also applies to others who won't or can't change their cultural ways to comply with our laws and social standards.

Social cohesian is very important to our communities and all effort must be made to maintain that. It is unreal to think that persuasion can alter generations of alien cultural practice.

Dear Banjo,

"Old hatreds" have been with us in this
country for decades. Each set of
migrants that came brought with them their
own set of prejudices or so called "hatreds,"
against someone else. The key feature of
prejudice is that it's rooted in generalisations
and so ignores the differences among individuals.
Also, the so called "trouble-makers" that are
featured in the media and news reports - are
usually a small minority of a given group.
However, they're the ones the get the publicity,
because it's newsworthy - not necessarily typical.

Someone who's prejudiced against Arabs will tend
to have a negative attitude toward any individual
Arab, in the belief that all Arabs share the same
supposed traits. The same goes for Lebanese people,
Serbs and Croats. We can't tar everyone with the
one brush - just because of what's on the news.

People continue to come from other countries, and
make Australia home, and although over 90 per cent
of Australians are of European descent, a direct
result of Australian immigration policies, the
population has become more representative of the
region. The cultural composition of the country is
more diverse - and as has been the case for decades,
people do eventually fit into their new society.
This is one of the most unique and rewarding aspects
of living in Australia.