Multiculturalism in Australia: A melting pot or a salad bowl?
This is hardly the time to extol the virtues of multiculturalism, a time when there is turmoil covering most of Europe, involving hundreds of thousands of displaced people looking for asylum, feeding a groundswell of discontent which has culminated in riots in several capital cities.
And yet, we find countries like Australia and Canada where multiculturalism has not only survived but is considered to be the only way forward. At worst, one can apply to multiculturalism what Winston Churchill said about the concept of democracy; namely, that it is the worst form of government except for all the others.
At a recent gala dinner organised by the Premier of Victoria and the Victorian Multicultural Commission, over 1,300 guests representing the 130 ethnic communities in this state gathered to hear speeches and be regaled by performances by various ethnic groups.
One thing both the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition were adamantly agreed on, and that is that multiculturalism is here to stay, something that has to be celebrated, enhancing as it does the richness of the nation through the various contributions that people from various backgrounds bring with them.
So what makes Australian multiculturalism so different from that espoused and maligned in Europe and US?
Australia also passed through a stage where preservation of national purity was indeed a major priority. The infamous ‘white Australia policy’ which espoused the values of ‘white’ migrants from the northern climes, and looked down on those with a varying shade of dark skin, was accepted dogma for a long time and was banished only in the 1970s.
Since that time, Australia has stood firm in the resolve to ensure there is a constant mix of nations, encouraging an active migration programme that is considered essential for the development of the nation.
This is perhaps one essential difference: whereas in both Canada and Australia there were vast open spaces and an increasing need for workers to fill the factories and work the farms, there was not a similar need in Europe, where most migrants were taken in for political rather than economic reasons.
A second essential difference is the concept of a melting-pot as opposed to that of a salad bowl. The former term refers to the expectation that newcomers should imbibe the habits of the natives and become assimilated in the shortest period of time possible. This policy was particularly obvious in the US, where it is still official policy.
On the other hand, the salad-bowl concept emphasises the fact that the individual elements within society may remain identifiable and still make a comprehensive whole. It appreciates the major problems associated with integrating within the host community, a process which is always hard, involves a lot of sacrifices, invariably takes a considerable amount of time, and is never completely finished within one generation.
It accepts the fact that migrants have their own habits and values and these have to be somehow squared with those of the land that hosts them. It appreciates the fact that you cannot suddenly detach an individual from his or her upbringing, history, and every aspect that has been built into one’s persona, and expect them to function normally as if that process of devaluation has never happened.
Multiculturalism encourages maintenance of one’s own culture while helping the newcomers to overcome the multiple difficulties involved in settlement, including setting up language classes and the provision of ethno-specific services.
There are, of course, limits to multiculturalism, but within these limits, every effort should be made by governments to ensure that the process of transition should be as seamless as possible.
This involves assistance, not antagonism. It is an unfortunate fact that racism is a fundamental trait of human nature. We may feel superior to the newcomers, or frightened by them, or in other ways feel we should not keep too close a company with them.
We devise ways of protecting ourselves from any possible contamination, erecting fences, physical or sociological, to defend our perceived rights.
Deep down, we all suffer from such fears. It is only by recognising our basic instincts and by a positive effort, overcoming them, that we may survive in a changing world.
The proof of the pudding is in the eating. It is patently obvious that ethnic unrest has been far less prevalent in places like Australia and Canada where multiculturalism is the accepted policy, compared with places where this is not the case.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
18 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Connie Deguara
Apr 17th 2012, 06:42
The current government only want boat people. If you want to migrate to Australia fly to Indonisia hope on a boat and you get everything free.
Rod Enderby
Apr 16th 2012, 17:05
Increasingly acknowledged as having been disastrous in the UK with the native population being made to feel second class and resenting it. The worm is now turning.
j falzon
Apr 16th 2012, 13:48
I am an Australian of Maltese descent and I can tell you that the immigrants in Australia (of which I am a product), are very different to the immigrants in Europe. Firstly, we never had a sense of entitlement, nor did we try to impose our culture on anyone else. In most cases, immigrants willingly absorbed the new culture and their offspring were truly Australian (not just by citizenship but by sentiment and learned values). Citizenship is fairly artificial in Europe and is not based on any real values or intention of assimilation.
