The government shouldn't leave the door open for the High Court to determine policy, which is what that court does when it decides how it will read a piece of legislation, and what precedents to follow.

As well, the government really must do something about the federal Racial Discrimination Act 1975. It is another case where a court has been able to determine policy by variously reading a law in the broad and narrowly at the same time.

However at its root, the problem is that federal governments have created a mill stone around their own neck by the extreme multiculturalism chosen for Australia - policy that the electorate was never consulted on and never allowed to vote on- and the powerful ethnic lobby is funded from taxpayers' money. The ethnic tail wags the public dog every time.

The population mix changed dramatically after World
War II when Australia increased its migrant intake
considerably and broadened the range of countries from
which the immigrants were allowed to come.

Until the early 1970s, assimilation and the preservation of
"White Australia" continued as the Australian Government's
official policies. Migrants of every ethnic origin were
expected to assimilate promptly into a monocultural
mould of Australian identity, based on the Anglo-Saxon/
Celtic culture.

The ideal migrant was one who assimilated easily, who
became more similar to the host population as a result of
social interaction and through the shedding of attributes
of their culture.

In the meantime, the postwar diversification
in Australian immigrants' backgrounds continued,
multiculturalism was becoming more and more evident in all
walks of life.

The new face of Australia was in existence, long before the
politicians and civil leaders were prepared to admit it.
The very presence of foreign languages and foreign language
press in Australia mirrored the nation's growing cultural
diversity.

Several other factors combined to erode, and finally eliminate
in 1966, the White Australia and Government-promoted
assimilation policies. The contributing factors included
generally changing social attitudes, war service, travel,
foreign students in Australia.

The revised immigration policy allowed new people to come and
settle in Australia. People from a wide range of nationalities,
races, religions and cultures. By the end of the 1970s,
Australia had acquired an unmistakably new heterogeneous face.

The official Government policies reflected these social
developments. They moved from "assimilation" to "integration,"
and then to "multiculturalism."

The Galbally Report (1978) was the turning point. It urged
the Australian Government "to encourage" the retention of the
cultural heritage of different ethnic groups and promote
intercultural understanding.

Since then, the Australian Government has re-defined
"multiculturalism."
"Multiculturalism involves living together
with an awareness of cultural diversity."

At present, Australia is one of the most ethnically diverse
societies in the world. However, the concept of multiculturalism
continues to have different meanings to different people.

Some Australians still believe that a
"unique Australian society and identity emerged with Federation
and this identity should be the basis of immigrant assimilation."

a good sound theses..lexie..
i would add..that there was a sudden change[amoung the poor]
that had a huge role in..ozzz societal..change..[that was when govt paid kids to go to..school]

allof a sudden..the standards of education fell
the now monmeyed up kids..bought upbig..onallthat nice new consuming age

bought walkmans..records cds cassette tapes clothing.,.maccas and other junk food..simply cause govt wanted consumers..and the best thing was to set up the junk shops so the kids could spend spend,,spend too much get credit cards and spent ya super

they now are so..over loaded with..easy money..the hex
they..need stronger than bex..sure they..can spend..but for how long must our super depend on..the kids overspend

i.recall too a biggie,..was when woman began working
overnight..houses needed duel..incomes..two working..while govt holds ransom ya kids..programing their minds into..landless consumerist..debt assuming..peons..

working for a modern..man
the two passport [duel..passport] holding land-lord and foreign/master

or something..like that..

Foxy,

Off again on a rant and throwing in the 'White Australia' card as well.

Do you really have to continually recycle your old posts from years ago? When you most likely didn't attribute a source then either.

Posted by Lexi, Wednesday, 22 June 2011 1:31:42 PM
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12221&page=2

Talk about being stuck in a rut. Or does that 'research' or 'library' job of yours pay you to do that?

Taxpayers will be overjoyed when the federal government stops wasting $millions annually on the victim industries set up by Whitlam. Any wonder ambulances are ramped outside hospital emergency units - no guesses where the money is being diverted instead.

onthebeach, I found part of Foxy's comment repeated in a post from 2009!
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2827#64264

I know these threads tend to get repetitive, but one would think people could at least write a new sentence, not just cut and paste their old ones.

And what is the point of your rant anyway, Foxy?

I think Australians had developed a self-identity *before* Federation.
That's one reason it happened.
When was the last time you heard anyone refer to themselves as a "New South Welshmen"?

"The Galbally Report (1978) was the turning point. It urged
the Australian Government "to encourage" the retention of the
cultural heritage of different ethnic groups"

Why should the government "encourage" any cultural practices?
Not interfere, yes. Encourage, no.

otb,

You need to understand that we need to look
into Australia's past to find out how our
national image and identity came about and
to see if the image changes or not, and why.

As I stated earlier the concept of multiculturalism
continues to have different meanings for different
people.
Hidden anti-mirgant prejudices may not be voiced in
public until they are highlighted by some well-publicized
incident, such as Pauline Hanson's maiden speech in
Australian Parliament.

And I fully understand that some Australians, such as
yourself, still believe that "a unique Australian
society and identity emerged with Federation and that
this identity should be the basis of immigrant
assimilation." Some politicians share your belief.

You brought up the issue of multiculturalism on this
thread. I felt obliged however to clarify some of the
assumptions you made about it and set the historical
record straight. It's archival material and is
available from any public library in this country if
you care to do a bit of research yourself.
I'd highly recommend it to you. You just may actually
learn something from the experience.
But, a closed mind is like a closed book.
Just a piece of wood.