The following is a continuation of the the world famous thread yours truly started back in June 2006.
http://cracker.com.au/viewthread.aspx?threadid=126689&categoryid=11121

---

This thread is aimed at LISTING the benefits and drawbacks of MULTICULTURALISM.

Is it really as good as people claim it is?
Or is it a dividing, useless, overrated policy like other people think it is.

Who knows? Maybe people can give me enough reasons to change my mind about the stupid policy that is Multiculturalism.


Multiculturalism

Cons:
1) Alienates people.
2) Riots.
3) Political correctness gone crazy (ie. Banning bibles in hospitals).
4) Community division.
5) Causes family breakdown.
6) Increased crime levels.
7) Creates ethnic gangs.
8) Cultural apartheid.
9) Social disharmony.
10) Language difficulties.
11) Money being sent back-home (Ethnics former home).
12) Importation of extra foreign goods.
13) Gross waste of taxpayers money.
14) Empire building.
15) Security risk.
16) Increased unwanted immigration.
17) Increased welfare bill.
18) Dilution or death of the Australian culture.
19) Conflicting belief systems.
20) Pandering to minorities.
21) Racism.
22) Cultural relativism.
23) Promotes tolerance not acceptance.


Pros:
1) Larger variety of food.
2) Provides jobs for rich bureaucrats and Government officials.

Feel free to add to this list.  :)

Diversity fosters innovation. Homogeneity leads to stagnation.

Quote:

Diversity fosters innovation. Homogeneity leads to stagnation.

Care to go deeper on that one, freediver?

See the first post I made on this board.

Freediver, that first post of yours isn't easily readable nor is it summed up very well.

Since you know the article so well, can you please just copy and paste all the points of importance?

Thanks.

I don't know it that well. I copied it from an email. To sum it up: Diversity fosters innovation. Homogeneity leads to stagnation.

Quote:

Diversity fosters innovation. Homogeneity leads to stagnation.

I see. So you're just bringing up a point for me to analyse?

pro: improved health

freediver wrote on May 14^th, 2007 at 9:49am:

pro: improved health

Erm... care to explain how?

The offspring of 'mixed' marriages tend to have better imune systems.

Multiculturalism makes the public far more aware of how much of our own behaviour is not 'human nature,' not rational, but just part of our culture. It enables a far faster resolution of problems that are created by our own culture.

freediver wrote on May 15^th, 2007 at 9:31am:

The offspring of 'mixed' marriages tend to have better imune systems.

Hehe. Just like breeds of dog.

In saying that though... there are species of dogs that are smarter than others. So in other words, if a dumbass pitbull mated with an intelligent Golden Retriever, the golden retriever may gain a little health, but at the same time, loses a significant amount of character and intelligence.
Does this apply to humans as well, freediver? ;D


But still though, this genetic argument of yours, is that REALLY multiculturalism at work? Or is it just genetics? I think it's just genetics, IMHO. Doesn't really fall under the category of 'multiculturalism.'



Quote:

Multiculturalism makes the public far more aware of how much of our own behaviour is not 'human nature,' not rational, but just part of our culture. It enables a far faster resolution of problems that are created by our own culture.

Example?

There aren't many examples in Australia as we are a multicultural society. Japan probably has a few examples. Imagine living in England a hundred years ago. Or even now to some extent. People do things just because that's the way it's always been done.

Three examples off the top of my head: the bronzed aussie, the tall poppy syndrome and food. The bronzed aussie thing is on the way out due mainly to skin cancer. The tall poppy thing probably does undermine our society to some extent, but it doesn't exist among immigrant groups and is not as strong as it would be without them. Probably the biggest one is the food we eat. We still eat largely European foods and try to grow them here. The residents of Darwin import apples while letting great tropical fruit rot on the ground. Immigrants from SE Asia are helping to change this. Without them the adaption to more suitable foods would take a lot longer. It's taken 200 years already and we've barely made a dent.

But still though, this genetic argument of yours, is that REALLY multiculturalism at work? Or is it just genetics? I think it's just genetics, IMHO. Doesn't really fall under the category of 'multiculturalism.'  

You can't have one without the other, unless it involves some kind of conquest or purchase.

Who'd of thought eh?

http://www.smh.com.au/news/breaking-news/australia-has-cultural-edge-over-us/2007/05/15/1178995148844.html

Australia has an advantage over the United States in the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts because of an affinity with foreign cultures, a US strategic analyst says.

Max Boot, a senior fellow in national security studies at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, also said US military skills were becoming outdated in those battlefields.

Mr Boot said Iraq was showing the need for smart people who understood foreign languages and cultures, policing, intelligence gathering and nation building.

"This is actually an area where I would argue that Australia and other countries have a relative advantage in some ways over the US," he told an Australian Defence College and Royal United Services Institute security seminar.

Quote:

There aren't many examples in Australia as we are a multicultural society. Japan probably has a few examples. Imagine living in England a hundred years ago. Or even now to some extent. People do things just because that's the way it's always been done.   Three examples off the top of my head: the bronzed aussie, the tall poppy syndrome and food. The bronzed aussie thing is on the way out due mainly to skin cancer. The tall poppy thing probably does undermine our society to some extent, but it doesn't exist among immigrant groups and is not as strong as it would be without them. Probably the biggest one is the food we eat. We still eat largely European foods and try to grow them here. The residents of Darwin import apples while letting great tropical fruit rot on the ground. Immigrants from SE Asia are helping to change this. Without them the adaption to more suitable foods would take a lot longer. It's taken 200 years already and we've barely made a dent.

Man... sometimes I wish you'd put more clarity in your arguments, freediver.



Quote:

You can't have one without the other

That's rubbish. Of course you can have one without the other.  

That's rubbish. Of course you can have one without the other.

Which is what I said in my post. If you want clarity, try quoting more than half the sentence.

Quote:

Which is what I said in my post. If you want clarity, try quoting more than half the sentence.

What? You mean this???


Quote:

unless it involves some kind of conquest or purchase.

What a stupid point. Basically all you're saying is that people of different races/genetic make-up only change their culture when violence or slavery enforces them to so. This is why I left it out freediver... because the point was meaningless.

No, I meant that you can get cross breeding in time of war or by purchasing foreign women. Apart from that cross breeding will only occur in multicultural societies. By trying to remove the cultural differences you inevitably remove the people and the genetic variation that goes with them.

freediver wrote on May 16^th, 2007 at 6:55pm:

No, I meant that you can get cross breeding in time of war or by purchasing foreign women. Apart from that cross breeding will only occur in multicultural societies. By trying to remove the cultural differences you inevitably remove the people and the genetic variation that goes with them.

This is not true, freediver. It's possible to stamp out the culture of newly arrived immigrants. If not the immigrants, the children of the immigrants.

Australian society, as a result of the multiculturalism policies it employs, encourages kids to keep their cultures and from nations within nations. This includes schools, funding for clubs and dentists/doctors that speak languages other than english. Do you honestly think these places pop up privately without Government assistance, freediver? I don't think so. -Even if the odd one here and there is, they should be banned.

So long as immigrants of similar nationality aren't slotted into the one area all together, the migrants will be forced to dispose of their old culture and adapt. It's called peer pressure. In saying that though, certain cultures, make it their mission to keep their culture. This should be dealt with in a different way.

But freediver, at the end of the day, to say that it's 'impossible' to get rid of different cultures within our society is ridiculous. They'd go away if people would stop encouraging it.

You might think that's what has happened, but in reality both cultures have changed into something new. The types of government policy you mentioned have little effect at all. What really matters is how accepting people are of other cultures. If you accept people, the cultures will mix. If you don't accept them they won't mix and you will end up with reduced immigration and multiculturalism the way you define it, which is different cultures living completely separate lives. It is the positive attitude towards other cultures which on the surface appears to support separate cultures, which actually encourages mixing of cultures. People only hold on to cultures when they feel it is being taken away from them. When it is paraded in front of everyone as something good they give it up because it is so embarassing.

They'd go away if people would stop encouraging it.

If they went away you would loose the genetics.

freediver wrote on May 14^th, 2007 at 9:49am:

pro: improved health

Asians started the bubonic plague and more recently the bird flu  and  ,
Africans started aids, Arabs started islam.

Association fallacy. Those dieases did not start because the societies were multicultural, or even because they had a different culture. Plenty of nasty diseases started in Europe before they recently began living in different rooms to their animals.

Races start disease. cultures enhance it.

freediver wrote on May 29^th, 2007 at 5:13pm:

Association fallacy. Those dieases did not start because the societies were multicultural, or even because they had a different culture. Plenty of nasty diseases started in Europe before they recently began living in different rooms to their animals.

I see AusNat's point here, freediver.

I've heard that the reason aids actually came about was because Africans were having sex with monkeys...

Yes, that's right, monkeys... :o

So anyway, having sex with monkeys might be a particular 'cultural practice' in some parts of Africa... strange, but not impossible.

So the spread of aids technically stemmed from other cultures. But I guess one could argue that it wasn't actually 'cultures mixing' that caused the spread, but rather, 'races mixing.' But I don't have much knowledge on how the actual disease spread from one continent to the other. So it could very well be the mixture of cultures that allowed the disease to pass through continents.

Anyway, what we have to be careful of here... is to avoid mixing the topics 'race' and 'multiculturalism.' They are not of the same thing.

Quote:

Australian society, as a result of the multiculturalism policies it employs, encourages kids to keep their cultures and from nations within nations. This includes schools, funding for clubs and dentists/doctors that speak languages other than english. Do you honestly think these places pop up privately without Government assistance, freediver? I don't think so. -Even if the odd one here and there is, they should be banned.

And this policy will be the downfall of our country.
Ban them all.


Quote:

So long as immigrants of similar nationality aren't slotted into the one area all together, the migrants will be forced to dispose of their old culture and adapt. It's called peer pressure.

Absolutely correct.


Quote:

In saying that though, certain cultures, make it their mission to keep their culture. This should be dealt with in a different way.

Such as the muslims. The only solution to the islamic question is thourough deportation, they are NOT compatible with western society.



Quote:

But freediver, at the end of the day, to say that it's 'impossible' to get rid of different cultures within our society is ridiculous. They'd go away if people would stop encouraging it.

And forcefully impose Australian ideas.

[quote author=DonaldTrump link=1177922468/0#0 date=1177922467]The following is a continuation of the the world famous thread yours truly started back in June 2006.
http://cracker.com.au/viewthread.aspx?threadid=126689&categoryid=11121

---

This thread is aimed at LISTING the benefits and drawbacks of MULTICULTURALISM.

Is it really as good as people claim it is?
Or is it a dividing, useless, overrated policy like other people think it is.

Who knows? Maybe people can give me enough reasons to change my mind about the stupid policy that is Multiculturalism.


Multiculturalism

Cons:
[color=#cc0000]1) Alienates people.

 - pro- gives people more chance to find someone they have something in common with
2) Riots.

-pro- allows for a greater depth of empathy and understanding

3) Political correctness gone crazy (ie. Banning bibles in hospitals).
- pro - allows for chidlren to understand the importance of freedom of religion and thought  and how tio cater for the needs of diverse others

4) Community division.
- pro- colourful vibrant exciting community

5) Causes family breakdown.
[?]
- pro- allows some families to survive who woudl die in their homeland

6) Increased crime levels.

- pro- increased small businesses and enterprise

7) Creates ethnic gangs.

- pro - pushes open the minds of the narrowminded and creates teh possibility of greater unity of human kind

8) Cultural apartheid.

-pro - people able to express themselves and feel at home

9) Social disharmony.

- pro- children who maat other childrne of different cultural backgrounds in schools to increase harmony between nations and cultures

10) Language difficulties.

-pro- resources for learning and practicing languages in the community

I could go on, but the point is that  all/most  your claims are a matter of viewpoint.

 
Quote:

- pro- gives people more chance to find someone they have something in common with

And that cant be done amongst the white community?



Quote:

-pro- allows for a greater depth of empathy and understanding

What about them?



Quote:

pro - allows for chidlren to understand the importance of freedom of religion and thought  and how tio cater for the needs of diverse others

Who cares its our country.


Quote:

- pro- colourful vibrant exciting community

HA HA HA thats rich ;D



Quote:

- pro- allows some families to survive who woudl die in their homeland

Then let them die. its NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO LOOK AFTER THEM.


Quote:

- pro- increased small businesses and enterprise

Places which speak little to no english


Quote:

- pro - pushes open the minds of the narrowminded and creates teh possibility of greater unity of human kind

What a textbook statement from the practice of brainwashing.


Quote:

-pro - people able to express themselves and feel at home

We could do that without them.


Quote:

- pro- children who maat other childrne of different cultural backgrounds in schools to increase harmony between nations and cultures

Destroys our race.



Quote:

-pro- resources for learning and practicing languages in the community

We learn their language but they dont learn ours? :-?


Quote:

I could go on, but the point is that  all/most  your claims are a matter of viewpoint.

