The Rights and Responsibilities of multiculturalism.

[old man emu]

After giving it a lot of thought, I thought I had discovered that we should not pay homage to multiculturalism here in Australia, but instead should embrace multi-ethnicity.

 

I thought that multiculturalism meant that anyone in Australia could practise their cultural traditions of their ancestors, be they those of Great Britain/Ireland; Europe; the Middle East, the Sub-continent, Asia or Polynesia. I also thought that if I said that anyone's cultural practices were not in tune with Australian Anglo-Irish customs, then I was being racist.

 

I wanted to get a good definition of "multicultural" to include in this post, so I went googling and found this one, which is the official Australian Goverment slant on multiculturalism:

 

Multiculturalism encompasses government measures designed to respond to the cultural and ethnic diversity of contemporary Australia. It plays no part in migrant selection. It is a policy for managing the consequences of cultural diversity in the interests of the individual and society as a whole.

 

The Commonwealth Government has identified three dimensions of multicultural policy:

 

• cultural identity: the right of all Australians, within carefully defined limits, to express and share their individual cultural heritage, including their language and religion;
   
  
• social justice: the right of all Australians to equality of treatment and opportunity, and the removal of barriers of race, ethnicity, culture, religion, language, gender or place of birth; and
   
  
• economic efficiency: the need to maintain, develop and utilize effectively the skills and talents of all Australians, regardless of background.
   
  

 

Now, this all sounds like most of us whose ancestors arrived in Australia before 1945 have to kowtow and tug our forelocks whenever some post-1945 arrival cries "Racist"

 

However, reading on, I found this:

 

There are also limits to Australian multiculturalism. These may be summarized as follows:

 

• multicultural policies are based upon the premises that all Australians should have an overriding and unifying commitment to Australia, to its interests and future first and foremost;
   
  
• multicultural policies require all Australians to accept the basic structures and principles of Australian society - the Constitution and the rule of law, tolerance and equality, Parliamentary democracy, freedom of speech and religion, English as the national language and equality of the sexes; and
   
  
• multicultural policies impose obligations as well as conferring rights: the right to express one's own culture and beliefs involves a reciprocal responsibility to accept the right of others to express their views and values.
   
  

 

It is Government policy that those who want to enjoy the rights of a multicultural society must accept their responsibility to meet the obligations of the policy. I'd say that it is about time we emphasized the responsibilities before granting the rights. The horse has to go before the cart.

 

Old Man Emu

 

 

[fly_tornado]

[ATTACH]47839._xfImport[/ATTACH]

[IBob]

After giving it a lot of thought, I thought I had discovered that we should not pay homage to multiculturalism here in Australia, but instead should embrace multi-ethnicity.

I thought that multiculturalism meant that anyone in Australia could practise their cultural traditions of their ancestors, be they those of Great Britain/Ireland; Europe; the Middle East, the Sub-continent, Asia or Polynesia. I also thought that if I said that anyone's cultural practices were not in tune with Australian Anglo-Irish customs, then I was being racist.

 

I wanted to get a good definition of "multicultural" to include in this post, so I went googling and found this one, which is the official Australian Goverment slant on multiculturalism:

 

Multiculturalism encompasses government measures designed to respond to the cultural and ethnic diversity of contemporary Australia. It plays no part in migrant selection. It is a policy for managing the consequences of cultural diversity in the interests of the individual and society as a whole.

 

 

 

The Commonwealth Government has identified three dimensions of multicultural policy:

 

• cultural identity: the right of all Australians, within carefully defined limits, to express and share their individual cultural heritage, including their language and religion;
   
  
• social justice: the right of all Australians to equality of treatment and opportunity, and the removal of barriers of race, ethnicity, culture, religion, language, gender or place of birth; and
   
  
• economic efficiency: the need to maintain, develop and utilize effectively the skills and talents of all Australians, regardless of background.
   
  

 

Now, this all sounds like most of us whose ancestors arrived in Australia before 1945 have to kowtow and tug our forelocks whenever some post-1945 arrival cries "Racist"

 

However, reading on, I found this:

 

There are also limits to Australian multiculturalism. These may be summarized as follows:

 

• multicultural policies are based upon the premises that all Australians should have an overriding and unifying commitment to Australia, to its interests and future first and foremost;
   
  
• multicultural policies require all Australians to accept the basic structures and principles of Australian society - the Constitution and the rule of law, tolerance and equality, Parliamentary democracy, freedom of speech and religion, English as the national language and equality of the sexes; and
   
  
• multicultural policies impose obligations as well as conferring rights: the right to express one's own culture and beliefs involves a reciprocal responsibility to accept the right of others to express their views and values.
   