Let's put it this way, when an immigrant encounters a proud nation with a set of immutable values, such as those my parents found in Australia, the immigrant has something to assimilate to. In Europe, the self-hating Europeans give nothing to the immigrant to assimilate. This results in disharmony and a kind of self-imposed apartheid by the new arrivals. Europe really needs to do something about this. The first people to benefit will be the immigrants. Here is a great book on the subject:
http://www.bookdepository.co.uk/Home-We-Build-Together-Jonathan-Sacks/9780826423498
Emma Xerri
Apr 16th 2012, 15:17
Agree Mr. Falzon but that was before Multiculturalism. Immigrants were encouraged to assimilate. But Multiculturalism is different and expects the immigrants to retain their own values and culture. It is not the fault of Europeans or even Australians that they are experiencing problems - the system is creating it. Besides, they are now importing immigrants who see their own cultures as inherently superior to that of the European one, which they are striving to replace.
These countries are also continually importing new immigrants long after the need for them or space for them has run out. Australia and Canada and the US all needed European and other immigrants to build up these nations, but what purpose does immigration serve in the established old world countries of Europe? Even the US, Canada and Australia are getting pretty full up now. They keep giving us the lie that they need them to pay taxes to pay for our pensions, but in truth these type of immigrants hardly pay any taxes end up costing the taxpayers more money and are a big financial drain on the social safety net.
Bill Jensen
Apr 16th 2012, 11:43
@ Emma Xerri
' Even then, Australians are very racist and I know because I have lots of cousins living there and they tell me what a hard ride they had to integrate and they were all blue-eyed blonds who immigrated legally and with a trade.' What a laugh!!!!
Let me explain to you all as an Australian the issues we are having with multiculturalism in the luckiest country on Earth. In a political context the term is used for a wide variety of meanings, ranging from the advocacy of equal respect to the various cultures in a society, to a policy of promoting the maintenance of cultural diversity, to policies in which people of various ethnic and religious groups are addressed by the authorities as defined by the group they belong to.
At this time we have complete communities who have migrated to our nation, legally or illegally, who do not wish to assimilate or conform to the rules and regulations set down through our basically Christian based parliament system. We can not go to certain butchers in Preston Victoria and buy pork products out of fear of offending Muslims. Indian taxi drivers take the long way round for extra money in fares and when something is said they protest in the main street of Melbourne claiming we are racist. We do not have any Christmas or Easter movies on TV anymore. We have pensioners living on pittance and on the streets because government housing is full of Sudanese who pay a reduced rate of rent to give them a kick start in life.
Multiculturalism only works when the different and diverse communities involved in making it happen actually agree to work together and dont try to live their lives in the new nation with the same ideas and problems they had in their previous nation. Its pretty simple, remember why you left.....
Australians in general arent racist. We, like many other nationalities on this beautiful Earth (including the Maltese), just want equality in the nation we call home and dont want to have to continually take a back step just to keep immigrants, legal or not, happy.
Emma Xerri
Apr 16th 2012, 15:53
Then what you are describing that actually works is not Multiculturalism at all but the Melting Pot.
With Multiculturalism, the culture of the immigrants is exalted to that of above the host country and they are encouraged NOT to integrate. That is what makes it Multiculturalism. That is why you have to be careful what to say and to be constantly on the alert to appease them.
As to the reference to my cousins’ experience in Australia, please do not laugh, they immigrated to your beautiful country before Multiculturalism was in vogue and there were no anti-racists laws an Political Correctness was unheard of. They were called names just because they did not speak English with an Australian accent.
However, what you have described is actually happening in Australia (which the author of this op-ed piece conveniently neglected to mention) is very true as it has been happening in every country that you care to mention that has accepted Multiculturalism as the new religion. It seems that our leaders actually want us to become second-class citizens in our own country. Now it is Malta’s turn.
Paul Caruana
Apr 16th 2012, 09:17
One needs to make a clear distinction between multiculturalism and illegal migration.
Indeed Australia is a good example of this, where illegal migrants are treated quite harshly on arrival (basically deported and incarcerated on a small pacific island in the middle of nowhere until their case is processed), which had the effect of drastically cutting down the number of such unwelcome arrivals down under.