Please do. im learning about the minds of the Brainwashed

pro - there are fewer riots in multicultural societies

freediver wrote on Jun 26^th, 2007 at 3:06pm:

pro - there are fewer riots in multicultural societies

Bull!  there are more. look at europe.

freediver wrote on Jun 26^th, 2007 at 3:06pm:

pro - there are fewer riots in multicultural societies

And you're basing this off what?

Ausnat, you have to look at at least two countries for 'more' to make sense. It implies a comparison.

freediver wrote on Jun 26^th, 2007 at 3:21pm:

Ausnat, you have to look at at least two countries for 'more' to make sense. It implies a comparison.

Ah yes... so what country are you comparing our 'multiculturalism utopia' to, freediver? ::)

France, England, Italy, Spain. theres 4.

OK, now make the comparison, if you can.

wrote on Jun 26^th, 2007 at 3:02pm:

Quote: - pro- gives people more chance to find someone they have something in common with And that cant be done amongst the white community?

Well, not all aussies are the same even without migrants. For instance some are vegetarian, some Buddhist. These people likely benefit from seeing their values expressed as part of another culture but within our own. It tends to make their own positions more acceptable and at least make them feel more part of the wider community to have others here that understand and live this way of life.

Your objections all seem based on a very narrow  impression of what Australia is. Infact one could say that your idea of "australian" is actually mistaken, as australians are factually diverse in both race and ideals anyway.

Quote:

: [quote]-pro- allows for a greater depth of empathy and understanding

What about them?  [/quote]

In both us and them.

freediver wrote on Jun 26^th, 2007 at 4:21pm:

OK, now make the comparison, if you can.

Okay... Iceland is a mono-cultural country and it's peaceful.... no riots.

Japan is a somewhat monocultural culture and it has zero riots.


France, America and Germany are all multiculturalism countries that have had nation wide cultural protests.


Gee... that was difficult.


-Discuss



Cautious Connie
Quote:

Well, not all aussies are the same even without migrants. For instance some are vegetarian, some Buddhist. These people likely benefit from seeing their values expressed as part of another culture but within our own. It tends to make their own positions more acceptable and at least make them feel more part of the wider community to have others here that understand and live this way of life.

Hi Connie. Welcome to my board. It's good to see some pro-multicultural support in here. -Despite the fact that I'm strongly opposed to it. Free debate is always encouraged on the multiculturalism board. Let me emphasise this to the people viewing this thread and don't be scared off just becasue the evil moderator is a so-called 'wacist-bigot.'

Now... how does being a vegetarian and being a buddhist 'benefit' the wider community?



Quote:

It tends to make their own positions more acceptable and at least make them feel more part of the wider community to have others here that understand and live this way of life

So... basically what you're saying... is that people who are already buddhist in Australia will benefit from having more buddhists come over? Despite the fact that I have no problem with buddhists... how does this benefit other people other than the ones who are already buddhist? :-?



Quote:

Your objections all seem based on a very narrow  impression of what Australia is. Infact one could say that your idea of "australian" is actually mistaken, as australians are factually diverse in both race and ideals anyway.

Couldn't I say the same and say your views are based on a very narrow perception that multiculturalism works no matter what cultures we mix into this country? Or do you think that some cultures need to be restricted?

Other 'successful' multiculturalism countries... Israel, Sudan, Yugoslavia, Iraq.

Okay... Iceland is a mono-cultural country and it's peaceful.... no riots.  

Japan is a somewhat monocultural culture and it has zero riots.  


France, America and Germany are all multiculturalism countries that have had nation wide cultural protests.  


Gee... that was difficult.

None of those western countries have lots of riots. Take a look at where most riots happen today - it is in countries that are highly intolerant of multiculturalism and different lifestyles.

freediver wrote on Jun 27^th, 2007 at 7:57pm:

Okay... Iceland is a mono-cultural country and it's peaceful.... no riots.   Japan is a somewhat monocultural culture and it has zero riots.   France, America and Germany are all multiculturalism countries that have had nation wide cultural protests.   Gee... that was difficult. None of those western countries have lots of riots. Take a look at where most riots happen today - it is in countries that are highly intolerant of multiculturalism and different lifestyles.

Which ones genius?

Anybody who supports multiculturism is a fool, asking for their own destruction.

Quote:

Cautious Connie[quote]Well, not all aussies are the same even without migrants. For instance some are vegetarian, some Buddhist. These people likely benefit from seeing their values expressed as part of another culture but within our own. It tends to make their own positions more acceptable and at least make them feel more part of the wider community to have others here that understand and live this way of life.

Hi Connie. Welcome to my board. It's good to see some pro-multicultural support in here. -Despite the fact that I'm strongly opposed to it. Free debate is always encouraged on the multiculturalism board. Let me emphasise this to the people viewing this thread and don't be scared off just becasue the evil moderator is a so-called 'wacist-bigot.'

Now... how does being a vegetarian and being a buddhist 'benefit' the wider community? [/quote]

Organisms with many capacities and faces are more resilient and deal better with change- are more likely to survive. If faced with an exterior threat they are more likerly to have the internal resources to deal with it.  In current circumstances, Australia having Muslim residents who are accepted and feel themselves part of the wider community is definitely in Australia's interest, in helping "catch" a potential threat driven by calls from outside the country.  If China or Indonesia invaded it would also be useful to have members of our community who can speak to the invaders. Being a vegetarian is specifically about being part of the spiritual development of the human race to a point where we do not kill and consume our brother and sister animals, and each vegetarian member of our community increases the standing and spiritual status of our society. They also represent a widening segment of compassion and empathy which helps peopel get on together both internally in the country and externally.


Quote:

[quote]It tends to make their own positions more acceptable and at least make them feel more part of the wider community to have others here that understand and live this way of life

So... basically what you're saying... is that people who are already buddhist in Australia will benefit from having more buddhists come over? Despite the fact that I have no problem with buddhists... how does this benefit other people other than the ones who are already buddhist? :-?[/quote]

Well- why does it have to? Those already Buddhist are significant.  However the answer is similar to th previous one - increasing diversity, versatility and capacity to adapt within the community. Increased adaptability leads to better survival.



Quote:

[quote]Your objections all seem based on a very narrow  impression of what Australia is. Infact one could say that your idea of "australian" is actually mistaken, as australians are factually diverse in both race and ideals anyway.

Couldn't I say the same and say your views are based on a very narrow perception that multiculturalism works no matter what cultures we mix into this country? Or do you think that some cultures need to be restricted?[/quote]

I would probably screen Serbian migrants very very thoroughly before admittance and also I favour deporting migrants who exhibit  physical violence to others.

Quote:

- pro- allows some families to survive who woudl die in their homeland

there are plenty of families all over the world who will be willing to integrate into our society, and become like us, lets get them instead. I have nothing against a person being black white red yellow or whatever, so they can all come as long as they become aussie.


Quote:

- pro- increased small businesses and enterprise

regular population growth will also build this.


Quote:

- pro - pushes open the minds of the narrowminded and creates teh possibility of greater unity of human kind

Or perhaps multicultralism just prmotes another kind of narrow mindedness? one where those who disagree with what other cultures do and want to do something about it are wrong no matter what?

Quote:

Organisms with many capacities and faces are more resilient and deal better with change- are more likely to survive. If faced with an exterior threat they are more likerly to have the internal resources to deal with it.  In current circumstances, Australia having Muslim residents who are accepted and feel themselves part of the wider community is definitely in Australia's interest, in helping "catch" a potential threat driven by calls from outside the country.  If China or Indonesia invaded it would also be useful to have members of our community who can speak to the invaders. Being a vegetarian is specifically about being part of the spiritual development of the human race to a point where we do not kill and consume our brother and sister animals, and each vegetarian member of our community increases the standing and spiritual status of our society. They also represent a widening segment of compassion and empathy which helps peopel get on together both internally in the country and externally.

Okay... this is meaningless to me Connie... because you're avoiding specific examples and leaning towards a more 'ideological,' hence... unrealistic view of multiculturalism.

"Oh... multiculturalism is good becasue it brings people together. -It would stop invaders because they can talk to the guys with machine guns and talk them out of shooting Australians." This is what you're basically saying. You're talking so broadly and not using sufficient evidence to support your claims.

How's about using ACTUAL events and use it as a case study to back up what you're saying?.... that having 300,000 Muslims in Australia they can talk Indonesia out of attacking? Did Germans living in Britain in WWII talk Hitler out of it? Did Iraqis living in Kuwait stop Saddam? Did Sunnis living in Iran stop Saddam?  ::) See what I'm getting at Connie? Stay realistic... and quit talking such ideoligical mantra.



Quote:

Well- why does it have to? Those already Buddhist are significant.  However the answer is similar to th previous one - increasing diversity, versatility and capacity to adapt within the community. Increased adaptability leads to better survival.

Oh give me a break. Diversity is a good thing? Versatility? Adaptabilty? Leads to better survival?  ::) All these words are stupid and  too broad. You sound like you're quoting Oprah Winfrey or something (No... Oprah Winfrey is NOT a good source of information). Specific examples please... preferably in Australian society. Again I ask... how do Buddhists benefit the Australian community?

To answer your question... it doesn't matter that much with Buddhists. Why? Because Buddhists are nice people who adapt. Moreso, Buddhism isn't even a religion... it's just a practice. Remember, Buddhists don't believe in the afterlife.  :) Some say that means it's not spiritual... therefore... not religious. But overall, their practice doesn't benefit 'society'... it just benefits them as 'individuals.' -Making them happier. -Hardly a victory for multiculturalism.



Quote:

I would probably screen Serbian migrants very very thoroughly before admittance and also I favour deporting migrants who exhibit  physical violence to others.

Okay... good. Now we're getting somewhere. So there are certain acceptions. I'm glad you're open-minded enough to say that.

Now... why Serbian immigrants specificically? Are you a Croat by any chance? Or were you just upset with what you saw at the Australian Open earler this year?

Congratulations Donald

It is easy, enticing and idiotic to adopt a nonmainstream point of view for the sake of it being nonmainstream.

When one looks at things for their own values, then takes his viewpoint on what he sees.
He can logically put his point of view forward.

Excellent debating - 5/5 easily

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 8^th, 2007 at 7:39pm:

Congratulations Donald It is easy, enticing and idiotic to adopt a nonmainstream point of view for the sake of it being nonmainstream. When one looks at things for their own values, then takes his viewpoint on what he sees. He can logically put his point of view forward. Excellent debating - 5/5 easily

I'm not adopting my point of view to simply be non-mainstream to impress everyone, Sprint.

Quote:

ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Jul 8th, 2007 at 6:39pm: [quote]Organisms with many capacities and faces are more resilient and deal better with change- are more likely to survive. If faced with an exterior threat they are more likerly to have the internal resources to deal with it.  In current circumstances, Australia having Muslim residents who are accepted and feel themselves part of the wider community is definitely in Australia's interest, in helping "catch" a potential threat driven by calls from outside the country.  If China or Indonesia invaded it would also be useful to have members of our community who can speak to the invaders. Being a vegetarian is specifically about being part of the spiritual development of the human race to a point where we do not kill and consume our brother and sister animals, and each vegetarian member of our community increases the standing and spiritual status of our society. They also represent a widening segment of compassion and empathy which helps peopel get on together both internally in the country and externally.   Okay... this is meaningless to me Connie... because you're avoiding specific examples and leaning towards a more 'ideological,' hence... unrealistic view of multiculturalism. "Oh... multiculturalism is good becasue it brings people together. -It would stop invaders because they can talk to the guys with machine guns and talk them out of shooting Australians." This is what you're basically saying. You're talking so broadly and not using sufficient evidence to support your claims. How's about using ACTUAL events and use it as a case study to back up what you're saying?.... that having 300,000 Muslims in Australia they can talk Indonesia out of attacking? Did Germans living in Britain in WWII talk Hitler out of it? Did Iraqis living in Kuwait stop Saddam? Did Sunnis living in Iran stop Saddam?  ::) See what I'm getting at Connie? Stay realistic... and quit talking such ideoligical mantra.

You are not getting what I am saying at all. What is the reason the human race has survived? Why does any species survive? It survives through being adaptable. Being flexible. Dealing with change. Having suitable resources internally to deal with what comes to it. My argument poses that a society is a big organism, made of many living individual cells.  The examples you are asking for are actually all around you. Do you believe in evoloution?

As for  actual examples- I know of someone who had a close Muslim friend. That person lives in Victoria. They were able to pass information on suspicious activities of other Muslims to the police and terrorism hotline. At the moment peopel who can speak foreign languages are important to investigating possible terror threats in the community- native speakers do this very well, and are helping in investigations.


Quote:

[quote]Well- why does it have to? Those already Buddhist are significant.  However the answer is similar to th previous one - increasing diversity, versatility and capacity to adapt within the community. Increased adaptability leads to better survival.

Oh give me a break. Diversity is a good thing? Versatility? Adaptabilty? Leads to better survival?  ::) All these words are stupid and  too broad. You sound like you're quoting Oprah Winfrey or something (No... Oprah Winfrey is NOT a good source of information). Specific examples please... preferably in Australian society. Again I ask... how do Buddhists benefit the Australian community?