  

 

It is Government policy that those who want to enjoy the rights of a multicultural society must accept their responsibility to meet the obligations of the policy. I'd say that it is about time we emphasized the responsibilities before granting the rights. The horse has to go before the cart.

 

Old Man Emu

Hopefully I have it entirely wrong, and I shall be most obliged to you for boxing my ears if i do....but do you not think all those items, and especially the last bulleted one, should apply equally to the new arrivals AND the less recent arrivals???

 

 

[winsor68]

After giving it a lot of thought, I thought I had discovered that we should not pay homage to multiculturalism here in Australia, but instead should embrace multi-ethnicity.

I thought that multiculturalism meant that anyone in Australia could practise their cultural traditions of their ancestors, be they those of Great Britain/Ireland; Europe; the Middle East, the Sub-continent, Asia or Polynesia. I also thought that if I said that anyone's cultural practices were not in tune with Australian Anglo-Irish customs, then I was being racist.

 

I wanted to get a good definition of "multicultural" to include in this post, so I went googling and found this one, which is the official Australian Goverment slant on multiculturalism:

 

Multiculturalism encompasses government measures designed to respond to the cultural and ethnic diversity of contemporary Australia. It plays no part in migrant selection. It is a policy for managing the consequences of cultural diversity in the interests of the individual and society as a whole.

 

 

 

The Commonwealth Government has identified three dimensions of multicultural policy:

 

• cultural identity: the right of all Australians, within carefully defined limits, to express and share their individual cultural heritage, including their language and religion;
   
  
• social justice: the right of all Australians to equality of treatment and opportunity, and the removal of barriers of race, ethnicity, culture, religion, language, gender or place of birth; and
   
  
• economic efficiency: the need to maintain, develop and utilize effectively the skills and talents of all Australians, regardless of background.
   
  

 

Now, this all sounds like most of us whose ancestors arrived in Australia before 1945 have to kowtow and tug our forelocks whenever some post-1945 arrival cries "Racist"

 

However, reading on, I found this:

 

There are also limits to Australian multiculturalism. These may be summarized as follows:

 

• multicultural policies are based upon the premises that all Australians should have an overriding and unifying commitment to Australia, to its interests and future first and foremost;
   
  
• multicultural policies require all Australians to accept the basic structures and principles of Australian society - the Constitution and the rule of law, tolerance and equality, Parliamentary democracy, freedom of speech and religion, English as the national language and equality of the sexes; and
   
  
• multicultural policies impose obligations as well as conferring rights: the right to express one's own culture and beliefs involves a reciprocal responsibility to accept the right of others to express their views and values.
   
  

 

It is Government policy that those who want to enjoy the rights of a multicultural society must accept their responsibility to meet the obligations of the policy. I'd say that it is about time we emphasized the responsibilities before granting the rights. The horse has to go before the cart.

 

Old Man Emu

I reckon it is about time a lot of us pre 1945 "Aussies" started to accept our responsibility to meet the obligations of that policy too.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

I can't believe OME wants aboriginal law reinstated

 

 

[old man emu]

Well, the wording is not 100% clear, multicultural policies require all Australians to accept the basic structures and principles of Australian society - the Constitution and the rule of law, but since it is the policy of an elected Westminster type government, one could safely read the words to mean that the rule law referred to is developed from the Constitution, which was the product of a democratic process.

 

OME

 

 

[IBob]

I'm not quite clear what your position is, OME. Two questions?

 

1. Are you in general agreement with those items that you quoted.

 

2. If so, who specifically do you feel is/are not toeing the line on all this?

 

I'm not trying to be a clever b*******, neither am I interested in nitpicking. I'm genuinely wanting to be clear on your point of view here, since you obviously saw some good reasons for starting this thread.

 

Thanks.

 

 

[old man emu]

IBob,

 

I thought, like a lot of Australians whose family roots here go back at least to before 1914, that multiculturalism was a set of behaviours that must be followed so as not to offend new arrivals.

 

I thought along the lines that, if the way of life in a person's country of origin were so unfavourable that leaving it and moving half-way across the world was the best option, then the person should adopt the way of life in the new country. This means that the person would abandon the social behaviours of the society being left and adopt those of the new society. This has happened since the first non-British, European people came here in the 1800's, but it didn't seem to be happening with recent Middle Eastern, Sub-continental or Asian migrants, and that was the cause of friction.