MALCOLM SEYCHELL
Apr 16th 2012, 07:10
As far as I know Australia has strict laws on illegal immigration not like we have in Europe.
In Australia they take immigrants but legally and just what the country would need.
carmel cassar
Apr 15th 2012, 18:35
we were always overcome by greater powers this is the next.
stephen koludrovic
Apr 15th 2012, 16:19
Now what would Maurice think of the Christmas island. detention centre?Would that be a melting pot or a fruit salad bowl?
Just as an after thought How about the cultural intermingling between Aussies and the aborigines?
Joseph Cauchi Senior
Apr 15th 2012, 15:31
Can this article apply to Malta?
I don’t think so.
How can anyone compare Malta to such countries as massive as Australia and Canada with a relatively sparse population to just an almost a barren rock brimming with people in the middle of the sea, with no mineral resources whatsoever?
Why not the concept of the Melting Pot rather than the Salad Bowl analogy to have a better society with less friction and antagonism?
JC.
Louis Gialanze
Apr 15th 2012, 14:10
With all due respect Profs your argument is fundamentally flawed. Australia and Canada need immigration for economic reasons and must therefore take on board the immigrants cultures alongside. On the other hand a small island like Malta, lacking basic resources like fresh water, is in need of depopulation and must be extremely selective what immigrants to take on board for our own economic survival. Moreover, the absolute majority of immigrants in the past ten years ,who are either illiterate or semiliterate, came in uninvited and therefore cannot expect to be made welcome by the locals.
Robert Callus
Apr 15th 2012, 11:51
At long last! Someone talking about multiculturalism and actually knows what the word means.
http://robertcallus.wordpress.com/2011/12/29/multiculti-in-north-korea/
My opinion is somewhere in the middle. A strict melting pot is not only impossible to achieve but also ends up destroying the beauty of different cultures. On the other hand, while everyone should be allowed to retain his own culture, doing so should never be an excuse to break the law, or have the laws change to accommodate you.
Emma Xerri
Apr 16th 2012, 05:33
I think that you are very naive. Even in Multiculturalism, one culture always has to dominate. Which one will depends one strength and numbers. Then the dominant culture will change the laws to suit itself.
What they are doing in Malta is nothing short of sheer madness.
"Those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make mad".
B. Cachia
Apr 15th 2012, 10:21
What may apply to Australia, Canada or even the US is hardly relevant to Malta, an island of 320 km sq that already has a population of 400,000. And the immigrants who come here do not come from a diversity of cultures anyway, they are almost exclusively sub-saharan Africans, and a large majority of them are Muslim, judging by the demographics of the countries they come from.
Mr Joseph Carmel Chetcuti
Apr 15th 2012, 11:05
And judging by where Malta is (geographically) located!
pat muscat
Apr 15th 2012, 10:20
I agree, but you are talking of Australia, a country that stretches thousands of km from west to east, and sparsely inhabited. Malta on the other hand is 28 km from one side to the other, and one of the most inhabited barren rocks on earth! Our major problem is that of space and survival; where are we going to place the new comers? Figures speak for themselves: Australia refugees per 1000 pop: 0.98; Malta's 14.73 per 1000 population!
Emma Xerri
Apr 16th 2012, 05:15
Even then, Australians are very racist and I know because I have lots of cousins living there and they tell me what a hard ride they had to integrate and they were all blue-eyed blonds who immigrated legally and with a trade.
And it is not true that Multiculturalism is working swimmingly well there either. Did the author forget the Cronulla Beach Riots between gangs of Middle Eastern youths and Anglo Australians or the problems they are having with Muslim immigrants and the 'uncovered meat' Imam (he came out officially and said that any woman, whether she be Muslim or not, if not wearing a hijab is 'uncovered meat' and was fair game to rape)?
Multiculturalism is being forced from above in a dictatorial way but the people in the streets do not want it. People know it is bad for them instinctively.
All I know is that Multiculturalism has taken off all over the world where there is a culturally European Christian nation, so there must be a big payoff for the Governments who in concert decided without prior consent of the electorate to mix-and-match. My guess is that it would be a lot easier for Governments to rule and pass any draconian and repressive legislation when the people are not united but split along racial or ethnic lines. You know, the old divide and rule tactic. Now they want this in Malta too.
Please choose the reason of your report below: