What does it mean to be Australian, to feel Australian, to take it for granted that this is our home, warts and all ?

I'm in a singing group, Sing Australia, and we do gigs - on Friday night we did one at an Italian retirement home. We sang mostly Australian songs - the balloons were inscribed with the flag and 'January 26', after all, and many of the 120 or so participants sang along and tapped their feet. And I got to thinking, yeah, it's no problem to be both Italian AND Australian - whatever you do in Australia, that's Australian. What do you reckon ?

[continued]

The people on that evening had been quintessential Aussie battlers: the photos on the walls were of people picking fruit together and working on farms, often living in fairly rudimentary accommodation. They had certainly done it tough.

It was one of the best nights and I hope that our contribution will be remembered as a tribute to some of the people who have made Australia. We are many, and we are one. Common-place that may sound, but that's how, I'm sure, many, many people see themselves as part and parcel of Australia. So many people, from so many countries as well as the British Isles, have helped to build this country, Afghans, Chinese, Greeks, Arabs, Vietnamese, Filipinos and Filipinas, Indians, Latin Americans, and now Sudanese, Hazaras, and so many other people. And they mostly, surprisingly quickly, become Australians in their own ways, through their own experiences here in Australia, helping to build Australia.

And I'll bet that they come to think of themselves as fully Australians - their allegiances and heart-feelings are to both their home-country AND to Australia. Maybe this makes for all sorts of initial and on-going cultural and relational conflicts, but the bottom line is that yes, with all our wrinkles, our shared experiences, we become one.

Our children will inter-marry and our grandchildren and great-grandchildren will be beautiful, inheriting the best of their parents and grandparents. I only wish I could be around in a hundred years.

Joe

many would like to be one however their are so many loathers of western culture that unfortunatley the horse has bolted. The only thing that really unites people is a common set of values. Once the majority of Australians seemed to share those values. Now we are as divided as all the tribes were before Captain Cook landed here. No joy in facing that reality.

Joe,
Sorry but I don't share your enthusiasm or optimism.

There are far too many here now that will not integrate and many are now in their 3rd generation here. Take the Croats, Serbs and muslim Lebs for example, Their hatred and contempt for us and our society is even greater now than before. What began as idealism by Whitlam and Fraser, multiculturalism was a huge mistake and divides us now and will continue to do so. The culture of African refugees is so different it is causing major social problems, Now hearing of a large brawl among them on New Years Day in Melbourne and this has been hidden from the public. Just like the 60 gang rapes were hidden from the public by the press in 2000.

I am sure the muslim agenda is to make us a muslim nation and they use the wombs of their women to achieve that, just like Europe and the UK. We are willingly helping to accommodate that by allowing muslim immigration and the influx of the illegals.

Add to this the binge drinking by the young, the king hit brigade and the knifings and shootings occurring almost nightly.

I am very concerned about what the future holds for those that come after us. Our industry is all but gone and there is nothing to see ahead but hard and troubled times.

Dear Joe,

Great post mate.

Don't listen to the doomsayers, the bigots and the scaremongers. One of my kids spent last night at a small remote camp site in the southern ranges. There were a couple of Iraqi families there and they got on really well with everyone. Not that a carpet and hooka are all that typical in the Aussie bush but in every other way it was just a bunch of Australians getting together on the Australia Day Holiday, enjoying time with their family and friends, and generally chilling.

This is what makes me proud of this country, that we have the ability to find it in our hearts to accept others as human beings. That some among us have strictured minds and souls should not prevent you from celebrating what you experienced and I thank you for your own contribution.

We are Australian - The Seekers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UizA_5SVX0

Dear Runner,

<<however their are so many loathers of western culture that unfortunatley the horse has bolted.>>

Correct, I am one of them!

What has Western culture brought? Wars, slavery, colonialism, consumerism, drinking and smoking, gambling, worshipping of stupid sports teams, pursuit of electronic gadgets, junk food and lots of senseless noise and vanities.

<<The only thing that really unites people is a common set of values.>>

You mean drinking beer at the bar with the mates and watching the footie? No thanks, I don't share those values.

<<Once the majority of Australians seemed to share those values.>>

Yes, but the stress is on the word SEEMED. This English culture is all pretence, everyone plays the game and nobody really means it!

<<Now we are as divided as all the tribes were before Captain Cook landed here.>>

I wouldn't be that optimistic yet, but if you say so, then it's a good sign.

<<No joy in facing that reality.>>

Sorry, but reality was never different, it was pretence, it was imagination, people on the ground were never truly righteous or Christian, they only learned to conceal their weaknesses from others.

To all Muslim haters:

The better culture will prevail: if you want to win them over, then show them that you are morally better than them. While there are well-known specific problematic issues with Muslims (such as how they treat women), at the moment many Muslims (certainly not all!) are overall relatively more moral than their average English mates, so what culture have you got to sell them? - show them your moral advantage, or else they will show your children theirs!

Dear Joe (Loudmouth),

Thank You for this discussion and for the sentiments
you've expressed so beautifully. Yay!

Liz Thompson in her book, "From Somewhere Else:
People from other countries who have made Australia home,"
tells us that - many migrants found it
very difficult to adapt to a new climate, environment,
culture, and (often) language. Parents who brought young
children to Australia spoke of family conflicts as
their children resented
their parents, seeing them as representing the cultural
heritage they were keen to reject in order to fit into their
new society.

Thompson tells us that -

Most of the people, as well as facing adjustment difficulties
suffered from a sense of guilt at having left their people
to continue the struggle against repressive regimes.
They had found a greater physical freedom in Australia in that
their lives were no longer in danger, but the struggle they
commenced with their conscience allowed them no spiritual
freedom.

The people that Thompson interviewed for her book
talked about the hardships of the first few years and the nostalgia
with which they remembered the countries they had chosen to
leave. On returning to them for the first time, however,
they were reminded of the reasons they had left. The first trip
back was a common turning point, after which many people
became more content, and determined to establish their lives
in Australia.

The longer term residents spoke of their commitment to this
country, which had developed over the years spent living here.
They has started families, bought homes, established careers
and made a place for themselves. Most people spoke of
Australia with gratitude, as they believed that migrating
here allowed them to change their lives and the lives of their
families for the better.

Joe, I agree with your take - the multicultural nature of
Australian society is one of the most unique and rewarding
aspects of living in Australia. The nature of being Australian
today - is to be part of this diversity.

'What has Western culture brought? Wars, slavery, colonialism, consumerism, drinking and smoking, gambling, worshipping of stupid sports teams, pursuit of electronic gadgets, junk food and lots of senseless noise and vanities.

Yuyutsu

you raise interesting points however western culture originally promoted hard work, family values and a knowledge that all men were created equal under God. There has always been unsavourable elements in all cultures. An honest look at Indigeneous cultures is very ugly. Western culture or more accurately Christian culture brought us hospitals and schools and foreign aid. No doubt since the faith based secularism has overtaken we have ended up with many of the woes you list. Kiling the unborn, increased child abuse, pornography, alcholol abuse, lack of any morals, rebellion, etc etc are all clearly linked to the idoitic dogmas of secularism.

You will however have to be blind to believe that Islamic culture is superior. Islamic culture is cruel, deceitful, intolerant, hyprocrital and arrogant. There is no trace of humility and you see no people lining up to immigrate to Islamic countries.

The Author of life will allow Islamic domination for a period of time where the idiotic dogmas of secularist will be clearly seen for what they are (full of arrogance, price and irrational). You need however to read the book that does not lie to see that every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. MOhammed will be exposed for what he was (a false prophet)

Yuyutsu

'To all Muslim haters: '

don't get people who hate Islam mixed up with people who hate Muslims. Many many Muslims like you say are far better living than people calling themselves Christians or atheist (goes without saying). Those who follow the footsteps of their founder are generally not very nice people. Similar to those who follow Stalin and the new atheiest. Both Islam and athiesm are both death cultures.

Yes, thanks Joe for an Australia Day positive post :)
We don't get many positive posts on this site.

I totally agree with your sentiments and I take great joy in living in multicultural Australia....the place that is so great to live in, that everyone wants to emigrate here.

There are good and bad in every culture and belief system, and Australia handles all those aspects of life with understanding and humour.

Sings "For we are the Aussies and we are the best, we are the Aussies and.....love all the rest." (Sing along with me now Runner and Banjo!)

Susie,
Nothing to celebrate on Australia Day except we are finally stopping the illegal free loaders coming.

Oh, and even though the ideology of multiculturalism was forced upon us and has cost us millions. We are not MC and never have been. We are multi-racial, which I do not mind but not MC. There is no other culture we accept in total and we only tolerate some aspects of some other cultures. MC divides us into tribes instead of being one. The big lie was 'Unity in diversity'. We turn a blind eye to alien aspects of some cultures.

I grew up with heaps of migrants after the war and the difference was that they all wanted to be part of us. Now that has changed the latter migrants and the illegals and refugees promote their own kind.

The quality of life has deteiriated since the advent of MC and the sooner it is abandoned the better off we will be. We have to stop importing those groups that will not integrate and accept our society.

It is not the Australia I used to love. The best time in Aus was between 1950 and 1970. Gone dramatically downhill since then in almost every way.

Banjo,
I was discussing immigration with my Mum last night and the people who are normally blamed for the failure of multiculturalism and the destruction of the Australian nation, Menzies, Holt, Whitlam, Fraser and Hawke.
We concluded that these people really had no idea of the possible consequences of their actions because they had nothing with which to compare the new policies.
Immigrants aren't the problem, it's their children and particularly grandchildren who just become worse and worse and grow further apart from any form of culture or civilisation. This is the case in every country which has implemented racial replacement programmes.
We discussed the 2011 London riots where third generation Black youth went "Window shopping" and remembered the Brixton and Bradford riots which broke out in the 1970's and 80's when their parents were teenagers.
As I said, first generation Third World immigrants don't cause much trouble because they are mostly genuinely looking for a better life, their kids though start life in a completely different set of circumstances and they are a different ethnic group to both their parents and the other groups in society. Add to that the fact that there is no longer an Australian culture for anyone of any ethnic group to use as a framework for a blended identity and we go a long way to identifying why this country had reached it's peak in 1970 and has been on a downhill slide ever since.

Dear Banjo and Jay,

The following link may be of interest to you:

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/3777144.html

Dear Banjo and Jay,
It must be hard living in a 1970's time warp ?

Try and enjoy life here and now....in the year 2014.
It isn't that bad.

Suse, Foxy,
Incorrect, it's people such as yourselves who are stuck in 1969, I live in 2014, it's just that I remember to remember, so to speak.
You're the ones still trumpeting the "Aussie" way of life, I say it no longer exists and have accepted the world we live in, that's the difference, you hold a set of beliefs about the world whereas I'm an atheist who only accepts what he observes around him.

Welcome back Joe/Loudmouth and thanks.
We tend to forget we are indeed one and that is something to be very proud of.

We have never been one, except during the two world wars.
The Depression years saw landlords force the unemployed from their homes and small business people from their rented premises rather than take a cut in their income.

The First Fleet was made up of people from many cultures and races.
The Irish, because of persecution, didn't like the English and the English in turn looked on the Irish with contempt and their attitude towards the Welsh and the Scots was only slightly less contemptuous, unless one had Money which almost, but not quite, made up for racial and religious differences.

Religion was a great divider with sharp divisions between Catholic and Protestant, even within families.
In the workplace the "No Catholic Need Apply" signs were not uncommon and I can remember job adds in the Sydney Morning Herald in the 1950s that stated "Protestants Only".
But the younger generations, were coming together and forgetting the divisions of the past until new divisions were thrust upon us and for which we will pay a far higher price than for any such in our past.

Loudmouth, I have already experienced what you predict for yourself. Lovely children, with many different backgrounds, but all Australians.

I, myself ancestors all came here pre 1985. My childrens's father goes back even further, to the ships that arrived on the 26th. Yes, they were convicts that made good.

My background is Irish, both north and south, a little French and English. My husband's family, English and Irish. They came as convicts, free settlers and business people. All made good lives for themselves. All managed to achieve.

My children, and grandchildren have married from Indigneous, Islanderer, South American, German, along with more Irish blood. I must not forget those who married into families, who have been as long in this country, as our family.

Yes, those backyard barbecues are indeed mini United Nations. I have no Asian, or African, but matters not, as they are also found there. Yes, they come as friends of my family.

What has changed over the years, is the food that is consumed. Nothing like the food of my youth, and believe me, my mother was a wonderful cook, we ate well.

Contrary to what people say, multi-culturism works. Why should it not.


All cultures are about family, work and getting ahead.

I suspect that twenty or thirty years down the track, people reading our history, will wonder what the culture wars are about. By then people will move during their lifetime, all over the globe. Borders will have little meaning.

Dear Jay,

Read the link I gave you.

You just might recognise yourself.

Foxy, I've read the link and I don't see myself in that stereotype, like all stereotypes it's simply a straw man, the "Debate" is launched from false premises such as the mythical"Red Blooded Ocker". I come from a upbringing of extremely Liberal, left leaning thought,my father is a founding member of his Greens branch I believed all the things you believe until I saw with my own eyes what this society had become.
Read Is Mise' post, my original draft of the response to Banjo began "Real Australia died in 1914" but it was late and I didn't feel much like explaining what I meant so I re wrote it.
Australia has been a grandiose Liberal Democratic project, it could have achieved it's aims had it kept the immigration restriction act, we could have had an egalitarian society but for mass immigration.
Believe me, I want a free egalitarian society and am happy to live as a Liberal but the personnel being recruited from the Third world do not share those views and simply renovate whole blocks and parts of suburbs as habitat suitable for their own way of life, which for the most part is based on the lifestyle of the American Ghetto Negro.
You see when you have no mainstream culture to pass on to young people they find another one and bolt it onto their parents identity, people can't live and develop normally without a clearly defined national and ethnic identity.
If you think you can live freely and reason with with pentecostal Christian Africans and Asians, Salafist Muslims or wannabe Tupac clones hopped up on steroids and meth you're dreaming and you've obviously had very little interaction with such people of the lower castes. You don't live among the negativity in insecurity of the poor suburbs and you don't have to send your kids out into that environment every day, otherwise you wouldn't be posting the silly things you do.

Dear Jay,

Many people take for granted the cultural mix that
is Australia's population. I have grown up being
surrounded by people from a variety of countries
and backgrounds and by getting to know this wide
mix of people - I learned of
the ups and down of adapting to life in Australia.
As well as from the experiences that my own parents and
their friends provided.

For me it provided a window on the experience of leaving
one home in order to create another. Confounded
expectations, culture shock, conflicting national
loyalties and a search for belonging - all these themes
emerged in their anecdotal, sometimes amusing collection
of experiences that I gleaned from them about making a
new life in Australia.

To me, the multicultural nature of Australian society means
there is a gathering of many cultures, and as I've writen in
the past - this is one of the most unique and rewarding aspects
of living in Australia. I'll repeat, that the nature of being
Australian is to be part of this diversity. You may think that's
silly, but that says more about you than it does about me.
BTW - I grew up in the Western suburbs of Sydney. My profession
is that of a Librarian, and I've worked in Special Libraries,
University Libraries, and large Regional
Public Libraries - where I have had to deal with a wide variety
of people from various backgrounds and nationalities. I've
organised Book-Clubs, ran Storytime Sessions, and provided
Reference Services. Multi-skilling and hands on interaction
with people from various walks of life has always been part
and parcel of the job. I come from a Liberal-voting, conservative family,
My political preferences vary, depending on policies.
We have an excellent State Liberal MP - who works very hard
and who I fully support. I have voted Liberal in the past -
but not recently.

Foxy,
I know the situation of Third world migrants in regional areas in some detail and you're correct in saying that when hand picked first generation migrants who've been carefully vetted beforehand are placed under what amounts to 24 hour supervision and on call mentoring by local volunteers that the results you speak of are attainable. That's only a tiny fraction of the whole picture though, maybe 75% of Third World migrants are clustered in poor suburbs with no support, where the only mentoring they and more importantly their children will receive is from other generationally poor and criminally inclined families.
In the poor areas "Racism" does not exist, people are genuinely judged by the content of their character and assimilated, it's just that the values of those sub cultures described above don't match those of your good self or those implicit in the thread title.
Foxy as I said, I can see both sides of the argument because I've walked both sides of the line, so to speak, I can even concede some points of "Social Justice" but it's too late now to really do anything about the problem, stopping immigration won't make any difference, increasing it won't help, you can't mentor people who won't listen or educate people who won't even learn to read.

I went to war (a few times) because I loved this country and what it stood for.
Now I am saddened because all I did was make it open slather, thanks to Whitlam etc for foreign elements that want to dictate and control my grandchildren's inheritance.
Shove multiculturalism

Dear Jay,

Thank you for your civil response and your explanation.
I understand where you're coming from and I do
respect your opinion. I can only make assumptions
based on my own experiences.

cont'd ...

Dear Jay,

I forgot to add that as you've "walked both sides"
on this issue, I bow to your experience and
knowledge. I've only ever had positive
experiences. Therefore my experiences are
obviously not as broad as yours have been.

Dear Chris,

There were many people who went to war because
they loved this country. You're not the only one.
And their ancestries were of many nationalities.
They also are entitled to leave a legacy for their
granchildren - including the right to be different,
to protect their traditions, and to remember their
languages. Our society today no longer views homogeneity
as mandatory. Today we're a different society from the
dull, self-satisfied and joylessly conformist of the past,
Thanks to multiculturalism we've ended up with a more
vigorous and exciting country. And if you don't like
it you can always leave. ;-) (joke).

Foxy and her presumptuous(over-)use of the Royal 'we'. Politically correct storytelling in lieu of facts. The rhetorical trickery of Marxism.

When did the Australian people ever give federal government the mandate to make Australia the cultural 'melting pot' of Asia? When did Australians get to vote on the self titled political 'Progressives' 'goal' of diversity?

BTW Foxy, your contemptuous, snide dismissal of another poster's military service - your "And if you don't like it you can always leave" - is no joke.

OTB.
OK but you have to look at the facts, there was no benchmark for "multiculturalism" in the 1960's, perhaps Menzies, Holt, Whitlam and Fraser had looked at the U.S.A and the situation of the Negroes or the Windrush generation in the U.K and saw something they could reproduce.
Well we know now what the long term results of assimilation have been, in the U.S Negro business ownership has withered to 30% of it what was before 1964, 64% of Negro children grow up in a single parent household when in times past it was 15%, and don't let's get started on the situation in the U.K..or rates of incarceration..educational achievement...HIV rates..unemployment.
Multiculturalism is a failure, allowing Negroes and Mohammedans to to emigrate to majority European countries has been an unmitigated disaster, this is now beyond argument.
What's the solution? Foxy doesn't have one beyond more of the same, I'm a nihilistic revolutionary who's quite happy to see the whole society go up in flames if it means national rebirth, what can you right wingers bring to the table?

In my clumsy way, what I was trying to explore was how do people see themselves in relation to Australia, over time, and usually after many years of hard work, each person working with people from all sorts of backgrounds, and in turn contributing to THEIR experiences of working with others in 'Australia'. Of course, people don't forget where they come from, but they also build up a rich picture of good and bad experiences of this place too, and of those of their mates, and of their children. So each person, over the years, brews their own Australian-flavoured soup, you might say.

But the active ingredient seems to be effort, work, the hard slog. Of course, many of our newest arrivals are fully prepared to put in the hard slog. Some may not. And those newcomers may not learn the lessons, and gain the insights, of those who have gone before them, who have done the slog.

And the consequences are overwhelmingly positive: next time you drive past a secondary school at home-time, check out all the friendships you can see coming out the gate, kids horsing around, young men and women obviously getting on together. It's going to be a rich, beautiful world. Half their luck :)

Best wishes,

Joe

Joe.
When I drive past Brunswick Secondary on my way home I see groups of brown kids divided by ethnicity horsing around and a few solitary White kids trudging home with their headphones on and their eyes downcast.
When I drive past Preston Girls High I see locked gates, the school closed down after it became unsustainable because of a lack of students.
Why did it lack students in a booming area? Because no White parent would send their girls into the toxic environment created when the school population became majority Lebanese Muslim.
When I drive past Peter Lalor College I see gangs of Pacific Islanders in their twenties loitering outside and I hear from my kids about the lockdowns, the fights, the sexual assaults, the gay bashings etc at their school.

Dear Joe (Loudmouth),

I couldn't agree with you more.
Beautifully said.

However, sadly,
despite the enormous amount of diversity in Australia
there are still some people who like to perpetuate
a very limited construction of our nation's identity.

However, I agree with you that this will change with
time as the younger generations
through inter-action and discussion,
will learn to sort out their problems.

I guess it's a human trait that
some people are very good at demanding every one else
to be better, but they never seem to demand it of themselves.
Their answer to any kind of question of culture has always
been the obstinate "If you don't like it, leave."
(Hence my facetious, tongue-in-cheek post to Chris).

However, I too am positive about this country's future.
I have to be, for the sake of my children, and grandchildren.

Again, Thank You for your words of wisdom.

Thanks Foxy, you always represent the spirit of generosity and forbearance that I think we should all cherish :) Love, always.

When I was growing up in Bankstown and Penrith in the fifties, there were a few 'Balts' around and a couple of Aboriginal kids, but it was pretty much an Anglo world.

But from the late forties, non-Anglo immigrants, now citizens, must have felt that they had dropped into a multicultural world, and that it has been that way ever since. Every Italian, Greek, Latvian, Hungarian, Serb and Turk in the fifties and sixties must have had to negotiate working with people from all sorts of other backgrounds, all struggling with the crazy English language, all the while trying to understand this new world they had - usually irreversibly - dropped into. And in the process, in their own ways, they became Australians.

So multiculturalism is not new - that process has been going on, for non-Anglos, for more than two hundred years.

I wonder what those Australians think of the Indigenous/non-Indigenous kerfuffle ? After all, they mostly came out long after it had mostly occurred, and there was not a hell of a lot they could do about it, one way or the other. But as it happens, they now greatly out-number Indigenous people, and, apart from a relatively high proportion of marriages between non-Anglos and Indigenous people, most would not have had to give much thought to Indigenous issues.

So, yes, being Australian has become a many-sided phenomenon. And whatever it is, it will keep evolving, with input from a multitude of experiences.

Cheers,

Joe

Dear Jay,

Once again our observations and knowledge of the
various Melbourne schools seem to differ vastly.
My personal experience with the following:

Blackburn High School
Box Hill High School
Doncaster Secondary College
Hawthorn Secondary College
Kew High School
Mt Waverley Secondary College
Nunawading High School
St Albans Secondary College

Have all been very positive - with a wide mix of
students from various cultures and religions
all getting along admirably. And these are public
schools. Of course we've all read about the violence
in some private schools like Xavier. Interesting though
what you've managed to glean from the schools you
mentioned mainly - just by driving past.

Loudmouth "that process has been going on, for non-Anglos, for more than two hundred years."

The difference is, the non-Anglos were primarily European, from culltures similar to and related to ours.

They were also only a fraction of the total, with most immigrants coming from the British Isles.

This allowed a level of stablility and continuity that could tolerate a little "stretching".

Now, 80% of immigrants come from non-European backgrounds.

And in large enough numbers that they need never leave "their" community and be part of the larger picture.

"I only wish I could be around in a hundred years"

Be glad you're spared the horror.

Banjo "The best time in Aus was between 1950 and 1970"

Not surprisingly, that was when native-born Australians peaked as a proportion of the population.

And when we really started manifesting our own culture/identity, rather than simply being pseudo-Brits.

Now that's all being demolished as we become a Disneyland ride of "diversity".

Foxy "Our society today no longer views homogeneity as mandatory."

Except in politics. Progressivism is compulsory.

Foxy,
Wrong again, read my posts, I don't belong to any ethnic group, my ethnic group and the nation into which I was born no longer exist, I and the ones like me aren't "constructing" any identity, that's another straw man.
New graffiti outside the Anarchist club down on St George's Rd Northcote this morning "Death To Aussie Pride!", they needn't have worried so, it's been dead for at least 30 years.

Australia's majority Cultural Identity has been a copy of the USA for many years, entertainment in general, particularly movies, music and TV.
The town of Tamworth, NSW, has an annual "Country Music Festival" at which the dress of the fans and performers mirrors Hollywood's warped idea of what cowboys wore and the Western Drawl/Nasal Twang is the preferred singing voice at The Un-Australian Activities Festival.

Just why people would think that country people have such poor taste in music is anyone's guess.

Good evening to everyone...

There's no doubt Australia has got a multitude of problems, with some cultures not wishing to assimilate with us, and some of us not prepared to extend the hand of friendship, harmony and unity to them.

To be brutally honest, occasionally we Aussies aren't always prepared to be particularly welcoming towards others (strangers). Even though many of them will resolutely strive hard to befriend us ? It would seem therefore, we Aussies tend, not to be as approachable as we could be ? And I do wonder why ?

The solutions to these seemingly intractable problems above, I have no answers ? However, something I do know and appreciate, we have the very best country in the world, with the best conditions, the best way of life and climate, with the best statutory protections for all, and the most stable political and legal systems possible, and by far the most capable, and well trained military (per capita), and the most effective and best trained law enforcement officers, in the developed world. Finally, we have by far, the best Social Security System, of any country on earth, including that of any of the Scandinavian countries.

So folks, we really do have a lot to be thankful for, yet we still whinge, and whine about everything possible under the sun ? Isn't that part of the traditional Aussie way of life, to complain ?

So with these multitude of benefits, and our five star Social Security system, as evidenced by the number of asylum seekers arriving by boat... I sometimes wonder if we don't take it all, too much for granted ?

JOM "I don't belong to any ethnic group, my ethnic group and the nation into which I was born no longer exist, I and the ones like me aren't "constructing" any identity, that's another straw man."

Yes, we all know you are a "white" Australian of your favoured European flavour though Jay don't we?
You mention skin colour in almost all of your' posts.
Why is that?

Joe is thankfully one of the many who love Australia as it is now, and is not living in the past.

Jay Of Melbourne
" I see gangs of Pacific Islanders in their twenties loitering outside and I hear from my kids about the lockdowns, the fights, the sexual assaults, the gay bashings etc at their school."
Don't worry mate we have the same problem up here in Cairns only more so with the West Africans and their love for cane knives.

Joe,
You been drinking some strong home brew or smokin sumpen?

I could look forward to and rely on you to put out some practical experiences, knowledge and forthrightness on aboriginal matters, and here you are going all gooey and philosophical.

I think you are confusing our multi racial community with multiculturalism. Despite the best effort of Whitlam, Grazzby and Fraser we are not and never have been multicultural. The very foundations of our society are derived from the Westminster system. Our governance, military, justice, law enforcement, local government, medical and education systems show that. Multi-racial, Yes, multicultural No

With the advent of the multicultural ideology, where it was encouraged for new immigrants to continue many of their old cultural practices, there was this forming of various ethnic communities, complete with some very alien practices such as centuries old hatreds, forced marriages, oppression of women, FGM, polygamy, cockfights and a contempt for our laws and society. If nothing is done we will see a good country buggered.

I do not see how you can be so blind not to see the divisions caused by multiculturalism ideology. We are now a nation of tribes. Socially it has been all downhill since the 70s. Read the bloody news! Nothing to be optimistic about. It is blatantly obvious that we need to be more selective with our immigration.

You had better give up whatever it is you are on and remove the rose coloured glasses and have a good look at the real world. There are problems aplenty.

I far preferred the old Joe Loudmouth.

suse,
Who said anything about skin colour?
See there you go again, straw man, ad hominem.
This society suits people like you because it requires nothing of you, it's easier just to go along with it and ignore the corruption, the violence, the rapes, the ethnic cleansing, the intimidation of the elderly, the drug dealing etc.

There are hidden benefits to our migration policy.

Last time that I was in Sydney I was able to save quite a bit of money, I'd been planning a trip to a Muslim country to savor the culture and cuisine but I went to Belmore on my pensioners' day ticket and I was transported to the Middle East.

I'm told that had I had the time and some remaining inclination I could have visited simulations of other Arab countries by catching the next train.

Fascinating.

Is Mise,
We have Epping, Dandenong and Broadmeadows as our multicultural theme parks, the Liberals and Leftists love their ethnic themed nights out but it's much safer and nicer to get your Kibbeh,Rogan Josh or Laksa in Fitzroy, Williamstown or South Yarra. That's one thing outer suburban ethnic restaurants and local pubs have in common, no twittering ninnies like Suse and Foxy at the next table swilling white burgundy and boasting about their multicultural credentials, people go there because the food is cheap, the servings are generous and the service prompt and efficient.

Dear Jay,

My goodness, the things that you see - "a few white
kids wearing headphones, with their eyes downcast"
How dramatic!
Then you tell us all about Preston Girls Secondary
College and your reasons for its closure. Lebanese
Muslims. Really?
I suggest
you Google the real reasons for the closure - and also
read the speeches made by seniors of the school at
their last school assembly. As well as the many comments
from parents of the girls. You might get a totally
different picture to the one you're presenting to us
here. It's all very well to accuse others of bias,
strawmen arguments, et cetera, when you seem to have
mastered that art so well yourself.

Dear Banjo,

Years ago assimilation sounded like a noble political
idea, but in practice it smacked of cultural genocide.
Surely it would have been better to give our ethnic
minorities a choice between the invisibility of assimilation
and the drama of separateness. A choice of the extremes
or of any point between.

As I stated earlier they had
a right to be different, to protect their traditions (providing
they didn't break our laws), and to remember their languages.

Yes, this would have caused problems in a society that
saw homogeneity as not only desirable but mandatory. There
would have been tensions between the etnic groups and "us."
not to mention between and within the ethnic groups
themselves. And sadly, many of the problems that would have
developed would have impinged on the children of the
communities as they'd fight their disapproving parents for
the right to go to a dance, for the right to choose a
partner "outside."

Yes, it would have been difficult - and we would have wanted
to intervene when we saw those children subjected to
extreme authoritarianism. But hey, we would have ended up
in the process with a more vigorous, exciting, Australia, and in
the end, through interaction and discussion, we would have
sorted the problems out.

Oh wait, that's exactly what we did.

You can't go back to the past. Try contributing
positively to the future.

Foxy,
In the last 40 years or so many immigrants have came from countries with cultures completely divorced from, and nothing like the Westminster system. To encourage these people to keep their traditional cultural practices is folly and works against the basis of our society. They openly show contempt for us, our laws, standards and community involvement.

History is valuable because it teaches us lessons. People who do not value history will go on and make the same mistakes over again. It is important to recognise when something is not working. Such as the integration of some groups.

Australia really needs to modify its immigration policies.

Dear Jay,

In the past you had to travel the globe
(which, thanks to multi-cultral marketing,
media and technology was suffering from
galloping homogeneity) to see worlds that
contrasted with our own. Today, in a
multi-cultural society, as even you
have noticed (thanks to the wide variety
of now available foods that differ greatly
from skewered corned beef awash in tomato
sauce, mashed potatoes strained with two slices
of beetroot), such experiences are within
walking distance, or over the back fence, (or
in restaurants, as you point out). Good heaven,
you could even risk inviting people inside.

You could even abandon your racist bodgie-isms
and become a multi-cultural mod.
You might even try to see a film with
writing-on-the-bottom - that might be educational.
Perhaps then you'd realise that the world doesn't
end sharply a few miles beyond St Kilda beach.

Foxy,
It's all about the food isn't it? That's because the expanded range of dining options for middle class Whites is the only tangible artifact of 40 years of Third World immigration.
Let's skip the obvious points about how unhealthy commercially prepared ethnic foodstuffs are and examine the economics.
Foxy how do you think an ethnic restauranteur can serve up a bowl of Pho or a plate of Pakoras for $6? I personally don't care if the waiters and kitchen workers are being paid $5 an hour or that the owners are mostly trading while insolvent, free of state intervention the market decides the price.
You however profess a social conscience, don't you think it's a little hypocritical that you'd be a party to the exploitation of workers?
Maybe you'd be be a better citizen if, like my old mum you invested in some cook books and prepared all that yummy ethnic food yourself?
Be truthful, when you eat home cooked food with people of other ethnic backgrounds on a regular basis you get some variation of meat and three veg plus carbohydrates and fruit day in, day out. Why? Because the old diets are nutritious, contain plenty of fibre, protein and vitamins and the commercially available "ethnic" foods are full of salt, sugar and fat.
Foods go in and out of fashion, because of advances in transportation and expanded global tourism there would have been ethnic food crazes here regardless of whether we had Third World immigration or not. Furthermore wouldn't it be better for our people to aspire to travel the world and experience other societies rather than take the lazy route and try to create facsimiles and theme park suburban strips at home?

Dear Jay,

It isn't just about the food.
Again your distraction is not going to
work.

BTW - I would match your mother's
cooking skills with mine any day.

My cooking
is legendary among my family, friends, neighbours,
and colleagues - from traditional Lithuanian,
Russian, German, Chinese, English (my in-laws and
thank you Nigella) to Margaret Fulton's excellent
teaching. I love to cook - and do so with great
love and relish.
As for how much the restaurant staff are paid?
Your concern is deeply touching.
Are you just as concerned about all our manufacturing
that goes overseas, the overseas call-centres,
the products that we buy here that are made in
Third World countries? The lists go on.

All societies are made up of good and bad. None are perfect.

I have seen a comment from the right, that multi-culturism is wrong, because not all cultures are equal. Why does the person that made this comment believe he is superior.

I lived in the Guildford area, when the Muslims first came. Lived there for many years. Had sadly seen some of their kids grow up to be ccrinjmanls. Funny, also seen some of our kids go down the same path. Nothing to do with culture.
I am more interested in why this occurred, than blaming any religion or culture.

I have also seen the majority grow up, to create families of their own, and live worthwhile lives. Once again, nothing to do with religion or culture.

Flo,

The electorate is demanding much better screening of migrants.

Opponents to any screening of migrants (they want 'open door' immigration) try to cast that simple, reasonable, democratic demand of the majority of the electorate as opposition to all migrants or to some cultural groups, which it is not. The demand for better screening is being made by migrants too, who are more opposed to importing the toxic customs and persecutors they themselves have fled.

The reasonable concerns of the law-abiding, respectable majority, who do not deserve the foul label of 'racists' - in fact they are constantly proving that the opposite is the case in their respect - were raised but are not being discussed here.

Dear Joe (Loudmouth,

Thank You for your kind words
and your well reasoned arguments.
They are appreciated.

Dear Flo,

Thanks to you for your perceptive
comments.

I am consistently amazed at those who continue to
divide issues into a "Them" and "Us" argument.
As Joe (Loudmouth) pointed out in this discussion -
"We are Many, and We are One," (as the song says).
But his words are not heard or appreciated by these
"decent law-abiding citizens" who know what's best
for "Us" (and "Them"). Screening of immigrants is
already being done as the following link tells us:

http://www.immi.gov.au/media/fact-sheets/70border.htm

Although obviously not to everyone's satisfaction.

o sung wu "we have the very best country in the world, with the best conditions, the best way of life and climate, with the best statutory protections for all, and the most stable political and legal systems possible"

And all that just appeared out of thin air?
No, it was a consequence of the very homogeneity now being destroyed.

What kind of "stability" do you expect will develop from today's immigration?
We will be the "best" Third World hellhole.

The people make the nation, and we are changing the people.

We had a nation of related people who understood what "liberal", "democratic" and "secular" meant.

We now have millions of unrelated people coming in who have never encountered such concepts, with many openly opposed to them.

Foxy "Years ago assimilation sounded like a noble political idea, but in practice it smacked of cultural genocide."

And who pulled the trigger?
If you loved your birth culture so much, why did *YOU* leave it?

"such experiences are within walking distance, or over the back fence"

So are the gang rapists.

Jay Of Melbourne "there would have been ethnic food crazes here regardless of whether we had Third World immigration or not."

Yes, this is the Information Age.
Recipes, films, music, art, literature.
Recorded and replicated with the touch of a button.

From any era or culture, all at your fingertips. Add to cart.
No need to move millions of human bodies around.

We had crazes for various styles of Black American music, with virtually no Black American immigration.

Crazes for Latin American dances, with virtually no Latin American immigration.
We adopted surfing, with virtually no Hawaiian immigration.

We can partake of any cultural elements we wish, without anyone migrating anywhere.

Dear Shockadelic,

I was born in Australia.
My parents were refugees, who had fled from
Lithuania to escape the second Soviet occupation of
their country (1944 -1990). They helped solve an acute
labour shortage in Australia, especially in outlying
areas. A report by the Commonwealth Employment
Service dated September, 1948 stated:

"They (the first 4000 displaced persons) are everywhere
employed upon work for which sufficient Australian labour
is not available ... This review of their activities over
a very short period suggests how much impetus their
availability in large numbers is likely to give our
housing program and to our production in other industries
which are vital to the Australian economy."

On arrival in this country, the 10,000 Lithuanians had
joined other migrants in the rebuilding of Australia's
capital structures that were to save the nation for many
decades to come. Their economic contribution was significant
at a time when Australia needed it most.

Today, despite the enormous amount of diversity in this
country, cultural, sexual, racial, political - there
remain people who still like to perpetuate a very
limited construction of our nation's identity.

They're very good at demanding every one else to be
better - but they never seem to demand it of themselves.
Their answer to any kind of question of culture that
occupies the status quo has always been the obstinate,
"If you don't like it, leave." Perhaps we need to say
to them - "We like it here, but if you don't, then
why don't you take your own advice and go. Sadly for you
though, this world is full of diversity. Good-luck with
finding your Utopia."

JoM ,"Who said anything about skin colour? See there you go again, straw man, ad hominem."

Yeah right Jay, you protest your innocence when all one has to do is read at least 2 posts in this thread, and numerous in other threads where you mention 'Whites', with a capital W!

There are many people of all colours who we would rather not have as citizens of this country, and many of the lighter skin coloured people are among them.

So don't carry on about your favourite colour skin as though it is a 'master race', because there are good and bad amongst all groups of humans...

Julia Gillad was accused of xenophobia and racism when she acted to stop employers from rorting 457 visas. She was a 'racist' because she wanted Australian workers put in the queue ahead of foreigners. She quite rightly held that 457 visas were for skilled workers.

The Left howled with rage, accusing Gillard of racism and xenophobia when she said what the electorate believed, that Australian culture was worth keeping and that government should be choosy in who was allowed to migrate to Australia - and who should be permitted to cross Australia's border for that matter.

Mr Abbott once stated in Parliament,

"True love for this country is expressed by trying
to unite us, not by setting out to divide us."

Those of us who are proud of what this country has
achieved by the contributions of so many
diverse people - can see the value in that comment.

suse,
Again. who said anything about skin colour? Skin colour is an obsession of Anti Racists not of capital W Whites, we're the only ethnic groups with a wide variation in skin tone and hair/eye colour so why would we define ourselves based on such a nonsensical standard.
A White man:
http://fast.swide.com/wp-content/uploads/italian-men-cure-to-baldnesspierluigi-collina.jpg
A White woman:
http://celebritiesexercise.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Margot-Robbie.jpg
Another White man:
http://images.smh.com.au/2013/08/20/4676991/1_vince169-408x264.jpg
Another White woman:
http://jp2.r0tt.com/l_3acf6b50-8e31-11e1-8a1a-dd34d5500002.jpg

Get it? Capital W Whites celebrate the diversity of physical features among our people, but you're not one of us, that's why you're obsessed with skin colour.

Here's an interesting tidbit for you, some Europeans appear to have had much darker skin and blue eyes as recently as 7,000 years ago:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com.au/2014/01/brown-skinned-blue-eyed-y-haplogroup-c.html

I agree with Mr Abbott.

However you have ducked the questions as usual. Do you agree with Julia Gillard and if not, specifically where do you differ her and for what reasons?

As well, it would be good to see you finally recognise the generosity and acceptance of the Australian people in offering sanctuary - temporary or permanent, whichever the migrant wanted - to the many thousands of people who fled Europe during and after WW2. That was in addition to the huge loss of life and injury to Australians who served. Post WW2 it was impossible to find a living soul who had not lost someone near and dear to them, and to go out into the street was to witness the crippled shells of men and women who volunteered.

Yet you seem to take every opportunity to sledge the people (and culture) who took your family to their breast. Tolerance and acceptance is not a one-way street.

That said, there is also the not so small matter that Australians should be allowed a vote on the diversity you believe Australia has to have. No-one here is opposed to migration, but as Julia Gillard stated, it is Australia that should choose who is allowed to cross its borders and be allowed to settle here. The open door policy you and the Greens espouse is not acceptable. No other country would support an open door immigration policy either.

My post @onthebeach, Thursday, 30 January 2014 11:51:21 AM was in reply to Foxy. It should have been addressed accordingly, sorry.

I am going to repeat what I've written in the past
on this topic:

One could try and argue that the indentured contract scheme
(for Post World War II migrants) was
equally beneficial to Australia and to the migrants.
One could say, for example, that Australia benefited
because the migrants solved its acute labour shortages
in key areas, while the migrants benefited, too, by
being assured of jobs and having an opportunity to
settle in a new country.

This argument is difficult to sustain.

Australia was the last country to enter the International
Refugee Organisation's re-settlement scheme and,
political rhetoci aside, "economic expedience was by far
the stronger motivation." The Australian Government
contributed only ten pounds ($20) towards each migrant's
fare. The rest of the passage was paid by various
non-Australian welfare agencies.

On arrival in Australia, all migrants were classified in
only two occupations: "labourers" which denoted all
males, and "domestics" which meant all females. Although
the Australian employment officials had full details of each
immigrant's skills and qualifications, no effort was
made to match these with the jobs offering. The Australian
authorities enforced labour contracts strictly.

The early conditions for migrant settlement were inadequate.
There was no family accommodation in many places to which
contract workers were sent. Men had to live in tents or
tin huts, in most primitive conditions. Their wives and
children remained in holding camps for long periods and
often a long distance away from their husbands' and fathers'
work places. Marriages suffered, and the psychological
scars of forced separations have for some remained for
life.

There is so much literature on this subject that people
can access for themselves. Books such as - J. Jupp
(2002) "From White Australia to Woomera: The Story of
Australian Immigration," E. Kunz, (1975)
"The Intruders: Refugee doctors in Australia,"
and C. Panich (1988) "Sanctuary? Remembering Post-War
Immigration," to name just a few.

Today, building a fairer Australia remains a work in
progress.

Dear Joe (Loudmouth),

The early months after arrival in a new country call
for the greatest adjustment not only for the migrants,
but also for the local people who interact with the
migrants. Since Culotta's humorous exposure of the
problem (1957 - in his book, "They're a Weird Mob"),
the literature on this topic has been growing rapidly,
E. Boas (1999)"Leading dual lives," I. Gelsen (1983),
"Fares, please!" C. Panich (1988), "Sanctuary? Remembering
Post-War Immigration," and R. Tarvydas (1997) "From
Amber Coast to Apple Isle," are but a few examples.

Thank You for putting this discussion up on this
Forum. As I've stated to you in the past - You have
a good heart.

See you on another thread.

Take care.

Thanks Foxy, right back atya :)

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but there was an element of discrimination in how ten-pound migrants were treated: Anglos could move to any city they liked, but non-Anglos had to do a stint of two years in the bush, on the railways or farms before they could be 'released' to work in the cities.

When I started working in factories in 1965, I came across very few Australian-born workers, usually the tradesmen, and my work-mates were usually Italians, Greeks, Yugoslavs, Maltese, the odd Turk or Lebanese. Our leading hands and foremen and supervisors tended to be Australians. I don't think the union movement ever caught up with that fact. Australians had moved into the trades and middle-class professional jobs by then. Fifty years ago.

Let's face it, since the War, migrants have built this country. Australians have done well out of that arrangement, moving up in the social world partly, if unintentionally, on their backs. But they weren't stupid, they usually tried to make sure their kids didn't follow them into the factories and become a permanent non-Anglo work-force. In their turn, those kids battled their way into the middle-class. Over the years, they have been followed in this strategy by Vietnamese and South Americans and other groups. And now it's other people's turn.

And we are all constantly re-making Australia, on the basis of the rule of law, equality of rights and a fair go, more or less. This is not to say there isn't friction, and difficulties, or that there won't be in the future, but I wouldn't live anywhere else.

Cheers,

Joe

Foxy,

The misleading impression you spread stems from giving only half the story. You cherry-pick and misrepresent. -As has been pointed out to you in previous threads where you did you usual thing of sicking the boot into Australians for what you allege to be 'unfair' treatment post-WW2 refugees and displaced persons from Europe.

You are long on the poor infrastructure and opportunities available in Australia and you opine that people such as the Lituanians who fled the German Displaced Persons (DP) camps and shambles that was post-war Europe should have been given lodging, work and recreation commensurate with what they might have expected in good times in pre-WW2 Europe.

What you consistently fail to mention or even recognise is that the fledgling Australian industries were devastated by WW2. The whole country had been restructured to provide the food and raw materials for Europe's war. Every available man was either in an industry essential to the war effort or was overseas fighting for the freedom of others, including your relatives. Women were the factory workers -engaged solely in war production- and women ran the farms - again, oriented to war production. Post war it collapsed in on itself as war production was not required.

TBC

contd..

As for housing for the thousands who were welcomed after the war (you refuse to even grant Australians their generosity), of course there was a shortage of housing after the war. In fact in the country and on the outskirts of towns, many a returned Digger built temporary housing for his family out of secondhand iron, with dirt floors. Inside, the pot of dripping to be spread on bread for lunch sat on a wood fired stove or open fireplace. Bags were often entrance doors. They would have been happy to have been allocated free lodging in the relatively new army barracks and huts. But so what if the men lived in tents. So did Australian workers in the country.

You failed to mention that the great majority of Lithuanian arrivals were single men and women. In fact you imply that all were families, split apart by awful, insensitive Australian authorities.

I will leave it at those quick remarks, knowing that you have had it all explained for you in detail many times before and links provided, which you so obviously have ignored. Your prejudice against you fellow Australians is that important to you it appears that you cannot see another side.

Foxy, that was then and this is now.

Back then, we could afford to take a few thousand Lithuanians (who are our ethnic cousins).

There was firstly, a legitimate urgent reason for their migration.

Secondly, we had a stable, homogenous nation that could cope with a *little* stretching.

Thirdly, there were jobs.
We had a manufacturing industry, and projects like Snowy River, where people with few skills and poor English could get a job.

There was also virtually no welfare system like today's. If they didn't manage their own affairs, tough luck.

I didn't "construct" our national identity.
It constructed itself.
People like you just want to dismantle it.

It is you who seeks a Utopia, an impossible fairyland where any and all types of people coexist, as long as they do the worst jobs and stay in their cutely quaint ethnic pigeonhole, entertaining you with their strange dances in embroidered skirts.

You are proof assimilation works.
Are you writing here in Lithuanian? Or English?

The world is full of diversity? Duh!
That's not the issue. The demographics of *Australia* is the issue.
We don't have to replicate the world in our own streets.

Look at the trouble that diversity has caused.

Almost everywhere where one group butts borders with another group, there's been conflict (Muslims/Hindus, Greeks/Turks).

Almost everywhere there are significant regional minorities, there's been conflict (Sri Lanka, Chechnya).

Do you really want to replicate that in Australia?
Give me homogeneity any day.

We don't have to "be" the world.
We can just be us, what history made us.

The people who would become "Australians" were White in 1788, White in 1888 and White in 1988.
They will still be White in 2088.
Anyone else is a guest in our home. Increasingly, unwanted guests.

Japan can be Japanese (with a native minority, the Ainu).
France can be French (with a native minority, the Bretons).
And Australia can be Australian, and that means White (with a native minority, the Aborigines).

Dear Joe (Loudmouth),

Again Thank You for understanding the situation
so well.

My parents were ones who experienced
the Australian Government's official policies of those
difficult times after World War II when Australia increased
its migrant intake considerably and invited the Displaced
People to come to Australia with their families. My parents
came along with older brothers, and my mother's parents.

The conditions that I write about are
based on my family's personal experiences, and those of
many migrants who travelled with them - and these are also -
historical facts that can be verified through government
records, books, Immigration Museums, State Library -
archival records, Oral Recordings, films, and other primary
sources - including holding camps like Bonegilla that now
have museums established.

Social history involves learning about, and
understanding how people lived, behaved, and why. It helps
us understand and learn from the past and
take what's relevant out of it - to us today - and how we
can improve on things. Historians record
what happened, however as we know,
the minute they begin to look critically
at motivation, circumstances, context, or any other such
considerations, the information may become unacceptable for one
or another camp of readers.

Well over twenty per cent of all Australians today were
born in another country, more than half of these have
come to Australia from non-English-speaking countries
in Europe, the Middle East, South America, and Asia.
More than 7 million (42 per cent) were born
outside Australia or had a parent born outside Australia.

However, the concept of multiculturalism as we've seen
from this discussion continues to have different meanings
for different people. Some people still believe that a
unique Australian society and identity emerged with
Federation and...this identity should be the basis of
immigrant assimilation.

These people are entitled to their opinions.
What they are not entitled to do however is stoop to
making personal attacks on those that disagree with them.
That is unacceptable.

Again Thank You and I hope to see you on another discussion.

Take care.

Dear Shockadelic,

Before I go there are a few things that need to be
corrected. You've made quite a few statements
that are absolutely wrong. Firstly you referred
to "people with few skills and poor English."
Absolute nonsense! My father spoke eight languages.
And managed to learn English with few problems.

Let me tell you that on arrival in this country, the
10,000 Lithuanians and other migrants,
joined in the
rebuilding of Australia's capital structures that were
to serve the nation for many decades to come.

The same
migrants could have accomplished a great deal more, if
the Australian authorities had made full use of their
skills and knowledge, instead of treating them all
as unskilled labour.

Nevertheless, their economic
contribution was significant at a time when Australia needed
it most. Also for your information, Lithuanian migrants have
always greatly valued education and training. Many of them
entered professions, mostly after years of arduous study
and sacrifice. Doctors, dentists, lawyers, and others
whose qualifications were not recognised in Australia,
went back to universities and qualified again.
Some laboured during the day and studied at night. In some
families, wives worked long hours while husbands studied
full time, or vice versa. Other Lithuanian immigrants
continued working well below the level of their training,
while some became self-employed in new fields. All were
self-reliant and none expected any welfare payments.
That would have been considered a disgrace.

I am not trying to dismantle the "Australian" identity.
On the contrary, I am presenting it, as it really is.
You are the one doing the dismanteling. BTW - I speak also
several languages. How many do you speak?
Only English?

You really are locked in a narrow time warp.

cont'd ...

Dear Shockadelic,

Some more information for you:

In our history books you get
"The First Fleet arrived. It brought 1000
English convicts."

It brought 1000 convicts but they came from a
dozen different countries. As somebody put it
so delightfully, "English jails were no respecters of
nationality." The first Italian arrived on January 26, 1788 -
Giuseppe Tuso. There were people from South Africa,
there were people from Ceylon, from India, from Spain,
from Portugal, from Hungary. So when you keep referring
to "Whites" you are espousing a myth.

"If my skin was coloured
And yours was starkly white
Would you start putting me down
Till I'd have to turn and fight

If I prayed to a god
And it was different to yours
Would you reason it out
As a good cause for war?

If men are truly brothers
Though we can't live in peace
Should we obey the rules and fight
Or Try and make the fighting cease?"

Brenda Krenus (1978) Form 3, Richmond High, Victoria

Before going to sleep for the night I Googled
the words to the song - "We are One, but we are many,"
and found the entire wording. I suggest that those
who don't know the entire song - to look it up.
There's more to the song than I realised. And the words
are very meaningful and relevant and beautiful.

Here's just the first verse and the chorus, but there's
so much more:

"I came from the Dreamtime, from the dusty red soil plains
I am the ancient-heart, the keeper of the flame
I stood upon the rocky shore, I watched the tall ships come
For fourty thousand years I've been the first Australian.

We are one, but we are many
And from all the lands on earth we come
We share a dream and sing with one voice
I am, you are, we are Australian..."

Well worth a read.

"The people who would become "Australians" were White in 1788, White in 1888 and White in 1988.
They will still be White in 2088."

Did your history book forget to mention the Negroes on the First Fleet?

Sorry, my mistake, they must have been white Negroes.

Foxy,

Again, you need some facts to balance your negative rhetoric and personal 'factoids' that disparage Australians and the Australian Government at the time.

The bulk of Lituanians arrived in Australia very soon after WW2. They were overwhelmingly young and single, Catholic and very few had any English language at all, or any similar cultural exposure. While you no doubt have disrespected Labor PM Arthur Caldwell in the past, it was Caldwell as Minister for Migration, who visited the DP camps in Europe in 1947, was dismayed by the conditions there and offered sanctuary to them. Contrary to what you imply, there was one surge of Lituanian migrants and bugger all later. They were the early arrivals post WW2. [Taken from the Sydney Lithuanian Society briefing papers]

It is unrealistic of you to expect that they could be offered a similar lifestyle, jobs, housing, cultural and sporting pursuits, entertainment and recreation to what they might have expected in good times in pre-war Europe.

In fact they were offered what contract work was available, which was rather generous considering the sanctuary they were offered, with housing and no commitment was demanded of them to stay. It was rather obvious that in post-WW2 Australia the job opportunities of pre-WW2 developed, intensively populated Europe could not apply. The arrangement was flexible for them and their choice was paramount.

However, if things were as bad as you make out and would like people to believe, how come very, very few ever left?

There is a gap the size of the Carnarvon Gorge between you with your modern Left expectations and the migrants whose experiences and expectations you claim to represent. Back then they got on with life, thankful they survived, were out of Europe and had a future. The 'locals' did the same.

BTW, there was no ESL for the Lituanians in 1947 either. You would see that as shocking and discriminatory, huh?

Honestly, get some balance and get on with your life.

I remember the post war migrants well and worked with a number of 'Balts' as they were collectively known.

We were Call Boys at Enfield Locomotive Depot (Sydney), it was our job to deliver job notifications to drivers and firemen who lived within a one mile radius of the depot and on the night shifts to wake them one hour before they were due to sign on (we bore no similarity to Call Girls !).
They quickly assimilated and were keen to learn English and we spent a lot of time between jobs perfecting their new language; being mostly multi-lingual they soon picked up English.
One, a Lithuanian, who became a good friend, had no English until he boarded the migrant ship but by the time he arrived he was fluent.
My other particular workmates were a Latvian, and two White Russians.

One of these latter became so Australian that I met him some years later in Korea at a bit of a get together between 3RAR and 1RAR.

These were young people and only one of them was lucky enough for his father to have come with him the others were on their own having lost all immediate relatives.

The only migrants from these early post war years that I knew who asked for special treatment were a famous surgeon and an exceptional pianist, both had been allocated to labouring jobs at the depot.
Both feared for the sensitivity of their hands and Jack Elton, the District Locomotive Engineer (the Big boss) readily granted their requests (the pianist easily proved his claim by playing on the Canteen piano). The doctor cut out his two years compulsory as a very diligent clerk in the main office and the pianist in a stores job.

In later years these lads that I knew were indistinguishable from their neighbours except for their names and their ability to speak more than one language.

otb,

I have told you in the past that I do not wish to interact
with you. I have stated quite clearly many times
that I have no interest
in responding or interacting with you.

As far as the information that I have provided on Lithuanians
and other post war immigrants goes. That information, is given
by people who have lived during those times and what they
experienced, this information has been taken from available
government records, Oral Recordings, documentation and personal
experiences.
It has been thoroughly researched, and it can all be verfied
through the primary sources that I mentioned earlier.

BTW - Any intelligent person would realise that the
historical conditions that existed at that time do not
denigrate a country or its people. The material
simply presents things as they were during those times.
If you want to present things from your own point of view
and your own interpretations - you are entitled to do so.
However do not accuse me of invention, denigration, or make
false assumptions about me and then expect me to respond.
That is unacceptable.

