Chain smoker,

Thankyou very much for your thoughtful post. I hadn’t heard that policy on multiculturalism… I’d never really heard a policy on it, for me, it just seemed to fall into our language as a concept at some stage during the 80s. I need to think on it before I comment.

Your point on variations of culture is interesting and I generally agree, but for some extremes. Also I think the problem is less racism but more social.

I loath racism, my family is rather colourful via marriages and adoptions. We are Anglo and have had Chinese, Vietnamese, Manchurian and Japanese spouses along with some black African toddlers.

The cultural aspects of my family are easy and likeable but for one guy. His being Manchurian (Russian and Chinese) racially was no issue. The sticky point was we became unable to accommodate his communism as it was actually hostile to our beliefs. He was eventually, a big part in due to this attitude being utterly unworkable and much to the relief of most of us, divorced by his partner from our family.

Was that a cultural or political or even religious problem? To me it’s always looked like the atheist Russians and the Chinese `loved` communism in place of a god, so I veer towards calling it incompatible on religious terms. But it is touchy, blurry and confusing

Chain Smoker,

Naturally I hope for a something workable for all, especially as I have black cousins and don’t want them to suffer racism in life. Nor do I want them to grow up as pseudo `race victims`.

I think there are only a few areas that ca not be ironed out or as you and Foxy suggest say `adjusted` to. Human nature underneath has too much in common for many of the differences too be of enough depth to be a genuine problem. I am not denying there is racism in the world, there is too much of it. But here in this discussion on culture, needs and belief I don’t think racism is the our issue.

I think there are a few beliefs or needs that are fundamentally unworkable or antagonistic to our basic standards. This is the core of the trouble. It is ruining the integration process and good will for many Australians and new people, the trouble just sours it for everyone until they become angry and resentful or apathetic and give up on what is a mostly workable future for lots of us.

As you said we are globalized now and we do need to work out how to get along in a new manner.

How much of our own culture or structure are we obliged too loose or alter for a new culture or belief system?
When can we say no to some and not others?
Who chooses?

Looking forward to more of your thoughts on this.

Foxy
I would add another dimension some cases those who are also outspoken about immigration are in fact 1-2 generation migrants themselves. The issue here is often a matter of identity or fear that they might get the backwash of the racist argument e.g.
In Melbourne parts of Richmond are dominated by Vietnamese oriented businesses simply because it makes good business sense to cluster but to the low status whites it becomes yet another example of “being taken over”.

Chain smoker.
You’re right most people don’t know what Multiculturism is. For that reason I rather than try to explain it, I treat it as a foregone conclusion part of an enlightened society.
The alternative is what? The post war reffo assimilation programs, heavily routed in imposing a different way of life on others. Like the failed practices, attitudes in places like Bonegilla Migrant camp and much later Dandenong Migrant hostels. Multiculturism simply makes sense.
I question the parameters of the report in question. What price respect for individuals (fears/ insecurities), not to mention long-term benefits to this country with an assisted integration?
Tor Hunloe in his book “Buddha to Bono” offers a triple bottom line to incorporate the environment I would add a bottom line to include maximizing human capital.
Therefore Multiculturism would be a given.

PH00_stains.
Communism isn’t a religion, it's an atheistic philosophy. In the context of Australia the individual is entitled to believe in communism, there are still some diehards today. The issues with your rellies are more accurately defined as:
• Compliance with current laws and
• a difference of ideologies therefore a matter of tolerance/acceptance on both sides not a matter of religion per se

Banjo

I accept your position regarding opinions. But, one person's opinion is not as good as another if the quality of the argument, the logic and the evidence base are inadequate in the one and superior in the other.

I agree wholeheartedly with you that "We have always expected those comming here to abide by our laws and standards". That would apply equally to cock fighting and to female genital mutilation (FGM). If allegations are made and evidence is sufficient for a prosecution, then the case should proceed. This is independent of the issue of multiculturalism. That policy does not condone FGM, despite un-evidenced and unsubstantiated claims to the contrary.

