Canem Malum wrote: " I thought it was a step in the right direction that Yuyutsu realised that definitions and a baseline are necessary...."

Fair enough, if you think definitions are required. But saying we need them and then not even attempting to provide them smacks of someone desperately trying to look erudite and not quite nailing it.

Things like successful, resilient and strong are relative. A society is successful relative to others. Rome was successful relative to all other societies of the era.

Britain was resilient relative to other nations of its time. (It no longer is - so its less resilient compared to itself from a different era).

Australia was a very successful society and continues to surf on those previous periods. We can tell its relatively successful compared to others by the fact that so many from other societies want in, which is the same way we know Rome was successful.

According to Yuyutsu Rome "forced] its culture and "religion" down their throats?

Well again that shows an appalling misunderstanding of Rome. The conquered and/or absorbed didn't need to have the culture imposed - they universally embraced it and even after the fall of Rome, its conquerors continued to live by its culture. A perfect example is Greece whose culture 'conquered' Rome rather than the reverse - hence the saying Rome conquered Athens and then Athens conquered Rome.

And Rome didn't impose religion - it allowed others to live their religion while incorporating local religions into the Roman deities

Dear Foxy,

«You're the one who addressed me in this discussion.»

I did, but it was not on the topic of multiculturalism, which I did not mention in a word and was never on my mind even.

«I responded in a manner I thought appropriate.»

Yes, about your present favourite topic, which is fine, but then there was no need to address that post to me.

«I view multiculturalism as a central characteristic of our
shared Australian identity...»

OK, that is your view, just please don't say "our" when addressing me on this, because I do not share that identity or any other false identity for that matter. I am not a continent!

«Our country's identity continues to grow from pre-settlement...»

Australia's identity is that of a continent.

I am not aware of any indications that it is presently growing.

---

Dear Mhaze,

«The conquered and/or absorbed didn't need to have the culture imposed»

So conquering other peaceful people by the sword is just fine?

«And Rome didn't impose religion - it allowed others to live their religion while incorporating local religions into the Roman deities»

Ever heard of Christianity?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_pagans_in_the_late_Roman_Empire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_persecution_in_the_Roman_Empire

I think I heard once that when people joined the Roman Empire, their life spans immediately increased by 20 years

Kudos Armchair Critic

Yuyutsu,

You entered my discussion of your own accord.
And the topic under discussion "Is Australia
a melting pot, a salad bowl, or a mosaic?"
A topic which very much involves the issue
of multiculturalism.

When you addressed me - as I've told you - I replied
in good faith. If you
found it so objectionable - you were under no obligation to
both read it or continue to respond to what I posted.

It appears to me that you're not interested in a discussion.
I'm not interested in arguing with you.

We should be able to have civil debates about matters of
race, culture, and identity.

With all due respect, seeing as my topic
for discussion does not interest you, you're welcome to leave.
But, Kindly do not try to de-rail mine.

Thank you.
_________________________________________________________________

Now back to the topic:

Multiculturalism today is very much a reality of our society.
We see it all around us everyday in our cities, in our
schools, universities and work places, on buses, trains,
trams, in all places. We mix with those from
different backgrounds.

For the most part most of us are comfortable with the reality.
Surveys have shown that public acceptance of multiculturalism
has been consistently high

Dear Foxy,

In your introductory post, you mentioned "multiculturalism" as one option and "White Australia" as another.

Here is what you said:

«We started out with the "White Australia" policy. Then
we went on with "multiculturalism," and today we're a
wide mix of many different cultures sharing the one
country - and singing - "I am, you are, we are -
Australian!"»

That seems to present a skewed one-dimensional EITHER/OR situation (perhaps also including whatever is in between), whereas my response was NEITHER. I refuse to limit myself to that one-dimensional scale.

In my response I objected to your use of "we" as in "We started" or "we're a wide mix". That is nonsense, there exists no such "we", nor do I sing that stupid song, "I am, you are, we are Australian".

Australia is a continent, just that.
By God's grace and by God's grace alone, this continent generously supports many people and animals, each being a world unto its own and deserving of self-determination.

That some people arrogantly declare themselves a "state of Australia", as if it was them who created this land, then dictate policies in an attempt to forcibly determine who may and who may not live in this continent, is simply wrong and abusive - and I don't care whether their policies are to create a melting pot, a salad bowl or a mosaic: humans have no moral authority to tell others where and where not to live in God's land.

There, I now spelled out my initial response, "Australia is a continent!", more explicitly, in case you have not understood it in the first instance.