Multicultural Australia
One of Australia’s greatest resources is its diversity. The embracing of multiculturalism and increase in immigration since the 1970s has changed the face of our nation. People from places like Vietnam, Greece, Lebanon and more recently Afghanistan, Sudan and Iraq have left their mark and shaped our country.
There are 260 languages spoken in Australia, and over a quarter of the population was born overseas. A further 20 per cent has at least one parent born overseas.
The Open Forum featured forum on Multicultural Australia will celebrate the beauty and challenges this multitude of cultures brings with it. We will explore the rich traditions and holidays as well as foods and flavours from around the world that have enriched modern Australian cuisine. We look at the role sport plays to unite people from different ethnic backgrounds and how music has the power to overcome language barriers.
We will discuss the divisive subject of asylum seekers, which was a major election issue. Looking at the government’s stance we aim to open the debate to both supporters and opponents of the new policy. Existing tensions and outbreaks of racism will be explored as we strive to create a country where everyone lives in harmony.
If you would like to share your culture, impart your insights and join the debate, please contact Svetlana at sstankovic@openforum.com.au.
___________________________
RELATED CONTENT
- Migrant support essential to strong future – by Peter Fritz
- Opposing racism and supporting multiculturalism not the same thing – by Peter Fritz
- Multiculturalism in Australia the road to success – by Pino Migliorino
- The Importance of Cultural Exposure – by Laurence Strano
- Temporary residents need permanent political rights – by Andrew Norton
- Australian Multiculturalism – cherish it, build on it – by Dr Klaas Woldring
- How Australia Universities differ to those in Brazil – by Denise Frizzo
- Ending racism does not require respect – by Benjamin Herscovitch
- Plenty of Australians speak Asian languages – by Benjamin Herscovitch
- Multiculturalism is who we are – by David Morris
- Let’s not follow Europe’s model in integrating immigrants – by Jean-Marie Simart
- Let’s create a Constitution free from racial discrimination – by Jacqueline Phillips
- Australia’s approach to asylum seekers – by Jo Coghlan
- Indonesian perspective of life in Australia – by Louis Puguh
- Diverse cultures strengthen Australia’s sporting culture – by Melinda Turner
- Harmony Day: Many Stories – One Australia – by Senator Kate Lundy
- Why I am a boat person – by Shane Conroy
- Australian Culture in Multicultural Australia – by Sue Ellson
- White Australia Day – or Multicultural Movement Day? – by Sue Ellson
- Harmony Day Navel Gazing – the Good, the Bad and the Ugly – by Sue Ellson
- Addressing deaths at sea – by Vince Scappatura
- Culture shock real for international students – by Vivian Chen
- Overpopulation drives boats – by William Bourke
- A home for Brisbane’s multicultural community – by Jeannie Mok
- Coming together as a nation – by Alok Ralhan
Open Forum is a policy discussion website produced by Global Access Partners – Australia’s Institute for Active Policy. We welcome contributions and invite you to submit a blog to the editor and follow us on Twitter, Facebook, Linkedin and Mastadon.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
herrythakur
November 27, 2013 at 4:51 am
Multiculturalism
Multiculturalism is the identity of a multi cultured people within the country. Australia is great with multiculturalism, and is it showing everyday in every field with its great impact.
LouisMark
December 13, 2013 at 12:48 pm
Australia a multicultural nation
Australia being a multicultural nation has well developed and it happened due to the increase of immigrants in Australia and the high number of people settling in Australia.
Mittee4totalEquality
February 15, 2014 at 9:35 pm
Multicultural or just multi-racial?
Think about it a true authentic "multi-cultural" society would necessarily have to include different legal systems for dealing with variations and differences of cultures. The clearest example are with Islam and Arab culture and without the legal code from their religious text the Quran their culture as they wish to live it CANNOT be lived and thrive. Other more subtle but still vital examples might include some culture that practice strong traditionalist gender roles in life such that women may be restricted from certain things men can enjoy (possibly education, ownership, leadership especially). To call our nation "Multi-cultural" is a farce, and in fact the overt claims that we accept all people and cultures and we incorporate them into ourselves whilst simultaneously allowing all cultures their respect and self-autonomy and existence, persistence in this new nation . . . . . . are purely and simply not true but LIES, half known to be such by those who speak them. That is, even the most die-hard leftist who avows to support multicultural and different peoples and ways of life no matter what without judging any of them as better or worse (i.e. "moral relativism") cannot claim without overt deceit to be ever going to accept that the International Laws of Human Freedoms and Rights which by the way are a cultural product of Enlightenment European society and liberal thinking, will allowed to partially eroded, changed etc. in any way that changes the fundamentals such as – 1. Equality for all 2. Freedom for ALL 3. Fair treatment, respect and dignity for all 4. basic level of care provided to all humans on earth etc., etc. For example, the most well-known instance in which cultures clash with these values and override them are in basically every Islamic society, which demonstrates this clash when they sign the Declaration of Human Rights but always "stipulate", "unless the rules clash with those of Islamic law, faith and culture". So the point overall I am making is this: no self-respecting person of left or right political views would serious ever consider that ANY of those 4-5 main tenants of Human Rights internationally could be deleted, left out or changed to deny the essence of it. Further when any western, Leftists included, who espouse to new refuges and migrants that they accept all cultures as equal and that's why they support multi-cultures living in this one nation in unity, this is a SEVER LIE since they would NEVER agree to abandon ANY of those 405 main tenants of HUMAN RIGHTS. Therefore to conclude, since no actual nation espousing to be "Multi-cultural" is really actually this, since the fact that the entire nation and every different and type of culture included has to ultimate adhere and abide by the laws and rules and standards set out in the western descended legal codes, and the same is on our political system and general culture as espoused by the elite white business/political classes. What really is going on someone might ponder. Well, I wager that most westerners and Leftists also hold a sub-conscious belief that eventually every person no matter what culture and background when they come to this type of western nation, WILL ultimately (even if it takes 2-3 or 4 generations to achieve) become more and more like and in tune with western ways and culture and tend to leave much of their own traditional background culture behind, perhaps once they become fully educated (the belief likely goes) and understand the error of certain practices which involve prejudice and hatred.
mobilepundits
February 19, 2014 at 10:08 am
Australia is multiculture
Very nice, exploring multicultural Australia for any business development and for branding of product also. This leads to success. Nice post, thanks for sharing with us.
MarkLukes
March 21, 2014 at 3:17 am
This is very informative.
This is very informative. Honestly, I learned quite a lot. I never knew these things about the culture in Australia. It makes me more knowledgeable about the culture and the living in Australia.
Bronte Jackson
April 10, 2014 at 2:21 am
Multicultural or Polycultural?
Been back in Australia now for three and a half years after living in Rome for the past twenty but travelling and working in over 23 other countries as part of my role in UN food development. My Italian husband remarked the other day that "Australia has many cultures within it but they are not integrated". My views exactly as a Social Anthropologist (the study of culture). We have connected with many other immigrants since arriving back, and the conversation and experience is similar to ours. Australians pride ourselves and like to define ourselves as multi-cultural but there is really only one dominant culture here – the Anglo-Saxon one – and others are welcomed for their food and film festivals primarily, and accomodated well at times, but there is still a barrier of "us and them" and everyone tries as hard as possible to fit in with the "them" because your job opportunities, your livelihood, and your ability to be left alone and/or included into the Anglo community depends on it. Yesterday I was listening to a show on the radio about our government and community services in relation to palliative care and the provision of different types of approaches for different cultures, as there are cultural differences in how people would like to manage their deaths and final days. What a great country I thought, to provide such support in a manner which accomodates the spectrum of the community that requires it. Until I heard the Anglo-Saxon provider speak. As an example of what the service provided for a particular cultural group that has been prevalent in Australia for over sixty years she described them as needing a particular approach then said "for example THEY require more time with the body after death whereas AUSTRALIANS have a different approach"………..In one foul swoop proving my point that there is still an "us and them". How come a non-Anglo Saxon cultural group that has been part of Australia since the 50's is not referred to as "Australian"? What does this imply that Australia is then? It was a tiny slip of the tongue but language reflects deeply the shared mindset and there is still a shared mindset amongst Anglo-Saxons that we are Australians and others are not because they have a different culture to us. This demonstrates not multi-culturalism but the presence of many cultures existing within a primary and dominant one, from which to deviate makes you part of the "them" and not the "us (Australians)". We have a long way to go before we can say we are multi-cultural, before the dominant Anglo-Saxon culture really moves over and integrates different modes of communication, lifestyles, work cultures and values. I am not suggesting anything radical. We don't have to instigate siesta's as part of office life, or wear hats to cover our heads but we could all be a little more open to facing our insecurities when we are faced with differences and instead of shying away from them, look them over a little closer to see what benefits they might bring to our great present culture.
ipsagroup
July 12, 2014 at 8:40 am
Multicultural Australia
The need for Australia to confront problems with culture and distinction has never been bigger. As a brand new century approaches, associate progressively complicated world grooved by native and international networks is developing. This assortment develops new ways of concerning|brooding about|pondering|considering|puzzling over|wondering social and cultural relations and about the role of arts in a very philosophy society.
Beowulf
August 17, 2014 at 4:26 am
Multiculti
Well I disagree with the sentiments and thoughts in the OP. In fact I agree with what was One Nation's position on the subject and that as a settlement policy it should be abandoned. We should revert to Integration as a settlement policy. 1 or the 3 Australian has had in the recent past.
Here's a policy brief I'd like to see adopted by some political party with a backbone.
When were Australians ever asked about Multiculturalism? We are told that “Multicultural” is a term that describes the cultural and linguistic diversity of Australian society. But what about Australian culture?
Multiculturalists say that Australia is, and will remain, a culturally diverse country. When did Australia and Australians ever vote on this in a referendum? How many Australians know how small the original group of lobbyist-activists and politicians that worked to impose multiculturalism upon Australia really was? How many know how few Australians, native born or immigrant wanted it?
Most Australians have been unaware of the changes in the immigration process – changes brought by stealth. Those that were aware and spoke out against it, found that, criticism of multiculturalism, wasn’t tolerated. Political correctness, censorship and finally vilification led to their; marginalisation in the media, academia, publishing and public service. It was not until Pauline Hanson and One Nation entered the political arena that people at the coalface of Multiculturalism saw a chance to be heard. But even then, most Australians were still unaware of the truth about it.
Things moved quickly after Hanson’s emergence, political bipartisanship followed, emerging critics could be vilified as racists – and were – Australian nationalism was seen as superfluous and “cultural cringe” emerged as a term used to describe the multicultural elitists attitude to any form of Australian culture. After many years, Australians were waking up after a long sleep, to find they lived in a “multicultural” Australia. A “community of communities”. Suddenly people were questioning the apathy and acceptance that led them to where they were and the direction their society was heading in. Events were showing the flaws in the multicultural fabric and Multiculturalism was being questioned more widely.
Since One Nation’s coming into being, too infrequent public soundings have indicated that many, if not most citizens, either reject, are ignorant of, or are luke-warm to what is described as Multiculturalism. Most in fact, do not know what it actually is. Who can blame them, when governments continually tinker with the definitions and parameters, vainly trying to make the square peg fit. Trying to seek public acceptance. Not even amongst the Multiculturalists themselves is there a single definition they all agree on.
A few years past, the government tried yet again to make it fit. They included the words; “Towards inclusiveness”. But they still didn’t get it right. It was just another attempt to placate the wider community and not offend minorities or groups associated with Multiculturalism. For years “tolerance” was the keyword associated with Multiculturalism. But tolerance does not equate to acceptance. When will Australians get a government with the courage to face reality and call a spade a spade?
Jerzy Zubrzycki and Sir James Gobbo, early advocates of cultural pluralism, believed multiculturalism had “outlived its purpose”. Professor Zubrzycki thought multiculturalism had been tainted by the arguments and practices of Left-Wing multiculturalists; by the ethnocentric and separatist behaviours of some ethnic groups and the attempts by political parties to woo ethnic group organizations (members etc) through grants and hand-outs.
Multiculturalism has created its own self-perpetuating industry and vested interest groups. Most migrants don’t involve themselves in “migrant” politics, movements or theorising, any more than they watch ethnic television. Very little unpaid input is present in the contemporary multicultural industry. Hence, the hard Left participants, and grant-happy careerists whom Gobbo and Zubrzycki so deplored, are not going to let go easily. How many Australians would know how much money is spent by the government on propping up multiculturalism each year? Would the word billions surprise them?
Australian Immigration policies have undergone many changes over the years. Issues have been clouded by those vested interests seeking to perpetuate their positions and power. For decades now multicultural lobbyists have sought to discredit Assimilation and its successor policy Integration. They produced definitions of those policies that didn’t accord with the beliefs and understandings of those who supported them. Pedantry was used to confuse the issues even more. How many times has the term “assimilation” been used incorrectly when the person was actually referring to “integration”? Australians should make themselves aware of the definitions and of the history of our settlement policies. They should do this so they know what they are talking about and so others cannot so easily confuse them.
Multiculturalism is not Assimilation nor is it Integration. Migrants are not expected to assimilate or integrate under Multiculturalism. Here is a brief explanation:
Assimilation: 1901 to the mid 1960s. Assimilation drew its rationale from the “White Australia” policy. While the preference at this time was for British migrants, others were accepted on the understanding that they should shed their cultures and languages and be assimilated into the host population so that they would rapidly become indistinguishable from it.
Integration: the mid-1960s to 1972. Integration did not suggest the loss of an individual’s identity, original language and culture.
The Liberal-Country Party effectively ended the “White Australia” policy in 1966 by permitting the migration of “distinguished” non-Europeans.
Among other things, the new immigration policy recognised that large numbers of migrants, especially those whose first language was not English, experienced hardships as they settled in Australia, and required more direct assistance. It also recognised the importance of ethnic organizations in helping the process of resettlement. Expenditure on migrant assistance and welfare rose sharply in the early 1970s in response to these needs.
Multiculturalism: from 1972. By 1973, the term “multiculturalism” had been introduced and minority groups were forming state and national associations to promote the survival of their language and heritage within mainstream institutions.
• In 1979 a Coalition Government initiative resulted in the passing of the Australian Institute of Multicultural Affairs Act, which established the Australian Institute of Multicultural Affairs (AIMA), whose objectives included raising awareness of cultural diversity and promoting social cohesion, understanding and tolerance.
• In 1986 the Act was repealed by the Labor Government, which in 1987, created the Office of Multicultural Affairs (OMA) in the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.
• In1989, following community consultations and drawing on the advice of the Advisory council for Multicultural Affairs, the Labor Government produced the National Agenda for Multicultural Australia, which had, and continues to have bipartisan support.
In 1994 the NMAC was established to review and update the National Agenda. The NMAC report launched in June 1995, found that much had been achieved and recommended further initiatives.
Following the election of the Coalition Government in March 1996, the OMA was absorbed into the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs.
• In October 1996, Parliament endorsed the Parliamentary Statement on Racial tolerance.
• In June 1997, the government announced the new NMAC.
• In May1999, the Prime Minister, Mr Howard, launched NMAC’s report, Australian Multiculturalism for a New Century: Towards Inclusiveness.
In December 1999, the Government launched A New Agenda for Multicultural Australia in response to Australian Multiculturalism for a New Century: Towards Inclusiveness, and the NMAC was wound up.
On the same day, the Government announced the establishment of the CMA. Benjamin Chow was made Chairman of the CMA.
• On 6 July 2000, the minister for immigration and Multicultural affairs, Philip Ruddock. Announced the CMA membership.
• On 28 September 2001, Mr Ruddock announced the appointment of 3 new members to the CMA.
A full account of the flawed policy and its many incarnations can be found on the government website. As the saying goes; “Oh what a tangled web…”
Multiculturalism is not about Integration or Assimilation. It is about transferring a way of life, language, religion, etc, etc, into a new geographical location. It has nothing to do with the Australian culture. At the very least it is about hybridising Australian society. Creating a community of communities. Any notion of integration with Australian society was swept aside with the Integration policy, and any attempt at integration has since failed. If allowed to continue, more than likely it will lead to the eventual “extinction” of the Australian culture, its values and colour. Those who promote multiculturalism, usually do not think we have a culture. Or at least, no culture of any value. Usually those who promote it are of a different culture, a different nationality, and still see themselves apart from Australia and Australians. They are set on preserving their culture, and not, our culture.
How much diversity and separatism is consistent with unity? How can division be unity? The idea of this policy is clearly spelt out in its name; Integration not Multiculturalism!
In June 1988, the ex-Prime Minister John Howard had a lot to say about the inappropriateness of Multiculturalism; “I think it is a rather aimless and divisive policy and I think it ought to be changed.”
In the words of former Governor General and Labor leader Bill Hayden; “And finally I’d like to say it’s about time we killed multiculturalism stone dead.”
The policy will be implemented as follows:
The Department of Immigration and Citizenship will be given 1 year to plan for the winding down and removal of all aspects of multiculturalism from the department. This removal shall take place over the 2nd year. Part of the planning will involve a focus on the Integration of migrants into Australian society.
Harmony Day and all “multicultural associated” grants will be discontinued.
Diversity management concepts will be overseen by the appropriate government departments eg; The Department of Immigration and Citizenship, The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, The Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations, etc.
The Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) will be privatised.
This policy will save the taxpayers of Australia billions of dollars annually. Funds that could be better spent on; Health, Customs, Quarantine, Education and Defence.
The cost of multiculturalism to the Australian taxpayer has been enormous. The total expenditure has been hidden within the maze of departmental bureaucracy. Costs have been estimated in the past as follows: (1991) Stephen Rimmer put the annual cost at $6.9 billion $6,900,000,000. (1996) Paul Sheehan (Journalist, Sydney Morning Herald) put the annual cost of “infrastructure” alone at $2 billion $2,000,000,000.
Migrants who choose Australia as their permanent homeland, should, as part of their decision to migrate, have a genuine desire to embrace and enjoy Australia’s cultural values, lifestyle and freedoms.
Nhbmmaknight
September 26, 2014 at 9:51 pm
Interesting.
Good read!
Shopprice Australia
October 10, 2014 at 1:10 pm
Proud
We are proud to be australian !! 🙂
ZYKO
October 13, 2014 at 11:56 am
who will deny?
Australia is the most beautiful place in the world.