The Croats and Serbs act no better and no worse than the Irish and English at comparable stages of their settlement in this country. The fact is that ethnic-motivated violence in Australia is minimal - has multiculturalism played a part?

But let's not attribute too much to multiculturalism. It is, after all, merely a social policy. The laws of the land must still be obeyed. Multiculturalism has no magic powers to cause "social standards to be eroded" as you claim. If standards have been eroded let's look to all the possible explanations including increased individualism and greed, and the relaxation of regulation on private businesses.

As an Australian of Anglo origin I cannot agree that my 'culture' has been usurped or diminished by 'multiculturalism'. Everywhere I look I see the power in parliaments, councils, civic bodies dominated by Anglo Australians.

At any rate, I think your use of the word 'culture' is in need of definition. It's not something that is found in museums or in academies. Culture is lived by real people every day. It changes imperceptibly as our circumstances and environment change. No one expects 'Anglo Australian culture' to be the same today as it was in the 1950s. Much of the change that has come about since the 50s has been brought about by Anglo Australians. And good on 'em!

Interestingly, I'm finding that this thread has actually become quite productive. Rather rare occurrence for this topic, I think.

Perhaps we need to define more perceptions of what multiculturalism really is.
As has been pointed out by other posters, it's not an instantaneous thing - ultimately, it happens within a few generations, and I don't think any migrants to Australia would want their children to not assimilate to a certain extent - to do so would literally be denying them the chance to earn money, live, work, and be happy. These are people, not monsters, and you'll find the vast majority want what is best for their children.

Now a concession - it has been the case that minority groups have pushed for special rights and exemptions. Occasionally, if it causes no problems, it may be warranted, though in most cases, I think it's knocked back. For example, certain posters (I won't name him) often make claims of minorities asking for special treatment, however closer inspection reveals these requests tend to be refused.

Of course we can make requests, that goes hand in hand with freedom of speech - that doesn't equate to them being granted, nor does it equate to a society bending over backwards to give advantages to minority groups.

Ultimately this discussion falls into some broad categories.

For example: to what extent do minorities need assistance?

Most opportunities and positions of powers will flow to the majority (i.e. more Anglo people in power). To what extent is this true? How entrenched are such things?

The answer won't be that there are no entrenched opportunities in society, look at children in remote communities for example. Nor will it be an extreme 'only WASPS can succeed'.

It will be a grey area, not a black and white yes/or no answer. The answer will be that 'some' assistance is required, but it may be very little or a lot. The same goes for efforts to assist integration.

Spikey,
You say multiculturalism is "merely social policy"

MC was imposed on us and is much more than that. Millions of dollars have be spent giving grants to various ethnic bodies, not to ease their way into our society or promote integration, but for them to retain and promote their culture. We were supposed to make concessions to them on cultural grounds. At times, we were even told that we had no culture.

Fighting between Croats and Serbs not only involves riots but burning cars, smashing busses and shots fired into buildings. Violence between Sunni and Sharia Iraqis involved wrecking cars, bashings, intimidation of voters and 3 persons shot. The Incidents at Cronnula, by Leb gangs, included sexual harrassment, lewd comments and verbal abuse and bashings. Our authorities would not tolerate such conduct from Anglo aussies, and bear in mind some of these were 2nd and 3rd generation, not just newcomers.

Multiculture has a lot to do with the FGM matter. When asked the NSW Health Minister why no action has been taken. the reply, in a nutshell, stated "there are cultural considerations"

Ask those females such as teachers, police, ambulance, nurses, shop assistants and receptionists about the arrogant and demanding attitudes of Leb Muslims to them and see if they don't think our social standards have been eroded.

It is true that our culture changes over time, but that should be a process of acceptance over time by our community. Our problems are brought about by a government imposed ideology of MC. The biggest furfhy told has been "Unity in Diversity", that is utter fantasy!

As I said earlier, it is pleasing to see that this federal government has continued with the dropping of MC in favour of integration and let us all hope that MC just quietly dissappears.