19 April 2016

A threat to our culture?

| John Hargreaves
Join the conversation
118
iStock_000048724962_Small

Tonight, I’m going to a Divali function. This is one of the Indian festivals which celebrates the triumph of good over evil. It is called the Festival of Lights because this is where when we atone for wrongdoings, the light emerges showing the way forward to a bright future. This is only one of the multicultural festivals I enjoy.

Loy Kratong is the Buddhist version and happens later in the year where candles are placed in paper lotus flowers, lit and set adrift, sending our sins away.

The Mosque Open Days are ways the Muslims share their faith with others by way of transparency. They open their doors and their hearts to people who want to understand what makes Islam tick.

I’ve been to Hanukkah celebrations at the Jewish Memorial Centre and been honoured to be allowed into their holist of places.

The other week I attended a book launch by my good friend Kabu Okai-Davies. Kabu is a Ghanaian from West Africa and he tells stories about his journey from Africa to his new home via Canada and the joys he has now found here.

Next week, I think, is an East African celebration which is rich in music, food and colour.

These are some of the ways people from other cultures are sharing their uniqueness as Aussies by choice, not by birth.

The most obvious way Canberrans show off their multiculturalism is of course the National Multicultural Festival in February each year. The acclaim that the festival has acquired over the years is demonstrated by the curiosity shown to me by the Vice-Mayor of Beijing when I visited there as Minister for Multicultural Affairs. This most senior of officials sought my advice on how we embraced our minority groups and how we regarded these new citizens as equals.

I was talking to my good friends Deepak-Raj Gupta, who is one of our most senior and influential Indian-Canberrans, and Mark Kulasingham, a Canberran who was born in Malaysia of Indian culture but who has grown up here, about the notion of multiculturalism here and interstate.

One of the most consistent negative comments we agreed that we hear was that these boat people are a threat to our culture. I asked the question – what culture would that be and how is threatened? The answers were far from satisfactory.

“This is a Christian country and these boat people will Islamise our country.” Really? And how is that going to happen? I think that the majority Christian religions might have a view on that. If they are threatened that the theology of Islam is threatening them, what are they doing about spreading their own theology? The Buddhists and Hindus here don’t see Islam as the threat. Only the Christians do. Shame that.

I remember the same negativity when the Vietnamese came by boats. All a lot of rubbish. The Italians, Greeks, Spanish, etc were also threatening our culture in the 1950s yet it was okay for them to provide fruit and vegetables and hydroelectric schemes, doing work that “Aussies” wouldn’t do. I can go on and on and relate many of the nonsensical accusations of threats to our culture and I’m sure that you readers can add your own.

But let’s look at what culture we are protecting by sending these people back.

We speak English. This is not indigenous to Australia. So we are actually protecting a British culture. Right.

What about literature? When was the last time Australian authors more keenly sought after than say, American or English authors? Not in my time. How about cinema? What was the last film you watched? Was it an Australian film or an American or British one? Did you watch the Oscars or the Australian Film and Television Awards? What is the cultural content of our TV programs? Even the magazines we read are in overseas format, usually American.

Where do our fashions come from? Europe and America. Not here.

So the culture we are protecting is predominantly the US culture, with some British influence. Little of it is truly Aussie.

When was the last time the Tamworth Country Music Festival was given the same prominence as the Eurovision Song Contest?

So… the culture we are protecting is that of a bible bashing, gun-toting, murderously violence society which has an appalling human rights record. A society which has taken us to wars we can’t win, wars that have displaced people so that they need to come here as refugees, and one which uses TV programs to spread its propaganda of how society should behave. Well, that works for me! Not.

I haven’t heard those wanting to exclude Muslims, Asians, Africans say that they are protecting the culture of the first peoples. I haven’t heard any explanation from them on why it is that we are happy to keep the first peoples in abject poverty yet say that we want to protect our way of life.

I want to keep the Aussie way of life too, but recognise that it is not American, it is not British but rather it is an amalgam of many cultures. The mixture is what makes Australia what it is.

Join the conversation

118
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

wildturkeycanoe said :

Nilrem said :

watto23 said :

gazket said :

Muslims won’t even eat our food unless it has a stupid halal symbol that we the non Muslim pay for.

I’ve got a few muslim friends who stray from halal food. I’ve drunk alcohol with a muslim also. Just like the majority of christians who stray from what they strictly should be doing. Australian law allows for that and it will take time for muslims to choose how they wish to live under a secular government.

I’m almost certain given a choice of enjoying our freedoms and the freedom of following their beliefs how they want to, muslims in Australia will adopt far more of our freedoms, than the ridiculous unfounded notion that they want Sharia law in this country. Which is no different to the catholic church not wanting things like marriage equality. They want Catholic laws to be the law.

There are many muslims in Turkey that drink alcohol and grog is freely available in shops there. Not all muslims are strict about Halal.

Would that alcohol have been a factor in the disrespectful boo-ing and chanting during the minute’s silence for the French terror victims at the Greek/Istanbul soccer match? Turks are predominately Muslim, so obviously reflecting the Islamic feelings toward the French and the Western World in general. They don’t even have the decency to respect the dead, what chance of finding any peaceful solution to this ultimate battle between good and evil?

They must have been “lone wolf boozers”.
Actually, dying to get respect (martyrdom) is what it is all about. We can’t do anything about that.

wildturkeycanoe7:16 am 19 Nov 15

Nilrem said :

watto23 said :

gazket said :

Muslims won’t even eat our food unless it has a stupid halal symbol that we the non Muslim pay for.

I’ve got a few muslim friends who stray from halal food. I’ve drunk alcohol with a muslim also. Just like the majority of christians who stray from what they strictly should be doing. Australian law allows for that and it will take time for muslims to choose how they wish to live under a secular government.

I’m almost certain given a choice of enjoying our freedoms and the freedom of following their beliefs how they want to, muslims in Australia will adopt far more of our freedoms, than the ridiculous unfounded notion that they want Sharia law in this country. Which is no different to the catholic church not wanting things like marriage equality. They want Catholic laws to be the law.

There are many muslims in Turkey that drink alcohol and grog is freely available in shops there. Not all muslims are strict about Halal.

Would that alcohol have been a factor in the disrespectful boo-ing and chanting during the minute’s silence for the French terror victims at the Greek/Istanbul soccer match? Turks are predominately Muslim, so obviously reflecting the Islamic feelings toward the French and the Western World in general. They don’t even have the decency to respect the dead, what chance of finding any peaceful solution to this ultimate battle between good and evil?

It now takes two people in the household to be working just to make ends meet; it used to be one. Liberalism is overrated. When do we start to stand up for ourselves and not be mesmerised by the vapid words of politicians and the crafty agendas of mainstream media?

watto23 said :

gazket said :

Muslims won’t even eat our food unless it has a stupid halal symbol that we the non Muslim pay for.

I’ve got a few muslim friends who stray from halal food. I’ve drunk alcohol with a muslim also. Just like the majority of christians who stray from what they strictly should be doing. Australian law allows for that and it will take time for muslims to choose how they wish to live under a secular government.

I’m almost certain given a choice of enjoying our freedoms and the freedom of following their beliefs how they want to, muslims in Australia will adopt far more of our freedoms, than the ridiculous unfounded notion that they want Sharia law in this country. Which is no different to the catholic church not wanting things like marriage equality. They want Catholic laws to be the law.

Sharia law permits a Muslim man having more than one wife (also called his possessions).
Sharia law bans homosexuality.
So, “marriage equality” for Muslims is much fairer than the Catholic Church?
Give me a break!

watto23 said :

gazket said :

Muslims won’t even eat our food unless it has a stupid halal symbol that we the non Muslim pay for.

I’ve got a few muslim friends who stray from halal food. I’ve drunk alcohol with a muslim also. Just like the majority of christians who stray from what they strictly should be doing. Australian law allows for that and it will take time for muslims to choose how they wish to live under a secular government.

I’m almost certain given a choice of enjoying our freedoms and the freedom of following their beliefs how they want to, muslims in Australia will adopt far more of our freedoms, than the ridiculous unfounded notion that they want Sharia law in this country. Which is no different to the catholic church not wanting things like marriage equality. They want Catholic laws to be the law.

There are many muslims in Turkey that drink alcohol and grog is freely available in shops there. Not all muslims are strict about Halal.

pink little birdie12:07 pm 18 Nov 15

dungfungus said :

JC said :

miz said :

Comments that Canberra does multiculturalism well are hilarious – because Canberra would have to be the most Anglo capital in Australia. We really do not face the confronting aspects of it here that are commonplace in other cities.

Because they have assimilated, which is exactly what others are calling for. Thank you for proving my point.

Those foreign minorities are there and in large numbers, they just don’t stand out. Isn’t that what people want?

Referring to your last paragraph, you are correct:
http://www.idca.org.au/mosques-centres/m-act.html
There is now a section of the Theo Notaris Multicultural Centre (North Building) that is a virtual mosque on Fridays.

It what happens when people make a big issue about building mosques and delaying them as long as possible.
engagement with community groups such as being active in your community religion of choice leads to positive outcomes for society and the individual. Social services are less because of the community factor.

JC said :

dungfungus said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

JC said :

miz said :

Comments that Canberra does multiculturalism well are hilarious – because Canberra would have to be the most Anglo capital in Australia. We really do not face the confronting aspects of it here that are commonplace in other cities.

Because they have assimilated, which is exactly what others are calling for. Thank you for proving my point.

Those foreign minorities are there and in large numbers, they just don’t stand out. Isn’t that what people want?

Referring to your last paragraph, you are correct:
http://www.idca.org.au/mosques-centres/m-act.html
There is now a section of the Theo Notaris Multicultural Centre (North Building) that is a virtual mosque on Fridays.

So what? It’s a multicultural centre, do you expect to see if full of white Anglo-Saxons? And what is wrong with there being a (Muslim) prayer room in there? No one is forcing you to go in for prayers.

It’s not the Muslim prayer room, it’s the largest area in the building.

Again so what? They are probably hiring out the room, and again they are not forcing you to go in for prayers.

Bet you wouldn’t have an issue if one of these Praise The Lord sing a long churches was holding prayers there, now would you?

Nothing to do with prayers – the point is that you claim this group is here in large numbers but they don’t stand out.
The hall has a capacity for 350 people – I call that a stand out. Soon they will be demanding space to build a mosque in the middle of Canberra.

HenryBG said :

JC said :

So what? It’s a multicultural centre, do you expect to see if full of white Anglo-Saxons?

Gosh, so when you say “multicultural”, you actually mean…something else…?

It’s been good this week seeing the Left intellectually disintegrate.

Not sure what left right has anything to do with it. But the Anglos-Saxons were the original inhabitants of England, who in turn colonised Australia and whom some on this board think we owe our culture too and anything non English is bad. Muslim prayers in a multicultural centre on Fridays for example.

dungfungus said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

JC said :

miz said :

Comments that Canberra does multiculturalism well are hilarious – because Canberra would have to be the most Anglo capital in Australia. We really do not face the confronting aspects of it here that are commonplace in other cities.

Because they have assimilated, which is exactly what others are calling for. Thank you for proving my point.

Those foreign minorities are there and in large numbers, they just don’t stand out. Isn’t that what people want?

Referring to your last paragraph, you are correct:
http://www.idca.org.au/mosques-centres/m-act.html
There is now a section of the Theo Notaris Multicultural Centre (North Building) that is a virtual mosque on Fridays.

So what? It’s a multicultural centre, do you expect to see if full of white Anglo-Saxons? And what is wrong with there being a (Muslim) prayer room in there? No one is forcing you to go in for prayers.

It’s not the Muslim prayer room, it’s the largest area in the building.

Again so what? They are probably hiring out the room, and again they are not forcing you to go in for prayers.

Bet you wouldn’t have an issue if one of these Praise The Lord sing a long churches was holding prayers there, now would you?

pink little birdie9:57 am 18 Nov 15

dungfungus said :

pink little birdie said :

miz said :

Comments that Canberra does multiculturalism well are hilarious – because Canberra would have to be the most Anglo capital in Australia. We really do not face the confronting aspects of it here that are commonplace in other cities.

Not really we let them get on with their lives peacefully and we love their food… basically Canberra is ok with other cultures because we see them as regular people with similar interests and aspirations to our selves.
With different foods that they usually share. Food is delicious.

The English migrants have enchanted us with their signature dish Bangers and Mash.

Their are many Sausage making competiton winning butcheries in Canberra and Mash is delicious.

Mostly people want to live in peace and in Canberra we are pretty good at letting them and sharing their delicious food.
But multiple people agree with me… They are people first and want the same things we generally want. A place to be with our family and friends in peace.

JC said :

So what? It’s a multicultural centre, do you expect to see if full of white Anglo-Saxons?

Gosh, so when you say “multicultural”, you actually mean…something else…?

It’s been good this week seeing the Left intellectually disintegrate.

JC said :

dungfungus said :

JC said :

miz said :

Comments that Canberra does multiculturalism well are hilarious – because Canberra would have to be the most Anglo capital in Australia. We really do not face the confronting aspects of it here that are commonplace in other cities.

Because they have assimilated, which is exactly what others are calling for. Thank you for proving my point.

Those foreign minorities are there and in large numbers, they just don’t stand out. Isn’t that what people want?

Referring to your last paragraph, you are correct:
http://www.idca.org.au/mosques-centres/m-act.html
There is now a section of the Theo Notaris Multicultural Centre (North Building) that is a virtual mosque on Fridays.

So what? It’s a multicultural centre, do you expect to see if full of white Anglo-Saxons? And what is wrong with there being a (Muslim) prayer room in there? No one is forcing you to go in for prayers.

It’s not the Muslim prayer room, it’s the largest area in the building.

pink little birdie said :

With different foods that they usually share. Food is delicious.

My neighbour is Sri Lankan, they make the best goat curry you would ever want to taste.

My wife is Thai, two doors up is a lovley Aussie lady with Vietnamese parents who also has some great food and are wonderful neighbours.

dungfungus said :

JC said :

miz said :

Comments that Canberra does multiculturalism well are hilarious – because Canberra would have to be the most Anglo capital in Australia. We really do not face the confronting aspects of it here that are commonplace in other cities.

Because they have assimilated, which is exactly what others are calling for. Thank you for proving my point.

Those foreign minorities are there and in large numbers, they just don’t stand out. Isn’t that what people want?

Referring to your last paragraph, you are correct:
http://www.idca.org.au/mosques-centres/m-act.html
There is now a section of the Theo Notaris Multicultural Centre (North Building) that is a virtual mosque on Fridays.