To answer your question... it doesn't matter that much with Buddhists. Why? Because Buddhists are nice people who adapt. Moreso, Buddhism isn't even a religion... it's just a practice. Remember, Buddhists don't believe in the afterlife.  :) Some say that means it's not spiritual... therefore... not religious. But overall, their practice doesn't benefit 'society'... it just benefits them as 'individuals.' -Making them happier. -Hardly a victory for multiculturalism. [/quote]

We disagree about this. Have you heard the saying travel broadens the mind?




Quote:

[quote]I would probably screen Serbian migrants very very thoroughly before admittance and also I favour deporting migrants who exhibit  physical violence to others.

Okay... good. Now we're getting somewhere. So there are certain acceptions. I'm glad you're open-minded enough to say that.

Now... why Serbian immigrants specificically? Are you a Croat by any chance? Or were you just upset with what you saw at the Australian Open earler this year?[/quote][/quote]

No, I am not Croat. The reason is the ethnic cleansing that Serbs practiced in Kosovo.

Donald - absolutely not.
You looked at the facts and based your decision on what you saw.

Often people do the opposite, they initially choose a nonmainstream "side", then find the argument to help them. But it never has the ring of sincerity.
They are just picking an argument for the sake of arguing.

Whereas you are discussing it cause it is what you believe. Be it wrong or right.  Obviously, you believe it to be right and am still convinced of that.  I like a straight shooter.

cautious connie wrote on Jul 8^th, 2007 at 7:59pm:

Quote: ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Jul 8th, 2007 at 6:39pm: [quote]Organisms with many capacities and faces are more resilient and deal better with change- are more likely to survive. If faced with an exterior threat they are more likerly to have the internal resources to deal with it.  In current circumstances, Australia having Muslim residents who are accepted and feel themselves part of the wider community is definitely in Australia's interest, in helping "catch" a potential threat driven by calls from outside the country.  If China or Indonesia invaded it would also be useful to have members of our community who can speak to the invaders. Being a vegetarian is specifically about being part of the spiritual development of the human race to a point where we do not kill and consume our brother and sister animals, and each vegetarian member of our community increases the standing and spiritual status of our society. They also represent a widening segment of compassion and empathy which helps peopel get on together both internally in the country and externally.   Okay... this is meaningless to me Connie... because you're avoiding specific examples and leaning towards a more 'ideological,' hence... unrealistic view of multiculturalism. "Oh... multiculturalism is good becasue it brings people together. -It would stop invaders because they can talk to the guys with machine guns and talk them out of shooting Australians." This is what you're basically saying. You're talking so broadly and not using sufficient evidence to support your claims. How's about using ACTUAL events and use it as a case study to back up what you're saying?.... that having 300,000 Muslims in Australia they can talk Indonesia out of attacking? Did Germans living in Britain in WWII talk Hitler out of it? Did Iraqis living in Kuwait stop Saddam? Did Sunnis living in Iran stop Saddam?  ::) See what I'm getting at Connie? Stay realistic... and quit talking such ideoligical mantra. You are not getting what I am saying at all. What is the reason the human race has survived? Why does any species survive? It survives through being adaptable. Being flexible. Dealing with change. Having suitable resources internally to deal with what comes to it. My argument poses that a society is a big organism, made of many living individual cells.  The examples you are asking for are actually all around you. Do you believe in evoloution? As for  actual examples- I know of someone who had a close Muslim friend. That person lives in Victoria. They were able to pass information on suspicious activities of other Muslims to the police and terrorism hotline. At the moment peopel who can speak foreign languages are important to investigating possible terror threats in the community- native speakers do this very well, and are helping in investigations. [quote][quote]Well- why does it have to? Those already Buddhist are significant.  However the answer is similar to th previous one - increasing diversity, versatility and capacity to adapt within the community. Increased adaptability leads to better survival.

Oh give me a break. Diversity is a good thing? Versatility? Adaptabilty? Leads to better survival?  ::) All these words are stupid and  too broad. You sound like you're quoting Oprah Winfrey or something (No... Oprah Winfrey is NOT a good source of information). Specific examples please... preferably in Australian society. Again I ask... how do Buddhists benefit the Australian community?

To answer your question... it doesn't matter that much with Buddhists. Why? Because Buddhists are nice people who adapt. Moreso, Buddhism isn't even a religion... it's just a practice. Remember, Buddhists don't believe in the afterlife.  :) Some say that means it's not spiritual... therefore... not religious. But overall, their practice doesn't benefit 'society'... it just benefits them as 'individuals.' -Making them happier. -Hardly a victory for multiculturalism. [/quote]

We disagree about this. Have you heard the saying travel broadens the mind?




Quote:

[quote]I would probably screen Serbian migrants very very thoroughly before admittance and also I favour deporting migrants who exhibit  physical violence to others.

Okay... good. Now we're getting somewhere. So there are certain acceptions. I'm glad you're open-minded enough to say that.

Now... why Serbian immigrants specificically? Are you a Croat by any chance? Or were you just upset with what you saw at the Australian Open earler this year?[/quote][/quote]

No, I am not Croat. The reason is the ethnic cleansing that Serbs practiced in Kosovo. [/quote]

Okay... so would you also want Sunni Muslims carefully screened since they oppressed, killed and attempted to commit genocide against the kurds and shiites? Furthermore, the Rwandans, Sudanese and Somalis for their war crimes and spread of aids? You shouldn't single out the Serbians when so many commit similar acts.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 8^th, 2007 at 8:14pm:

Donald - absolutely not. You looked at the facts and based your decision on what you saw. Often people do the opposite, they initially choose a nonmainstream "side", then find the argument to help them. But it never has the ring of sincerity. They are just picking an argument for the sake of arguing. Whereas you are discussing it cause it is what you believe. Be it wrong or right.  Obviously, you believe it to be right and am still convinced of that.  I like a straight shooter.

Oh okay. I thought you were havng a go at me.  :P

No problem.

I think all migrants should be screened and they are as far as i know. But I  think that what went down in Kosovo was particularly horrific and  i would want to have a clear record of absolute non-violence in Serb immigrants before I would want them to be part of the community here.  Perhaps you are correct regarding Rwandans; at least Hutus.

cautious connie wrote on Jul 8^th, 2007 at 8:28pm:

I think all migrants should be screened and they are as far as i know. But I  think that what went down in Kosovo was particularly horrific and  i would want to have a clear record of absolute non-violence in Serb immigrants before I would want them to be part of the community here.  Perhaps you are correct regarding Rwandans; at least Hutus.

So Rwandans .. oops.. .sorry... 'hutus' should be kept out as well as 'some' Serbians?

Why not Sunnis and Shiites? What makes them exempt?


How about Africans with aids? Are you okay with them?

cautious connie wrote on Jul 8^th, 2007 at 8:28pm:

I think all migrants should be screened and they are as far as i know. But I  think that what went down in Kosovo was particularly horrific and  i would want to have a clear record of absolute non-violence in Serb immigrants before I would want them to be part of the community here.  Perhaps you are correct regarding Rwandans; at least Hutus.

What ''went down'' in kosovo was Muslims wanting their own country in a country which is serbia.
It'll happen here one day- Sydney's bankstown/punchbowl suburbs.
Hutus? what the hell is that? the PC name for them?

wrote on Jul 8^th, 2007 at 8:57pm:

cautious connie wrote on Jul 8th, 2007 at 8:28pm: I think all migrants should be screened and they are as far as i know. But I  think that what went down in Kosovo was particularly horrific and  i would want to have a clear record of absolute non-violence in Serb immigrants before I would want them to be part of the community here.  Perhaps you are correct regarding Rwandans; at least Hutus. Hutus? what the hell is that? the PC name for them?

Nah.. tribe name within Rwanda.

Quote:

Nah.. tribe name within Rwanda.

Ok thanks. Let us pray-  May a disease so potent and deadly sweep down apon them and quickly remove them from the face of the earth. Amen. ;D

You cannot have true choice of lifestyle without multiculturalism. Ignorance is the greatest barrier to choice, and multiculturalism is the only effective way to break that ignorance. Citing a few examples of people making bad choices is no justification for trying to create barriers to choice.

freediver wrote on Jul 9^th, 2007 at 11:38am:

You cannot have true choice of lifestyle without multiculturalism. Ignorance is the greatest barrier to choice, and multiculturalism is the only effective way to break that ignorance. Citing a few examples of people making bad choices is no justification for trying to create barriers to choice.

::)

Okay freediver... i'll play along... what CHOICES does multiculturalism give us that's sooo important? And to make the situation more fun... let's take away 'food' as a 'choice.' Let's see how many you can name.  ;D

For starters, there's religion.

freediver wrote on Jul 10^th, 2007 at 9:31am:

For starters, there's religion.

And in RESPECT for the topic freediver... how is religious variety beneficial to Australian?


It's pretty easy shouting out 'freedom, freedom, freedom!!!' from the rooftops freediver, but just how beneficial to a society can certain freedoms be? It gets a little difficult for you to justify when you start ACTUALLY analysing it, hey?

No it doesn't. If you don't think freedom of religion is a good thing, I'm more than happy to leave it at that. Or freedom in general for that matter. If you think freedom is a bad thing, your arguments start to make sense. I see freedom as an end in itself.

freediver wrote on Jul 10^th, 2007 at 7:26pm:

No it doesn't. If you don't think freedom of religion is a good thing, I'm more than happy to leave it at that. Or freedom in general for that matter. If you think freedom is a bad thing, your arguments start to make sense. I see freedom as an end in itself.

'Freedom' in the end is just a word, freediver.

Over-used in almost everything. It's a different meaning for everyone. Why do you think the Iraqis are fighting America? Not because they're 'evil' terrorists, but because they're rejecting America's version of freedom and substituting their own.

Do you have the freedom to take marajuana? To kill someone? To take a girl on the street and hump her in public?

Not really.

Do I believe in freedom of religion? Absolutely... so long as a religion does not cause trouble for others. Simple as that. You can't be so 'black and white' on this matter, freediver... and say, "If you don't believe in allowing Islam or certain other religions then you don't believe in freedom of religion." I hate ideologies... and what you're doing freediver is being ideological. For once, just be practical and leave all this ideological 'freedom of' stuff at the door.

DT I don't believe I have said anything to indicate that I don't understand the tradeoff's between different freedoms. Most people are more than capable of making a reasonable decision about where one freedom ends and another begins. In any case, that is a more detailed/technical/legal issue, far removed from questioning whether religious variety is beneficial to Australia.

The Iraqis who are killing Americans are not fighting for what they see as a different version of freedom. Your 'different version of freedom' spiel sounds like some of the extreme 'left wing' stuff about how extremists should be free to kill anyone who doesn't agree with them. At least, it's usually associated with left wing ideologues. It's not what I normally expect from you.

freediver wrote on Jul 10^th, 2007 at 7:46pm:

DT I don't believe I have said anything to indicate that I don't understand the tradeoff's between different freedoms. Most people are more than capable of making a reasonable decision about where one freedom ends and another begins. In any case, that is a more detailed/technical/legal issue, far removed from questioning whether religious variety is beneficial to Australia. The Iraqis who are killing Americans are not fighting for what they see as a different version of freedom. Your 'different version of freedom' spiel sounds like some of the extreme 'left wing' stuff about how extremists should be free to kill anyone who doesn't agree with them. At least, it's usually associated with left wing ideologues. It's not what I normally expect from you.

Alright... whatever... you just proved my point. It may be left-wing ideology but it's correct.

*End of 'what defines freedom' discussion*

Back on topic. Do you have anything further to contribute to the 'choice' list? Or  can you list some benefits of multiple religions give? Seriously... you're making me annoyed by your lack of 'preciseness.'

Monoculturalism stifles creativity.

freediver wrote on Jul 10^th, 2007 at 8:08pm:

Monoculturalism stifles creativity.

Let me correct you... 'multiculturalism increases creativity.'

Please give specific examples or explain how. Then explain why it's beneficial.

Leonardo De Vinci was pretty creative.
Socrates, van gogh, michelangelo and strauss were all ok at creating.

;)

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 10^th, 2007 at 9:48pm:

Leonardo De Vinci was pretty creative. Socrates, van gogh, michelangelo and strauss were all ok at creating. ;)

And?

Please stick to the topic Sprint.

Sorry Donald.
All of those artists/thinkers came from Monocultural societies.

they were not "stifled."

Let me correct you... 'multiculturalism increases creativity.'

If you agree with me, why do I need to explain it?

Do you want me to explain why creativity is beneficial?

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2007 at 10:25am:

Let me correct you... 'multiculturalism increases creativity.' If you agree with me, why do I need to explain it? Do you want me to explain why creativity is beneficial?

1) I don't agree.
2) No I don't want to explain why 'creativity' is beneficial... I want to know what multiculturalism has 'created' to prove your point.  

We only disagree on the semantics. I say monoculturalism stifles creativity, you say multiculturalism increases it. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

People create, not isms.

freediver wrote on Jul 13^th, 2007 at 10:44am:

We only disagree on the semantics. I say monoculturalism stifles creativity, you say multiculturalism increases it. Six of one, half a dozen of the other. People create, not isms.

