Mass immigration kills Aussie culture, says demographer Bob Birrell (fit in, standard of living)

[adsfr88]

Cushla what is Chinese culture?...or malaysian culture or Pakistani culture? Pro-multiculturalists should be able to answer this, since you guys are so quick to question ours.

[Spindle]

Originally Posted by Trimac20

Australian culture as we know it is a mix of different cultures, so I don't think that statement is a paradox at all.

lol. I merely pointed out that Ozgal's particular statement was a paradox. Any mathematician or linguist would see it. I knew what she really meant.

[Trimac20]

Originally Posted by Vichel

You know, when I lived in Canada, I craved the bloody things. I got back and I was happy as a pig in .... and ate them whenever and then suddenly I realised ... I really didn't like them afterall. It's not the way I eat.

They are so loaded with fat, the worst fat. And salt. And then there's the "meat" - which is rather loosely defined when it comes to meat pies. And that grosses me out. I'm a bit squeamish that way. I love liver and brains but not any other organ meat (kidney - BLECH!!!) and definitely not globs of fat. Meat pies, according to what I've read have a lot of stuff that I don't consider all that edible. So it's more a psychological thing with me. I've made meat pies myself - Steak & Guiness Pie, Chicken Pot Pie ... those I love! In moderation though.

It's the same with sausages - I never buy the typical Aussie snags. They're so greasy! If I'm going to have sausage it has to be a good Italian sausage from Princi's, or Chorizo, or Angus Beef, or Turkey.

You know I often ask myself why I like them so when I know (or maybe don't know!) what's in them. I think it's because when you were raised on them from a very young age you get a taste for 'em that becomes part of your blood. Same goes for McDonald's.

I think some of the pies you find at good bakeries are more edible, but pie mince in general is kind of the lowest grade there is. Four'n'Twenty or Mrs Mac's is, I'll have to admit, pretty gross when you examine exactly what's in it. Even steak pies are perhaps 50% steak at best; probably cheap cuts like rump, with alot of mince and organ filler.

Same goes with snags. When you have a look at what's in them it's not very nice. Italian sausages can still be good, but in the end a sausage is still a sausage; mostly ground up leftovers. That's what their original purpose was, after all, to make use of all the leftovers!

[Trimac20]

Originally Posted by adsfr88

The only "good" thing about multiculturalism is the food. That's the only argument the supporters have for it. There's nothing else. Who needs social cohesion and identity when we can just indulge ourselves in cuisines. My response to that is "I have the recipe now pi$$ off".
It doesn't take a genius to make a meal.

I've had friends from many different nationalities and backgrounds. My school was the United Nations, basically, for better or for worse, and it didn't reduce the social cohesion one iota. We all got along and it wasn't an issue. Now it might be an issue for some ungrateful immigrants, or some xenophobic Aussies, but for the majority of us it's not a problem.

And food is one of the many benefits; what about learning more about other cultures and thus ourselves? Learning about our united identify as people instead of separate groups? It's seems isolationists like you want to keep barriers up - which is the real problem - rather than face up to the fact that as civilised people this shouldn't be an issue anymore.

If the arguments for multiculturalism are weak then the arguments against it are weaker, and stem mainly from paranoia or a superiority complex.

I should mention I do think there should be restrictions. What's happening in Britain is ridiculous. All thinks talk of banning Santa Claus or pandering to Muslims is going too far. We should welcome other cultures but still maintain our customs. Though I don't think that includes barring certain groups just because of their background.

[Richard7666]

I have to say I enjoy Mrs Mac's sausage rolls. The pies are average.

[wanneroo]

Originally Posted by Vichel

They are so loaded with fat, the worst fat. And salt. And then there's the "meat" - which is rather loosely defined when it comes to meat pies. And that grosses me out. I'm a bit squeamish that way. I love liver and brains but not any other organ meat (kidney - BLECH!!!) and definitely not globs of fat. Meat pies, according to what I've read have a lot of stuff that I don't consider all that edible. So it's more a psychological thing with me. I've made meat pies myself - Steak & Guiness Pie, Chicken Pot Pie ... those I love! In moderation though.

I've tried meat pies a number of times but I can't say I'm all that impressed and the meat definitely falls under the guise of "mystery meat" from what I have seen.

However I'd be game for a pie made homemade or at a decent restaurant with quality ingredients.

[Efranke]

Originally Posted by Ozgal

30 years ago??? 30 years ago Italians & Greeks were being bashed for being different in this country. Now you're all sipping your latte's, and dining al fresco.

Hold on.