So what? It’s a multicultural centre, do you expect to see if full of white Anglo-Saxons? And what is wrong with there being a (Muslim) prayer room in there? No one is forcing you to go in for prayers.

miz said :

No, it doesn’t prove your point at all, JC – first, there are significantly fewer minorities in Canberra in general (see post 53).

Second, the ones that are here are (not all, but mostly) educated and employed and therefore often reasonably well off (as you have to be in Canberra to manage financially), with fewer social problems than the large numbers that live in other cities.
I am not against immigration or compassion per se, but you have to also look after your own and make sure existing populations are not seriously disadvantaged by it. You wouldn’t open your house to other families if the cost was displacing your own family from your own house. You would look carefully at the capacity of your house and related services first, right? This aspect tends to get neglected.

Post 53 doesn’t say that. All post 53 says is circa 2% more were born in Aus in Canberra compared to the national average.

However it also says further down that the national average for Christians is 61.1% and for the ACT it is 54.6%. Is that because maybe because there are more people with a non European back-grounds (the predominate followers of Christianity in the world). Who knows but those stats don’t say that either way but you could possibly draw that conclusion, just like you have in saying there are less minorities here because 2% more were born in Aus.

And agree with your comment about there being less of the lower end migrants in the ACT, which gets back to the point I was making, we still have a large number of migrants in the ACT but they are not as obvious, but that doesn’t mean they are not there.

gazket said :

Muslims won’t even eat our food unless it has a stupid halal symbol that we the non Muslim pay for.

I’ve got a few muslim friends who stray from halal food. I’ve drunk alcohol with a muslim also. Just like the majority of christians who stray from what they strictly should be doing. Australian law allows for that and it will take time for muslims to choose how they wish to live under a secular government.

I’m almost certain given a choice of enjoying our freedoms and the freedom of following their beliefs how they want to, muslims in Australia will adopt far more of our freedoms, than the ridiculous unfounded notion that they want Sharia law in this country. Which is no different to the catholic church not wanting things like marriage equality. They want Catholic laws to be the law.

pink little birdie said :

miz said :

Comments that Canberra does multiculturalism well are hilarious – because Canberra would have to be the most Anglo capital in Australia. We really do not face the confronting aspects of it here that are commonplace in other cities.

Not really we let them get on with their lives peacefully and we love their food… basically Canberra is ok with other cultures because we see them as regular people with similar interests and aspirations to our selves.
With different foods that they usually share. Food is delicious.

The English migrants have enchanted us with their signature dish Bangers and Mash.

pink little birdie9:41 am 17 Nov 15

miz said :

Comments that Canberra does multiculturalism well are hilarious – because Canberra would have to be the most Anglo capital in Australia. We really do not face the confronting aspects of it here that are commonplace in other cities.

Not really we let them get on with their lives peacefully and we love their food… basically Canberra is ok with other cultures because we see them as regular people with similar interests and aspirations to our selves.
With different foods that they usually share. Food is delicious.

JC said :

miz said :

Comments that Canberra does multiculturalism well are hilarious – because Canberra would have to be the most Anglo capital in Australia. We really do not face the confronting aspects of it here that are commonplace in other cities.

Because they have assimilated, which is exactly what others are calling for. Thank you for proving my point.

Those foreign minorities are there and in large numbers, they just don’t stand out. Isn’t that what people want?

Referring to your last paragraph, you are correct:
http://www.idca.org.au/mosques-centres/m-act.html
There is now a section of the Theo Notaris Multicultural Centre (North Building) that is a virtual mosque on Fridays.

No, it doesn’t prove your point at all, JC – first, there are significantly fewer minorities in Canberra in general (see post 53). Second, the ones that are here are (not all, but mostly) educated and employed and therefore often reasonably well off (as you have to be in Canberra to manage financially), with fewer social problems than the large numbers that live in other cities.
I am not against immigration or compassion per se, but you have to also look after your own and make sure existing populations are not seriously disadvantaged by it. You wouldn’t open your house to other families if the cost was displacing your own family from your own house. You would look carefully at the capacity of your house and related services first, right? This aspect tends to get neglected.

miz said :

Comments that Canberra does multiculturalism well are hilarious – because Canberra would have to be the most Anglo capital in Australia. We really do not face the confronting aspects of it here that are commonplace in other cities.

Because they have assimilated, which is exactly what others are calling for. Thank you for proving my point.

Those foreign minorities are there and in large numbers, they just don’t stand out. Isn’t that what people want?

Comments that Canberra does multiculturalism well are hilarious – because Canberra would have to be the most Anglo capital in Australia. We really do not face the confronting aspects of it here that are commonplace in other cities.

gazket said :

It seems we have learn’t nothing from history. Neville Chamberlain was an apologist and a British PM. Very similar to the leftie MP’s now days.

Neville Chamberlain appeasement policy set to repeat it’s self again.

He credited Germany as the shield against the spread of communist revolutionary sentiment from Russia. Thus, on Chamberlain’s watch, Germany acquired Austria, Sudetenland, and then later the rest of Czechoslovakia without British intervention. With his businessman mindset, he thought he and Hitler had a mutual respect. “Hitler definitely liked me,” he noted in a personal correspondence to his sister, “and thought he could do business with me.” Hitler, however, was no businessman; Hitler “dealt with [Chamberlain] because he believed him to be infinitely malleable.”

Chamberlain finally declared war on Germany after the invasion of Poland on Sep 1939, but the realization by then was already too late to prevent the conflict from growing into a major war

Poland has been invaded once too often and they seem to have more foresight than some other European countries: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/02/poles-dont-want-immigrants-they-dont-understand-them-dont-like-them
Following the massacres in Paris last week the Poles have stopped all migration.
Watch them all fall into line now.

justin heywood4:16 pm 16 Nov 15

JC said :

,…. yet will still have people on this board (and not directed at you), who come on here with their xenophobic views of the world, and seemingly yearning for a return to the White Australia policy and hiding that view with the assertion that our countries culture was built on a European war and British values.

Really? I haven’t seen those views expressed here lately JC.

In the OP, Hargreaves was also quoting unnamed ‘people’ who hold racist and xenophobic views, and how terrible they are, and you’re talking about ‘people’ on this board saying similar things.

But I rarely hear or see them expressed here – the moderators have mercifully killed off most of the real haters from both left and right. I don’t doubt that such people are about, but not many, and certainly not enough to represent it as anything like the norm.

Part of the problem with these debates is that people project a wide range of views onto people they might disagree with on another topic.

It seems we have learn’t nothing from history. Neville Chamberlain was an apologist and a British PM. Very similar to the leftie MP’s now days.

Neville Chamberlain appeasement policy set to repeat it’s self again.

He credited Germany as the shield against the spread of communist revolutionary sentiment from Russia. Thus, on Chamberlain’s watch, Germany acquired Austria, Sudetenland, and then later the rest of Czechoslovakia without British intervention. With his businessman mindset, he thought he and Hitler had a mutual respect. “Hitler definitely liked me,” he noted in a personal correspondence to his sister, “and thought he could do business with me.” Hitler, however, was no businessman; Hitler “dealt with [Chamberlain] because he believed him to be infinitely malleable.”

Chamberlain finally declared war on Germany after the invasion of Poland on Sep 1939, but the realization by then was already too late to prevent the conflict from growing into a major war

justin heywood11:02 am 16 Nov 15

wildturkeycanoe said :

…To be Australian I thought was more to be able to poke a bit of fun at one’s self and have a laid back attitude to life. Helping out ya mates, getting together for a barbie and appreciating [with respect] the different kinds of blokes n sheilas of the world.

Our own culture (like our own personality), is not a conscious thing and I think it’s pretty hard for us, as Australians, to make judgements about what Australian culture is.

Surely our best guide is what other people say about us, and in that regard I hear from overseas that we DO have a distinct culture, and it is generally laid back, humorous and tolerant.

John Hargreaves said:

“So… the culture we are protecting is that of a bible bashing, gun-toting, murderously violence society which has an appalling human rights record. A society which has taken us to wars we can’t win, wars that have displaced people so that they need to come here as refugees, and one which uses TV programs to spread its propaganda of how society should behave. Well, that works for me! Not.”

Surely much of what you write is purely for effect John. I don’t think such extravagant hyperbole helps your argument though.

wildturkeycanoe said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

John, you would be aware that today is remembrance day which is one of the cornerstones of Australian culture.
I am sure that you will join with me and all other Australians to share a minute’s silence at 11am to remember the sacrifices made by those Australians who fought for the preservation of our freedoms.

Is it? I though Anzac day was the day that is the cornerstone of Australian Culture, what ever Australian Culture really is. To me what makes Australia unique is we have a melting pot of culture and until recently relative tolerance.

I thought the “melting pot of culture” was an American thing, not Australian. Look how well that has been working out for them over the last few centuries. To be Australian I thought was more to be able to poke a bit of fun at one’s self and have a laid back attitude to life. Helping out ya mates, getting together for a barbie and appreciating [with respect] the different kinds of blokes n sheilas of the world.
When you get cultures who lock themselves up in their own little borderless communities by not associating, talking or interacting with anybody who is of different ethnicity, the whole relative tolerance thing starts to wear thin and racism begins to take over.
It’s like in the school playground when a new kid joins the class. If they sit quietly on their own and don’t try to make friends with anybody, they slowly become alienated, picked on and eventually hated. On the other hand if they can learn to talk to everybody and try to fit in a little without losing their uniqueness, they are gradually accepted as one of the students’ classmates. It won’t matter that their skin is different color or they have a funny accent, as long as they have a go at being part of the group. Only the ones who turn their back on everybody and stick with “their own kind” end up being left out, bullied and ostracised.
Aussies will tolerate assimilation, but they won’t take too nicely to anyone coming here who starts dictating their own religious practices and laws upon our freedoms.

America is similar but different. Similar in that they like Australia were basically a UK colony that has defined itself and its culture as more and more migrants have come to the country. The core difference is they cut the British stings much earlier than us (we are still hanging on) and of course the people who arrived were generally different so different culture mixes from day 1.

As for the rest of what you wrote don’t disagree really. Though some history, even those who came from Europe when they arrived didn’t really assimilate until years and years later, even now you will find enclaves of Europeans from various countries in our larger cities. But I am guessing most won’t be offended by en enclave of Italians or Greeks, but might be by an enclave of those from the middle east.

And also let us look at Canberra. Canberra is one place where assimilation has worked really well, yet will still have people on this board (and not directed at you), who come on here with their xenophobic views of the world, and seemingly yearning for a return to the White Australia policy and hiding that view with the assertion that our countries culture was built on a European war and British values.

It’s always us Australians who are told we have to be excepting of change and permit a new culture, Yet the immigrants are not told to assimilate at all, infact the government sets these ethnics up in enclaves in our society so they don’t assimilate to our way of life in our god damn country .

Muslims won’t even eat our food unless it has a stupid halal symbol that we the non Muslim pay for.

wildturkeycanoe6:48 am 16 Nov 15

JC said :

dungfungus said :

John, you would be aware that today is remembrance day which is one of the cornerstones of Australian culture.
I am sure that you will join with me and all other Australians to share a minute’s silence at 11am to remember the sacrifices made by those Australians who fought for the preservation of our freedoms.

Is it? I though Anzac day was the day that is the cornerstone of Australian Culture, what ever Australian Culture really is. To me what makes Australia unique is we have a melting pot of culture and until recently relative tolerance.

I thought the “melting pot of culture” was an American thing, not Australian. Look how well that has been working out for them over the last few centuries. To be Australian I thought was more to be able to poke a bit of fun at one’s self and have a laid back attitude to life. Helping out ya mates, getting together for a barbie and appreciating [with respect] the different kinds of blokes n sheilas of the world.
When you get cultures who lock themselves up in their own little borderless communities by not associating, talking or interacting with anybody who is of different ethnicity, the whole relative tolerance thing starts to wear thin and racism begins to take over.
It’s like in the school playground when a new kid joins the class. If they sit quietly on their own and don’t try to make friends with anybody, they slowly become alienated, picked on and eventually hated. On the other hand if they can learn to talk to everybody and try to fit in a little without losing their uniqueness, they are gradually accepted as one of the students’ classmates. It won’t matter that their skin is different color or they have a funny accent, as long as they have a go at being part of the group. Only the ones who turn their back on everybody and stick with “their own kind” end up being left out, bullied and ostracised.
Aussies will tolerate assimilation, but they won’t take too nicely to anyone coming here who starts dictating their own religious practices and laws upon our freedoms.

rommeldog56 said :

If you look at what Dungers said, it was “Australians fought” – not Australia.

Anyway, its a moot point. The intent of the Dunger’s comment is obvious and your misinterpretation of Dunger’s at post #22 clearly show the extent that a few posters on RiotAct will go to to have a go at what ever Dunger’s – and others, post that does not accord with their own left leaning views.

There is plenty in Dungers posts that you can comment on if that’s what u want to do – just don’t deliberately misinterpret what is said in order to “have a go”.

Talk about a few posters here closing down discussions by the constant verbal attacks on others…..

Correct he said Australians my bad, but if you read my post, the main issue I was responding to was the claim that remembrance day was one cornerstone of Australian culture.

Now you are also right there was plenty else to comment on, however the one part I took offence to and which I choose to commented on, was as I mentioned above the assertion that Remembrance day is somehow one of the cornerstone of Australian culture.

I don’t believe it is, in fact I don’t believe Remembrance day is all that significant in Australia, and I especially don’t think it has influenced our culture to the extent of being a cornerstone.

Our modern day culture was driven by the arrival of the English, and the arrival of everyone else who has come here in the preceding 227 years, with, unfortunately very little culture being taken from the original habitants of this land which is a great pity. But that is the English for you hey?

When it comes to recognising our war dead, the more important day in Australian culture is without doubt Anzac day, not remembrance day.

dungfungus said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

John, you would be aware that today is remembrance day which is one of the cornerstones of Australian culture.
I am sure that you will join with me and all other Australians to share a minute’s silence at 11am to remember the sacrifices made by those Australians who fought for the preservation of our freedoms.

Is it? I though Anzac day was the day that is the cornerstone of Australian Culture, what ever Australian Culture really is. To me what makes Australia unique is we have a melting pot of culture and until recently relative tolerance.

Remembrance days however recognises the end of the First World (read European) War. A war that Australia never fought in. Australians did however fight (otherwise we wouldn’t have Anzac day would we), but Australian fought under the British flag in what was essentially a European war.

Ironically even the poms don’t do remembrance day on 11/11. They do Remembrance Sunday on what ever Sunday is closest to 11/11.

Two points:
-“nz” in Anzac stands for New Zealand. Anzac Day is not exclusive to Australia.
How can Anzac day be Australia’s “cornerstone of culture” if Australia’s “melting pot of culture” you refer to happened 40 years after?

-The First World War was originally called The Great War, later to be called Word War One (even by the lefty historians you read). I have never heard of is referred to as the “European War”.
Almost every country in the then British Empire took part (hence the British flag) and the USA (who fought under the stars and stripes) participated in WW1 so you can’t call it the “European War” in any context.
You may recall that the USA was coerced into joining the war when the Germans sank the Lusitania in international waters.
The fact that the British commemorate remembrance day a little differently is neither here nor there as far as what we choose to do.

Actually if you took the time to read my post rather than getting on attacking me you would see that I don’t really think that Anzac day is the cornerstone of Australian culture either. Cynicism is clearly something that goes right over your head.

But still stand by my statement that in no way shape or form has remembrance day shaped Australian culture. No way. In my reasonably short 50 years on this earth, remembrance day was something were we stood silent at 11am, but that is about it. Anzac day, even if the Kiwi’s also claim the same day was the day we really remembered our war dead but even still don’t think our culture has been driven by it either.

And where in my post was there any left leaning, or attacking you because you are known to lean to the extreme right? Yet you have the hide to accuse me (in a post subsequent to the one I’ve quoted) of just that but happy to throw this left right mud as you please.

Oh as for America and the first world war, you may notice that I said the war was ESSENTIALLY European. Notice the word in capitals?

There were non European countries involved that’s for sure, including Japan who was on the side of the allies and what is now known as Thailand plus others. But not Australia, except for our troops who fought under the pommy flag.

The war was also fought in Asia (mostly the part of Asia that is better known as the middle east) and Africa, as well as a small parts in the Pacific, however as mentioned it was essentially a European war.

And the part in the Pacific was because parts of Samoa were German so again even in the Pacific, the core issue was European.

And finally what is this 40 years later business when referring to Australia’s melting pot? I don’t recall saying anything about 40 years later. Australia has been a multicultural country since not long after the English arrived and it has been evolving ever since. To just draw a line in the sand and say that is culture is just plain wrong.

A classic example are the Chinese who came for the gold, then of course more modern events such as European migration after the 2nd World War and more recent wars too. Again maybe read before going on the attack.

dungfungus said :

Thank’s for that support rdog.
There have been times when I thought I would stop posting on RiotACT because of the pressure of the lefties who relentlessly attack my opinions. Thank’s to your earlier encouragement I have decided before today to hang in and I think the moderators have knocked me into shape as well.
I often draw strength from comments I read from a large number of media outlets.
Recently, I saw one from US broadcaster Mike Rosen who was interviewing Mark Steyn and he made the point that “Conservatives are bound by reality. The Left is unbound….they’re utopian….and the welfare state, whether we’re talking about Greece or the European Union or the United States, has hit the wall of economic reality.”

Well, don’t get too carried away by a glimmer of support, dungers. I don’t agree with a fair bit of what u say, but support your, and others, right to say it politely and with respect.

What I see here now is a systematic attempt by certain posters to shut down discussion.

Engagement by potential posters in what appears to be a never ending “deluge” of posts in response to yours – and others that aren’t left or green leaning, is a primary reason why posters have left RiotAct, which is a shame, but that trend can continue to be expected in the run up to the next ACT election.

rommeldog56 said :

JC said :

Is it? I though Anzac day was the day that is the cornerstone of Australian Culture, what ever Australian Culture really is. To me what makes Australia unique is we have a melting pot of culture and until recently relative tolerance.

Remembrance days however recognises the end of the First World (read European) War. A war that Australia never fought in. Australians did however fight (otherwise we wouldn’t have Anzac day would we), but Australian fought under the British flag in what was essentially a European war.

If you look at what Dungers said, it was “Australians fought” – not Australia.

Anyway, its a moot point. The intent of the Dunger’s comment is obvious and your misinterpretation of Dunger’s at post #22 clearly show the extent that a few posters on RiotAct will go to to have a go at what ever Dunger’s – and others, post that does not accord with their own left leaning views.

There is plenty in Dungers posts that you can comment on if that’s what u want to do – just don’t deliberately misinterpret what is said in order to “have a go”.

Talk about a few posters here closing down discussions by the constant verbal attacks on others…..

Thank’s for that support rdog.
There have been times when I thought I would stop posting on RiotACT because of the pressure of the lefties who relentlessly attack my opinions. Thank’s to your earlier encouragement I have decided before today to hang in and I think the moderators have knocked me into shape as well.
I often draw strength from comments I read from a large number of media outlets.
Recently, I saw one from US broadcaster Mike Rosen who was interviewing Mark Steyn and he made the point that “Conservatives are bound by reality. The Left is unbound….they’re utopian….and the welfare state, whether we’re talking about Greece or the European Union or the United States, has hit the wall of economic reality.”

JC said :

Is it? I though Anzac day was the day that is the cornerstone of Australian Culture, what ever Australian Culture really is. To me what makes Australia unique is we have a melting pot of culture and until recently relative tolerance.

Remembrance days however recognises the end of the First World (read European) War. A war that Australia never fought in. Australians did however fight (otherwise we wouldn’t have Anzac day would we), but Australian fought under the British flag in what was essentially a European war.

If you look at what Dungers said, it was “Australians fought” – not Australia.

Anyway, its a moot point. The intent of the Dunger’s comment is obvious and your misinterpretation of Dunger’s at post #22 clearly show the extent that a few posters on RiotAct will go to to have a go at what ever Dunger’s – and others, post that does not accord with their own left leaning views.

There is plenty in Dungers posts that you can comment on if that’s what u want to do – just don’t deliberately misinterpret what is said in order to “have a go”.

Talk about a few posters here closing down discussions by the constant verbal attacks on others…..

dungfungus said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

John, you would be aware that today is remembrance day which is one of the cornerstones of Australian culture.
I am sure that you will join with me and all other Australians to share a minute’s silence at 11am to remember the sacrifices made by those Australians who fought for the preservation of our freedoms.

Is it? I though Anzac day was the day that is the cornerstone of Australian Culture, what ever Australian Culture really is. To me what makes Australia unique is we have a melting pot of culture and until recently relative tolerance.

Remembrance days however recognises the end of the First World (read European) War. A war that Australia never fought in. Australians did however fight (otherwise we wouldn’t have Anzac day would we), but Australian fought under the British flag in what was essentially a European war.

Ironically even the poms don’t do remembrance day on 11/11. They do Remembrance Sunday on what ever Sunday is closest to 11/11.

Two points:
-“nz” in Anzac stands for New Zealand. Anzac Day is not exclusive to Australia.
How can Anzac day be Australia’s “cornerstone of culture” if Australia’s “melting pot of culture” you refer to happened 40 years after?

-The First World War was originally called The Great War, later to be called Word War One (even by the lefty historians you read). I have never heard of is referred to as the “European War”.
Almost every country in the then British Empire took part (hence the British flag) and the USA (who fought under the stars and stripes) participated in WW1 so you can’t call it the “European War” in any context.
You may recall that the USA was coerced into joining the war when the Germans sank the Lusitania in international waters.
The fact that the British commemorate remembrance day a little differently is neither here nor there as far as what we choose to do.

I should add that the USA also commemorates the end of WW1 on 11 November each year. They call it Veterans’ Day.

JC said :

dungfungus said :

John, you would be aware that today is remembrance day which is one of the cornerstones of Australian culture.
I am sure that you will join with me and all other Australians to share a minute’s silence at 11am to remember the sacrifices made by those Australians who fought for the preservation of our freedoms.

Is it? I though Anzac day was the day that is the cornerstone of Australian Culture, what ever Australian Culture really is. To me what makes Australia unique is we have a melting pot of culture and until recently relative tolerance.

Remembrance days however recognises the end of the First World (read European) War. A war that Australia never fought in. Australians did however fight (otherwise we wouldn’t have Anzac day would we), but Australian fought under the British flag in what was essentially a European war.

Ironically even the poms don’t do remembrance day on 11/11. They do Remembrance Sunday on what ever Sunday is closest to 11/11.

Two points:
-“nz” in Anzac stands for New Zealand. Anzac Day is not exclusive to Australia.
How can Anzac day be Australia’s “cornerstone of culture” if Australia’s “melting pot of culture” you refer to happened 40 years after?

-The First World War was originally called The Great War, later to be called Word War One (even by the lefty historians you read). I have never heard of is referred to as the “European War”.
Almost every country in the then British Empire took part (hence the British flag) and the USA (who fought under the stars and stripes) participated in WW1 so you can’t call it the “European War” in any context.
You may recall that the USA was coerced into joining the war when the Germans sank the Lusitania in international waters.
The fact that the British commemorate remembrance day a little differently is neither here nor there as far as what we choose to do.

No_Nose said :

Southmouth said :

So for the uninitiated, the Bible is two books. The Jewish Tanakh and the Christian Canon, known as the Old and New testaments. The Old testament is not Christian teaching, it is Jewish and is there for context. That is why Christians eat bacon. Using the Jewish texts to attack Christians is no more valid than using Buddhist writings to attack Hindus. It is not about selectively carving out. It is about understanding the difference between two completely diverse religions with different written teachings. At least try reading something before telling us how much of it you can quote.

There is nothing implicitly written in the New Testament which says it overrides gods old and existing rules, quite the contrary actually. There are in many verses which say that the old rules still apply and people must obey them. In one part (Matthew from memory) Jesus himself admonishes the pharisees for not killing disobedient and disrespectful children as the rules command.

Bits are selectively carved out all the time.

Hahaha yeah right. The Old Testament ways were replaced with the New testament ways and open to non Jews and Jews alike. Some moral guidelines are common to both, and Islam as well, but there is definitely absolutely no requirement for Christians to follow the Jewish law. More to the broader point, any verses in the Old Testament condoning violence were specifically related to Israel as per it’s boarders 3500 years ago and have zero relevance to Christianity. Using Old Testament (Jewish).. verses to bash Christians just displays a lack of understanding of both religions. Just give it 5 minutes thought, Christian eat bacon, work on Saturdays, don’t need to be circumcised and don’t celebrate the passover or any other Jewish holidays.
Even if your Sunday school teacher told you that the Old and New Testaments both apply, there still is no comparison between that and the violence encouraged in the Koran. Give it a read.
Oh, and by the way, Jesus never said that naughty children should be killed.

dungfungus said :

John, you would be aware that today is remembrance day which is one of the cornerstones of Australian culture.
I am sure that you will join with me and all other Australians to share a minute’s silence at 11am to remember the sacrifices made by those Australians who fought for the preservation of our freedoms.

Is it? I though Anzac day was the day that is the cornerstone of Australian Culture, what ever Australian Culture really is. To me what makes Australia unique is we have a melting pot of culture and until recently relative tolerance.

Remembrance days however recognises the end of the First World (read European) War. A war that Australia never fought in. Australians did however fight (otherwise we wouldn’t have Anzac day would we), but Australian fought under the British flag in what was essentially a European war.

Ironically even the poms don’t do remembrance day on 11/11. They do Remembrance Sunday on what ever Sunday is closest to 11/11.

No_Nose said :

Southmouth said :

So for the uninitiated, the Bible is two books. The Jewish Tanakh and the Christian Canon, known as the Old and New testaments. The Old testament is not Christian teaching, it is Jewish and is there for context. That is why Christians eat bacon. Using the Jewish texts to attack Christians is no more valid than using Buddhist writings to attack Hindus. It is not about selectively carving out. It is about understanding the difference between two completely diverse religions with different written teachings. At least try reading something before telling us how much of it you can quote.

There is nothing implicitly written in the New Testament which says it overrides gods old and existing rules, quite the contrary actually. There are in many verses which say that the old rules still apply and people must obey them. In one part (Matthew from memory) Jesus himself admonishes the pharisees for not killing disobedient and disrespectful children as the rules command.

Bits are selectively carved out all the time.

Two points, Jesus was Jewish.

Secondly the New Testament is not a book of rules, it is a book of stories and recollections written some years later.

Christianity is all about believing in Jesus as being the son of god.

rubaiyat said :

Malcolm gets it:

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/business/comment-and-analysis/america-shows-how-to-harness-haveago-migrants-with-university-educations-20151112-gkxsrp.html

Malcolm might get it but taxpayers are getting in the neck with the unpaid HECS debt blowing out to $74 billion. What a waste of money.

wildturkeycanoe7:06 am 14 Nov 15

TonyMikinos said :

I’m taking issue with the OP’s (and his supporters) claims that the current wave of refugees is no different to earlier waves (post-war European and post Vietnam war Indo-Chinese were mentioned).
To have such a significant number of recent immigrants on benefits after 5 years indicates some failure in the system, and a miserable outlook for both them and the nation.

Too right. The European immigrants from 50 years ago came here legally with in demand skills to work on large projects such as the Snowy Hydro scheme. What exactly are the current waves bringing with them except doctrine that hates the western world and an unwillingness to adapt to the Aussie way of life? As for skills, what exactly would the “hi-tech” regions of Syria have in common with Australia’s workplace? With a language barrier for a start, how will they be any more employable than our current population of uni-qualified unemployed? Seriously, we do not need any more welfare recipients in Australia and without something seriously being invested into job creation we will never have any hope of providing the “Aussie dream” to the new arrivals.
Would it not be cheaper to set up protected camps for refugees on their home soil? Send the military in to create a safe zone in the countries where the trouble is, so that these poor souls do not have to flee overseas. They obviously had the money to get flights and boat rides to our shores, why not take that cash as they enter the main gate and use it to settle them temporarily somewhere in their own country under the protection of the U.N.?

Loved your article John

dungfungus said :

TonyMikinos said :

Nilrem said :

TonyMikinos said :

rubaiyat said :

Yet oddly there are less immigrants on welfare than Aussies, and all the dirty menial jobs that the Aussies refuse to do are being done by the most recent migrants, including refugees IF THEY ARE ALLOWED TO WORK.

At least get your facts right before going off on yet another rant. According to a survey last year, less than 10% of humanitarian immigrants had a job.

http://www.bnla.com.au/docs/bnla-news-2014-final-spread.pdf

Errr how long had they been in the country when they were interviewed?

Err, the report doesn’t say.

In 2011, DIAC said that 80% were still on benefits after 5 years. The rates vary by nationality. 94% of Afghan households were still on benefits after 5 years, compared with 54% of households from Sierra Leone.

Make of that what you will. But clearly, and not for the first time, Rube is not even in the same ball park as the truth.

