Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-27-2022, 04:15 PM
 
50 posts, read 25,155 times
Reputation: 34

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bakery Hill View Post
No, I went with the most recent authoritative data I could find for both countries.

Regarding the Australian total, that's your "doubt" only.

What makes you think there haven't been influential Italian Australians?
You went with the lowest estimate that the ACS has given - it was almost 2 million higher as recently as 2017. You were looking to report the most restrictive number to prove your point. This is no more authoritative than the 2017 report or others.

And I'm not sure it's my doubt - ethnic groups typically see a decrease only a century+ after they arrive in a given location - considering the Australian Italian population is newer than the American, I'd think that the current estimate for Italian Australians is about at the upper limit of Italian ancestry in Australia.

Can you find any higher estimates for the number of Italian Australians? I can't.

I can, however, find a number of organizations that give higher estimates for the number of Italian Americans, including the U.S. Department of State and a number of government and media reports from as far back as the 70s giving estimates of 20 million+.

And I never said there haven't been influential Italian Australians - but can you point to any visible features of Australian culture that were impacted by them? It doesn't seem so.

Nevertheless, the Italian Australian population is much less prominent than the Italian American one. It's not even a debate.

Last edited by charget; 07-27-2022 at 04:35 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-27-2022, 04:21 PM
 
50 posts, read 25,155 times
Reputation: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daywalk View Post
It seems African countries are the most ethnically diverse in the world:
https://worldpopulationreview.com/co...erse-countries

As for the 3 countries states in this topic's heading, it seems Canada is the most diverse?

Ethnic Fractionalization
Canada : 71%
United States : 49%
Australia : 9.3%
How many times does it need to be pointed out - that this is a study of ethnic fractionalization and not "diversity".

African countries are not the most ethnically diverse, they have a lot of people with different tribal identities who are nonetheless genetically similar to identical.

Canada reports higher ethnic fractionalization because of the French/English dichotomy.

And the worldpopulationreview titling the survey "most racially diverse countries" when it's a survey of ethnic fractionalization is deliberately misleading and wrong. African countries, Canada, etc, are not more ethnically/racially diverse than the US.

You guys need to do your own basic research, instead of just believing what any immediately accessible index on Google will tell you.

The US has 50 diasporic ancestry populations numbering more than 1 million, in a racially diverse society. You mean to tell me Canada is more diverse than that? It isn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-27-2022, 04:27 PM
 
50 posts, read 25,155 times
Reputation: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler View Post
Yea, and I think a large part of it is the large proportion of foreign-born population and first generation of people born in Australia which is really high up there. Australia is at about 30%, Canada at 21%, and the US at about 15%. This is arguably a much larger difference in terms of the basic communications when it comes to language and idiomatic expressions and the kind of shared understanding of cultures. This also extends out on a city level as Sydney to me felt in practice, as in day to day, extremely diverse in a way that's pretty rare in US cities. Sydney's proportion of foreign-born is actually greater than that of LA and NYC's, and comparable to Vancouver's, but unlike Vancouver, doesn't draw so heavily on one specific region/culture.
You're always casually biased against America in any and every way.

You people have your pet strategies you use to disadvantage the US in any given argument.

"% foreign born" is not a useful statistic, especially not to compare small populations with shorter and less diverse immigrant histories to larger populations with longer and more diverse immigrant histories.

This obfuscates the fact that the US has always had more immigration than Australia, and it's immigration and settlement patterns have always been more diverse than Australia's - but you could easily ignore this as the American population gets larger, because then any proportion of foreign born, or of a given immigrant group, will get smaller - Australia's will stay larger because it's a much smaller and more homogeneous society and it takes much smaller immigrant populations to make a "large" proportional impact.

Australia's foreign born population has long been dominated by people from the UK, for example - it doesn't really evidence a diverse society at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-27-2022, 05:49 PM
 
Location: Australia
3,602 posts, read 2,267,717 times
Reputation: 6931
Quote:
Originally Posted by charget View Post
You're always casually biased against America in any and every way.

You people have your pet strategies you use to disadvantage the US in any given argument.

"% foreign born" is not a useful statistic, especially not to compare small populations with shorter and less diverse immigrant histories to larger populations with longer and more diverse immigrant histories.