You're a frickin moron.

When or where have I said multiculturalism increases creativity?


Whatever... you think monoculturalism stifles creativity. Therefore, you you think multiculturalism is a better option in that increases creativity. Same thing dipsh1t.


I've given examples where monoculturalism has proven it can create culture. Now... smart@ss... put up or shut-up.... give me some examples of multicultulturalism creativity. Surely... if you think it's sooooo much better.... you can think of a couple of things that have resulted from it.

I hope everyones taking note of freediver here. It's the key strategy of multiculturalists.... avoiding the question and using broad, meaningless statements... such as 'multiculturalism increases creativity' to defend their stupid ideology.

;D

wrote on Jul 13^th, 2007 at 8:40pm:

[quote] ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Jul 10th, 2007 at 8:17pm: Let me correct you... 'multiculturalism increases creativity.' Right here :P

Well everyone reading must have misunderstood me. I was merely correcting freedivers ACTUAL phrase... aka... "Monoculturalism stifles creativity"... when he SHOULD have said "Multiculturalism increases creativity."

In the spirit of this thread... he shouldn't bring 'monoculturalism' into it. The thread is entitiled... 'Multiculturalism' pros and cons.... NOT 'Monoculturalism' pros and cons.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

I DO NOT think muliculturalism increases creativity and have not yet seen evidence to prove otherwise. I think creativity happens in isolation if anything. Not when you're having cultures thrown in your face. I think it leads to chaos. -Please ignore that last point on this thread.

A study like this would not have been possible without a multicultural society. There would have been two many confounding factors if geographic differences were also present.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Live-healthier-on-Mediterranean-diet/2007/07/29/1185647716355.html

Eating a traditional Mediterranean diet - more vegetables, fruits, and fish, and fewer animal products - does seem to ward off heart disease,

an Australian study shows, and it may be especially beneficial for people with diabetes.

Mediterranean-born immigrants in Australia have lower death rates from heart disease than native-born Australians, note Dr Linton R Harriss, from Monash University in Melbourne, and colleagues.

This prompted them to investigate dietary patterns in relation to heart-related mortality "in an ethnically diverse population."

freediver wrote on Jul 29^th, 2007 at 12:25pm:

A study like this would not have been possible without a multicultural society. There would have been two many confounding factors if geographic differences were also present. http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Live-healthier-on-Mediterranean-diet/2007/07/29/1185647716355.html Eating a traditional Mediterranean diet - more vegetables, fruits, and fish, and fewer animal products - does seem to ward off heart disease, an Australian study shows, and it may be especially beneficial for people with diabetes. Mediterranean-born immigrants in Australia have lower death rates from heart disease than native-born Australians, note Dr Linton R Harriss, from Monash University in Melbourne, and colleagues. This prompted them to investigate dietary patterns in relation to heart-related mortality "in an ethnically diverse population."

lamb yiros mmm yum.

Medditereanaen food I love it and its very healthy

Multiculturalism....

Pad Thai - Thai
Nasi Goreng - Malaysian
Kebabs - Mediterranean
Pizza - Italian
Spagetti - Italian
Hokkien noodles - Malaysian
Yoga - Indian
Kung Fu - Chinese
Karate - Japanese
Sushi - Japanese
Hot Dog - American
Oktoberfest - German
Chinese New Year - Chinese
Goulash - Hungarian
Shepards pie - English
Guiness draft - Irish
San Choy Bao - Chinese
Bok Choy - Chinese
Green tea - Japanese
Rice tea - Chinese
Peking Duck - Chinese
Sauerkraut - German
Roesti (hashbrowns) - Swiss
Curry - Indian
Dahl - Indian
Tandoori chicken - Indian
Beef Vindaloo - Indian
MTV - American
Salsa - South American
Nachos - Mexican
Capoeira - Brazilian
Mexican Wave - North American
Kama Sutra - Indian
Drift racing - Japanese
Acupuncture - Chinese
Shiatsu massage - Japanese
Swedish massage - Sweden
Potato Veriki - Russian

I can go on.....

What's not to like?

Cheers!

You don't need Multiculturalism for all of that.
Just recipes.

Experience would indicate otherwise. All recipes leave a lot unsaid. They assume a lot of knowledge that people don't pick up from books. If it wasn't for asian immigrants, white Australians would not be eating a minute fraction of the asian food we do today.

You still don't need Multiculturalism for it.
Even if you were right and you are not.

In any practical sense, you do need multiculturalism. What is the alternative? Overseas holidays for everyone? Trying to get locals of European origina to cook cheap asian food?

wrong.
again.

Have you never watched Iron chef?
they have asian cooks that specialise in japanese, chinese and french.
Are french chefs all french?
Asian Chefs all Asian?

I can make many types of meal.  But I'm Australian.
how do I do it?
Cook books google and recipes.
practice and experimantation is what makes a good cook.
NOT Multiculturalism.

I don't want to be a good cook. I want to get a feed of Thai or Japanese without forking out a small fortune. Does it only matter to you whether the wealthy get to experience these things? The barriers are economic, cultural, familiarity etc. Multiculturalism is the only effective way to break down these barriers. Sure, I could learn to cook Asian food even if there were no Asians in Australia, but it wouldn't happen would it? We would be eating meat pies and sausage rolls, living an ignorant, bland existence.

I'm sorry, but your arguments aren't really all that good are they.

Did I say anything about the wealthy?  No.

Do you think it costs me lots to have spaghetti bolognese or lasagne or fried rice?  Etc.

Since when are meat pies and sausage rolls staple diet for Australians.  Mind you I like them. I'd much rather them than many more exotic dishes.

My parents when they were young would have had lamb and beef and a variety vegetables, fish, crab, rabbit, cheese and a variety of dairy products, apples and assorted other fruits, prepared in many different ways.  These would have been their staples.  Nothing wrong with any of that.

Nothing you have said is reliant on the policy of multiculturalism.  It's called cuisine.

You brought up that Iron Chef show. Do you think poor people could get top notch cooks like that who can do any style to cook for them? Would that show even be on our TV if we weren't a multicultural society? People would spit their fish and chips at the screen and demand they cook pies and lamb roasts, not odd looking food they have never seen before.

I brought up iron Chef because it shows that people of any ethnicity can cook dishes of any culture.
In a vastly globalised world yes, many TV shows are shared amongst nations, the US even has it's own version which has been shown here as well.
Are you some kind of cultural bigot?

Just a realist.

Who cant debate.

We had ethnic restaurants before multiculturalism came in.

It seems to me you are derisive and/or are in denial about the Australian culture.
More than likely you are a cultural bigot.

Who cooked in those ethnic restaurants? Just because multiculturalism wasn't a buzzword at the time doesn't mean they didn't have it. It just tended to be confined to a few urban areas.

honestly...  just because some restaurant may have staff and cooks of a particular ethnic heritage doesn't mean they still live that way or hadn't adopted the Australian culture.  I can name many Chinese I know who are more Australian than me.

You have no idea do you?

Acid Monkey wrote on Oct 20^th, 2007 at 9:19pm:

Multiculturalism.... Pad Thai - Thai Nasi Goreng - Malaysian Kebabs - Mediterranean Pizza - Italian Spagetti - Italian Hokkien noodles - Malaysian Yoga - Indian Kung Fu - Chinese Karate - Japanese Sushi - Japanese Hot Dog - American Oktoberfest - German Chinese New Year - Chinese Goulash - Hungarian Shepards pie - English Guiness draft - Irish San Choy Bao - Chinese Bok Choy - Chinese Green tea - Japanese Rice tea - Chinese Peking Duck - Chinese Sauerkraut - German Roesti (hashbrowns) - Swiss Curry - Indian Dahl - Indian Tandoori chicken - Indian Beef Vindaloo - Indian MTV - American Salsa - South American Nachos - Mexican Capoeira - Brazilian Mexican Wave - North American Kama Sutra - Indian Drift racing - Japanese Acupuncture - Chinese Shiatsu massage - Japanese Swedish massage - Sweden Potato Veriki - Russian I can go on..... What's not to like? Cheers!

pim-

Acid never said it was a multicultural pursuit -but the cooking of ethnic food is best done by the ethnics [noone does chinese like the Chinese]

I wont eat ethnic food unless I see a cook of the right nationality in the actual restaurant kitchen.

wrote on Jan 6^th, 2008 at 2:13pm:

Acid Monkey wrote on Oct 20th, 2007 at 9:19pm: Multiculturalism.... Pad Thai - Thai Nasi Goreng - Malaysian Kebabs - Mediterranean Pizza - Italian Spagetti - Italian Hokkien noodles - Malaysian Yoga - Indian Kung Fu - Chinese Karate - Japanese Sushi - Japanese Hot Dog - American Oktoberfest - German Chinese New Year - Chinese Goulash - Hungarian Shepards pie - English Guiness draft - Irish San Choy Bao - Chinese Bok Choy - Chinese Green tea - Japanese Rice tea - Chinese Peking Duck - Chinese Sauerkraut - German Roesti (hashbrowns) - Swiss Curry - Indian Dahl - Indian Tandoori chicken - Indian Beef Vindaloo - Indian MTV - American Salsa - South American Nachos - Mexican Capoeira - Brazilian Mexican Wave - North American Kama Sutra - Indian Drift racing - Japanese Acupuncture - Chinese Shiatsu massage - Japanese Swedish massage - Sweden Potato Veriki - Russian I can go on..... What's not to like? Cheers!

Yes, countries that do not suffer multiculturalism do nat have any of that stuff.

Wait a minute.  Of course they do.  Please explain?

just because some restaurant may have staff and cooks of a particular ethnic heritage doesn't mean they still live that way

They are still cooking food the same way. There is nothing about multiculturalism that says people have to stay the same. I eat asian food, so I have taken on parts of their culture. This is a good thing. They are welcome to take on parts of our culture. So long as we aren't forcing them to do anything, this is also a good thing.

honestly you are so self deluded about this.
I eat Asian too, that doesn't make me Asian nor does it mean I'm asian by culture.
I cook rice and other "asian" dishes that doesn' make me asian etc either.

A recipe is a recipe.

Australia has a culture and it will keep evolving what you advocate is cultural apartheid.  That is what Multiculturalism is.  You advocate it at the loss of and detriment to the Australian culture as you show by your derision of it.

Every aspect of culture could be singled out like that and according to your argument, it wouldn't be culture. eg, I'm not Japanese, I jsut wear a kimono.

Australia has a culture and it will keep evolving what you advocate is cultural apartheid.

What exactly do you think I am advocating?

multiculturalism...   ::)

So you equate multiculturalism with cultural apartheid?

That's certainly a fair/accurate description of it.

wrote on Jan 6^th, 2008 at 8:31pm:

I cook rice and other "asian" dishes that doesn' make me asian etc either. A recipe is a recipe.

I can tell you having lived in an Asian country for many years that cooking rice is not simply popping rice into a plastic container, filling it with water and pushing x amount of minutes on the high setting in the microwave.

I've noticed that rice cooked by Westerners looks and taste different than those cooked by Chinese and different again by Malays. I've noticed that there are 2 simple techniques which Asians apply that most Westerners don't. The result is that the rice is whiter, fluffier and taste better. I can tell you what that step is but in a multiculturalless society you would never know what that is unless you've been there.

As for cooking lasagna, there's the easy way, frozen - just pop it into the oven or there the homemade fresh one. Which tastes better.

A recipe is a recipe which can be read and learnt. Technique however, is taught. As Dropkick said, no one does Chinese like the Chinese.

Take martial arts - every serious martial artists eventually travels to the country of origin to learn the traditional methods from the traditional masters. No one does it better than the inventers. And furthermore, you wouldn't get martial arts without multiculturalism.

Had some pretty lousy chinese from pple that looked Chinese let me just say.

Its not a given that if you look oriental that you can cook the local cuisine..Some pple are just lousy cooks.

Good rice is not that easy. Steamed is very good.

The chinese do eat some very bad food. The fact that it is Chinese doesn't make it special, it's the fact that we can afford the good stuff.

rotflmao

learning to cook doesn't require a policy called Multiculturalism

pathetic arguments BTW AMonk

There are superficial similarities between the situation in Western Europe now and the one in the 5th century, when a decadent civilization was overrun by the barbarians. The population movements we are witnessing now are the largest and fastest in human history. In Europe, they can only be compared to the period often referred to as the Migration Period, following the disintegration of the Roman Empire. Yet we now have communications that can transport people anywhere on earth within hours, and media outlets that show ordinary people how much better life is in other countries. On top of that, the Romans didn’t have human rights lawyers advocating that millions of outsiders should be allowed to settle in their lands.

In some ways, what is going on now surpasses the downfall of the Roman Empire. It has never happened before in human history that an ethnic group voluntarily finances other ethnic groups to advance their culture on their territory to the detriment of their own people. Native Europeans are paying people who openly declare to be our enemies to eradicate our civilization and are told to celebrate this as tolerance. This happens against a backdrop of broken families, social pathologies, widespread abuse of drugs and booming crime rates, while we are shopping expensive Gucci purses and watching naked people do strange things in reality TV shows.