Rube was referring to all immigrants which includes those claiming to be refugees.
Nevertheless, if he said that in courtroom the judge would direct the jury to ignore it and I’m with the judge.

Well we’re nearly all immigrants Dungers 🙂 He is clearly referring to recent immigrants.

I’m taking issue with the OP’s (and his supporters) claims that the current wave of refugees is no different to earlier waves (post-war European and post Vietnam war Indo-Chinese were mentioned).
To have such a significant number of recent immigrants on benefits after 5 years indicates some failure in the system, and a miserable outlook for both them and the nation.

Southmouth said :

So for the uninitiated, the Bible is two books. The Jewish Tanakh and the Christian Canon, known as the Old and New testaments. The Old testament is not Christian teaching, it is Jewish and is there for context. That is why Christians eat bacon. Using the Jewish texts to attack Christians is no more valid than using Buddhist writings to attack Hindus. It is not about selectively carving out. It is about understanding the difference between two completely diverse religions with different written teachings. At least try reading something before telling us how much of it you can quote.

There is nothing implicitly written in the New Testament which says it overrides gods old and existing rules, quite the contrary actually. There are in many verses which say that the old rules still apply and people must obey them. In one part (Matthew from memory) Jesus himself admonishes the pharisees for not killing disobedient and disrespectful children as the rules command.

Bits are selectively carved out all the time.

HenryBG said :

Nilrem said :

Maybe moderate Muslims could carve out the more offensive sections of the Koran in a similar way then? That would be fair.

..or maybe do what we’ve done, which is to pretty much admit as a society that religion is a bunch of fairy tales and that secular authority is the only way to make society work properly.
That means replacing “respect” for idiotic beliefs with “tolerance, as long as the idiocy stays out of my face”.

Sounds like a good policy.

TonyMikinos said :

Nilrem said :

TonyMikinos said :

rubaiyat said :

Yet oddly there are less immigrants on welfare than Aussies, and all the dirty menial jobs that the Aussies refuse to do are being done by the most recent migrants, including refugees IF THEY ARE ALLOWED TO WORK.

At least get your facts right before going off on yet another rant. According to a survey last year, less than 10% of humanitarian immigrants had a job.

http://www.bnla.com.au/docs/bnla-news-2014-final-spread.pdf

Errr how long had they been in the country when they were interviewed?

Err, the report doesn’t say.

In 2011, DIAC said that 80% were still on benefits after 5 years. The rates vary by nationality. 94% of Afghan households were still on benefits after 5 years, compared with 54% of households from Sierra Leone.

Make of that what you will. But clearly, and not for the first time, Rube is not even in the same ball park as the truth.

Rube was referring to all immigrants which includes those claiming to be refugees.
Nevertheless, if he said that in courtroom the judge would direct the jury to ignore it and I’m with the judge.

HenryBG said :

dungfungus said :

I can tell you from regular personal experience that most people at Chatswood Station, for example, appear to be East Asian in origin. …. most of the opposition to different cultures seems to come from the areas that have the least exposure to those cultures.

So….what you’re saying is that now that the takeover is complete in Chatswood, opposition in Chatswood has become more muted?

I am saying nothing henrybg because once again you are verballing me as I did not post the words you are claiming.

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

“Immigration is a fantastic boost to an economy”
It used to be but contemporary migrants are choosing to stay on welfare. Sure, they are consumers and big business loves consumers and they don’t care where their spending money comes from.
Australia has the most preferred welfare system in the world.
A former president of the largest Muslim country in the world once said “Australia has too much sugar on the table”.
Just quotin’.

Yet oddly there are less immigrants on welfare than Aussies, and all the dirty menial jobs that the Aussies refuse to do are being done by the most recent migrants, including refugees IF THEY ARE ALLOWED TO WORK.

I have yet to meet a refugee too lazy to walk to a nearby destination or job, but seem increasingly to meet enormously fat and shiftless Aussies who can’t manage such a simple task.

See if you could overcome these REAL obstacles, including teaching yourself to read English at 15:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buA3tsGnp2s

I have watched this before and my comment then was what are they advertising?
The skills of the film maker, the education opportunities at the university, the law firm he works for, what?

Nilrem said :

TonyMikinos said :

rubaiyat said :

Yet oddly there are less immigrants on welfare than Aussies, and all the dirty menial jobs that the Aussies refuse to do are being done by the most recent migrants, including refugees IF THEY ARE ALLOWED TO WORK.

At least get your facts right before going off on yet another rant. According to a survey last year, less than 10% of humanitarian immigrants had a job.

http://www.bnla.com.au/docs/bnla-news-2014-final-spread.pdf

Errr how long had they been in the country when they were interviewed?

Err, the report doesn’t say.

In 2011, DIAC said that 80% were still on benefits after 5 years. The rates vary by nationality. 94% of Afghan households were still on benefits after 5 years, compared with 54% of households from Sierra Leone.

Make of that what you will. But clearly, and not for the first time, Rube is not even in the same ball park as the truth.

Maybe moderate Muslims could carve out the more offensive sections of the Koran in a similar way then? That would be fair.

So for the uninitiated, the Bible is two books. The Jewish Tanakh and the Christian Canon, known as the Old and New testaments. The Old testament is not Christian teaching, it is Jewish and is there for context. That is why Christians eat bacon. Using the Jewish texts to attack Christians is no more valid than using Buddhist writings to attack Hindus. It is not about selectively carving out. It is about understanding the difference between two completely diverse religions with different written teachings. At least try reading something before telling us how much of it you can quote.

wildturkeycanoe1:31 pm 13 Nov 15

Nilrem said :

TonyMikinos said :

rubaiyat said :

Yet oddly there are less immigrants on welfare than Aussies, and all the dirty menial jobs that the Aussies refuse to do are being done by the most recent migrants, including refugees IF THEY ARE ALLOWED TO WORK.

At least get your facts right before going off on yet another rant. According to a survey last year, less than 10% of humanitarian immigrants had a job.

http://www.bnla.com.au/docs/bnla-news-2014-final-spread.pdf

Errr how long had they been in the country when they were interviewed?

The most common languages used to
complete the survey were:
1. Arabic (42%)
2. Persian (23%)
3. English (10%)
4. Dari (8%)

So how easily are these folks going to be able to get paid work? How many will turn to a “sponsor” in order to get work and be paid “normal” wages?

Also, if you analyze the data from detention center figures, https://www.border.gov.au/ReportsandPublications/Documents/statistics/immigration-detention-statistics-31-Aug-2015.pdf you will see men outnumber both women and children 7 to 1. What does that alone tell you about these cultures and their values? Obviously men are valued more highly than anyone else. That kind of mindset is not what Australia [a land of equal opportunity] either needs or wants.

Nilrem said :

Maybe moderate Muslims could carve out the more offensive sections of the Koran in a similar way then? That would be fair.

..or maybe do what we’ve done, which is to pretty much admit as a society that religion is a bunch of fairy tales and that secular authority is the only way to make society work properly.
That means replacing “respect” for idiotic beliefs with “tolerance, as long as the idiocy stays out of my face”.

Nilrem said :

TonyMikinos said :

rubaiyat said :

Yet oddly there are less immigrants on welfare than Aussies, and all the dirty menial jobs that the Aussies refuse to do are being done by the most recent migrants, including refugees IF THEY ARE ALLOWED TO WORK.

At least get your facts right before going off on yet another rant. According to a survey last year, less than 10% of humanitarian immigrants had a job.

http://www.bnla.com.au/docs/bnla-news-2014-final-spread.pdf

Errr how long had they been in the country when they were interviewed?

The stat I remember was after 3 years less than 20% had got themselves off welfare.

dungfungus said :

I can tell you from regular personal experience that most people at Chatswood Station, for example, appear to be East Asian in origin. …. most of the opposition to different cultures seems to come from the areas that have the least exposure to those cultures.

So….what you’re saying is that now that the takeover is complete in Chatswood, opposition in Chatswood has become more muted?

TonyMikinos said :

rubaiyat said :

Yet oddly there are less immigrants on welfare than Aussies, and all the dirty menial jobs that the Aussies refuse to do are being done by the most recent migrants, including refugees IF THEY ARE ALLOWED TO WORK.

At least get your facts right before going off on yet another rant. According to a survey last year, less than 10% of humanitarian immigrants had a job.

http://www.bnla.com.au/docs/bnla-news-2014-final-spread.pdf

Errr how long had they been in the country when they were interviewed?

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

When found wanting for further argument, attack the character of the other team and if necessary, play the racist card.

When found wanting for further argument, attack the character of the all the scientists.

…and if necessary, play the Lefties card.

What have scientists got to do with multiculturalism?

rubaiyat said :

Yet oddly there are less immigrants on welfare than Aussies, and all the dirty menial jobs that the Aussies refuse to do are being done by the most recent migrants, including refugees IF THEY ARE ALLOWED TO WORK.

At least get your facts right before going off on yet another rant. According to a survey last year, less than 10% of humanitarian immigrants had a job.

http://www.bnla.com.au/docs/bnla-news-2014-final-spread.pdf

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

“Immigration is a fantastic boost to an economy”
It used to be but contemporary migrants are choosing to stay on welfare. Sure, they are consumers and big business loves consumers and they don’t care where their spending money comes from.
Australia has the most preferred welfare system in the world.
A former president of the largest Muslim country in the world once said “Australia has too much sugar on the table”.
Just quotin’.

Yet oddly there are less immigrants on welfare than Aussies, and all the dirty menial jobs that the Aussies refuse to do are being done by the most recent migrants, including refugees IF THEY ARE ALLOWED TO WORK.

I have yet to meet a refugee too lazy to walk to a nearby destination or job, but seem increasingly to meet enormously fat and shiftless Aussies who can’t manage such a simple task.

See if you could overcome these REAL obstacles, including teaching yourself to read English at 15:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buA3tsGnp2s

That is a fantastic ad.

Southmouth said :

Nilrem said :

dungfungus said :

Nilrem said :

miz said :

Rubaiyat, it’s nothing to do with race or even religion – it’s about whether the culture changes for good or ill.
Everyone agrees that multiculturalism was quite successful in Australia when looking back from the 1970s to the 1930s to 1960s. Those immigrant groups were primarily from Europe, having similar cultures, and a will to make Australia home. You could even say that the Vietnamese, while quite different, were mainly similarly inclined to adapt to Australian culture.
But unfortunately, a noticeable percentage of the more recent immigrants have identified Australia and UK as easily manipulated places whose goodwill can be exploited. Collectively, there is a push to change these countries into ‘their’ old, awful homelands, such as imposing Sharia law.
Even if you think the following article is somewhat extreme (pardon the pun!), it gives a feel for the growing sentiment in the UK:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2909185/Mass-immigration-led-Muslim-ghettos-Britain-run-Sharia-Law-says-Farage-Ukip-leader-claims-authorities-turn-blind-eye-TV-interview.html

Similar concerns about not integrating were raised about Southern European migrants in the 50s and 60s, and about Southeast Asian migrants in the 70s. Those concerns turned put to be unfounded. Why would the current concerns be any different?

They are different because of the Koran which instructs followers of Islam like this:
“Question:
Are Muslims allowed to make friends with Christians, Jews or other non-Muslims?
Summary Answer:
Unbelievers are described by Muhammad (in the Qur’an) as “the vilest of animals” and “losers.” Christians and Jews are hated by Allah to the extent that they are destined for eternal doom as a result of their beliefs. It would make no sense for Muhammad to then recommend them to be taken in as friends by Muslims. In fact, the Qur’an plainly commands believers not to take unbelievers as friends.”
What is the point in inviting people who can’t integrate because of their cultural beliefs?

I could quote you slabs out of the bible preaching intolerance and violence too. It proves nothing. As I stated before, I oppose fundamentalists of all religious flavours.

Well i’ll have to call you on that. Maybe from the Jewish section but you’d struggle to do that from the Christian section.

Maybe moderate Muslims could carve out the more offensive sections of the Koran in a similar way then? That would be fair.

dungfungus said :

“Immigration is a fantastic boost to an economy”
It used to be but contemporary migrants are choosing to stay on welfare. Sure, they are consumers and big business loves consumers and they don’t care where their spending money comes from.
Australia has the most preferred welfare system in the world.
A former president of the largest Muslim country in the world once said “Australia has too much sugar on the table”.
Just quotin’.

Yet oddly there are less immigrants on welfare than Aussies, and all the dirty menial jobs that the Aussies refuse to do are being done by the most recent migrants, including refugees IF THEY ARE ALLOWED TO WORK.

I have yet to meet a refugee too lazy to walk to a nearby destination or job, but seem increasingly to meet enormously fat and shiftless Aussies who can’t manage such a simple task.

See if you could overcome these REAL obstacles, including teaching yourself to read English at 15:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buA3tsGnp2s

dungfungus said :

When found wanting for further argument, attack the character of the other team and if necessary, play the racist card.

When found wanting for further argument, attack the character of the all the scientists.

…and if necessary, play the Lefties card.

Nilrem said :

dungfungus said :

Nilrem said :

miz said :

Rubaiyat, it’s nothing to do with race or even religion – it’s about whether the culture changes for good or ill.
Everyone agrees that multiculturalism was quite successful in Australia when looking back from the 1970s to the 1930s to 1960s. Those immigrant groups were primarily from Europe, having similar cultures, and a will to make Australia home. You could even say that the Vietnamese, while quite different, were mainly similarly inclined to adapt to Australian culture.
But unfortunately, a noticeable percentage of the more recent immigrants have identified Australia and UK as easily manipulated places whose goodwill can be exploited. Collectively, there is a push to change these countries into ‘their’ old, awful homelands, such as imposing Sharia law.
Even if you think the following article is somewhat extreme (pardon the pun!), it gives a feel for the growing sentiment in the UK:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2909185/Mass-immigration-led-Muslim-ghettos-Britain-run-Sharia-Law-says-Farage-Ukip-leader-claims-authorities-turn-blind-eye-TV-interview.html

Similar concerns about not integrating were raised about Southern European migrants in the 50s and 60s, and about Southeast Asian migrants in the 70s. Those concerns turned put to be unfounded. Why would the current concerns be any different?

They are different because of the Koran which instructs followers of Islam like this:
“Question:
Are Muslims allowed to make friends with Christians, Jews or other non-Muslims?
Summary Answer:
Unbelievers are described by Muhammad (in the Qur’an) as “the vilest of animals” and “losers.” Christians and Jews are hated by Allah to the extent that they are destined for eternal doom as a result of their beliefs. It would make no sense for Muhammad to then recommend them to be taken in as friends by Muslims. In fact, the Qur’an plainly commands believers not to take unbelievers as friends.”
What is the point in inviting people who can’t integrate because of their cultural beliefs?