This obfuscates the fact that the US has always had more immigration than Australia, and it's immigration and settlement patterns have always been more diverse than Australia's - but you could easily ignore this as the American population gets larger, because then any proportion of foreign born, or of a given immigrant group, will get smaller - Australia's will stay larger because it's a much smaller and more homogeneous society and it takes much smaller immigrant populations to make a "large" proportional impact.

Australia's foreign born population has long been dominated by people from the UK, for example - it doesn't really evidence a diverse society at all.
It seems you are coming from the point of view that the more diversity the better. That is entirely your right though not an opinion universally accepted. Especially by countries such as Japan.

However, surely in all the countries being discussed, the only non immigrants were the Indigenous populations. Obviously we had our convicts and the US had slaves but they all came from a different place.

Australia did indeed for a long time draw most of its immigration from the British Isles, but not necessarily the UK. Around 25-30% of the population were Irish and the Irish Catholics had their own culture right up to late last century.

The Italian migration pattern was a slow increase until after WW2. In 1939 there were 38,000 Italian born residents. In 1961 it was around 230,000 and by 1971 660,000.

The importance of the Italian migration was very high as it was the first big migration from a country that was not predominantly English speaking. It broke down the Irish nature of the Catholic Church and of the Catholic school system. Italians were subjected to all sorts of racism in those days but gradually people embraced Italian food (I remember as a child my uncle trying to describe what a pizza was) and other aspects of their culture.

So the last wedding we attended of an Italian descent cousin had three ceremonies. A Buddhist, a Chinese and a Mass. The bride being Cambodian but with an ethnic Chinese parent. The reception was at a typical Australian venue overlooking Sydney harbour.

That is quite typical here and I am sure also in the US and Canada.

The focus here, and from what I read also in Canada, is more addressing the issues arising from the historical treatment of the Indigenous population.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-27-2022, 06:43 PM
 
1,458 posts, read 1,315,686 times
Reputation: 1167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
I know both the US and Australia, and Italian-Americans appear much more impactful in American society in general than Italian-Australians down under.

I can't even keep track of how many Italian-American icons there are in all aspects of US life: Madonna, Robert de Niro, Tony Bennett, Frankie Valli, Francis Ford Coppola, Mario Cuomo, Rudy Giuliani, Frank Sinatra, Joe Di Maggio, Dan Marino, Mike Eruzione, Martin Scorcese, Mario Andretti, etc.

The only country that comes as close to having as impactful an Italian diaspora is Argentina.
A fair proportion of those are pretty much unknown outside of North America though.

Daniel Ricciardo would have name recognition in any country that follows Formula 1. Tina Arena is probably now more popular in France than Australia where her career peaked in the 1990s. Anthony LaPaglia has acted in more US TV series and movies (e.g. Cold Case, Frasier, Betsy's Wedding) than Australian. Natalie Imgruglia would be reasonably well known in any country that aired Australian soap operas.

And Anthony Albanese, Australia's current Prime Minister, should be known to his Canadian and US counterparts, but apparently is not.....

As for more local influence, people like Carla Zampatti (fashion), Anthony (Nick) Scali (mid market furniture), Paul Bongiorno (political commentator) have been pretty influential in their fields.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-27-2022, 06:55 PM
 
1,458 posts, read 1,315,686 times
Reputation: 1167
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarisaMay View Post
It seems you are coming from the point of view that the more diversity the better. That is entirely your right though not an opinion universally accepted. Especially by countries such as Japan.

However, surely in all the countries being discussed, the only non immigrants were the Indigenous populations. Obviously we had our convicts and the US had slaves but they all came from a different place.

Australia did indeed for a long time draw most of its immigration from the British Isles, but not necessarily the UK. Around 25-30% of the population were Irish and the Irish Catholics had their own culture right up to late last century.

The Italian migration pattern was a slow increase until after WW2. In 1939 there were 38,000 Italian born residents. In 1961 it was around 230,000 and by 1971 660,000.

The importance of the Italian migration was very high as it was the first big migration from a country that was not predominantly English speaking. It broke down the Irish nature of the Catholic Church and of the Catholic school system. Italians were subjected to all sorts of racism in those days but gradually people embraced Italian food (I remember as a child my uncle trying to describe what a pizza was) and other aspects of their culture.