A couple of posts ago you were telling us that Australia never had a dominant culture and has always been a diverse, multicultural mix of different peoples (as if to say the entire world came here at the same time in one big boat), but now we see you're lamenting how badly post-war Italian and Greek immigrants were treated for being "different" from the Anglo-Celtic Australian mainstream.

Make up your mind.

what's your point? For each of those categories I could find someone who is not "dinky di" who has contributed to Australian society.

Sure, but I think you'll find that, on the whole, it was people of British Isles descent who played the dominant role in building and shaping the modern Australian nation.

a shameful and embarrasing part of Australian history. Yet, some people think this is ideal.

Gee, you really are a product of the ultra-PC Australian education system, aren't you?

Leaving aside all that rubbish about how reprehensible the so-called "White Australia" policy was, would you care to explain what is so wrong about a nation's founding majority wanting to preserve their identity and culture instead of being overwhelmed by alien populations?

To this day, nearly every other nation in the world keeps out ethnically and racially distinct foreign populations in the name of self-preservation. Yet I don't hear people screaming about how "racist" they are for not allowing themselves to be flooded with immigrants.

threatens social cohesion? Please tell me in what way.

Nobody can honestly deny that Australia was a far more cohesive, unified, harmonious country prior to the advent of mass non-European immigration and state-sanctioned multiculturalism. That shared sense of nationhood - or the "crimson thread of kinship" as Sir Henry Parkes put it - that Australians once enjoyed has been completely undermined. Today Australia is a society of strangers, inhabited by an increasingly polyglot hodgepodge of peoples who have absolutely nothing in common with each other.

To suggest that Australia's identity - that NO ONE has been able to tell me what that is exactly, is being eroded is false & misleading, appealing to bigots nationwide, who have forgotten just how their families got here.

Can you define China's identity in a few words? What about Greece's? India's? Turkmenistan's?

You can't? That must mean they haven't got one!

The fact that we are having this discussion just shows that mass diverse immigration has indeed undermined Australia's historic identity. Not so long ago Australia was confident in its identity as a white, English-speaking Western nation with a strong British heritage. It was only the onslaught of mass non-European immigration and multiculturalism in the 1970s that threw Australia's national identity into confusion.

Whether it was the convict ship, the 10 pound poms, or after WW2 - face it everyone came here to create a new life and brought with them a facet of their old community & homeland.

Yes, the original British and Irish settlers transplanted much of their old culture and way of life onto this continent. By the time the post-war wave of non-British European immigrants arrived, the die was well and truly cast. Most of the post-war immigrants assimilated into Australia's existing, British-derived culture and way of life. They shared a common European Christian heritage with the existing Australian population, so assimilation was possible. I'm yet to see evidence that the current wave of non-Western immigrants are able or willing to do the same.

[Efranke]

Originally Posted by Ozgal

Japan. They virtually don't let anyone in, although that's changing - similar to Australia, they have an aging population & lacking skilled workers.

Pity that immigration is not a fix for either of those problems.

[Efranke]

Originally Posted by Ozgal

There are no double standards - my point is Australia is built on multi-cultralism wasn't /isn't it???

From the beginning of the colonial era until the mid 20th Century, Australia drew its people and culture almost exclusively from the British Isles (In 1949, Australia’s population was 90% Anglo-Celtic, 98% European). Thus, to claim that “Australia was founded on multiculturalism” is completely wrong and demonstrates a total ignorance of Australian history. The truth is that Australia was founded upon British civilisation, not "diversity" or "multiculturalism."

so what "people" are we preserving? Anglo Australia? Indigenous Australia? Migrants of 40,50 years past??

The various, disparate nomadic tribes that we now collectively label "Indigenous Australians" never formed a nation-state of their own per se. Nevertheless, they did try to prevent the British from settling on this continent (those racist, xenophobic Aborigines!). And they failed.

Given what happened to them once they became a minority, why on earth would European Australians want to follow in their footsteps?

We have had an increase in population - that would increase crime. more people.

He means per capita levels of crime.

Australia is an example of how multicultralism works.

Is it?

A European-descended majority keeps the country and economy running, while unproductive Third World immigrants rip off and exploit Australia in every way that they can. Most of them do not give anything to Australia, not even their loyalty.

I really wonder what will happen over the next three or four decades if immigration continues to shift the demographic balance. Will Australia remain a First World country when most of its population becomes of Third World origin?

[Eastern Roamer]

Ausie culture sure didn't help the aboriginies who were there first. Yup, I'd say immigration kills.

Zenophobe.