CM,

There's a bit of a problem as roughly one in every hundred people on the First Fleet were black.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Fleet#People

Is Mise,

Why is this all of a sudden a problem?

The fleet picked up a handful of African workers at Cape Town.

Apparently a lot of their descendents live in Queensland.

Misopinionated,

Black people - Africans, Americans, West Indians, Mauritians, have been coming to Australia since the beginning of 'settlement'. Here in SA, in 1860, there would have been at least one South African bloke living down the Coorong; an American Black fishing on Lake Alexandrina; a couple of West Indians married to Aboriginal people living up the River; a Mauritian bloke living with an Aboriginal woman on Pt Pearce and claiming rations. The last Kaurna (Adelaide) woman, Evaritji, was married to a Black American 'born in Adelaide' in the 1850s.

The late 'Aboriginal' academic, Colin Johnston, had a Black American father. Bobbi Sykes had a Black American father.

To get back to topic: I don't have the slightest worries - in contrast to racists like CM - about anybody coming to Australia and making their contributions. I'm perfectly happy with the positive impacts that people have made, and will continue to make, into the unlimited future, no matter where they have come from. I don't have the slightest interest in keeping Australia white, as CM does, and I suspect you do too. That notion disgusts me.

Foreign governments are a very different kettle of fish, especially that of China.

Joe

I guess Loudmouth thinks Jewish Israeli's are racist too. Perhaps they are based on Loudmouth's literal meaning of the word racist. I don't have a problem with so called racist policies- I do have a problem with killing innocent people.

I think Loudmouth is a Global Universalist Dictator and perhaps an anti-white racist- based on the literal meaning of his comments.

I don't have a problem with Loudmouth being an Anti-White British Racist- this is common in the Aboriginal community it seems. He should look after his own cultural interest. But I don't think many other cultures will treat Aboriginal's better than British Australian's. Queen Victoria had a fairly enlightened view of so called native aboriginals for her time as I understand.

Good Morning Folks,

There's an article by Tim Soutphommasane, part 1
of 3, in The Jakarta Post Aug. 21st 2014.

It's a few years ago, I feel that it is still relevant
today. I'd like to share some of his thoughts with you.

He makes it quite clear that the reality of multicultural
Australia is that it does contain Asian cultures and
identities. He points out the fact that our economic
activity is now centered towards Asia. He also tells us
that:

"Debates about Asian immigration reflect a contest over
Australian national identity. For some, immigration has
meant a repudiation of Australia's British cultural
heritage - a reflection of all that was, in their eyes,
traditionally Australian. For such people, Asia, to be more
precise, immigration from Asia in significant numbers was/is
a source of cultural corruption or degradation".

Yet as Tim Soutphommasane points out - "for all its pungency
the rhetoric about multiculturalism's imminent failure
- it has not been proven correct. "

Not only has it endured. It has succeeded.
A Scanlon Foundation survey on social cohesion
found that 84% of respondents agreed
that multiculturalism is a good thing and benefited Australia.

Australians of Asian
backgrounds have proved in every way that they are capable of
participating in the life of the nation. We're told that
"they've excelled when it comes to educational attainment or
economic participation."

"To be sure success has a lot to do with the character of
our immigration program." Pointing out that governments
since the 1970s and our political leaders have played an
important role in equipping immigrants to participate in
our society. That Australia has had a multicultural program
that's been different from elsewhere.

We've had nation-building multiculturalism, a liberal
multiculturalism. Multiculturalism in our country has always
been something that was meant to strengthen Australian
national identity NOT supersede it. And that makes sense.
When people feel that they belong to a society and feel
comfortable for who they are they will have a better chance to
participate in a society as full and equal members.

There's more at the following link:

http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2014/08/21/the-asianization-australia-part-1-3.html

CM,

I'm an internationalist, but most certainly not a globalist. I suspect that any dopey idea about one-world government - and I've known of these crackpot ideas for fifty years now - can just as easily tip into fascism. So I'll leave the potentially-fascist notion of a single world government to the megalomaniacs. In fact, I would have thought that you would love the idea.

I believe in the equal rights of all human beings on the planet, and the (necessarily long-term) struggle to bring about equality for all people, all men and all women, equal opportunities, equal chances at long lives, the sorts of privileges that we take for granted, and wherever they may be, here in Australia, in their home countries or elsewhere.

Globalism and sovereignty: Putting aside the ridiculous notion that, say, Armenia and Azerbaijan, India and Pakistan, Iran and Israel, Vietnam and China, would ever come together with each pair under a single government - there are more than two hundred separate, sovereign nations across the world and as far as I am concerned, and as long as they don't go to war with their neighbours, that's how it's going to be, and ought to be, into the future: more than two hundred separate, co-existing nations. No worries.

Joe