So, some migrants, in some suburbs, for some time, prefer to put their energies into families, friends and neighbors than into the more distant organised civic, sporting, and welfare organisations.

And in doing so, in the eyes of those who can't tolerate THEM not being like US, bring about the end of Australia as we know it!

"So there you have it," says The Realists, "multiculturalism amongst other things leads to a withdrawal from community life." Where does the 'among other things' come from?

Dr Healy, the author of the copycat Putnam study, actually said: "... it would be wrong to conclude migrants from non-English speaking countries were unfriendly and uncaring and less altruistic than Australian-born people. It was likely their altruism was directed to friends, families and neighbours, not through organised civic, sporting, and welfare organisations."

That's all his research data allowed him to say.

That doesn't stop Polycarp from trotting out his usual nonsense: "As I've long said .. multi culturalism simply facilitates ethnic minorities trying to advance their own cultural agenda at the expense of the host culture. It's a fact of life, with ample evidence. Why even bother arguing against this?"

Why indeed, when you don't even need any evidence? Even when you can spin 'evidence' that goes the other way?

What is it with you guys? Every time someone mentions 'multiculturalism' you lose your faculties.

I take issue with characterising TheRealists.com.au as a race-hate site (see earlier post by Sams).

Your reference to an article that mentioned black gangs in London as your justification for this description ignores the fact that even the then Prime Minister Tony Blair said that the violence wouldn't be stopped "by pretending it is not young black kids doing it".

The site provides alternative views to the orthodoxy that mass immigration and multiculturalism are intrinsically good. Exclaiming 'race hate!' when a point of view is expressed that you are not comfortable with does not further the debate.

"Exclaiming 'race hate!' when a point of view is expressed that you are not comfortable with does not further the debate."

Your strawman argument doesn't further the debate. I didn't "exclaim" at all - I pointed out a fact, using just one example out of hundreds. You are right about one thing: I am not comfortable with points of view founded on racial hatred, which is why I felt the need to point out the subtext of the initial post. That certainly does 'further the debate' in my opinion.

Multiculturalism works, look how well the English, Irish, Scots and Welsh get on together in this country. They even intermarry these days.

I just had a quck squizz at 'TheRealists' website, and Sams is quite correct - it's just another thinly disguised racist hate site.

With respect to this thread, Spikey's right - the study merely shows that "some migrants, in some suburbs, for some time, prefer to put their energies into families, friends and neighbors than into the more distant organised civic, sporting, and welfare organisations."

Just another troll from just another racist.

Why not debate the evidence rather than reverting again to name calling?

The study confirms what other studies, both here and around the world, point to: That members of multicultural communities are less altruistic than members of more homogeneous communities. It's pretty clear.

Here is a quote from the article that points that out:

"in ethnically diverse areas, both the Australian-born residents and the migrants from non-English speaking countries are less likely to volunteer than their counterparts in the more homogenous neighbourhoods."

We can either open our mind and accept that multiculturalism has some disadvantages, or chose a closed minded point of view that says multiculturalism is an intrinsic good regardless of any evidence that may point to the opposite in fact being true.