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2007/01/multiculturalism-and-enlightenment.html
Multiculturalism is one gigantic-CON!!
Try transporting it to muslim countries or Japan! >:(

Our country was built on multiculturalism, on people from all over the world living together in tolerance and working together to make a better life for themselves. That hasn't changed overnight. Nor has the complaints. People have been making the smae complaints from the beginning. They were wrong then and they are wrong now.

Quote:

Our country was built on multiculturalism, on people from all over the world living together in tolerance and working together to make a better life for themselves. That hasn't changed overnight. Nor has the complaints. People have been making the smae complaints from the beginning. They were wrong then and they are wrong now.

They probably are wrong FD - but over the last few years the balance is shifting too much one way and it is a bit worrying when huge areas of our cities are so asianised that we feel like aliens in our own country of birth.

It would be fine if most of the immigrants and their descendants assimilated - but in many cases they don't and we are just becoming a very divided nation with enclaves of different nationalities who appear to hate each other.

Australia used to have genuine problems with enclaves, but they inevitably assimilated, as will the current ones. These days you have to go looking to find an actual problem.

Crap

We were until mid last century basically British.

If we were truly Multicultural there would have been no need for such a foolish policy.

It breeds division, it supports diversity of culture at the expense of the national culture.  It fosters disharmony within a society a proven fact by scientific study.

wakey, wakey.

We were until mid last century basically British.

Crap. We had large numbers of people from other European countries, many living in 'enclaves'. We also had plenty of Asians.

Living in denial of our history and culture still I see fd.

Ah...  no it wasn't.
It was built on the british culture, which is why we speak English have their system of government and laws etc, etc, etc...

Culture didn't build this country. Immigrants did. Australian culture is not British culture.

lol


If you cant win, cant be right... create a strawman eh fd.

How is that a strawman?

rotflmao

Suddenly culture is totally irrelevant to you...  and you fail to recognise it's part in nation-building.

The British built this country, it is based on british culture.  easily recognised and proven historically and anecdotally.

Your strawman tries to turn what I originally said into something else.  By negating the word culture and the nationality involved then claiming that we don't have a british culture...  something I didn't say we had.  hence strawman.

Australia wasn't built on British culture either. It was built despite Bristish culture.

Ah no it wasn't...  are you an anglophobe or what?

The british created Australia.  They had more to do with it and direct influence upon it than any other nationality or culture.

Stop living in denial you have nothing to hide behind except your stupidity.

British people created Australia (along with other nationalities), not British culture. In creating Australia they forged new cultures and abandoned British culture. Many of them came here to escape British culture.

lol  get back to you about your last trash later..

here's a con...

SAUDI PREACHERS INCITING MURDER AT UK MOSQUE UK
Daily Mail 31/8/2008
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1050917/Revealed-Saudi-women-preaching-hate-British-mosque-promised-clean-act-18-months-ago.html

Hardline female 'preachers of hate' are radicalising Muslim women atone of Britain's top mosques. The Saudi Arabian preachers were secretly filmed ordering women tomurder gays and ex-Muslims. Undercover reporters from Channel 4's Dispatches recorded the lectures in the women's section of Regent's Park Mosque in London.

An unnamed Saudi woman is seen mocking other religions – labelling Christianity 'vile' and an 'abomination'. Another, known as'Angelique', claims Britain is a 'land of evil'. The investigators attended lectures for two months at the mosque,which had promised a clean-up after another Dispatches probe just 18months ago exposed it for spreading extreme Islamic views. During one sermon, a woman called Um Amira says: 'He is Muslim, and he gets out of Islam...what are we going to do? We kill him, kill, kill.'

In the programme, to be screened tomorrow, she adds that womenadulterers should be stoned to death and people who have sex beforemarriage should get '100 lashes'. Regent's Park Mosque is one of the biggest and most prestigiousIslamic institutions in the UK. Opened in 1944 by King George VI, itcan hold up to 5,000 worshippers. After the 2007 Dispatches investigation, which also looked at mosques in Birmingham, West Midlands Police and the Crown Prosecution Service(CPS) claimed Channel 4 had distorted sermons and tried to presscharges. But watchdog Ofcom dismissed their findings and Channel 4 won six-figure libel damages from the police and CPS.

This time, Dispatches returned to Regent's Park Mosque to find exactly the same extremist books on sale there and the female preachers spreading radical Wahhabi Islam. One Saudi woman, who mocks other religions, says: 'We feel nothing sometimes going past the church. What they say with their tongues is so vile and disgusting, it's an abomination.' Another female preacher, Um Saleem, says it 'breaks her heart' to see Muslims 'working in banks, wearing short sleeves...and make-up'.

The man in charge of the mosque, Dr Ahmed Al Dubayan, is Islamic Affairs attaché to the Saudi Embassy. Dispatches claims the mosque haslinks to the Saudi government, which it accuses of spending billionsspreading the Wahhabi message. The Saudi Embassy denied this. Dr Al Dubayan said he did not know the preachers in the documentaryand claimed the mosque 'does not support or condone extreme views'.

Gotta love Multiculti...  right???????

Multiculturalism is not responsible for that.

Really...  how so?

Under the policy of multiculturalism and diversity etc enclaves of hatred of other cultures are formed within the dominant culture by minority cultures allowed to exist through this policy.

No. Those things have always happened. Multiculturalism doesn't enable it. If anything it prevents it.

crap...  it has worsened the situation.
Anyone with eyes can see that.

Once more you have failed to refute another point and have made an empty claim instead.

Closing your eyes and blocking your ears wont make it go away.

Multiculturalism sx but so does Nationalism. However you don't get "golden middle" without having both ingredients. So what is the trade off?

When we take in other cultures the way we do we often create fifth columns but also make a few our own inroads into them, go and check on Australian ethnic forums for that. Anybody here is multilingual?

Well first we see many more cons than pros based on this the descission should be simple, and as for the pros they are cons, the food is not better ingredients are regionaly different if you want authentic food go to the region of choice, my best pizzas were in Italy not in Australia, why because it goes down to the local ingredients.
Another con is the half breed children idea, if you are right then why is it that in animals half breeds are dangerous have numeous health problems and often turn, gee hang on these symptoms are ever growing in society oh we have solved a problem race mixed children risk becoming dangerous have numeous health problems and often turn oh well that explains everything. GET YOUR HEADS TOGETHER.

Multi-culturalism is like Shizophrenia: Every other Culture but your own.
The Union Jack (or even the Aboriginal Flag) upon the Flag with the Southern Cross: Bi-Polar.
...the UK is suffering from Bi-Polar (A 'western' medical term and condition), it doesn't know if it is European or a part of the USA (as if it has become a colony itself).

Race:
There are Black people
There are White people
(and both these two think they are the only two people in the room)
There are Yellow people
There are Red people
There are Green people (olive skin you nutter!)
There are Blue people
There are Grey people
There are Brown people (the former middle-eastern come 'bronzed aussie' you nutter!)

...but its the Purple 'people' eaters that you really have to watch out for.

:D ;D

Multiculturalism creates hate.


Visit www.aussie-patriot.com

BlOoDy RiPpEr wrote on Jul 29^th, 2010 at 11:23pm:

Multiculturalism creates hate.

But great restaurants  8-)

I don't really have a problem with having people of other cultures ettle here - just so long as they remember that they are guests, dependant on the goodwill of the host culture for offering them the opportunity.
When they, assisted by weak PC traitors, start to use our own laws against us, to get special treatment is when I get annoyed.

BlOoDy RiPpEr wrote on Jul 29^th, 2010 at 11:23pm:

Multiculturalism creates hate. Visit www.aussie-patriot.com

lol

BlOoDy RiPpEr wrote on Jul 29^th, 2010 at 11:23pm:

Multiculturalism creates hate. Visit www.aussie-patriot.com

It's the redheads who cause hate.  :P

They should go back to wherever they came from .................. They're all Tocharians from China.

oznationalist wrote on Aug 14^th, 2009 at 10:45am:

Well first we see many more cons than pros based on this the descission should be simple, and as for the pros they are cons, the food is not better ingredients are regionaly different if you want authentic food go to the region of choice, my best pizzas were in Italy not in Australia, why because it goes down to the local ingredients. Another con is the half breed children idea, if you are right then why is it that in animals half breeds are dangerous have numeous health problems and often turn, gee hang on these symptoms are ever growing in society oh we have solved a problem race mixed children risk becoming dangerous have numeous health problems and often turn oh well that explains everything. GET YOUR HEADS TOGETHER.

Your comment is at odds with science and experience. How do you think such beneficial animals and crops that we have today come about? Oh yeah, cross-breeding.

The fact is that you get a host of problems in "pure breds" because when you narrow the gene pool, deleterious genes become more of a problem. This  was strikingly seen with in-bred Royals of Europe with haemophilia.

Your comment is both obnoxious and essentially untrue and I'd suggest that you get your head rewired with more information,more compassion and empathy for your fellow man. You are only encouraging and promoting a toxic attidude in society and in yourself. Your hate cuts both ways, you will find that you are poisoning yourself and the relationships you're in.

Change course matey because you're setting yourself up for a miserable existence, if you're not there already.

[quote author=Ziggy link=1177922468/120#131 date=1280761922
Your comment is at odds with science and experience. How do you think such beneficial animals and crops that we have today come about? Oh yeah, cross-breeding.


[/quote]


No, selective breeding.  Not just crossing for the sake of it,  breeding two indivudals with desirable characteristics to achieve the desired outcome.
Like it or not, the circumstances that led to many of the worlds peoples evolving into who/what they are no longer exist....so some of their characteristics aren't needed or helpful in todays world.

We're all 'cross-bred' for what it's worth. Human races are a relatively modern phenomenon also.  We are all Homo sapiens sapiens, and even though some of us have different coloured hair or skin, it's a highly subjective thing.

These pictures from Xinjiang Province, China (near the bottom of the page) illustrate that it's not as clear-cut as some people make out. You could easily mistake some Uyghurs for Scandinavians or Irish.

http://pastmists.wordpress.com/2010/05/12/xinjiang/

The one with the gold headwear looks like a relative of mine from Scotland.

muso wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2010 at 2:25pm:

We're all 'cross-bred' for what it's worth. Human races are a relatively modern phenomenon also.  We are all Homo sapiens sapiens, and even though some of us have different coloured hair or skin, it's a highly subjective thing. These pictures from Xinjiang Province, China (near the bottom of the page) illustrate that it's not as clear-cut as some people make out. You could easily mistake some Uyghurs for Scandinavians or Irish. http://pastmists.wordpress.com/2010/05/12/xinjiang/

Yep, and a chihuahua and a pit bull are both the same species too....but ya wouldn't put a chihuahua into a dog fight.

... wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2010 at 2:27pm:

muso wrote on Aug 3rd, 2010 at 2:25pm: We're all 'cross-bred' for what it's worth. Human races are a relatively modern phenomenon also.  We are all Homo sapiens sapiens, and even though some of us have different coloured hair or skin, it's a highly subjective thing. These pictures from Xinjiang Province, China (near the bottom of the page) illustrate that it's not as clear-cut as some people make out. You could easily mistake some Uyghurs for Scandinavians or Irish. http://pastmists.wordpress.com/2010/05/12/xinjiang/ Yep, and a chihuahua and a pit bull are both the same species too....but ya wouldn't put a chihuahua into a dog fight.

homo (genus) sapiens (species)  sapiens (race)

It's a taxonomic classification. I didn't invent it.

The first sapiens is the species level. The second one is the race level.

muso wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2010 at 2:25pm:

We're all 'cross-bred' for what it's worth. Human races are a relatively modern phenomenon also.  We are all Homo sapiens sapiens, and even though some of us have different coloured hair or skin, it's a highly subjective thing. These pictures from Xinjiang Province, China (near the bottom of the page) illustrate that it's not as clear-cut as some people make out. You could easily mistake some Uyghurs for Scandinavians or Irish. http://pastmists.wordpress.com/2010/05/12/xinjiang/ The one with the gold headwear looks like a relative of mine from Scotland.

Most of these are still very asiatic.

Would any of you be interested in taking part in my Psychology research into attitudes towards asylum seekers?

It would only take about 10 minutes to do and your views would be really helpful.

Gillard, would you shut the bugger up please?

Had to laugh at the bigoted woman who asked a loaded rhetorical question of Gillard at tonight's televised community forum in SA...

In a very thick residual accent, she suggested that multiculturalism didn't work...

I'm surprised that somebody didn't stand up and tell her to take her foreign birth certificate and bugger off then!

Equitist wrote on May 19^th, 2011 at 11:17pm:

Had to laugh at the bigoted woman who asked a loaded rhetorical question of Gillard at tonight's televised community forum in SA... In a very thick residual accent, she suggested that multiculturalism didn't work... I'm surprised that somebody didn't stand up and tell her to take her foreign birth certificate and bugger off then!

Having an accent and being culturally hostile or separatist are two different things, yingy-yangy person. But you wouldn't understand the first thing about almost anything so no surprise here, either.

Quote:

Multiculturalism Cons: 1) Alienates people. 2) Riots. 3) Political correctness gone crazy (ie. Banning bibles in hospitals). 4) Community division. 5) Causes family breakdown. 6) Increased crime levels. 7) Creates ethnic gangs. 8) Cultural apartheid. 9) Social disharmony. 10) Language difficulties. 11) Money being sent back-home (Ethnics former home). 12) Importation of extra foreign goods. 13) Gross waste of taxpayers money. 14) Empire building. 15) Security risk. 16) Increased unwanted immigration. 17) Increased welfare bill. 18) Dilution or death of the Australian culture. 19) Conflicting belief systems. 20) Pandering to minorities. 21) Racism. 22) Cultural relativism. 23) Promotes tolerance not acceptance. Pros: 1) Larger variety of food. 2) Provides jobs for rich bureaucrats and Government officials. Feel free to add to this list.

10 pages and no new 'pros' to add to the list.

but yeah, it's definitely a good thing.  Noone can say whats good about it, but it's gotta be good..It just HAS to be....PMSL.

freediver wrote on Jun 26^th, 2007 at 3:06pm:

pro - there are fewer riots in multicultural societies

LOL.

Yeah the recent london riots kinda disproves that.

Multiculti, like PC, is completely devoid of any cohesive justification. There cannot be an intellectually cohesive defence of either because they do not have an intellectually cohesive basis.



To speak the language of today's youth, multiculti and PC are , like,  totally random.

Quote:

Australia has an advantage over the United States in the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts because of an affinity with foreign cultures, a US strategic analyst says.

So thats the solution to national disputes? to import their civilian population into your nation, altering your nations makeup and identity and becoming more like that foreign nation. Ever heard of a translator? or an embassy?

Imagine the immigration minister justifying immigration from a certain nation
"well we dont really get along with [Insert country here] at the moment, and they are hostile to us, with absolutely nothing in common, so if we import 200 thousand of their people as permanent residents, it may build closer ties"

I think that posters signature is appropriate right about now

"“Tolerance is the virtue of men who no longer believe in anything.”
– G.K. Chesterton"

I want to ask some questions to the guys who against Multiculturalism.

Do you respect the Freedom of thought, conscience and religion?

Freedom of thought, conscience and religion is an important part of human rights.

If sure, how can you attempt to ban different cultures?

Bowen wrote on Oct 30^th, 2012 at 10:29pm:

I want to ask some questions to the guys who against Multiculturalism. Do you respect the Freedom of thought, conscience and religion? Freedom of thought, conscience and religion is an important part of human rights. If sure, how can you attempt to ban different cultures?

Bowen,

The right of every person, to continue to breathe, is also a 'human right'.





Bowen,

Do you respect the right to 'freedom of religion', where a certain 'religion' encourages its members [as a doctrine of its religion] to murder those, who do not believe as they believe ?

IMAGE...
http://www.zionism-israel.com/ezine/Isllam2.jpg
London, moslem street protests.
Moslems demanding their right to exercise their 'freedom of religion', to kill people who disagree with their religion.








IMO, TOLERANCE OF 'MULTICULTURALISM' SHOULD NOT EXTEND, to allowing the members of another culture [e.g. ISLAM] to live with us, in this country, when moslems intend to engage in criminal activities against people who do not follow, or agree, with their ISLAMIC culture, EVEN IF THEIR ISLAMIC CULTURE 'LAWFULLY' ALLOWS SUCH CRIMINALITY.

e.g.
Mainstream ISLAM gives a 'lawful' sanction to moslems, to intimidate, to persecute, to threaten, to fight against, and to murder, those persons who reject ISLAM.

"O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him)."
Koran 9.123


"Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain:...."
Koran 9.111


"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. "
Koran 9.29




IMO, ISLAM is an 'organisation', a philosophy, which promotes criminality [by our laws], in its own followers.

And imo, a moslem is a member of a criminal organisation called 'ISLAM'.

IMO, every moslem in Australia [and indeed, every good moslem on the planet], by self declaring as a moslem, is self declaring a criminal intent [by our laws] against local non-moslems.

And imo, every non-moslem should be made aware and recognise, that ISLAM is in fact, a criminal compact among moslems, to wage a violent 'religious' war against ALL non-moslems ['unbelievers'].





IMO, respecting another persons right to 'freedom of religion', does NOT extend, to allowing persons to follow a religion [in my country], which criminally persecutes people who do not believe, what he [a moslem] believes.

IMO, the right to 'freedom of religion', does NOT extend, to give a 'lawful' sanction to moslems, to intimidate, to persecute, to threaten, to fight against, and to murder, those persons who reject ISLAM.[/highlight][/size]





IMO, behaviour like this [below] should not be tolerated, in Australia.

If i could, i would lock these people away for 50 years, OR, give them the option to leave Australia.

http://images.smh.com.au/2012/09/15/3637564/art-protest3-620x349.jpg
Sydney, 2012, moslem street protests.
Moslems >> PUBLICLY << stating, that they really are violently intolerant, of any world-view which does not coincide with their own world-view.

Good, you got the point.

"encouraging its members [as a doctrine of its religion] to murder those, who do not believe as they believe." is not the part of Freedom of Religions.

I am against these actions too.

However, Multiculturalism is to protect the Freedom of Religions not these actions.

Every religions have extreme members.

Spreading different cultures in peace should be protected. But violence or agitating for violence is not under the protection of Multiculturalism.

If what you are against is the violence, please focus on the violence, I will be with you.

But please respect the Freedom of Religions and culture spreading in peace which is the real goal of Multiculturalism.



Yadda wrote on Oct 30^th, 2012 at 11:11pm:

Bowen, The right of every person, to continue to breathe, is also a 'human right'. Bowen, Do you respect the right to 'freedom of religion', where a certain 'religion' encourages its members [as a doctrine of its religion] to murder those, who do not believe as they believe ? IMAGE... London, moslem street protests. Moslems demanding their right to exercise their 'freedom of religion', to kill people who disagree with their religion. IMO, TOLERANCE OF 'MULTICULTURALISM' SHOULD NOT EXTEND, to allowing the members of another culture [e.g. ISLAM] to live with us, in this country, when moslems intend to engage in criminal activities against people who do not follow, or agree, with their ISLAMIC culture, EVEN IF THEIR ISLAMIC CULTURE 'LAWFULLY' ALLOWS SUCH CRIMINALITY. e.g. Mainstream ISLAM gives a 'lawful' sanction to moslems, to intimidate, to persecute, to threaten, to fight against, and to murder, those persons who reject ISLAM. "O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him)." Koran 9.123 "Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain:...." Koran 9.111 "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. " Koran 9.29 IMO, ISLAM is an 'organisation', a philosophy, which promotes criminality [by our laws], in its own followers. And imo, a moslem is a member of a criminal organisation called 'ISLAM'. IMO, every moslem in Australia [and indeed, every good moslem on the planet], by self declaring as a moslem, is self declaring a criminal intent [by our laws] against local non-moslems. And imo, every non-moslem should be made aware and recognise, that ISLAM is in fact, a criminal compact among moslems, to wage a violent 'religious' war against ALL non-moslems ['unbelievers']. IMO, respecting another persons right to 'freedom of religion', does NOT extend, to allowing persons to follow a religion [in my country], which criminally persecutes people who do not believe, what he [a moslem] believes. IMO, the right to 'freedom of religion', does NOT extend, to give a 'lawful' sanction to moslems, to intimidate, to persecute, to threaten, to fight against, and to murder, those persons who reject ISLAM.[/highlight][/size] IMO, behaviour like this [below] should not be tolerated, in Australia. If i could, i would lock these people away for 50 years, OR, give them the option to leave Australia. Sydney, 2012, moslem street protests. Moslems >> PUBLICLY << stating, that they really are violently intolerant, of any world-view which does not coincide with their own world-view.

Bowen wrote on Oct 30^th, 2012 at 11:25pm:

Good, you got the point. "encouraging its members [as a doctrine of its religion] to murder those, who do not believe as they believe." is not the part of Freedom of Religions. I am against these actions too. However, Multiculturalism is to protect the Freedom of Religions not these actions. Every religions have extreme members. Spreading different cultures in peace should be protected. But violence or agitating for violence is not under the protection of Multiculturalism. If what you are against is the violence, please focus on the violence, I will be with you. But please respect the Freedom of Religions and culture spreading in peace which is the real goal of Multiculturalism.

Bowen,

I will endorse any culture that exhibits a respect for virtue.

What is virtue, you ask ?


By promoting equality, justice, truth, and liberty, is a good start.



And imo, this, is another expression of virtue......

Matthew 7:12
.....all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.


Romans 12:18
If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.


1 Thessalonians 5:21
Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
22  Abstain from all appearance of evil.

I come to Australia for "equality, justice, truth, and liberty". And that's why I post my opinion here. I believe Multiculturalism is one of the protection of the equality and liberty for me.

I have no religion. I believe science only. But I respect any religions if they are spreading in peace. For me there is no big difference between different religions especially for monotheism. Essentially, all the monotheism look others who do not believe the religion as unprotected people. Most of the monotheism were created thousands of years ago. Most of monotheism include the part of violence.

The issue is how the members understand the religion. So I don't think I can judge the religions by myself. And that's why the Freedom of Religions is the part of human rights.

And I am against any violence of religions. And I believe the multiculturalism is against any violence too.



Yadda wrote on Oct 30^th, 2012 at 11:46pm:

Bowen, I will endorse any culture that exhibits a respect for virtue. What is virtue, you ask ? By promoting equality, justice, truth, and liberty, is a good start. And imo, this, is another expression of virtue...... Matthew 7:12 .....all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets. Romans 12:18 If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. 1 Thessalonians 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. 22  Abstain from all appearance of evil.

Ironically "liberty" isnt an aussie thing. Thats yank. Aussies dont talk about "liberty" @ all. Prolly several will now just to be contrary but its not an aussie thing.

SOB

As I keep saying ~ Britain is Australia's crystal ball to the future.

Let's have a look into the smoky orb, shall we?

Aahh ... here's something of interest.

I wonder if our politicians will take note of this and act upon it by tweaking their immigration policy so as to reduce the chance of this happening here in a major way.


Quote:

White Britons are 'retreating' from areas dominated by ethnic minorities, a study has revealed. Analysis of census figures shows that white Britons are leaving areas where they are in a minority and are being replaced by immigrants and other ethnic minorities. As a result, nearly half of ethnic minorities – 4 million people – live in communities where whites make up less than half the population, the study by the Demos think-tank found. Demos said the survey showed a 'spiral of white British demographic decline' as white Britons choose to leave minority-dominated areas.

COME ON, boys and girls! Let's sing it one more time before we sell up and move out of these inner-city ghetto areas.

"We are oneeeeee, but we are ....  "

;D

Boy, have we been rolled.

Australian society is not British society old man.  They are now very different.  When was the last time you went back to your old adopted homeland?

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 31^st, 2012 at 4:10am:

Ironically "liberty" isnt an aussie thing. Thats yank. Aussies dont talk about "liberty" @ all. Prolly several will now just to be contrary but its not an aussie thing. SOB

Funny how you are one of the deluded left who insists that there is no such thing as Australian culture... yet here you are saying that something is "not an aussie thing". '

For something to not be an "aussie thing" means that Australians have a particular behaviour that excludes that very thing. Therefore, you are helping to define Australian culture, the very thing you insist doesn't exist.

Another typical borgism. 

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 31^st, 2012 at 4:10am:

Ironically "liberty" isnt an aussie thing. Thats yank.

French, actually, stupid.
SOB

Dude.

What the Germans did to the Jews
The Moslems will do to the French
and then...
...the Jews ON BEHALF OF
the Moslems
- will get the Italians.

Why you ask?

Well Religion was created by the Middle-East.
It kept Africa in the dark.
Was stolen by Asians who can't think for themselves,
and it oppressed Europe.

Think about it - x3 'Old World' Religions.
One describes the Land & Mathematics.
Another, Healing and Food Prep.
With City living (Citi-Zen) and Sport the other.

Look at it this way  :P

After 2000 years of Jews telling Germans that the way to Asia is through them only ...then Namerica appears and shows the 'true way' to Asia via the American Indian. It was only natural for the Germans to say "Liars!" etc and renounce.

Then there is the French-Moslem connection to Africa ...but Australia and the Aboriginie kinda throws a spoke in that.

As for the Christian part - well South America via the Conquistador will liberate the Middle-East itself.

etc, etc, etc.
Too complex or cryptic??
Maybe watch The Dark Crystal then :P

The irony of it all is that Mohomedism is an expression of Boyhood, Christianity as Adulthood and Judaism as Elderhood although ironically the Judaistic book was created first...
...but Knowledge works in REVERSE of Life.