Foxy,

You just want your own opinions to hold sway, that is all. However the public are waking up to people who claim to be experts and who employ storytelling rhetoric in lieu of facts and documentary evidence, particularly from official sources. But then you would cast suspicion about official sources and reports in the newspapers of the time, just as you denigrate what you disparingly label the 'MSM' or mainstream media.

Facts do matter. It is never good enough to work back from your conclusion to cherry-pick and distort to arrive at where you want to be. Storytelling is commonplace. It is in lieu of QA by peers, eg peer review in a respectable journal. It is myth-making. Get the sensationalist headline and no matter that the truth comes out ages later in a wee column on page 4.

Storytelling is toxic, divisive and destructive. Much worse is that such 'information' is unreliable. Yet a lot of it is being taught in schools as fact. The Marxist would be proud that their sly language tools are used to such effect.

That is what has been happening in the victim industries. An example among many would be the claimed officially-supported massacres of Aborigines. Where is the actual evidence though?

otb,

Again - you refer to "storytelling" as if evidence
does not exist. Are you really that ignorant?
Or are you simply stirring?

The evidence exists - and if you
can't Google it - go to your local library and ask for
help. That includes on any topic of this country's
history including the Aboriginal people's massacres.

What level of education have you achieved and how old
are you? I'm just curious as many people that I deal
with on a daily basis in my job have been poorly
served by their teachers and by the nation's historians
in the past. They've been denied information, interpretation,
and understanding. It is as I've stated previously now
possible to explore the past by means of a large number
of books, and other primary sources. And we certainly now
know a great deal about the history of Indigenous-Settler
relations.

But knowing brings burdens which can be shirked by those
living in ignorance. With knowledge however, the question is no
longer what we know, but what we are to now do, and that is a
much harder matter to deal with and as far as the Aboriginal
people are concerned will probably continue to perplex us
for many years to come.

Foxy,

The fact remains that you cherry-pick to work back from your conclusion. You lack balance.

Like others I do not seek to change your prejudices, but I will not stand idly by while you tip undeserved buckets on your fellow Australians, and indirectly on the post-WW2 migrants who fled Europe and would never have contemplated, nor had a bar of the victim politics you play.

The monkey is on your back and you are welcome to it.

otb,

I'm not interested in mud-slinging contests.
All I can do professionally for you Sir, is
politely suggest that you try to get a hold of
James Jupp's book, "From White Australia to
Woomera," the recently revised and updated version,
and read it. James Jupp is Australia's leading
specialist in migration issues. He covers the entire
history of Australian migration in this book as well
as covering the vexed issues of refugees and
asylum seekers in great depth. You may just learn
something.

I can't do any more for you.
And, I have no further wish to either read what you have
to say or respond to you. Therefore if you still persist
in addressing posts to me - you shall be ignored.
I am not in the slightest bit interested in anything
you have to say. I am not paid to deal with your type
on this forum. I suggest you go and talk to someone
who cares. I don't!

Cheers.

Dear Joe (Loudmouth),

One last link for you before I go:

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/01/03/1041566221402.html

Very relevant today. Building a fairer Australia
remains a work in progress. But intereaction and
civilised discussion will hopefull solve the problems.

Thanks Foxy, that's a brilliant article !

Love,

Joe

Foxy,

Most would see through you rather obvious rhetorical trickery such as naming a book, while heavily implying that the author somehow supports your opinion. Why is it always impossible for you to provide quotes and show how the author supports your jaundiced opinions of Australians and their treatment of the Lithuanians who came here immediately post-WW2? The answer is that both Australia and those migrants did the very best with what was available at the time.

Australia was deeply affected by the transition from the war economy, war production and the devastation loss of life and return of thousands of crippled servicemen. There was no deliberate ill-treatment, unfairness or discrimination was there and you have no evidence to support your sledging of Australia's generosity.

You cherry-pick and generalise to support your prejudice, all the while judging authorities back then against the Left victim industry expectations of a modern, developed State in peacetime.

It is interesting that you always duck and disregard all evidence that challenges your storytelling and factoids, such as the information I provided from the Sydney Lithuanian Information Centre.

There will always be good upstanding people who are prepared to weather your lecturing, posturing and insults, and challenge you to provide direct, specific evidence to support your assessments and opinions, which you have consistently failed to do.

As I said previously, the monkey is on your back.

Foxy "The world is full of diversity"

And how do think that came about?
By everyone opening their castle doors to any upright hominid that walked past, mixing merging and morphing away any distinctions?

No, all these different peoples exist because they did the exact opposite.
Refusing, rejecting and resisting "them" (whoever "they" were).

"Some people still believe that a unique Australian society and identity emerged with Federation"

It happened long before then, or Federation would never have occurred.
People were calling themselves "Australians" before there was technically an "Australia"!

"How many [languages] do you speak?"

I only *need* to speak, read and write one: English.

"So when you keep referring to "Whites" you are espousing a myth."

Most of the ethnicities you refer to ARE White. Sheesh!
And what PROPORTION were these "others"? A tiny fraction.

Maybe you should take another look at those museums (general ones, not ones that cherry-pick to suit an agenda).

Look at the photos.
Crowds at an event? White.
School class? White.
Sports team? White.

Sure you'll find a few exceptions, but mostly you'll see White, White, White.

Thanks for the kiddie poem.
That's sums it up: multiculturalism is only suitable for naive people who know nothing about human nature, society or history.

I don't want to "fight" anyone.
I'm simply aware of the realistic probability of "fighting" should this policy continue.
No people has EVER passively accepted the loss of their social dominance or territory.

There are hundreds of separatist movements in the world.
Almost all are defined along ethnic lines.
This is the reality of "diversity", not your naive Disneyland fantasy.

Is Mise "Did your history book forget to mention the Negroes on the First Fleet?"

All two of them?
Again you and Foxy like to cherry pick the *anomalies* and pretend they are the norm.

Yes, there was an Xantho here and a Yepiti there.
But the overwhelming majority were White/Europeans, primarily from the British Isles.

Go with Foxy and look at the photos.
White, White, White.

Joe,
It seems foxy has left this thread, if not I thank her for the link and I commend it to you.

Although now dated, it has some very useful information. I started to copy and save some quotes and ended up saving the whole article. Some I agreed with and some I do not and am not sure what the intention of the author was.

I am sure that you, and others, will find many sentences and phrases interesting and worth thinking about.

Foxy,
It's not possible to have a civilised discussion of immigration or any other aspect of the "Progressive" agenda when the elite groups in society, the media, the parliament, the churches and the chamber of commerece are all biased in favour of "progress".
The millions of nice, pious, middle class French people who exercised their democratic "rights" and rallied against same sex marriage last year were genuinely surprised and horrified when riot police began clubbing them to the ground.
Pro immigration advocates are not peace activists, they're more than willing to use violence, in fact in a lot of cases it's their first act in suppressing dissenting opinions so this idea of a "civilised" debate is pie in the sky.

Shockadelic,

The emphatic statement was that the people on the First Fleet were 'White' it is not cherry picking to point out the historically accurate fact that two of the them were negro, nor, further, that they bred and multiplied and that there were other negroes who came to the early colony is attested by the area in which they lived being known as "Dixieland".

"Their descendants married other black newcomers, emancipated convicts, free settlers, aboriginal and (very often) their own cousins. By the middle of the nineteenth Century large numbers settled the area stretching from North Parramatta, Carlingford, Pennant Hills, the Field of Mars Common and the Fox Valley. Many of these people had distinctly African features, but were often publicity identified as aboriginal. This part of Sydney was known derisively as "Dixieland". Some descendants acquired property and respectability and inter-married with the other "old" families of the region (John Howard link). Others remained "fringe dwellers". At least one descendant was hanged (for a crime he didn't commit!), another was shot by police (Tom Conquit link). Many were associated with the timber trade, as sawyers, timber cutters etc. Towards the end of the 1850's the larger community broke up, some moving to settle the Clarence River region of NSW, others going to Sofala and Wattle Flat (for the gold rush) and a remnant group consolidating themselves along Pennant Hills Road and near Aiken Road, Pennant Hills. The latter was known within living memory as "Dixi Lane"."
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~johnrandall2/

and,
"Contrary to opinion that the First Fleet was made up entirely of Anglo-Celtic people is wrong. We know for instance that there were at least 15 West Indians and Negroes, there were Dutch, Portuguese, Swedes and one Indian from Bengal. Some Asians were included in the Fleet."
http://www.fellowshipfirstfleeters.org.au/storie6.html

Their descendants among us are now many and many of us have a chance of being one.

Have another bite at the cherry !

Is Mise, nothing like a bit of mythbusting LOL
Off topic but here are some of my favourite "anachronisms", they really stand out against backdrop of the Anti Racist narrative don't you think?:
http://i465.photobucket.com/albums/rr13/Garpman_bucket/Military%20pics/JapinNaziarmy.jpg
http://blogs.periodistadigital.com/imgs/20090125/negro-wehrmacht.jpg
http://s242.photobucket.com/user/Adler69_photo/media/imps/Frankreich_Turkestani_in_der_Wehrmacht01.jpg.html
See also the stories of John Joseph and Rafaello Carbone, two not insignificant figures in the Eureka rebellion, then there's the tale of multicultural British army sent in 1915 to repel the Jihad in the Dardanelles.
So why do the anti Racists view colonisation in such a subjective fashion? We all know that Australia was multicultural from the start so why are Anglo Australians singled out?
The answer is obvious, Anti Racists (who are really just Anti White) cherry pick examples from history to suit their agenda and to illustrate their narrative fiction.

It doesn't sound to me like the "Negroes" were a significant part of early Sydney.

They were outsiders living *separately* on the outskirts.
Again showing the tendency of any people to want to live amongst their own kind.
NOBODY really wants "diversity", even the people you claim as examples of it.

They obviously didn't make much of a lasting impact.
I remember being astonished at how many "negroes" I saw when I first moved to Sydney in 1986: None.
And I lived in Epping, not too far from ye olde Dixieland.

Your type keep referring to a "myth" of an *exclusively* White history.
Nobody is saying it was 100% White.
We are saying it was *overwhelmingly* White (90% Australian-born White by the 1940s), and the few anomalies are just that, anomalies, of no significance.

I'm sure there's a few anomalies in every country in the world.
But there is also usually a dominant/majority ethnicity that gives the nation its character/identity.

In this land, it's White Australians.
It never was Africans or Asians.
You're the ones peddling a myth.

"there were at least 15 West Indians and Negroes [out of 1500 people: 1%. OMG!], there were Dutch [White], Portuguese [White], Swedes [White] and one Indian from Bengal [ONE!]. Some Asians were included in the Fleet."

Wow. About 1% weren't White.
Well, golly gee wilikers!
That certainly justifies an 80% non-White immigration policy today.

1788: 1%
2014: 80%
Sounds reasonable.

Sockadelic, you're just promoting a different narrative, the truth is shades of grey.
That's not the way you repel "those types" from a discussion.
The Anti Whites don't rely on facts to put their case, they use fiction as a learning toolkit which refers back to a semi fictional narrative which due to the lack of real documentation or concrete evidence is a sort of oral history relayed from one storyteller to another.See one set of beliefs doesn't trump another, your beliefs don't have any capacity to nullify those of an Anti Racist.
In real life, you can actually show "these types"evidence which contradicts their beliefs and they simply reject it saying "I don't believe you". What it boils down to are beliefs held by believers, a preference toward acceptance of shall we say the supernatural over the rational and demonstrably true statements of another person.
As a result of usually highly personal and subjective reasons Anti Racists simply don't want to believe that White people are by nature good and caring people, especially when it comes to the treatment of minorities in their midst,they cannot be convinced that the vast majority of Whites who volunteered to oversee Aboriginal groups did so for altruistic reasons. Whites overall were not "worse" in the two centuries past, looking at history objectively our ancestors were in many regards "better" than we are today but to a person indoctrinated with the doctrine of progress this view is completely unacceptable.
The origins of the cult of progress are well known so I won't labour the point but do you see where I'm going? The only difference is that people on your side are usually less dogmatic and a bit more flexible in their outlook than the other type who are more likely to react violently when challenged.

Shockadelic,

Well I'm glad that we cleared that up, when you say White you don't mean White but 'predominantly white'.
You list the Portuguese as 'White' but can you be sure?

By 1788 Goans were moving around the world and most of them still regard themselves as Portuguese rather than Indian.

Ever been to Blues Point in Sydney?
Named after a man of obvious African descent, Billy Blue.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Blue

The point for all you White Supremacists is the number of Australians who have 'non-white' blood (I know that it's all red, but for the purpose of the exercise I'm sure you'll stretch a technical point}.

The number of descendants of just two of the First Fleet Negroes is estimated at 20,000.

Then there are all those that came later.

Try a 'Cherry Ripe'.

More rhetorical questions.
We can all now accept that Australia from day one was a project of Liberal "reformers" and Socialist "progressives" working hand in hand at all times with capitalists, just as they do today.
Therefore all the positive attributes claimed in the name of Australia are attributable to the interactions of those three groups.
Yet those groups, their modern offshoots and successors refuse to accept that Australia's failures are absolutely their failures?
Or more to the point where they do seek absolution they'll still try to step sideways and frame it as the sins of the father then expect that penance need only be verbal assertions and oaths much in the manner of the old seven hail Mary's.
There's nothing "progressive" about "progressives", they way they carry on is in the manner of a medieval mob an their latest projects, such as consecrating same sex marriage, pederasty and the buying and selling of human children are positively Romanesque.
So in this country we have only the two throwback belief systems, we have no modernist tradition, no modernising schools of thought and no Avant Garde.

Another question, were all those American troops who had a less than white pigmentation celibate?

Contraception being what it was in WW II I wonder were there any half white babies?

Did they survive and propagate?

Is Mise,
It's pretty unlikely, Negro troops were here in small numbers in support and logistics units but they weren't allowed to fraternise with Australians or if deployed to the islands take their leave in Australia.
The U.S army was segregated so Negro troops had few of the same rights and liberties as White troops, this resulted in a lot of friction and resentment and even a mutiny at one barracks near Townsville which had to be put down by Australian soldiers.
They had their own clubs staffed by American hostesses but were barred from entering the other pubs and dancehalls, maybe they could have sired a few children with prostitutes and such but their interaction with White women would have been minimal.
There's some hair raising stories about the calibre and behaviour of Negro troops on this page including the one about the 73 who died at Mount Isa after using discarded cyanide drums to brew their own booze:
http://www.ozatwar.com/usarmy/cyanidedeaths.htm

Is Mise I know you're trying to wind people up but you have to understand that in spite of what the "progressive" narrators say interracial sex is extremely rare, even in the U.S it's something like 1.5% of all couples.
Furthermore in 1942 why would a White woman seek the company of a Negro GI who wasn't even allowed into the dances, pictures and pubs and turn down offers from bona fide White war heroes like she'd seen in the movies or even turn down Australian civilian labourers who'd at least be able to take her out?
Negro troops in 1942 were little more than labourers and rear echelon staff, all of the stories you've heard about Negro divisions liberating Buchenwald and Dachau or storming the beaches of Normandy are figments of the Anti Racist imagination, those events never happened. You can thank Steven Spielberg for most of the misinformation and fabricated commentary on the service of Negroes in WW2.
If you talk to U.S Iraq and Afghanistan veterans they'll also tell you that even in the 21st century very few Negroes serve in combat units and there are none in the specialist, high risk areas like the Tier 1 operations.

Jay,

Extend your reading, in Brisbane Negro troops on leave were restricted to the south side of the river, one that crossed over, possibly by mistake, was shot dead by a US MP.

Regarding the incident at Townsville have you got a reference to Australian troops putting down the mutiny?

Did you ever hear of the Tuskegee Airmen?

"The Tuskegee Airmen /t&#652;s&#712;ki&#720;&#609;i&#720;/[1] is the popular name of a group of African-American pilots who fought in World War II. Formally, they formed the 332nd Fighter Group and the 477th Bombardment Group of the United States Army Air Forces."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Airmen

Or of the African Americans who won the Medal of Honor?

Personally I had a bit to do with the 3rd Battalion of the 7th US Marines in Korea and I knew African American marines and slept in the non-segregated tents with marines who were just Americans.

I'm not trying to stir the pot at all merely pointing out the fact that Australia was not 'white' from 1788 although it was settled predominantly by the most mongrel race on the planet.

Is mise, in the progressive narrative war truth is the first casualty.
The Tuskeegee airmen is another myth, despite what Steven Spielberg has promoted in "Red Tails" they were one of the "average" fighter groups in the European theatre, not particularly effective but not the least effective and they produced no aces:
http://www.tuskegee.edu/sites/www/Uploads/files/About%20US/Airmen/Nine_Myths_About_the_Tuskegee_Airmen.pdf
Is Mise the allied airmen and their commanders who devastated Germany were war criminals who knowingly slaughtered civilians, they strafed and bombed anything moving on the ground, even farm animals and refugees.
See Inferno by Keith Lowe and The Fire by Jorg Friedrich.
As with the fake concentration camp liberation stories the myths of Black heroics were invented mostly as cover stories for the atrocities committed by White troops, such as the massacres at Dachau and Buchenwald.
http://www.whale.to/b/walsh11.html
Here's just how bad, even malicious Spielberg's productions can be, he's probably done more to feed the Holocaust deniers than anyone else:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0JGN_Ixr7s

Interesting links Jay, and would make good reading in Ireland especially in the part occupied by Britain.

How about that reference to Australian troops putting down the Townsville massacre?

The film 'Red Tails' is considered a joke.

Any thoughts on the 'Whites' being a mongrel race?

About the battle in Townsville, there is a [barely] fictionalised account of it in a novel by John Oliver Killens, "And Then We Heard The Thunder". Interesting times.

Joe

Jay Of Melbourne "What it boils down to are beliefs held by believers"

For the Progressives, yes.
For me, no.
That Australia had a history and culture dominated by Whites is no "belief" or "myth".
It's a fact. You only have to look at photos or census records to see that.

"Anti Racists simply don't want to believe that White people are by nature good and caring people"

It's irrelevant whether we're "good" or not.
We could be the worst people in the world, and we'd still have just as much right to be what we are, live in our own territories and perpetuate our own cultures.

Is Mise "The number of descendants of just two of the First Fleet Negroes is estimated at 20,000."

And do any of them look Black?
Those 20,000 people also had many other ancestors, most of whom were probably White.

"although it was settled predominantly by the most mongrel race on the planet."

Mongrels, yes, but mostly within our own race.
Romans, White. Vikings, White. Celts, White.

Yes, there were invasions of Europe by Asiatic and Semitic peoples, but what is the long-term effect? Barely noticeable.
And they never made it to the British Isles, so their impact there would be zilch.

The languages of Finns, Estonians and Hungarians are unrelated to the Indo-European family that covers the rest of Europe.
But look at their faces and tell me they're "Asian". Not a trace.

It wouldn't matter if my great-great-grandfather was one of those Dixielanders, or if my great-great-great-great-great-grandfather was Genghis Khan himself.

I'm still White, as are most of the people who've lived in Australia since 1788, building a people, a culture, a nation which was never a reflection of the whole world, just themselves.

They have as much right to perpetuate their particular nature as any other people on Earth.
They cannot do this for much longer, when 80% of the people entering this country aren't even remotely similar.

Hi people,

I will admit to being a little shocked about the turn the thread has taken since I last dipped a toe in. What had started with a great post from Joe which was a real celebration of what this country has come to represent has essentially been trashed by a neo-nazi love in.

Why don't you three, you know who you are, just nick off, you really aren't wanted, you aren't respected, and you are diametrically opposite to what this country stands for.

And the rest of you why on earth aren't you calling a spade a spade? These are racist, bigoted throwbacks who really need to be taken to task every time they put their grubby little pens to paper.

I mean just look at some of jay of melbourne's links. I quote;

“in the light of postwar research it has been revealed that the only atrocities committed at Dachau were those carried out by the victorious allies”

And Is Mise calls them 'interesting'? Call them for what they are, extremist, fascist propaganda that any citizen of a modern mature democracy like ours should abhor and utterly reject

The vast majority of Australians are proud of our inclusiveness, it is part of our identity and what makes us who we are. Sure some might be concerned about the rate of migration but most of these wouldn't be couching it in terms of Whites vs the others.

So why don't you three take your miserable, sick little gabfest and go pollute somewhere else.

Shockadelic,

Looks like you're starting to get the picture, glad that you finally see that the 'White' peoples are a mongrel breed.
I can trace my own line back over 2,000 years and what a collection of different skin hues there are and some real bastards (both by inclination and by lack of parental marriage vows).

Race is a myth, except for the human race because no matter what our skin colour, the slant of our eyes or the shape of our heads we can all breed together. There are varieties within the race but basically all are one.
It's not advisable for pygmie females to get pregnant to Zulu males or other big men as the child could be somewhat large for a normal birth but it would be OK vice-versa.

As regards breeding out, I have friends of Chinese origin who are now fifth and sixth generation Australians and they don't look European at all; they are much bigger than their first ancestors in Australia but that is true of many of us, better diet mainly.

I didn't mean to suggest that it was all sweetness and light for all migrants coming to Australia. Those who came after the War, up to the late sixties, came at a time when there were many infrastructure projects - delayed by the Depression and the War - in urgent need of labour - the Snowy Scheme, dams, roads, railways, electrification, schools.

A simultaneous process, and need, provided employment for many Aboriginal families who left the missions and settlements after the War to find work, any work, usually unskilled and semi-skilled work, on those massive and long-term projects. Like so many of the ten-pound immigrants, they usually had to find work on projects in rural areas for a few years before they, one way or another, could move to the cities and find work there. The sixties were good times for that.

But migrants coming later, especially from the eighties, faced different problems. The Vietnamese seemed to cope with this by grabbing what work they could AND setting up their own businesses, family businesses. Other groups may have done it tougher. And as labouring and factory jobs disappeared, to be computerised or transferred overseas, groups coming later found the going even harder.

Skilled migrants may have little difficulty finding work but others, in today's economic situation, may find it much more difficult to get regular, long-term work. Just as many Aboriginal people 'missed the boat' on employment fifty and sixty years ago, they are in danger of becoming alienated from the economy, yet dependent on it.

It's a different ball-game now from fifty and sixty years ago. Everybody needs far more education and training even before they can get into work. So the pathways to becoming embedded in Australian society are longer, more complicated, diverse and expensive. With all my heart, I wish them well.

Joe

SteeleRedux, your pathetic "standard issue" response is not wanted or respected.

I am no fan of the Nazis. They have ruined any possibility for White people to ever defend their own interests.

I thought this country stood for individualism, free speech, scoffing at orthodoxy and authority and tactless honesty.

"The vast majority of Australians are proud of our inclusiveness"

Their proud of their easygoing nature.
Which is being exploited by political and financial powers that couldn't give a toss about us.

Is Mise, I've always known we're mongrels.
But we are mongrels primarily of related peoples (Europeans), none of whom have features typical of Mongoloid or Negroid people, and whose cultures are unrelated to them (with the exception of Indic/Iranian, but that connection was severed 6000 years ago).

"Pure" race is a myth. Observably different types of people is not.
You can't tell a Tibetan from a Zulu?
Get your eyes checked.

"we can all breed together."

That's a species, not a "race".
The term "human race" is a nonsensical misnomer.

All domestic dogs can "breed together".
So can all domestic cats.
Sometimes they can even breed with wild varieties.

But you can tell the different types apart, can't you?
You can see with your naked eyes that a Dachshund is not an Alsatian.

If dogs could speak, would they not demand each breed has a right to exist, to perpetuate its own particular nature?

Would they not object to any attempt to mix everything together, creating a generic "dog"?
Yes, the "species" would survive, but look at what you'd lose.

That is the irony of the "diversity" proponents.
Mixing everyone together will actually diminish diversity!

I don't know what you've got against 'tactless honesty' Shockadelic. I try to make it a rule :)

There are (at least) two sorts of 'Diversity' proponents, as you call them:

* individuals who don't want any mixing of phenotypically differing groups at all, and for 'members' of all groups to stick with their own, and in that way to build walls around 'diversity'; somehow;

* those of us who get a buzz out of diversity and have no trouble with the notion of mixing it all up, not all that worried about any blurring of 'diversity'.

But it's really all out of our hands (as it perhaps always has been) - young people will pair up with whoever takes their fancy, now and into the future. Down the track, their offspring may define themselves, if they feel any need to, in terms of multiple backgrounds, and socialise with and marry other people from multiple backgrounds, and so it will go.

After all, most of us Anglos have no trouble, when the situation calls for it, to describe ourselves as Irish, Scottish, English, French, German, whatever. We can be all those simultaneously, in the one person. Even differentiate our ancestry as Geordie or Scouse or Cornish, Northern Irish, West Coast, Corkmen, Glaswegians, Highlanders, Borderlanders.

While it's going to be a much more difficult economic world for our children and grandchildren to find a comfortable place in, it's also - unavoidably - going to be more like a sort of smorgasbord society.

Fantastic ! Fascinating ! Go for it !

Joe

Dear Shockadelic,

Sorry mate, I was channelling you lot. 'Don't want them, don't need them, don't respect them, they are not us'. Gets a bit unpleasant doesn't it?

You wrote;

"Banjo "The best time in Aus was between 1950 and 1970" ... when native-born Australians peaked as a proportion of the population."

Kids who were born and grew up during this period represent a group whose suicide rates drove this country's statistics through the roof. Like a pig in a boa constrictor it has remained consistently high, well above average as they move through the demographics. Leading insular and inward looking lives it appears does take its toll, especially in times of peace.

Some of the posts present a pretty sad reflection of that group. Depression, despair, fears, anger, all combining in a toxic mix.

A strong case can be made that opening up our country to migration from all parts of the world has lead to young Australians with a far more rounded and grounded outlook, who now travel overseas in their hundreds of thousands, far more open to experiencing other peoples and cultures, and who are far less likely to top themselves than those of the 1950-70 cohort.

The fact that we are now seeing some of the lowest suicide rates among our young indicates a pretty forward looking bunch, far more comfortable about their place in the world and what it means to be an Australian. If you lot want to crap all over that with your depressing, bigoted and poisonous perspectives, in a thread that was celebrating our diverse land, that is your right, but ugly and sad.

I suspect you guys are come here to have your bile ducts squeezed. You get to vomit up all your nastiness but also to hear some positive messages from the likes of Foxy and Joe etc. Well if you are in that high risk group I suppose there is a public service being performed.

If that's the case then go for it lads. Stay safe. But if you get a chance do try to grow past it.

Thank you SteeleRuddex, I'm honoured to be placed in the company of Foxy :)

Cheers,

Joe

Loudmouth, I was defending tactless honesty, actually.
I'm so sick of everyone tiptoeing and pussyfooting, lest they "offend" someone.

"But it's really all out of our hands"

No, immigration policy is decided by the government (should be by "the people").
You can only "pair up" with someone who's *here*.

A bit difficult to canoodle with someone on the other side of the planet.
You can have phone sex, but not phone babies.

I doubt many Australians describe themselves with such minute ancestral details.
Most probably don't even know the specifics.
They do know they're some sort of "White" though.

"like a sort of smorgasbord society"

Get ready for some serious sociological indigestion.

SteeleRedux, does it occur to you that your policy is one the *causes* of suicide?

When the social reality people grow up with is yanked out from under them, that can indeed be depressing.

"I was channelling you lot. 'Don't want them, don't need them, don't respect them, they are not us'."

I thought you were channelling the faceless Muslim placard-wavers: "Behead Those Who Insult Utopianism".

Race:

"Race is a classification system used to categorize humans into large and distinct populations or groups by anatomical, cultural, ethnic, genetic, geographical, historical, linguistic, religious, and/or social affiliation. First used to refer to speakers of a common language and then to denote national affiliations, in the 17th century, people began to use the term to relate to observable physical traits....Social conceptions and groupings of races vary over time, involving folk taxonomies that define essential types of individuals based on perceived traits. Scientists consider biological essentialism obsolete, and generally discourage racial explanations for collective differentiation in both physical and behavioral traits.....Even though there is a broad scientific agreement that essentialist and typological conceptualizations of race are untenable, scientists around the world continue to conceptualize race in widely differing ways, some of which have essentialist implications. While some researchers sometimes use the concept of race to make distinctions among fuzzy sets of traits, others in the scientific community suggest that the idea of race often is used in a NAIVE or SIMPLISTIC way [my capitalization], and argue that, among humans, race has no taxonomic significance by pointing out that all living humans belong to the same species, Homo sapiens and subspecies, Homo sapiens sapiens."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_classification)

Shockadelic,

"A bit difficult to canoodle with someone on the other side of the planet.
You can have phone sex, but not phone babies."

You may be surprised to know that young people (and some not so young) of all sorts are having much closer relations than from 'the other side of the world'.

As we speak :)

Half their luck: I've had to get glasses, everything was getting so blurry, they cost me $ 16.50 at National Pharmacies - and they have paid for themselves. Every day. Are women beautiful, or what ?!

Joe

Dear reader,

If I could bother you for a moment of your time to engage in a modicum of de-constructing.

You will have seen Shockadelic write;

“I am no fan of the Nazis. They have ruined any possibility for White people to ever defend their own interests.”

Please note when he says he isn't a fan its not because of the millions of Jewish people that were gassed and sent to the crematoriums, its not because of the wholesale slaughter of millions of others, or things like the horrendous medical experiments carried out on children, rather it because it has meant he, Shockadelic, can't be an overt racist with impunity.

He doesn't tell us what the 'interests of the White people are' but penny to a pound, in his twisted mind, it is to preserve racial purity. Oh that is just beautiful and so modern Australia isn't it.

One odious individual in my book.

Speaking of which where on earth is onthebeach? Still revelling in his insipid little victory of forcing foxy to abandon this thread? And banjo seems to be missing in action as well. Two bilge-pipe barnacles basking in all that … you know what!

It looks like all the good folk have made their leave, just us down and dirty muckrakers left, why don't we have some fun?

Or perhaps instead we might pause a moment and reflect on some of the pernicious bile that has been bandied about on this thread, consign it to the medical waste bin, and never speak of it again. I for one am happy to move on and pretend it never happened, treating you civilly in other threads (my exception being Jay of Melbourne whom i have chosen to ignore). What about it lads? Let's shut this sucker down now.

Is Mise, thanks for "educating" us, but we already know the orthodox spiel.

Am I naive and simplistic to recognise that Dachshunds, Alsatians, Chihuahuas and Poodles exist?
Should I only see "Dog"?

Does it occur to you that the taxonomic definition of humans is politically motivated?

"Scientists" no longer define subcategories because its politically unacceptable.
When it was politically acceptable, they did.

"Scientists" acknowledge that certain genetic elements (such as haplogroups or alleles) occur in some people and not in others.
They show the relatedness (or unrelatedness) of "populations".

So does linguistics.
All languages are not related.

Some are within the same branch, others are in different branches but the same family.
Then there are completely unrelated families.

The spread of religion also shows where connections have been made or not.

Its not that any religion is "true", but that its presence or absence shows where there are connections or disconnections between peoples.

You can dispute *biological* race all you like, but you cannot dispute that certain peoples are demonstrably related (Dutch and German) and others are not (Dutch and Tibetan).

The peoples I, and many other people, consider related to us we call "White", simply because it's easier than any more convoluted description.

SteeleRedux, the "odious individual" is your own invented boogeyman, not me.

I'm no fan of the Nazis for many reasons.

You refer to what they did at the time.
We all know what they did at the time.

I refer to the aftereffect *now*.
Because it affects *current* political decisions about us, today.

"He doesn't tell us what the 'interests of the White people are'"

Survival. Self-evident, if you actually read my comments.

Survival of our distinct peoples, cultures and civilisation.

And survival within our advanced living standards, not as a minority in an newly expanded Third World.
Ooh, how selfish!

"Let's shut this sucker down now."

Wishin' and hopin' and thinkin' and prayin'
Won't get rid of dissent.

And it won't stop the inevitable civil war, a consequence of excessive, destabilising immigration and a never-improving/possibly declining economy.
Angry young men, on both sides, assure it.

Shockadelic,

Just to nit-pick part of your rambling thread,

""Scientists" no longer define subcategories because its politically unacceptable.
When it was politically acceptable, they did."

Back in the 1960s, when I was an Anthropology student at Sydney Uni. one of my Professors, a renowned Anthropologist, taught the myth of Race and had been doing so since the early 1950s, hardly PC times.

He wrote and had published a book titled "The Myth of Race".

"Rambling"?

Is Mise, while I make the occasional grammatical error, my comments are meticulously coherent.
If you're having trouble understanding, the fault lies with you.

I didn't catch your professor's book, but I read the follow-up "The Myth of Breed".

Therein, he explains to us "naive and simplistic" types that despite observable morphological and behavioural variance, all domestic dogs are in fact the same species, can interbreed, and share a common ancestor in prehistoric Africa.

"Breed" is a fabrication of the human mind, imposed by White Men on those they consider inferior: domestic animals.

The genetic differences of apparently "different" dogs are so miniscule, that any intelligent person should consider them irrelevant.

In fact, the forced segregation of "breeds" is a form of oppression and should be prohibited by law.
Dog breeders, who talk of "purebreeds", "natural/traditional breeds" and "landraces" are Nazis.
There are only Dogs. Canis lupus familiaris.

Breed is a myth.
Don't cross the street. Let your child get know that Rottweiler.
It's just a Dog.