 

Then I found the policy statement I have quoted, and I realised that multiculturalism is a two-way street. That people have rights, but must also meet responsibilities. And don't forget that these New Australians can be extremely racist themselves. Not only towards Old Australians, but towards New Australians of other ethnic origin.

 

To answer your questions:

 

1. Yes, when the true purpose of the policy is explained: It is a policy for managing the consequences of cultural diversity in the interests of the individual and society as a whole.

 

2. I feel that it is the people who arrive here and are given the necessities of life on a silver platter. Migrants coming to Australia prior to, say, 1970 had to get out and work for their survival as soon as their bags were unpacked. Now migrants appear to unpack their bags and head straight to CentreLink for a hand out, and keep going back.

 

It is interesting to see that those of you who have replied to this do not live in the major metropolitan centres of Australia, and so are not subjected to the push and shove of a truly multicultural lifestyle on a daily basis.

 

Just to clarify a few things:

 

1. Do I consider myself a racist? Yes. But let me explain. I believe that racism is just another term for the fight the necessities for survival in-built in every living thing, be it plant, animal, fungus or bacterium.

 

2. Do I believe that the violent expression of racism is proper behaviour? NO. While I accept my own racism, I also like to think that I have it under control - a bit like an alcoholic who is a member of AA.

 

OME

 

 

[IBob]

Thank you for your clear and thoughtful reply, OME.

 

Theory is all very well, but these are difficult things in reality, for most of us, and I acknowledge that. It's a pleasure to read someone thinking about such things, rather than just asserting their prejudices.

 

Certainly you are right that I do not live in a metropolitan area, not even in Oz. My interest comes from living in a number of places (including Oz) in my lifetime, and having experienced various degrees of warm and not so warm welcome in the process.

 

 

[Marty_d]

OME, as IBob says you've put some thought into this.

 

I would like to pick up on one point though -

 

2. I feel that it is the people who arrive here and are given the necessities of life on a silver platter. Migrants coming to Australia prior to, say, 1970 had to get out and work for their survival as soon as their bags were unpacked. Now migrants appear to unpack their bags and head straight to CentreLink for a hand out, and keep going back.

There's some interesting reading on the Australian Human Rights website - https://www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/questions-and-answers-about-migrants-multiculturalism#q5

 

In short, economically migration is generally good for the receiving country. While the unemployment rate is initially higher for newly arrived migrants, over time their unemployment rate becomes less than the Australian-born population.

 

Yes as soon as refugees are accepted here we get them signed up at Centrelink and give them money. We also sign them up for English lessons and teach them about Australian law and society. This is an entirely valid thing to do if we want them to become productive members of society in time. However I think that most of them want to work and find ways to work, often doing the jobs that people born here don't want. How many Anglo-Saxons do you see collecting trolleys outside the supermarkets or driving taxis?

 

It's a difficult thing but I imagine how I'd go if the English-speaking world went to hell in a handbasket and I was forced to migrate to, say, China. I don't speak the language, I know nothing of their society, I don't know the social norms, culture, slang, history, anything. I'd probably try to find other Australians to hang out with, and I'd be grateful for someone to hook me up with language and culture lessons and something to live on until I found work.

 

 

[ev17ifly2]

"Multiculturalism" is just a modern sugar coated word for the old mantra of "populate or perish"

 

It is a con perpetuated on the people by successive governments.

 

 

[old man emu]

I would like to pick up on one point though...

Fair enough comment and ably supported by a suitable reference.

 

I wrote: "I feel that ...". I am expressing an opinion of mine here. With wider reading, as from your quoted source, I can see that I've picked up propaganda not created by the Government, so it is not "a con perpetuated on the people by successive governments". It must be a con perpetuated by the media.

 

OME

 

 

[IBob]

OME, it seems to me that when the going gets difficult, the likelihood of friction and resentment increases: unmarried mothers, the unemployed, immigrants, and so on, readily become suspects in the general dissatisfaction and the hunt for reasons. That happens everywhere, not just Oz.

 

Yes, there will always be bludgers, but they're not the problem, and in my opinion we're missing the bigger picture when we unload our resentments on what is actually quite a small group, and worse still, paint all unmarried mothers, unemployed, immigrants etc with the same brush.

 

Do you remember in the 70s, when we were all wondering what we would do with the extra time and wealth we would soon have due to 'modern technology'. So, what happened, that we now have both Mum and Dad working, and still can't make ends meet?

 

Here's what happened, and this is Oxfam talking:

 

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jan/18/richest-62-billionaires-wealthy-half-world-population-combined

 

Well, that is my view, or part of it.