I could quote you slabs out of the bible preaching intolerance and violence too. It proves nothing. As I stated before, I oppose fundamentalists of all religious flavours.

Well i’ll have to call you on that. Maybe from the Jewish section but you’d struggle to do that from the Christian section.

John Hargreaves said :

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

Rubaiyat, the rich East End culture was largely a product of its own actual culture (surprise!). Those influences you mention did not actually change it dramatically, as e.g. the Irish and Jewish people who moved there were absorbed into the culture. In contrast, the mass immigration from West Indian/African/Indian culture was far too large to be absorbed and created significant cultural change. It’s taken a couple of generations for the UK to settle down, and that only after policy makers started putting the brakes on British passport eligibility etc.
Culture is far more than different food (which while yummy is largely irrelevant to the actual issue). Rather, culture is mostly about beliefs and ideology and how those things affect people’s behaviour. Eg, it’s OK to spit in the street in some cultures, but that is not culturally tolerated here.
The point of my post was that the people who think mass immigration is ‘good for the country’ are generally NOT the people having to deal with it on a day to day basis.
Re prioritisation, you don’t have to be a genius to work out that the large numbers of people arriving with nothing need to be housed and the people already on that list will have to wait longer.

Oh rubbish! You are a typical mono-culturalist praising something you don’t even know anything about.

The East End was outside the city and a bunch of rural villages until the Huguenots settled there.

They made it what it was, just as they turned Berlin into a cultural centre of profound significance from the hick principality it had been.

The Irish and Jews built on that, with the Bangladeshis just the last layer on a rich gateau. The East Enders even passed on their multicultural baton to us in Australia, along with their dialect.

White Sliced Bread Yanks and Poms, two self-centred and dead ignorant self obsessed ethnic groups convinced of their own self-appointed superiority.

Immigration is a fantastic boost to an economy and brings added diversity that creates new ideas and influences. We all benefit from that, as has Britain which is one of the great melting pots of the world.

Brilliant! Absolutely spot on! and just for good measure, my favourite poet is Omar Khayyam and his Rubaiyat ought to be compulsory reading, particularly the quatrain which says”

“The Moving Finger writes; and having writ, Moves on: nor all your Piety nor Wit Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line, nor all your Tears was out a Word of it”

Just sayin’

My readings of medieval Arabic and Persian poetry indicate the writings cannot be taken literally. Many poets wrote about the pleasures of wine but claimed that this was another way for praising God.
There is opinion that Omar Khayyam actually liked a tipple or two of wine which was definitely not permitted by Islam.
Wherever there is a religious norm there is controversy.
If indeed Khayyam was a tippler I can understand why so many Canberrans would identify with him.

dungfungus said :

Nilrem said :

miz said :

Rubaiyat, it’s nothing to do with race or even religion – it’s about whether the culture changes for good or ill.
Everyone agrees that multiculturalism was quite successful in Australia when looking back from the 1970s to the 1930s to 1960s. Those immigrant groups were primarily from Europe, having similar cultures, and a will to make Australia home. You could even say that the Vietnamese, while quite different, were mainly similarly inclined to adapt to Australian culture.
But unfortunately, a noticeable percentage of the more recent immigrants have identified Australia and UK as easily manipulated places whose goodwill can be exploited. Collectively, there is a push to change these countries into ‘their’ old, awful homelands, such as imposing Sharia law.
Even if you think the following article is somewhat extreme (pardon the pun!), it gives a feel for the growing sentiment in the UK:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2909185/Mass-immigration-led-Muslim-ghettos-Britain-run-Sharia-Law-says-Farage-Ukip-leader-claims-authorities-turn-blind-eye-TV-interview.html

Similar concerns about not integrating were raised about Southern European migrants in the 50s and 60s, and about Southeast Asian migrants in the 70s. Those concerns turned put to be unfounded. Why would the current concerns be any different?

They are different because of the Koran which instructs followers of Islam like this:
“Question:
Are Muslims allowed to make friends with Christians, Jews or other non-Muslims?
Summary Answer:
Unbelievers are described by Muhammad (in the Qur’an) as “the vilest of animals” and “losers.” Christians and Jews are hated by Allah to the extent that they are destined for eternal doom as a result of their beliefs. It would make no sense for Muhammad to then recommend them to be taken in as friends by Muslims. In fact, the Qur’an plainly commands believers not to take unbelievers as friends.”
What is the point in inviting people who can’t integrate because of their cultural beliefs?

I could quote you slabs out of the bible preaching intolerance and violence too. It proves nothing. As I stated before, I oppose fundamentalists of all religious flavours.

John Hargreaves said :

We have different folks living in every street, we don’t have enclaves or ghettos.

Well, we have demolished Fraser Court and Burnie Court, the Allawah, Bega and Currong Flats are in the process of being eliminated, but the notorious urban ghetto called Stuart Flats is defintely still there….

John Hargreaves said :

We hare the example of how it should work and does work, as the Vice Mayor of Beijing told me when I visited there.

Country of Birth: Born in Australia:
Australia: 69.8%
Canberra: 71.4%

Religion in
Australia: Christian 61.1%, None: 22%
Canberra: Christian 54.6%, None: 29%

So when John says, “it’s working”, what are are talking about is:
– increased secularism
– fewer immigrants

Am I finally on the same page as John?!?!?

John Hargreaves said :

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

Rubaiyat, the rich East End culture was largely a product of its own actual culture (surprise!). Those influences you mention did not actually change it dramatically, as e.g. the Irish and Jewish people who moved there were absorbed into the culture. In contrast, the mass immigration from West Indian/African/Indian culture was far too large to be absorbed and created significant cultural change. It’s taken a couple of generations for the UK to settle down, and that only after policy makers started putting the brakes on British passport eligibility etc.
Culture is far more than different food (which while yummy is largely irrelevant to the actual issue). Rather, culture is mostly about beliefs and ideology and how those things affect people’s behaviour. Eg, it’s OK to spit in the street in some cultures, but that is not culturally tolerated here.
The point of my post was that the people who think mass immigration is ‘good for the country’ are generally NOT the people having to deal with it on a day to day basis.
Re prioritisation, you don’t have to be a genius to work out that the large numbers of people arriving with nothing need to be housed and the people already on that list will have to wait longer.

Oh rubbish! You are a typical mono-culturalist praising something you don’t even know anything about.

The East End was outside the city and a bunch of rural villages until the Huguenots settled there.

They made it what it was, just as they turned Berlin into a cultural centre of profound significance from the hick principality it had been.

The Irish and Jews built on that, with the Bangladeshis just the last layer on a rich gateau. The East Enders even passed on their multicultural baton to us in Australia, along with their dialect.

White Sliced Bread Yanks and Poms, two self-centred and dead ignorant self obsessed ethnic groups convinced of their own self-appointed superiority.

Immigration is a fantastic boost to an economy and brings added diversity that creates new ideas and influences. We all benefit from that, as has Britain which is one of the great melting pots of the world.

Brilliant! Absolutely spot on! and just for good measure, my favourite poet is Omar Khayyam and his Rubaiyat ought to be compulsory reading, particularly the quatrain which says”

“The Moving Finger writes; and having writ, Moves on: nor all your Piety nor Wit Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line, nor all your Tears was out a Word of it”

Just sayin’

“The moving finger writes,, and what what !”” I thought you followed Collingwood

John Hargreaves said :

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

Rubaiyat, the rich East End culture was largely a product of its own actual culture (surprise!). Those influences you mention did not actually change it dramatically, as e.g. the Irish and Jewish people who moved there were absorbed into the culture. In contrast, the mass immigration from West Indian/African/Indian culture was far too large to be absorbed and created significant cultural change. It’s taken a couple of generations for the UK to settle down, and that only after policy makers started putting the brakes on British passport eligibility etc.
Culture is far more than different food (which while yummy is largely irrelevant to the actual issue). Rather, culture is mostly about beliefs and ideology and how those things affect people’s behaviour. Eg, it’s OK to spit in the street in some cultures, but that is not culturally tolerated here.
The point of my post was that the people who think mass immigration is ‘good for the country’ are generally NOT the people having to deal with it on a day to day basis.
Re prioritisation, you don’t have to be a genius to work out that the large numbers of people arriving with nothing need to be housed and the people already on that list will have to wait longer.

Oh rubbish! You are a typical mono-culturalist praising something you don’t even know anything about.

The East End was outside the city and a bunch of rural villages until the Huguenots settled there.

They made it what it was, just as they turned Berlin into a cultural centre of profound significance from the hick principality it had been.

The Irish and Jews built on that, with the Bangladeshis just the last layer on a rich gateau. The East Enders even passed on their multicultural baton to us in Australia, along with their dialect.

White Sliced Bread Yanks and Poms, two self-centred and dead ignorant self obsessed ethnic groups convinced of their own self-appointed superiority.

Immigration is a fantastic boost to an economy and brings added diversity that creates new ideas and influences. We all benefit from that, as has Britain which is one of the great melting pots of the world.

Brilliant! Absolutely spot on! and just for good measure, my favourite poet is Omar Khayyam and his Rubaiyat ought to be compulsory reading, particularly the quatrain which says”

“The Moving Finger writes; and having writ, Moves on: nor all your Piety nor Wit Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line, nor all your Tears was out a Word of it”

Just sayin’

“Immigration is a fantastic boost to an economy”
It used to be but contemporary migrants are choosing to stay on welfare. Sure, they are consumers and big business loves consumers and they don’t care where their spending money comes from.
Australia has the most preferred welfare system in the world.
A former president of the largest Muslim country in the world once said “Australia has too much sugar on the table”.
Just quotin’.

John Hargreaves11:05 am 12 Nov 15

wildturkeycanoe said :

When one migrates to a new country they are expected to try and fit in with their new neighbors. These days they just move into suburbs where most of their friends and family live, form little mini countries where they can open up shops that supply only their foods, have their own “community centers”, mosques and even exclusive schools that teach their way of life. Why bother coming here if the intention is to isolate themselves from the rest of the community for religous or cultural reasons? That is not assimilation. So often I have spoken to people at the shops of different race, to be either ignored or given broken English replies that aren’t relevant because they cannot understand me. It is downright rude to live in a country long term and not know even some basic words of the nation’s language. Even worse is having to feel like uou are stepping on egg shells around other cultures for fear of doing or saying something offensive, unwittingly or by accident. When you feel like a foreigner standing on your own soil, it has gone too far.

This is partly true and nowhere more marked than in Sydney and Melbourne, Perth and Adelaide. But it is not the case here. We have different folks living in every street, we don’t have enclaves or ghettos. We have people bringing their individuality and differences to the kaleidoscope we call Canberra.

We hare the example of how it should work and does work, as the Vice Mayor of Beijing told me when I visited there.

Nilrem said :

miz said :

Rubaiyat, it’s nothing to do with race or even religion – it’s about whether the culture changes for good or ill.
Everyone agrees that multiculturalism was quite successful in Australia when looking back from the 1970s to the 1930s to 1960s. Those immigrant groups were primarily from Europe, having similar cultures, and a will to make Australia home. You could even say that the Vietnamese, while quite different, were mainly similarly inclined to adapt to Australian culture.
But unfortunately, a noticeable percentage of the more recent immigrants have identified Australia and UK as easily manipulated places whose goodwill can be exploited. Collectively, there is a push to change these countries into ‘their’ old, awful homelands, such as imposing Sharia law.
Even if you think the following article is somewhat extreme (pardon the pun!), it gives a feel for the growing sentiment in the UK:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2909185/Mass-immigration-led-Muslim-ghettos-Britain-run-Sharia-Law-says-Farage-Ukip-leader-claims-authorities-turn-blind-eye-TV-interview.html

Similar concerns about not integrating were raised about Southern European migrants in the 50s and 60s, and about Southeast Asian migrants in the 70s. Those concerns turned put to be unfounded. Why would the current concerns be any different?

They are different because of the Koran which instructs followers of Islam like this:
“Question:
Are Muslims allowed to make friends with Christians, Jews or other non-Muslims?
Summary Answer:
Unbelievers are described by Muhammad (in the Qur’an) as “the vilest of animals” and “losers.” Christians and Jews are hated by Allah to the extent that they are destined for eternal doom as a result of their beliefs. It would make no sense for Muhammad to then recommend them to be taken in as friends by Muslims. In fact, the Qur’an plainly commands believers not to take unbelievers as friends.”
What is the point in inviting people who can’t integrate because of their cultural beliefs?

John Hargreaves11:01 am 12 Nov 15

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

Rubaiyat, the rich East End culture was largely a product of its own actual culture (surprise!). Those influences you mention did not actually change it dramatically, as e.g. the Irish and Jewish people who moved there were absorbed into the culture. In contrast, the mass immigration from West Indian/African/Indian culture was far too large to be absorbed and created significant cultural change. It’s taken a couple of generations for the UK to settle down, and that only after policy makers started putting the brakes on British passport eligibility etc.
Culture is far more than different food (which while yummy is largely irrelevant to the actual issue). Rather, culture is mostly about beliefs and ideology and how those things affect people’s behaviour. Eg, it’s OK to spit in the street in some cultures, but that is not culturally tolerated here.
The point of my post was that the people who think mass immigration is ‘good for the country’ are generally NOT the people having to deal with it on a day to day basis.
Re prioritisation, you don’t have to be a genius to work out that the large numbers of people arriving with nothing need to be housed and the people already on that list will have to wait longer.

Oh rubbish! You are a typical mono-culturalist praising something you don’t even know anything about.

The East End was outside the city and a bunch of rural villages until the Huguenots settled there.

They made it what it was, just as they turned Berlin into a cultural centre of profound significance from the hick principality it had been.

The Irish and Jews built on that, with the Bangladeshis just the last layer on a rich gateau. The East Enders even passed on their multicultural baton to us in Australia, along with their dialect.

White Sliced Bread Yanks and Poms, two self-centred and dead ignorant self obsessed ethnic groups convinced of their own self-appointed superiority.

Immigration is a fantastic boost to an economy and brings added diversity that creates new ideas and influences. We all benefit from that, as has Britain which is one of the great melting pots of the world.

Brilliant! Absolutely spot on! and just for good measure, my favourite poet is Omar Khayyam and his Rubaiyat ought to be compulsory reading, particularly the quatrain which says”

“The Moving Finger writes; and having writ, Moves on: nor all your Piety nor Wit Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line, nor all your Tears was out a Word of it”

Just sayin’

wildturkeycanoe said :

When one migrates to a new country they are expected to try and fit in with their new neighbors. These days they just move into suburbs where most of their friends and family live, form little mini countries where they can open up shops that supply only their foods, have their own “community centers”, mosques and even exclusive schools that teach their way of life. Why bother coming here if the intention is to isolate themselves from the rest of the community for religous or cultural reasons? That is not assimilation. So often I have spoken to people at the shops of different race, to be either ignored or given broken English replies that aren’t relevant because they cannot understand me. It is downright rude to live in a country long term and not know even some basic words of the nation’s language. Even worse is having to feel like uou are stepping on egg shells around other cultures for fear of doing or saying something offensive, unwittingly or by accident. When you feel like a foreigner standing on your own soil, it has gone too far.

People said this too about the postwar waves of migration. It turned out that integration happened. It takes time to adapt to a new culture, but the second generation of children born here accelerate the integration process.

Nilrem said :

miz said :

Rubaiyat, it’s nothing to do with race or even religion – it’s about whether the culture changes for good or ill.
Everyone agrees that multiculturalism was quite successful in Australia when looking back from the 1970s to the 1930s to 1960s. Those immigrant groups were primarily from Europe, having similar cultures, and a will to make Australia home. You could even say that the Vietnamese, while quite different, were mainly similarly inclined to adapt to Australian culture.
But unfortunately, a noticeable percentage of the more recent immigrants have identified Australia and UK as easily manipulated places whose goodwill can be exploited. Collectively, there is a push to change these countries into ‘their’ old, awful homelands, such as imposing Sharia law.
Even if you think the following article is somewhat extreme (pardon the pun!), it gives a feel for the growing sentiment in the UK:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2909185/Mass-immigration-led-Muslim-ghettos-Britain-run-Sharia-Law-says-Farage-Ukip-leader-claims-authorities-turn-blind-eye-TV-interview.html

Similar concerns about not integrating were raised about Southern European migrants in the 50s and 60s, and about Southeast Asian migrants in the 70s. Those concerns turned put to be unfounded. Why would the current concerns be any different?

Well because those groups integrate and intermarry after one generation. Mosque going muslims do not. A fairly obvious point of difference

Mark of Sydney10:28 am 12 Nov 15

miz said :

What I keep noticing is that most of the people who think multiculturalism is great do not live in multicultural areas. A lot of political decision makers live in quite Anglo areas only minimally affected by cultural change (such as Canberra, Sydney’s North Shore, Peninsula or Eastern Suburbs), and think complainers ‘should’ pull their heads in because multiculturalism is ‘good for Australia.’ That is hypocritical.
Like them, I personally have no problem with multiculturalism ‘theoretically,’ but can completely understand why people who are not financially mobile and are expected to cop a series of these sudden influxes of foreign cultures (e.g. ‘Western Sydney) would become angry to see newcomers (who seem to bring trouble for at least a generation while adjusting) getting priority for e.g. housing and services, to the significant detriment of those already there.
Many UK immigrants (such as the OP) would have been quite glad to be a 10 pound Pom and escape the sudden undesirable change of culture in the UK at that time and move to an orderly Anglo place like Australia. There has been a lot of sadness about the loss of the rich London East End culture due to mass immigration. And guess what? The decision makers who allowed that mass immigration did not live in the East End but would probably have been ensconced in their own lovely personal enclave in St John’s Wood or Oxford, and would not have had to deal with the confronting elements of it at all.
We should learn from this.

Have you actually been to the North Shore recently? I can tell you from regular personal experience that most people at Chatswood Station, for example, appear to be East Asian in origin. And the Eastern Suburbs not multicultural? Not particularly Asian, but a rich mix of European cultures. I don’t have much experience of Tuggeranong, but the posters here do seem to validate the observation (made in relation to Pauline Hanson) that most of the opposition to different cultures seems to come from the areas that have the least exposure to those cultures.

miz said :

Even if you think the following article is somewhat extreme (pardon the pun!), it gives a feel for the growing sentiment in the UK:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2909185/Mass-immigration-led-Muslim-ghettos-Britain-run-Sharia-Law-says-Farage-Ukip-leader-claims-authorities-turn-blind-eye-TV-interview.html

The Daily Mail, reporting on an interview on Fox News, between an arch-conservative commentator and the leader of a radical right populist party Is unlikely to be an unbiased method of getting a ‘feel for the growing sentiment’.

wildturkeycanoe9:38 am 12 Nov 15

When one migrates to a new country they are expected to try and fit in with their new neighbors. These days they just move into suburbs where most of their friends and family live, form little mini countries where they can open up shops that supply only their foods, have their own “community centers”, mosques and even exclusive schools that teach their way of life. Why bother coming here if the intention is to isolate themselves from the rest of the community for religous or cultural reasons? That is not assimilation. So often I have spoken to people at the shops of different race, to be either ignored or given broken English replies that aren’t relevant because they cannot understand me. It is downright rude to live in a country long term and not know even some basic words of the nation’s language. Even worse is having to feel like uou are stepping on egg shells around other cultures for fear of doing or saying something offensive, unwittingly or by accident. When you feel like a foreigner standing on your own soil, it has gone too far.

rubaiyat said :

rosscoact said :

TFarquahar said :

And yet again another misguided individual confusing Islam with race. Islam is not a nationality John. It is a religious ideology. A religious ideology that has many arms. Some of these arms are more radical than others. .

It is arguably true that anti-Islamists are bigots rather than racists but it would be tough to tell the difference if you were on the receiving end.

It really would clear up a lot of the argument if all the people who have expert opinions on this actually read the the Koran.

Unfortunately Islam has an enormous amount of misogyny and bigotry built into it and what really sets it aside amongst all religions is its rigid adherence to the words of the Koran (in Arabic) which includes several pronouncements of death sentences for declared offenses, the principle one being for apostasy. That is the key to all the troubles surrounding it. It is not a religion of peace and never has been nor considers itself as such except to those who submit. Its adoption and success has been due to its application of a carrot and sword to everyone, including its own adherents.

Those cultures that survived under Islam did it only on sufferance and by submitting to the Jizyah the tax on non-muslims, which was used in conjunction with the indefensible legal status of non-muslims in the Ummah, to grind down non-believers, who were only rescued (temporarily it turns out) by western imperialism.

That presents a dilemma for liberals who would like to extend their tolerance to all, but can not on principle extend it to entrenched intolerance. Liberal minded people can not tolerate intolerance, no matter how it is branded or disguised. The two principles of open freedom and closed oppression are incompatible.

I have read the Koran, the Jewish Tanakh and the Christian New Testament. Rubaiyats explanation above is an excellent one.

Very broadly speaking, Judaism and Islam appear very similar to outside observers. Do this, don’t do that, eat this, don’t eat that, this place is Holy etc. If you do these things your whole life and atone for your sins in the prescribed way then prosperity and heaven await.
Christianity is a little different in that it is more try not to do the wrong thing but eventually you will and as there is no way for you to make up for it, someone else will take your punishment. (Catholicism is kind of a blend of Christianity and Judaism, with some random bits added)

The way each views unbelievers is the stark difference. Jews really have no instuction to make converts. It’s more about keeping to themselves and using violence only in the defence of the physical nation of Israel
Christianity is to make converts by being examples of love and kindness, and violence except in self defence in never allowed (which causes some problems for groups like the KKK who claim to be Christian but most have never read the Bible.)
Islam, is to convert everyone, by force if required. Those who refuse to convert are to be made subservient or killed.

With all three, one cannot choose to follow just some bits or to blend the best of each and still identify honestly with the base Religion, in so doing you become something else (something Baha’i esque maybe)
So saying that some are extremists etc is a misnomer. Either you follow a Religion as per it’s teachings in the sacred text or you do not. A moderate Muslim for example doesn’t follow the Koran, usually at all, but at least not in it’s entirety and therefore isn’t truely Muslim as the religion itself requires all of the sacred text be adhered to. The same could be said of Christians and of Jews.

miz said :

Rubaiyat, it’s nothing to do with race or even religion – it’s about whether the culture changes for good or ill.
Everyone agrees that multiculturalism was quite successful in Australia when looking back from the 1970s to the 1930s to 1960s. Those immigrant groups were primarily from Europe, having similar cultures, and a will to make Australia home. You could even say that the Vietnamese, while quite different, were mainly similarly inclined to adapt to Australian culture.
But unfortunately, a noticeable percentage of the more recent immigrants have identified Australia and UK as easily manipulated places whose goodwill can be exploited. Collectively, there is a push to change these countries into ‘their’ old, awful homelands, such as imposing Sharia law.
Even if you think the following article is somewhat extreme (pardon the pun!), it gives a feel for the growing sentiment in the UK:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2909185/Mass-immigration-led-Muslim-ghettos-Britain-run-Sharia-Law-says-Farage-Ukip-leader-claims-authorities-turn-blind-eye-TV-interview.html

Similar concerns about not integrating were raised about Southern European migrants in the 50s and 60s, and about Southeast Asian migrants in the 70s. Those concerns turned put to be unfounded. Why would the current concerns be any different?

Rubaiyat, it’s nothing to do with race or even religion – it’s about whether the culture changes for good or ill.
Everyone agrees that multiculturalism was quite successful in Australia when looking back from the 1970s to the 1930s to 1960s. Those immigrant groups were primarily from Europe, having similar cultures, and a will to make Australia home. You could even say that the Vietnamese, while quite different, were mainly similarly inclined to adapt to Australian culture.
But unfortunately, a noticeable percentage of the more recent immigrants have identified Australia and UK as easily manipulated places whose goodwill can be exploited. Collectively, there is a push to change these countries into ‘their’ old, awful homelands, such as imposing Sharia law.
Even if you think the following article is somewhat extreme (pardon the pun!), it gives a feel for the growing sentiment in the UK:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2909185/Mass-immigration-led-Muslim-ghettos-Britain-run-Sharia-Law-says-Farage-Ukip-leader-claims-authorities-turn-blind-eye-TV-interview.html

Here’s the link to the CT article – they’ve changed the heading http://www.canberratimes.com.au/comment/what-price-a-garden-city-20151109-gkux9j.html

miz said :

Today’s CT article ‘The threat to Canberra’s leafy ‘burbs’ is also on point re immigration. People move into an area based on its character, but unmitigated uncontrolled changes to that character mean it is not longer the place people moved there for. It’s even got a term – ‘tragedy of the commons.’
It is simply being honest to reflect and acknowledge that immigration has not always been positive.

Good, valid point.

miz said :

Rubaiyat, the rich East End culture was largely a product of its own actual culture (surprise!). Those influences you mention did not actually change it dramatically, as e.g. the Irish and Jewish people who moved there were absorbed into the culture. In contrast, the mass immigration from West Indian/African/Indian culture was far too large to be absorbed and created significant cultural change. It’s taken a couple of generations for the UK to settle down, and that only after policy makers started putting the brakes on British passport eligibility etc.
Culture is far more than different food (which while yummy is largely irrelevant to the actual issue). Rather, culture is mostly about beliefs and ideology and how those things affect people’s behaviour. Eg, it’s OK to spit in the street in some cultures, but that is not culturally tolerated here.
The point of my post was that the people who think mass immigration is ‘good for the country’ are generally NOT the people having to deal with it on a day to day basis.
Re prioritisation, you don’t have to be a genius to work out that the large numbers of people arriving with nothing need to be housed and the people already on that list will have to wait longer.

Oh rubbish! You are a typical mono-culturalist praising something you don’t even know anything about.

The East End was outside the city and a bunch of rural villages until the Huguenots settled there.

They made it what it was, just as they turned Berlin into a cultural centre of profound significance from the hick principality it had been.

The Irish and Jews built on that, with the Bangladeshis just the last layer on a rich gateau. The East Enders even passed on their multicultural baton to us in Australia, along with their dialect.

White Sliced Bread Yanks and Poms, two self-centred and dead ignorant self obsessed ethnic groups convinced of their own self-appointed superiority.

Immigration is a fantastic boost to an economy and brings added diversity that creates new ideas and influences. We all benefit from that, as has Britain which is one of the great melting pots of the world.

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

What I keep noticing is that most of the people who think multiculturalism is great do not live in multicultural areas. A lot of political decision makers live in quite Anglo areas only minimally affected by cultural change (such as Canberra, Sydney’s North Shore, Peninsula or Eastern Suburbs), and think complainers ‘should’ pull their heads in because multiculturalism is ‘good for Australia.’ That is hypocritical.
Like them, I personally have no problem with multiculturalism ‘theoretically,’ but can completely understand why people who are not financially mobile and are expected to cop a series of these sudden influxes of foreign cultures (e.g. ‘Western Sydney) would become angry to see newcomers (who seem to bring trouble for at least a generation while adjusting) getting priority for e.g. housing and services, to the significant detriment of those already there.
Many UK immigrants (such as the OP) would have been quite glad to be a 10 pound Pom and escape the sudden undesirable change of culture in the UK at that time and move to an orderly Anglo place like Australia. There has been a lot of sadness about the loss of the rich London East End culture due to mass immigration. And guess what? The decision makers who allowed that mass immigration did not live in the East End but would probably have been ensconced in their own lovely personal enclave in St John’s Wood or Oxford, and would not have had to deal with the confronting elements of it at all.
We should learn from this.

What I notice is those most afraid of multi-culturalism (the Pauline Hansens of this world) have never lived in multicultural areas but love to make statements like that, imagining “What a horror it must be”.

They are the people who look with deepest suspicion on anyone who speaks more than one language or eats “strange” food or has more than one idea of how the world is meant to be (aka “the Same”).

Oddly enough they even fear inanimate foreign objects, such as trams.

“anyone who speaks more than one language or eats “strange” food or has more than one idea of how the world is meant to be…..”
Sound exactly like the woman I am happily married to – but she never calls me a racist.

Rubaiyat, the rich East End culture was largely a product of its own actual culture (surprise!). Those influences you mention did not actually change it dramatically, as e.g. the Irish and Jewish people who moved there were absorbed into the culture. In contrast, the mass immigration from West Indian/African/Indian culture was far too large to be absorbed and created significant cultural change. It’s taken a couple of generations for the UK to settle down, and that only after policy makers started putting the brakes on British passport eligibility etc.
Culture is far more than different food (which while yummy is largely irrelevant to the actual issue). Rather, culture is mostly about beliefs and ideology and how those things affect people’s behaviour. Eg, it’s OK to spit in the street in some cultures, but that is not culturally tolerated here.
The point of my post was that the people who think mass immigration is ‘good for the country’ are generally NOT the people having to deal with it on a day to day basis.
Re prioritisation, you don’t have to be a genius to work out that the large numbers of people arriving with nothing need to be housed and the people already on that list will have to wait longer.

Nilrem said :

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

What I keep noticing is that most of the people who think multiculturalism is great do not live in multicultural areas. A lot of political decision makers live in quite Anglo areas only minimally affected by cultural change (such as Canberra, Sydney’s North Shore, Peninsula or Eastern Suburbs), and think complainers ‘should’ pull their heads in because multiculturalism is ‘good for Australia.’ That is hypocritical.
Like them, I personally have no problem with multiculturalism ‘theoretically,’ but can completely understand why people who are not financially mobile and are expected to cop a series of these sudden influxes of foreign cultures (e.g. ‘Western Sydney) would become angry to see newcomers (who seem to bring trouble for at least a generation while adjusting) getting priority for e.g. housing and services, to the significant detriment of those already there.
Many UK immigrants (such as the OP) would have been quite glad to be a 10 pound Pom and escape the sudden undesirable change of culture in the UK at that time and move to an orderly Anglo place like Australia. There has been a lot of sadness about the loss of the rich London East End culture due to mass immigration. And guess what? The decision makers who allowed that mass immigration did not live in the East End but would probably have been ensconced in their own lovely personal enclave in St John’s Wood or Oxford, and would not have had to deal with the confronting elements of it at all.
We should learn from this.

What I notice is those most afraid of multi-culturalism (the Pauline Hansens of this world) have never lived in multicultural areas but love to make statements like that, imagining “What a horror it must be”.

They are the people who look with deepest suspicion on anyone who speaks more than one language or eats “strange” food or has more than one idea of how the world is meant to be (aka “the Same”).

Oddly enough they even fear inanimate foreign objects, such as trams.

Bingo. Racism is a toxic blend of ignorance and arrogance.

Debating 1.01
When found wanting for further argument, attack the character of the other team and if necessary, play the racist card.

Today’s CT article ‘The threat to Canberra’s leafy ‘burbs’ is also on point re immigration. People move into an area based on its character, but unmitigated uncontrolled changes to that character mean it is not longer the place people moved there for. It’s even got a term – ‘tragedy of the commons.’
It is simply being honest to reflect and acknowledge that immigration has not always been positive.

miz said :

What I keep noticing is that most of the people who think multiculturalism is great do not live in multicultural areas. A lot of political decision makers live in quite Anglo areas only minimally affected by cultural change (such as Canberra, Sydney’s North Shore, Peninsula or Eastern Suburbs), and think complainers ‘should’ pull their heads in because multiculturalism is ‘good for Australia.’ That is hypocritical.
Like them, I personally have no problem with multiculturalism ‘theoretically,’ but can completely understand why people who are not financially mobile and are expected to cop a series of these sudden influxes of foreign cultures (e.g. ‘Western Sydney) would become angry to see newcomers (who seem to bring trouble for at least a generation while adjusting) getting priority for e.g. housing and services, to the significant detriment of those already there.
Many UK immigrants (such as the OP) would have been quite glad to be a 10 pound Pom and escape the sudden undesirable change of culture in the UK at that time and move to an orderly Anglo place like Australia. There has been a lot of sadness about the loss of the rich London East End culture due to mass immigration. And guess what? The decision makers who allowed that mass immigration did not live in the East End but would probably have been ensconced in their own lovely personal enclave in St John’s Wood or Oxford, and would not have had to deal with the confronting elements of it at all.
We should learn from this.

“getting priority for e.g. housing and services, to the significant detriment of those already there.”

Authority for this proposition please, otherwise I call racist scuttlebut.

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

What I keep noticing is that most of the people who think multiculturalism is great do not live in multicultural areas. A lot of political decision makers live in quite Anglo areas only minimally affected by cultural change (such as Canberra, Sydney’s North Shore, Peninsula or Eastern Suburbs), and think complainers ‘should’ pull their heads in because multiculturalism is ‘good for Australia.’ That is hypocritical.
Like them, I personally have no problem with multiculturalism ‘theoretically,’ but can completely understand why people who are not financially mobile and are expected to cop a series of these sudden influxes of foreign cultures (e.g. ‘Western Sydney) would become angry to see newcomers (who seem to bring trouble for at least a generation while adjusting) getting priority for e.g. housing and services, to the significant detriment of those already there.
Many UK immigrants (such as the OP) would have been quite glad to be a 10 pound Pom and escape the sudden undesirable change of culture in the UK at that time and move to an orderly Anglo place like Australia. There has been a lot of sadness about the loss of the rich London East End culture due to mass immigration. And guess what? The decision makers who allowed that mass immigration did not live in the East End but would probably have been ensconced in their own lovely personal enclave in St John’s Wood or Oxford, and would not have had to deal with the confronting elements of it at all.
We should learn from this.

What I notice is those most afraid of multi-culturalism (the Pauline Hansens of this world) have never lived in multicultural areas but love to make statements like that, imagining “What a horror it must be”.

They are the people who look with deepest suspicion on anyone who speaks more than one language or eats “strange” food or has more than one idea of how the world is meant to be (aka “the Same”).

Oddly enough they even fear inanimate foreign objects, such as trams.

It’s not trams we fear, it’s the people that worship them.

Nilrem said :

Nilrem said :

dungfungus said :

John, you would be aware that today is remembrance day which is one of the cornerstones of Australian culture.
I am sure that you will join with me and all other Australians to share a minute’s silence at 11am to remember the sacrifices made by those Australians who fought for the preservation of our freedoms.
Even those Australians who declare they are ashamed to be Australians for whatever reason should thank the people who gave their lives to make it possible for such unpatriotic things to be said.
With Australia accepting the “amalgam of many cultures” we should me mindful of preserving the Aussie way of life. Sadly, in some European countries (like France) the teaching of French history to some migrant groups is now forbidden.

Forbidden by whom?

That really sounds like classic internet scuttlebut.

The French Education Department under pressure from the European Government forbids it – the same weak-wrist bureaucrats that removed the question about country of origin and religion from welfare applications and I didn’t get it from the internet but I am sure you could find it if you weren’t so lazy and dismissive.
Why don’t you go to France and ask the school teachers,eh?

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

What I keep noticing is that most of the people who think multiculturalism is great do not live in multicultural areas. A lot of political decision makers live in quite Anglo areas only minimally affected by cultural change (such as Canberra, Sydney’s North Shore, Peninsula or Eastern Suburbs), and think complainers ‘should’ pull their heads in because multiculturalism is ‘good for Australia.’ That is hypocritical.
Like them, I personally have no problem with multiculturalism ‘theoretically,’ but can completely understand why people who are not financially mobile and are expected to cop a series of these sudden influxes of foreign cultures (e.g. ‘Western Sydney) would become angry to see newcomers (who seem to bring trouble for at least a generation while adjusting) getting priority for e.g. housing and services, to the significant detriment of those already there.
Many UK immigrants (such as the OP) would have been quite glad to be a 10 pound Pom and escape the sudden undesirable change of culture in the UK at that time and move to an orderly Anglo place like Australia. There has been a lot of sadness about the loss of the rich London East End culture due to mass immigration. And guess what? The decision makers who allowed that mass immigration did not live in the East End but would probably have been ensconced in their own lovely personal enclave in St John’s Wood or Oxford, and would not have had to deal with the confronting elements of it at all.
We should learn from this.

What I notice is those most afraid of multi-culturalism (the Pauline Hansens of this world) have never lived in multicultural areas but love to make statements like that, imagining “What a horror it must be”.

They are the people who look with deepest suspicion on anyone who speaks more than one language or eats “strange” food or has more than one idea of how the world is meant to be (aka “the Same”).

Oddly enough they even fear inanimate foreign objects, such as trams.

Bingo. Racism is a toxic blend of ignorance and arrogance.

miz said :

There has been a lot of sadness about the loss of the rich London East End culture due to mass immigration.

You do know that the “East End’s rich culture” was exactly due to it being a melting pot of wave after wave of immigrants, starting with the Huegenots in the C17th, and going on to the Irish, Jews and Bangaldeshis, all due to its proximity to the Docks and international ships.

miz said :

What I keep noticing is that most of the people who think multiculturalism is great do not live in multicultural areas. A lot of political decision makers live in quite Anglo areas only minimally affected by cultural change (such as Canberra, Sydney’s North Shore, Peninsula or Eastern Suburbs), and think complainers ‘should’ pull their heads in because multiculturalism is ‘good for Australia.’ That is hypocritical.
Like them, I personally have no problem with multiculturalism ‘theoretically,’ but can completely understand why people who are not financially mobile and are expected to cop a series of these sudden influxes of foreign cultures (e.g. ‘Western Sydney) would become angry to see newcomers (who seem to bring trouble for at least a generation while adjusting) getting priority for e.g. housing and services, to the significant detriment of those already there.
Many UK immigrants (such as the OP) would have been quite glad to be a 10 pound Pom and escape the sudden undesirable change of culture in the UK at that time and move to an orderly Anglo place like Australia. There has been a lot of sadness about the loss of the rich London East End culture due to mass immigration. And guess what? The decision makers who allowed that mass immigration did not live in the East End but would probably have been ensconced in their own lovely personal enclave in St John’s Wood or Oxford, and would not have had to deal with the confronting elements of it at all.
We should learn from this.

What I notice is those most afraid of multi-culturalism (the Pauline Hansens of this world) have never lived in multicultural areas but love to make statements like that, imagining “What a horror it must be”.

They are the people who look with deepest suspicion on anyone who speaks more than one language or eats “strange” food or has more than one idea of how the world is meant to be (aka “the Same”).

Oddly enough they even fear inanimate foreign objects, such as trams.

dungfungus said :

John, you would be aware that today is remembrance day which is one of the cornerstones of Australian culture.
I am sure that you will join with me and all other Australians to share a minute’s silence at 11am to remember the sacrifices made by those Australians who fought for the preservation of our freedoms.
Even those Australians who declare they are ashamed to be Australians for whatever reason should thank the people who gave their lives to make it possible for such unpatriotic things to be said.
With Australia accepting the “amalgam of many cultures” we should me mindful of preserving the Aussie way of life. Sadly, in some European countries (like France) the teaching of French history to some migrant groups is now forbidden.

Yes we will share the minutes silence but not the dated jingoistic world view, in that stretched myopic misconnection.

Australia never ever went to war for the “preservation of our freedoms”. Just about every war we have entered has been because we automatically followed our “bestus friends” and often the “preservation of our freedoms” meant the destruction of someone else’s. From our own war on the Aborigines, the Maori Wars, Sudan, Boer War onwards.

We happily interned anyone at anyone else’s request, totally disregarding their freedoms or even any process of justice. During WWI it was anyone with a German name. During WWII it was Germans and Italians, even Indonesian political prisoners from the Dutch East Indies and Jewish refugees from Britain.

That last example is what worries me the most, that we so readily and unthinkingly turn on those fleeing for their lives because it is a fear of strangers that dominates most people’s lives, not Christian charity or concern.

Nilrem said :

dungfungus said :

John, you would be aware that today is remembrance day which is one of the cornerstones of Australian culture.
I am sure that you will join with me and all other Australians to share a minute’s silence at 11am to remember the sacrifices made by those Australians who fought for the preservation of our freedoms.
Even those Australians who declare they are ashamed to be Australians for whatever reason should thank the people who gave their lives to make it possible for such unpatriotic things to be said.
With Australia accepting the “amalgam of many cultures” we should me mindful of preserving the Aussie way of life. Sadly, in some European countries (like France) the teaching of French history to some migrant groups is now forbidden.

Forbidden by whom?

That really sounds like classic internet scuttlebut.

dungfungus said :

John, you would be aware that today is remembrance day which is one of the cornerstones of Australian culture.
I am sure that you will join with me and all other Australians to share a minute’s silence at 11am to remember the sacrifices made by those Australians who fought for the preservation of our freedoms.
Even those Australians who declare they are ashamed to be Australians for whatever reason should thank the people who gave their lives to make it possible for such unpatriotic things to be said.
With Australia accepting the “amalgam of many cultures” we should me mindful of preserving the Aussie way of life. Sadly, in some European countries (like France) the teaching of French history to some migrant groups is now forbidden.

Forbidden by whom?

rosscoact said :

Garfield said :

rosscoact said :

TFarquahar said :

And yet again another misguided individual confusing Islam with race. Islam is not a nationality John. It is a religious ideology. A religious ideology that has many arms. Some of these arms are more radical than others. .

It is arguably true that anti-Islamists are bigots rather than racists but it would be tough to tell the difference if you were on the receiving end.

I think you should look up the definition of Islamist.

“An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favours reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam.”

Not all Muslims are Islamists, but Islamists are very bad news for any western liberal democracy. People who are anti-Islamists are not necessarily bigots or racists, but opponents of an authoritarian, medieval, barbaric system of government. I think what you meant to say was that people who are anti-Muslims, regardless of whether they are Islamists or not, are bigots.

You know what I meant but thanks for the lesson.

All religious extremists, of whatever kind, must be resisted. All bigots must be resisted. Don’t be a well-intentioned patsy for bigots.

John, you would be aware that today is remembrance day which is one of the cornerstones of Australian culture.
I am sure that you will join with me and all other Australians to share a minute’s silence at 11am to remember the sacrifices made by those Australians who fought for the preservation of our freedoms.
Even those Australians who declare they are ashamed to be Australians for whatever reason should thank the people who gave their lives to make it possible for such unpatriotic things to be said.
With Australia accepting the “amalgam of many cultures” we should me mindful of preserving the Aussie way of life. Sadly, in some European countries (like France) the teaching of French history to some migrant groups is now forbidden.

What I keep noticing is that most of the people who think multiculturalism is great do not live in multicultural areas. A lot of political decision makers live in quite Anglo areas only minimally affected by cultural change (such as Canberra, Sydney’s North Shore, Peninsula or Eastern Suburbs), and think complainers ‘should’ pull their heads in because multiculturalism is ‘good for Australia.’ That is hypocritical.
Like them, I personally have no problem with multiculturalism ‘theoretically,’ but can completely understand why people who are not financially mobile and are expected to cop a series of these sudden influxes of foreign cultures (e.g. ‘Western Sydney) would become angry to see newcomers (who seem to bring trouble for at least a generation while adjusting) getting priority for e.g. housing and services, to the significant detriment of those already there.
Many UK immigrants (such as the OP) would have been quite glad to be a 10 pound Pom and escape the sudden undesirable change of culture in the UK at that time and move to an orderly Anglo place like Australia. There has been a lot of sadness about the loss of the rich London East End culture due to mass immigration. And guess what? The decision makers who allowed that mass immigration did not live in the East End but would probably have been ensconced in their own lovely personal enclave in St John’s Wood or Oxford, and would not have had to deal with the confronting elements of it at all.
We should learn from this.

Garfield said :

rosscoact said :

TFarquahar said :

And yet again another misguided individual confusing Islam with race. Islam is not a nationality John. It is a religious ideology. A religious ideology that has many arms. Some of these arms are more radical than others. .

It is arguably true that anti-Islamists are bigots rather than racists but it would be tough to tell the difference if you were on the receiving end.

I think you should look up the definition of Islamist.

“An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favours reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam.”

Not all Muslims are Islamists, but Islamists are very bad news for any western liberal democracy. People who are anti-Islamists are not necessarily bigots or racists, but opponents of an authoritarian, medieval, barbaric system of government. I think what you meant to say was that people who are anti-Muslims, regardless of whether they are Islamists or not, are bigots.

You know what I meant but thanks for the lesson.

rosscoact said :

TFarquahar said :

And yet again another misguided individual confusing Islam with race. Islam is not a nationality John. It is a religious ideology. A religious ideology that has many arms. Some of these arms are more radical than others. .

It is arguably true that anti-Islamists are bigots rather than racists but it would be tough to tell the difference if you were on the receiving end.

It really would clear up a lot of the argument if all the people who have expert opinions on this actually read the the Koran.

Unfortunately Islam has an enormous amount of misogyny and bigotry built into it and what really sets it aside amongst all religions is its rigid adherence to the words of the Koran (in Arabic) which includes several pronouncements of death sentences for declared offenses, the principle one being for apostasy. That is the key to all the troubles surrounding it. It is not a religion of peace and never has been nor considers itself as such except to those who submit. Its adoption and success has been due to its application of a carrot and sword to everyone, including its own adherents.

Those cultures that survived under Islam did it only on sufferance and by submitting to the Jizyah the tax on non-muslims, which was used in conjunction with the indefensible legal status of non-muslims in the Ummah, to grind down non-believers, who were only rescued (temporarily it turns out) by western imperialism.

That presents a dilemma for liberals who would like to extend their tolerance to all, but can not on principle extend it to entrenched intolerance. Liberal minded people can not tolerate intolerance, no matter how it is branded or disguised. The two principles of open freedom and closed oppression are incompatible.

rosscoact said :

TFarquahar said :

And yet again another misguided individual confusing Islam with race. Islam is not a nationality John. It is a religious ideology. A religious ideology that has many arms. Some of these arms are more radical than others. .

It is arguably true that anti-Islamists are bigots rather than racists but it would be tough to tell the difference if you were on the receiving end.

I think you should look up the definition of Islamist.

“An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favours reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam.”

Not all Muslims are Islamists, but Islamists are very bad news for any western liberal democracy. People who are anti-Islamists are not necessarily bigots or racists, but opponents of an authoritarian, medieval, barbaric system of government. I think what you meant to say was that people who are anti-Muslims, regardless of whether they are Islamists or not, are bigots.

TFarquahar said :

And yet again another misguided individual confusing Islam with race. Islam is not a nationality John. It is a religious ideology. A religious ideology that has many arms. Some of these arms are more radical than others. Some are happy to co-exist peacefully alongside other religious ideologies such as Buddhism and Christianity. Others are not. Some of the arms are happy kill not only believers of alternate religious ideologies but members of their own faith who do not subscribe to their view of the Koran.

I have lived in peaceful communities that are mainly followers of Islam. Inclusive, loving communities were all religious ideologies co-existed and even celebrated each others religious festivals. But one common thread existed in that we were all members of that community regardless of religion or our ethnic background. The children who were of the Islamic faith even sang the National Anthem at school.

By defining Muslims as a race John you are playing straight into the hands of the Islamic extremists groups such as IS and Hizb ut Tahrir . These are the extreme groups who do not want to assimilate but desire to impose their view of the world – social, legal, financial and religious upon all “non-believers”. Please note the term “non-believers” also includes other Muslims of other less extreme arms.

It clear that you are a good man John, simple of rhetoric but nonetheless good. You correctly point out the value of multiculturalism in our society albeit awkwardly with some cheap shots at the British and Americans. But I caution you against identifying a religious ideology as a race. They are not and when you do you are helping to destroy the very fabric of our community.

Indeed, the Human Rights Commission concedes that that the Racial Discrimination Act protect only covered discrimination based on race, colour, ethnic or national origin or immigrant status – not religion.
This is different from Jewish Australians, as the Federal Court has found they have a common “ethnic origin” and are therefore owed protection under the act.
The Commission suggests those who experience discrimination because of their Muslim identity may need to find other legal avenues through which to obtain redress.
Don’t dismiss a push to see legislation creep in to make blasphemy (against Islam) a crime.

TFarquahar said :

And yet again another misguided individual confusing Islam with race. Islam is not a nationality John. It is a religious ideology. A religious ideology that has many arms. Some of these arms are more radical than others. .

It is arguably true that anti-Islamists are bigots rather than racists but it would be tough to tell the difference if you were on the receiving end.

And yet again another misguided individual confusing Islam with race. Islam is not a nationality John. It is a religious ideology. A religious ideology that has many arms. Some of these arms are more radical than others. Some are happy to co-exist peacefully alongside other religious ideologies such as Buddhism and Christianity. Others are not. Some of the arms are happy kill not only believers of alternate religious ideologies but members of their own faith who do not subscribe to their view of the Koran.

I have lived in peaceful communities that are mainly followers of Islam. Inclusive, loving communities were all religious ideologies co-existed and even celebrated each others religious festivals. But one common thread existed in that we were all members of that community regardless of religion or our ethnic background. The children who were of the Islamic faith even sang the National Anthem at school.

By defining Muslims as a race John you are playing straight into the hands of the Islamic extremists groups such as IS and Hizb ut Tahrir . These are the extreme groups who do not want to assimilate but desire to impose their view of the world – social, legal, financial and religious upon all “non-believers”. Please note the term “non-believers” also includes other Muslims of other less extreme arms.

It clear that you are a good man John, simple of rhetoric but nonetheless good. You correctly point out the value of multiculturalism in our society albeit awkwardly with some cheap shots at the British and Americans. But I caution you against identifying a religious ideology as a race. They are not and when you do you are helping to destroy the very fabric of our community.

No_Nose said :

dungfungus said :

I don’t deliberately want to curtail your euphoria John but you really should see a feature movie called Timbuktu which is showing as part of the Canberra International Film Festival.

I’m not really sure how a film which clearly shows that nut job jihadis are 1. A dangerous minority ( but clearly in the minority by a long way) , 2. More A threat to Muslims than anyone else, 3. A bunch of hypocrites and 4. Thought of with contempt by the majority of Muslims, is really relevant to multiculturalism in Australia.

It is a good film worthy of seeing just to prove the points above that show that the majority of Muslims do not support radical Islam and have the most to fear from it.

It is definately a very good film in its own right but I’m not sure what it really adds to this discussion.

The OP talks about the Muslims showing “transparency” by opening the doors of their mosques. My point to him was that in countries like Mali there is no transparency with Islam and he would perhaps get a different slant on how it serves the people of Mali.
I don’t agree with your summation of what the film was about though. After all, it was a feature film and not a documentary. The makers of the film wanted to put across a message and that’s their prerogative. They are businessmen first and social commentators second.
Politicians in western democratic countries are a bit like movie directors as when a social experiment fails (like trying to integrate a culture that it a totalitarian theocracy in a country) they highlight what they think are the positive things (diversity etc.). In other words, they tell you what they want you to hear.
John is like a lot of progressive politicians in Australia who trash our history and culture by suggesting it embraces the worst of what the USA has while ignoring the faults of other who celebrate “triumph over evil”. Give me a break!
Next thing he will be saying is that Britain invaded Australia in 1788.

wildturkeycanoe10:27 pm 09 Nov 15

““This is a Christian country and these boat people will Islamise our country.” Really? And how is that going to happen?”
It will happen very slowly and subtly. By the time Christmas displays are made illegal because they are offensive to non-Christians, it will be too late to make any kind of stand against it.
It won’t be the boat people that cause it though, it’ll be the legal, minority groups who quietly do their own thing and lift not one finger to fit into Australian culture. The kind of groups who still believe in oppression of females, that anyone not a Muslim is against them and that their own laws are above Australian law.

Blen_Carmichael8:34 pm 09 Nov 15

John Hargreaves said :

So… the culture we are protecting is that of a bible bashing, gun-toting, murderously violence society which has an appalling human rights record.

Charming. I’ve just returned from a five week holiday in the USA. Can’t say enough about the place, really. Can’t say we met any “bible bashing, gun-toting” types. Lovely people. Perhaps we were just lucky. But hey, let’s just cherry pick the worst aspects of their society and use them as their defining traits.

John Hargreaves said :

Next week, I think, is an East African celebration which is rich in music, food and colour.

East Africa? My geo-political knowledge of that part of the world isn’t that great. Perhaps you’d like to give us a run down on what we should be benchmarking against. You could start with Somalia, Rwanda, and Zimbabwe.

John Hargreaves said :

chewy14 said :

This seems to be some sort of circular rant against unknown people with strange motives all in order for the author to praise some vague notion of Multiculturalism?

I don’t know who you’re regularly conversing with but perhaps you should lay off listening to the talkback radio?

This is not a circular rant, as you say ,but a continuation of the position I have been putting in the public arena for decades. I would hope that sensible rioters would not be supporters of that US franchise the CCC – read Concerned Citizens of Canberra, brought from the CC [Bendigo], which was imported from the US.

it is an anti-Muslim organisation of extremists, acting in the name of Christianity, who would oppose any place of worship by Muslims. It is spawned from a radical from Wee Waa who influenced Irwin Ross to oppose the mosques here. Remember that this is the second mosque the CCC (or should it be KKK) have opposed.

I don’t listen to talk back radio at all. Never have. I listen to 2CA because I love the old music. I don’t need to have my mind polluted by idiotic and racist propaganda spread by radical extremists under the guise of talk back hosts. Suffice to say, that I do read newspapers, I do watch the news, I do listen to Radio National for news and current affairs, but I don’t listen to Jones, Hadley or Bolt.

I’d rather pull my own fingernails out with a pair of pliers.

So its an argument against a tiny group of anti Muslim people who don’t want Mosques built in Canberra?

I’m not really sure what that has to do with boat people or multiculturalism in general but OK, carry on.

Don’t be too quick to knock Britain and America, John. I’m sure you’ve visited our copy of the Magna Carta at Parliament House. In fact, if anything we should be following the US more closely, where people are American first, and then keep their multicultural identity. So long as migrants embrace Western liberal values they are welcome here. This means things like not preventing your daughters from marrying whomever they choose, and not allowing religious leaders to call for Jews to be knifed. People who do not agree with our values should not be here.

John Hargreaves said :

I would hope that sensible rioters…

4pt note at bottom of promo:

“Please Riot responsibly.” 😉

John Hargreaves4:23 pm 09 Nov 15

chewy14 said :

This seems to be some sort of circular rant against unknown people with strange motives all in order for the author to praise some vague notion of Multiculturalism?

I don’t know who you’re regularly conversing with but perhaps you should lay off listening to the talkback radio?

This is not a circular rant, as you say ,but a continuation of the position I have been putting in the public arena for decades. I would hope that sensible rioters would not be supporters of that US franchise the CCC – read Concerned Citizens of Canberra, brought from the CC [Bendigo], which was imported from the US.

it is an anti-Muslim organisation of extremists, acting in the name of Christianity, who would oppose any place of worship by Muslims. It is spawned from a radical from Wee Waa who influenced Irwin Ross to oppose the mosques here. Remember that this is the second mosque the CCC (or should it be KKK) have opposed.

I don’t listen to talk back radio at all. Never have. I listen to 2CA because I love the old music. I don’t need to have my mind polluted by idiotic and racist propaganda spread by radical extremists under the guise of talk back hosts. Suffice to say, that I do read newspapers, I do watch the news, I do listen to Radio National for news and current affairs, but I don’t listen to Jones, Hadley or Bolt.

I’d rather pull my own fingernails out with a pair of pliers.

dungfungus said :

“We speak English. This is not indigenous to Australia. So we are actually protecting a British culture. ”
What is the language that is indigenous to Australia then?
Also, you would be aware of what British culture was as you migrated from that country. How has that culture changed as a result of it’s experiment with multi-multiculturalism?

It’s much easier to get a good biriyani, koresh, jerk chicken, taco, blini, wat or boerewors in London now.

dungfungus said :

I don’t deliberately want to curtail your euphoria John but you really should see a feature movie called Timbuktu which is showing as part of the Canberra International Film Festival.

I’m not really sure how a film which clearly shows that nut job jihadis are 1. A dangerous minority ( but clearly in the minority by a long way) , 2. More A threat to Muslims than anyone else, 3. A bunch of hypocrites and 4. Thought of with contempt by the majority of Muslims, is really relevant to multiculturalism in Australia.

It is a good film worthy of seeing just to prove the points above that show that the majority of Muslims do not support radical Islam and have the most to fear from it.

It is definately a very good film in its own right but I’m not sure what it really adds to this discussion.

“The Buddhists and Hindus here don’t see Islam as the threat. “

Srsly?
You clearly haven’t asked them. Both those groups know far better than we do what the reality of the situation is.

“So… the culture we are protecting is that of a bible bashing, gun-toting, murderously violence society which has an appalling human rights record.”

Er…no.
The culture we would like to preserve and continue to enhance is-
– the culture that gave us Human Rights
– the culture that gave us the Age of Reason and the Industrial Revolution

If you want “appalling human rights record”, maybe enquire into how Egypt and Turkey are going, and why those countries continue to be occupied by colonisation from Arabia.

“This is one of the Indian festivals which celebrates the triumph of good over evil. “

What a fantastic idea! Wouldn’t that be great! 🙂

“We speak English. This is not indigenous to Australia. So we are actually protecting a British culture. ”
What is the language that is indigenous to Australia then?
Also, you would be aware of what British culture was as you migrated from that country. How has that culture changed as a result of it’s experiment with multi-multiculturalism?

This seems to be some sort of circular rant against unknown people with strange motives all in order for the author to praise some vague notion of Multiculturalism?

I don’t know who you’re regularly conversing with but perhaps you should lay off listening to the talkback radio?

I don’t deliberately want to curtail your euphoria John but you really should see a feature movie called Timbuktu which is showing as part of the Canberra International Film Festival.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.