And North America (Adam) said unto Europe (God)
who created him.
"Asia (Lilith) will not serve me!" and the result was that North America (Adam) nearly got it on with Mother Russia  :P for lack of  ;D
So Europe (God) created Australia (Eve)
who came to know Africa (Satan)
via the aboriginal Rainbow Serpent in her garden.
To serve Namerica (Adam).

...and they lived happily ever after until the next episode  ;)


Thou has eaten from the Tree of Knowledge
(Europe eats from North America)
and knows Good and Evil.
Will thou eat from the Tree of Life as well?
(Europe eats from Australia)
and live forever as Gods like us.

Note: the Region in the midst of the New Worlds is not Religiously part of the story :-X
...they prefer Science ;)


Farrrrkun Crazy eh  :D :D :D :D :D :D

Multiculturalism rearing its ugly head again.

A foreigner comes swanning in to another man's country and then starts dictating terms to his customers.

Chemist

Dictating terms eh?

That's one way to put it.  Not a very accurate way, but a way nonetheless.

... wrote on Jul 19^th, 2013 at 9:34am:

Dictating terms eh? That's one way to put it.  Not a very accurate way, but a way nonetheless.

A few years ago the NSW government had to put out a directive to certain ethnic doctors who were refusing to give teenage girls contraceptive pills.

The government had to remind these non-Westerners that while they live here in Australia they must play by OUR rules, and not the rules of their Middle Eastern Islamic ancestral homelands.

Do in Rome ...

They had to be reminded that doctors, chemists, and health professionals in general have no right to practice the beliefs of their religion in the course of providing a public service.

It was a learning curve for these Third Worlders. They had to be brought into line with the secular rules that ensure that everyone is treated the same without bias for reasons of religion or race.

Have a Nice Day, Honky.

Lord Herbert wrote on Jul 19^th, 2013 at 10:41am:

... wrote on Jul 19th, 2013 at 9:34am: Dictating terms eh? That's one way to put it.  Not a very accurate way, but a way nonetheless. A few years ago the NSW government had to put out a directive to certain ethnic doctors who were refusing to give teenage girls contraceptive pills. The government had to remind these non-Westerners that while they live here in Australia they must play by OUR rules, and not the rules of their Middle Eastern Islamic ancestral homelands. Do in Rome ... They had to be reminded that doctors, chemists, and health professionals in general have no right to practice the beliefs of their religion in the course of providing a public service. It was a learning curve for these Third Worlders. They had to be brought into line with the secular rules that ensure that everyone is treated the same without bias for reasons of religion or race. Have a Nice Day, Honky.

Yes, so you keep saying, Herbie, but each time you're asked to produce the circular, memo or correspondence the NSW government allegedly sent to said doctors, you feign ignorance.

Moi?

Instead, you quote your "memory" of something you heard on Alan once.

Reliable.

Mind you, I'd love to read a NSW Health document that tells GPs that "while they live here in Australia they must play by OUR rules, and not the rules of their Middle Eastern Islamic ancestral homelands".

I can safely tell you now - with, no doubt at all, the full agreement of everyone on this board - that that will never happen.

Karnal wrote on Jul 19^th, 2013 at 4:28pm:

I can safely tell you now - with, no doubt at all, the full agreement of everyone on this board - that that will never happen.

All doctors come under a medical board, which besides other things, oversees the matter of ethical practice.

Where doctors are reported by the public to not be adhering to an impartial and unbiassed treatment of their patients, then you can bet your bippy they get a polite reminder from the authorities that they had better review their attitude if they don't want to be hauled onto the carpet to answer some sticky questions.

Doctoring in a Western country is not the same as it is in the Third World where they are little tin Gods who milk their patients for bribes as a routine habit. (Worked for 30 years with immigrants. If you don't take the doctors a chicken or a side of pork they'll leave your mother to rot in a corner of the crowded ward).

Lord Herbert wrote on Jul 19^th, 2013 at 4:44pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 19th, 2013 at 4:28pm: I can safely tell you now - with, no doubt at all, the full agreement of everyone on this board - that that will never happen. All doctors come under a medical board, which besides other things, oversees the matter of ethical practice.

That's quite a different fish to NSW Health, Herbie. Church and state, innit.

Do you have the memo from the Medical Board?

That's federal, by the way.

Taxpayer-funded, Bulk-Billing GPs are not at liberty to practice medicine as an extension of their religious or cultural beliefs, any more than are Chemists at liberty to refuse the sale of contraceptive pills to teenage girls.

It is also an indictable offence for a shopkeeper to refuse to give service for reasons of racial or religious prejudice.

******

Did you hear what Rudd's up to? When processed here or overseas, your Muslim brothers and sisters are to be jetted at a height of 10,000 feet at a speed of 750kpm to a Third World country for residency.

The rorting is at last coming to an end. Not even Abbott had the balls to come up with such a radical solution.

Lord Herbert wrote on Jul 19^th, 2013 at 5:25pm:

Taxpayer-funded, Bulk-Billing GPs are not at liberty to practice medicine as an extension of their religious or cultural beliefs, any more than are Chemists at liberty to refuse the sale of contraceptive pills to teenage girls. It is also an indictable offence for a shopkeeper to refuse to give service for reasons of racial or religious prejudice.

Indictable, eh? So that means we can fly them over from the Deep South or Belfast or wherever and make them stand trial. Powerful stuff.

Did the Catholic GPs got the memo too, or just the ones from the Middle Eastern countries?

Did the Medical Board send one out to the chemists as well, or was that the Pharmaceutical Society?

Or the Retailers’ Association?

Please post the info, Herbie. This is an important issue.

I'll leave you to happily continue trying to muddy the waters with whiny and prissy little objections to the obvious, Karnel.  ;D

I'm going to let our vast and discerning audience decide for themselves which of us is stating the obvious, and which is playing silly-buggers with this.

Enjoy the rest of your evening.

Here is an excellent brand new article discussing Multicultural societies compared to  Homogenous societies.

I would love for someone to refute this article in its personal opinion that homogenous, unicultural nations are far more successful and stable than nations under multiculturalism


anglonz.blogspot.co.nz/2013/10/multicultural-vs-homogenous-nations.html

Are there any "homogenous, unicultural nations", apart from Iceland?   ::) ::)

Amazing how the author of that article appears to have forgotten the Maoris in his own homeland of New Zealand...   ::) ::)

Many cultures living side by side is one thing. It's the stuff of life. Regional varieties, countries comprising of different ethnicities and so forth. No big deal, run of the mill.

Multiculturalism, on the other hand, is an insidious ideology, an ism, an ukase, a directive, a PC BS imposition.

If you want to preserve your folk dancing traditions, preserve it by all means. But it is not the government's business or the taxpayer's expense to sanction or fund your efforts to preserve it for you.i

Soren wrote on Oct 6^th, 2013 at 1:16am:

Many cultures living side by side is one thing. It's the stuff of life. Regional varieties, countries comprising of different ethnicities and so forth. No big deal, run of the mill. Multiculturalism, on the other hand, is an insidious ideology, an ism, an ukase, a directive, a PC BS imposition.

Actually, old chap, it was invented by that bastion of liberty, the destination of choice for huddled masses everywhere, yearning to breathe free - the good old United States of Amerika. 

Like much of your cheese, we imported it from them.

Mathew wrote on Oct 5^th, 2013 at 5:51pm:

Here is an excellent brand new article discussing Multicultural societies compared to  Homogenous societies. I would love for someone to refute this article in its personal opinion that homogenous, unicultural nations are far more successful and stable than nations under multiculturalism anglonz.blogspot.co.nz/2013/10/multicultural-vs-homogenous-nations.html

For one thing humanity itself would render such a description probably moot.  We are all individuals not some homogenous blob.

But the  largest most recent study of diversity policy by Robert Putnam would disagree with it.

Karnal wrote on Oct 9^th, 2013 at 2:38pm:

Soren wrote on Oct 6th, 2013 at 1:16am: Many cultures living side by side is one thing. It's the stuff of life. Regional varieties, countries comprising of different ethnicities and so forth. No big deal, run of the mill. Multiculturalism, on the other hand, is an insidious ideology, an ism, an ukase, a directive, a PC BS imposition. Actually, old chap, it was invented by that bastion of liberty, the destination of choice for huddled masses everywhere, yearning to breathe free - the good old United States of Amerika.  Like much of your cheese, we imported it from them.

Actually old chap I wouldn't use the US as a model for Multiculti anymore than I would the UK or France.

Australia will have the same problems if it continues down this stupid path.

Grendel wrote on Oct 10^th, 2013 at 6:35pm:

Karnal wrote on Oct 9th, 2013 at 2:38pm: Soren wrote on Oct 6th, 2013 at 1:16am: Many cultures living side by side is one thing. It's the stuff of life. Regional varieties, countries comprising of different ethnicities and so forth. No big deal, run of the mill. Multiculturalism, on the other hand, is an insidious ideology, an ism, an ukase, a directive, a PC BS imposition. Actually, old chap, it was invented by that bastion of liberty, the destination of choice for huddled masses everywhere, yearning to breathe free - the good old United States of Amerika.  Like much of your cheese, we imported it from them. Actually old chap I wouldn't use the US as a model for Multiculti anymore than I would the UK or France. Australia will have the same problems if it continues down this stupid path.

One that is based on tolerance and acceptance, rather than intolerance and racism/bigotry/Xenophobia?

One that is inclusive, rather than exclusive of it's citizens?

One that works most of the time for most of it's citizens, as against one that only works for a minority of citizens, rarely?

Beowulf, looks to me like you need to figure out what you really want Australia to look like?  I for one want one where most citizens rub along just fine with one another, most of the time.  One where people respect one another rather than hate one another...   ::)

Oh I'm not hung up on looks bwian.
I'll leave that to you along with the bigotry.

Putnam's diversity study shows what you want doesn't work bwian.

Now, now Beowulf no need to obfuscate.

I'm still waiting for you to reply with something on topic and sensible.

freediver wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 7:00pm:

Diversity fosters innovation. Homogeneity leads to stagnation.

China seems to be doing quite well.

Winston Smith wrote on Oct 14^th, 2013 at 1:02am:

freediver wrote on Apr 30th, 2007 at 7:00pm: Diversity fosters innovation. Homogeneity leads to stagnation. China seems to be doing quite well.

Good point. Why is China doing so well?

A lot of people have put it down to China's East Asia networks. In other words, rather than being a cosmopolitan immigrant trading hegemony a la Amerika or Mother England, China is an emmigrant nation, making use of all those emigres sprinkled throughout Asia and the world.

I wonder, however, how sustainable this is. China has not, so far, developed global product brands - a la Japan or South Korea. Its emigres are brokers - ethnic-Chinese contractors who set up shop in Chinese free trade zones and do piecework for the foreign branded corporations. It's a business model that has developed China, but what next?

What's next, I think, is a booming middle class looking for new novelties, and this will, inevitably, mean a huge cultural shift in China.

Homogeneity does lead to stagnation. It's why Deng Zhou Ping uttered his famous line about cats catching mice - it doesn't matter what colour cat catches the mouse, China became rampantly capitalist the day that utterance was delivered - that's if capitalism wasn't in the DNA of the Chinese people anyway.

The essence of capitalism is class heterogeneity. China now has an economic system that facilitates this, even if it's corrupt. Most of the sons and daughters of the princelings have Western educations or live in the West full time, and this is the Chinese model - outward, rather than inward looking.

Brian Ross wrote on Oct 14^th, 2013 at 12:20am:

Now, now Beowulf no need to obfuscate. I'm still waiting for you to reply with something on topic and sensible.

Got nothing bwian...  then why don't you just wunaway?
oh and bwian we both know multiculti is supposed to run on tolerance and obeying the rule of law, not acceptance.
We both know that it has been tweaked several times to try and get it to work and gain public acceptance... the last time by the Howard government who tried to address the one rule for us and another for them attitude of new arrivals, because it can't be all we give and they take.
Putnam's study showed greater disharmony and insularity was created by greater diversity. You want greater diversity, therefore you want greater disharmony and insularity...  you support and foster the breakdown of our society.

Now, now Beowulf no need to obfuscate.

I'm still waiting for you to reply with something on topic and sensible.  ::)

like I said...  got nothing bwian.

ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:41pm:

Multiculturalism Cons:[/color] 1) Alienates people.

I reckon that is crap. Living in Melbourne, I have had Aussies, English, Yugoslavs, Turks, French as neighbours - have gotten to know most of them fairly well. Most of my friend throughout my life have been non-Anglo-Saxons - and I feel much richer for the experience.



ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:41pm:

2) Riots.

Australia has a long history of riots due to its bogan nature. For example there was the Ballarat Riot, theEureka stockade, the Liverpool soldiers riot of 1916, and the Melbourne Police Riots in the 1930's. There were riots involving communists and fascists in the 1930's. There was the Battle of Brisbane in WWII between mostly Christian English-speaking Anglo-Saxons. There was the Parliament House riot in Canberra in 1996 involving unionists. The Macquarie Fields riot of 2005. Nothing has changed it seems nowadays with Facebook party riots just about every weekend.

There have bee many other riots in Australian history involving unions and protesters.

Out of dozens of riots, I think that there are only a couple since WWII that involved ethnicity - one of those stirred up by homosexual fascist Alan Jones.





ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:41pm:

3) Political correctness gone crazy (ie. Banning bibles in hospitals).

Isn't this a media beat-up?

http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s1655732.htm

I have read that some hospitals stopped keeping Bibles in bedside lockers due to fears about the spread of dangerous germs - nothing to do with multiculturalism.


Quote:

Trust bosses said the Gideon International Bibles are hard to clean. They want all bedside areas in Queen’s Medical Centre and City Hospital kept tidy and “clutter-free” to stop deadly viruses breeding. http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/189145/Bashing-for-hospitals-over-ban-on-the-Bible

ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:41pm:

4) Community division.

Proof that multiculturalism creates community division? What about socio-ecomonic disadvantage isn't that more likely to cause division?




ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:41pm:

5) Causes family breakdown.

WTF? What next? Causing global warming too?



ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:41pm:

6) Increased crime levels.

Is there any proof that homogenous societies have less crime than multicultural?



ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:41pm:

7) Creates ethnic gangs.

I think that that has more to do with socio-economic disadvantage and lack of opportunities




ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:41pm:

8) Cultural apartheid.

Great slogan, but what the heck does that mean?



ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:41pm:

9) Social disharmony.

Any statistical evidence for that?


ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:41pm:

10) Language difficulties.

More than 97% of Australians either speak English as a first language or a second language "very well" or "well".

The number is rising too, as the Government has raised language standards for migrants and provided language training for refugees.




ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:41pm:

11) Money being sent back-home (Ethnics former home).

Why is that a problem? Wouldn't that mean less burden on governments and taxpayers in general to provide aid to poorer countries? I don't think the amount of money sent overseas is much compared to government aid programs.



ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:41pm:

12) Importation of extra foreign goods.

Like plasma TVs and Hollywood movies?




ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:41pm:

13) Gross waste of taxpayers money.

The economic benefits of immigration far outweigh the costs. Why else would governments do it?



ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:41pm:

14) Empire building.

??? :-?




ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:41pm:

[color=#ff6600]15) Security risk.

ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:41pm:

16) Increased unwanted immigration.

Unwanted by who?




ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:41pm:

17) Increased welfare bill.

You don't seem to have a good understanding of Australia's immigration system. It is designed so that the vast  overwhelming majority of migrants are either wealthy or have skills needed by the Australian economy. The amount of unskilled refugees scarred by war ente






ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:41pm:

18) Dilution or death of the Australian culture.

You can thank Hollywood for that.




ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:41pm:

[color=#ff6600]19) Conflicting belief systems.

Like Liberal and Labor.  Hmmm should we ban democracy?



ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:41pm:

20) Pandering to minorities.

Like the Rinehart family?



ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 6:41pm:

21) Racism.

Multicuturalism causes racism, or ignorance and hate causes racism?

By  True Colours- Australia has a long history of riots due to its bogan nature.

What does that mean?

By True Colour's reckoning, multiculturalism makes absolutely no difference to a place and its effects, if any, are undetectable.

But I don't remember any regular New Year car-b-ques in Paris before large scale immigration of 'marginalised youths' from Africa and the Middle East.

Shurely shome mishtake.

Why do NSW Police has specific ethnic crime squads then?
Why was Vietnamatta the centre of drug dealing in Australia?
Why is it returning to that place now?
Why are Outlaw Motorcyle Clubs now largely populated by ethnics?
Why do certain suburbs/ethnic-enclaves have bad reputations and criminal activity, like drive by shootings and murder?

Grendel wrote on Oct 15^th, 2013 at 10:23am:

Why do NSW Police has specific ethnic crime squads then? Why was Vietnamatta the centre of drug dealing in Australia? Why is it returning to that place now? Why are Outlaw Motorcyle Clubs now largely populated by ethnics? Why do certain suburbs/ethnic-enclaves have bad reputations and criminal activity, like drive by shootings and murder?

And how is this the fault of a government policy which promotes acceptance and tolerance?

How would a policy of Monoculturalism change any of that anyway?   The same violent and criminals minorities within certain ethnic groups would exist.  The same responses would be required.   Monoculturalism wouldn't change a thing except create even greater resentment and lead to greater alienation.   Looks to me like you'd exacerbate the problems rather than abate them!   :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D

|dev|null wrote on Oct 15^th, 2013 at 10:46am:

Grendel wrote on Oct 15th, 2013 at 10:23am: Why do NSW Police has specific ethnic crime squads then? Why was Vietnamatta the centre of drug dealing in Australia? Why is it returning to that place now? Why are Outlaw Motorcyle Clubs now largely populated by ethnics? Why do certain suburbs/ethnic-enclaves have bad reputations and criminal activity, like drive by shootings and murder? And how is this the fault of a government policy which promotes acceptance and tolerance? How would a policy of Monoculturalism change any of that anyway?   The same violent and criminals minorities within certain ethnic groups would exist.  The same responses would be required.   Monoculturalism wouldn't change a thing except create even greater resentment and lead to greater alienation.   Looks to me like you'd exacerbate the problems rather than abate them!   :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D

Actually it promotes no such thing at least not successfully.
Multiculti is based on TOLERANCE...  we must all TOLERATE each other...  you can't even tolerate dissenting opinions Jnr how are you going to cope.
It requires new Australians to obey the law...  oh dear doesn't look like that's happening does it.
Not a good start employing criminals to get you here.
Not a good start to discard your identity.
Not a good start when most are found to be not genuine refugees... not really good honest stock to build a harmonious society from eh?

I'll let you dwell on your strawman and see if your brain can come up with a sensible answer shall I?

|dev|null wrote on Oct 15^th, 2013 at 10:46am:

Grendel wrote on Oct 15th, 2013 at 10:23am: Why do NSW Police has specific ethnic crime squads then? Why was Vietnamatta the centre of drug dealing in Australia? Why is it returning to that place now? Why are Outlaw Motorcyle Clubs now largely populated by ethnics? Why do certain suburbs/ethnic-enclaves have bad reputations and criminal activity, like drive by shootings and murder? And how is this the fault of a government policy which promotes acceptance and tolerance?

Not every culture we import favours or promotes multiculturalism ('tolerance of other cultures').  Islam doesn't. Why tolerate any culture that doesn't reciprocate the tolerance of other cultures? Islam is submission, not tolerance of diverse cultural and social practices in an open and mutually beneficial manner.
Islam will require multiculturalism to submit to Islam. What happens to 'tolerance' then?

Soren wrote on Oct 15^th, 2013 at 7:16pm:

|dev|null wrote on Oct 15th, 2013 at 10:46am: Grendel wrote on Oct 15th, 2013 at 10:23am: Why do NSW Police has specific ethnic crime squads then? Why was Vietnamatta the centre of drug dealing in Australia? Why is it returning to that place now? Why are Outlaw Motorcyle Clubs now largely populated by ethnics? Why do certain suburbs/ethnic-enclaves have bad reputations and criminal activity, like drive by shootings and murder? And how is this the fault of a government policy which promotes acceptance and tolerance? Not every culture we import favours or promotes multiculturalism ('tolerance of other cultures').

You’re right there, old bean. Look at you cheese-gatherers. Can’t return you now, eh?

Still, I’m sure you’ll assimilate before long. I do have hope in the human condition.

Call me old fashioned...

For a Paki, you have a lot of cheek.

Multiculturalism, like the refugee convention, was meant to accommodate the various European cultures under the umbrella of a common humanity. Nobody ever though, at the initial stages, that all the ... er... 'warm-climate' people will want to come and pretend to be Swiss and Finns and Friesians and Australians or what have you.

All those wonderful ancient cultures of India, Persia, China, Africa - why would they want to leave their wonderful ancient cultures for some backward, upstart European 'kulture'??

But leave their noble cultures they did. For filthy lucre. All that 'ancient noble civilisation' is gone out the back door the moment they hear the sound of shiny coins. Suddenly all that wonderful culture melts into thin materialist air. The west is all just money to be grubbed, grasped, scraped. No culture or civilisation to honour or support.

When the white man went to their countries, it was called colonialism.
When they come top the white man's country, it is called multiculturalism.
We have had post-colonialism. I am eagerly looking forward to pot-multiculturalism.

Don't you?

Filthy lucre?

No, old chap, I won’t have that. You people came to help better us. You wanted to bring your marvellous cheese and your delightful trouser dance and all your beards and capes and monacles and what have you.

You should feel proud, old boy. Look at all the wonderful things you’ve brought to our country. Your anus, in particular, is a real sight to behold - squeezing out a lovely cheese on the plate for all to enjoy. Ah, yes.

Divine!

Soren wrote on Oct 15^th, 2013 at 7:16pm:

|dev|null wrote on Oct 15th, 2013 at 10:46am: Grendel wrote on Oct 15th, 2013 at 10:23am: Why do NSW Police has specific ethnic crime squads then? Why was Vietnamatta the centre of drug dealing in Australia? Why is it returning to that place now? Why are Outlaw Motorcyle Clubs now largely populated by ethnics? Why do certain suburbs/ethnic-enclaves have bad reputations and criminal activity, like drive by shootings and murder? And how is this the fault of a government policy which promotes acceptance and tolerance? Not every culture we import favours or promotes multiculturalism ('tolerance of other cultures'). Islam doesn't. Why tolerate any culture that doesn't reciprocate the tolerance of other cultures? Islam is submission, not tolerance of diverse cultural and social practices in an open and mutually beneficial manner. Islam will require multiculturalism to submit to Islam. What happens to 'tolerance' then?

The truth is that;

Moslems are even intolerant towards [will murder!] other moslems!     [i.e. other persons who claim to be moslems]




And so, the 'loser'/'victim' moslems [of that internecine warfare, among moslems], are told by humanists, that they have an entitlement to escape [their own internecine warfare], and to seek a sanctuary in places like Australia.

i.e.
Those moslems [i.e. the 'loser'/'victim' moslems], are themselves, people who all embrace a culture of an 'entitlement' to be intolerant, towards everyone who does not believe as they believe - a mindset which ISLAM inculcates within every moslem from childhood.




So, moslems are seeking to escape to places like Australia - where humanist idiots teach the moslems, that we [non-moslems] have a moral responsibility to rescue, and give sanctuary to moslems 'saltwater crocodiles', who are in danger of being killed by bigger and badder moslems 'saltwater crocodiles'.

I say [that in the case of 'saltwater crocodiles'], let nature takes its course.




see also;
The futility, of trying to accommodate moslems
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1379892909

Good point, Y. You've had one of the old boy's tasty snacks, no?

Miam miam.

Karnal wrote on Oct 16^th, 2013 at 10:31am:

Good point, Y.

So you are conceding, to my argument ?

That is incredible.

Yadda wrote on Oct 16^th, 2013 at 10:47am:

Karnal wrote on Oct 16th, 2013 at 10:31am: Good point, Y. So you are conceding, to my argument ? That is incredible.

That Moslems kill other Moslems? Not incredible, effende.

Christians kill other Christians, Jews kill Jews, Buddhists and Hindus and Sikhs and Zoroastrians - all kill each other regularly.

All is the will of Gud, no? Nature will always take her course.

Karnal wrote on Oct 16^th, 2013 at 10:49am:

Yadda wrote on Oct 16th, 2013 at 10:47am: Karnal wrote on Oct 16th, 2013 at 10:31am: Good point, Y. So you are conceding, to my argument ? That is incredible. That Moslems kill other Moslems? Not incredible, effende. Christians kill other Christians, Jews kill Jews, Buddhists and Hindus and Sikhs and Zoroastrians - all kill each other regularly. All is the will of Gud, no? Nature will always take her course.

So that moslems killing other moslems, is just par for the course, because Christians kill other Christians, too ?

So your argument is that many human beings are simply homicidal maniacs, then ?




And so, this is simply the will of your Gud, no?

That is an incredible philosophy.

Yadda wrote on Oct 16^th, 2013 at 11:00am:

Karnal wrote on Oct 16th, 2013 at 10:49am: Yadda wrote on Oct 16th, 2013 at 10:47am: Karnal wrote on Oct 16th, 2013 at 10:31am: Good point, Y. So you are conceding, to my argument ? That is incredible. That Moslems kill other Moslems? Not incredible, effende. Christians kill other Christians, Jews kill Jews, Buddhists and Hindus and Sikhs and Zoroastrians - all kill each other regularly. All is the will of Gud, no? Nature will always take her course. So that moslems killing other moslems, is just par for the course, because Christians kill other Christians, too ? So your argument is that many human beings are simply homicidal maniacs, then ? And so, this is simply the will of your Gud, no? That is an incredible philosophy.

Not my Gud, Y. The one Gud.

Some humans are homicidal maniacs, and some are cold blooded killers, and some are getting in first, but most are just following orders.

I'm not sure what one Gud thinks of this, but He seems to tolerate it, no?

Maybe He's spineless.

Is that a pro or a con?

Multiculturalism is a CON! There are no "pros".