So the last wedding we attended of an Italian descent cousin had three ceremonies. A Buddhist, a Chinese and a Mass. The bride being Cambodian but with an ethnic Chinese parent. The reception was at a typical Australian venue overlooking Sydney harbour.

That is quite typical here and I am sure also in the US and Canada.

The focus here, and from what I read also in Canada, is more addressing the issues arising from the historical treatment of the Indigenous population.
And even in the Gold Rush days about 25% of arrivals were from continental Europe, Asia and elsewhere. The impact of 19th century Chinese migration is evident in most of Australia. There were even Italian, Dutch, Jamaican and Black American miners involved in the Eureka Stockade, a pivotal moment in Australian political history.

That historical Irish-British divide still reveals itself today. It's a large part of the why the Catholic Church remains one of the largest employers in the country due to its role in healthcare, social services, and education.

Last edited by Bakery Hill; 07-27-2022 at 07:14 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-27-2022, 07:32 PM
 
Location: Canada
14,633 posts, read 14,720,940 times
Reputation: 34553
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
We've always been told that Canada's immigration department (which handled both people who want to live here and those who want to visit) is strictly colour-blind and ethnicity-blind. And the reality is that it's lived up to that billing for a long time.

That's why it's a bit shocking to see some of the news coming out about visas for people from certain countries being denied.

For example, students from Africa who want to come to study in Canada (especially in Quebec, and where the institutions have already admitted them) from sub-Saharan countries have sky-high rejection rates from the Canadian immigration department.

There is also this story that is currently in the news.

UNAIDS chief calls out racism after 'people in the South' denied visas to attend conference (in Canada)

http://www.africanews.com/2022/07/27...nd-conference/

Buried in that story is another controversy about the headliner for a major African music festival in Montreal being denied a visa because they were afraid she'd never leave Canada (she's a multi-millionaire artist).
That link says "We are really sorry, but the page you requested could not be found."

In recent weeks I've been hearing on the news about people from certain countries, including from areas of Africa, that are presently being denied visas for admittance into Canada because they are from locations where there is a very high incidence of Monkey Pox in those countries and there's the concern about the risk of those people bringing it with them into Canada.

Also just 4 days ago the WHO declared that Monkey Pox has become a global emergency.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/world-...ency-1.5999502

Does the news I've been hearing have anything to do with whatever news you've been hearing recently about people being rejected, or is what you're talking about older news that is unrelated?

If people from foreign countries are being denied entry because of Monkey Pox and the high risk of another potential global pandemic because of a truly nasty disease, I don't think that kind of rejection has anything to do with racism. That's just about sound common sense and it certainly won't have been the first time such restrictions have been put in place in Canada during a world wide health emergency of that nature.


.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-27-2022, 08:51 PM
 
Location: Canada
14,633 posts, read 14,720,940 times
Reputation: 34553
Quote:
Originally Posted by charget View Post

How many times does it need to be pointed out - that this is a study of ethnic fractionalization and not "diversity".

African countries are not the most ethnically diverse, they have a lot of people with different tribal identities who are nonetheless genetically similar to identical.

Canada reports higher ethnic fractionalization because of the French/English dichotomy.

And the worldpopulationreview titling the survey "most racially diverse countries" when it's a survey of ethnic fractionalization is deliberately misleading and wrong. African countries, Canada, etc, are not more ethnically/racially diverse than the US.

You guys need to do your own basic research, instead of just believing what any immediately accessible index on Google will tell you.

The US has 50 diasporic ancestry populations numbering more than 1 million, in a racially diverse society. You mean to tell me Canada is more diverse than that? It isn't.
Forgive a decrepit old biddy here but can you please explain the difference between ethnic fractionalization vs. diversity? I'm not familiar with the word fractionalization and don't know what it means. I tried to look it up but the definitions I found were confusing, didn't make any sense to me.

Canada doesn't have an English/French dichotomy and the two are not equal. French and English are not the only languages spoken in Canada, they are just the two "official" languages of Canada. More than 200 mother languages from around the world are spoken in Canada plus over 60 Indigenous languages.

America is the 3rd most highly populated country in the world and has 10 times the population of Canada so it wouldn't be a stretch of the imagination to believe that America is more diversely populated than Canada. But Canada holds it's own: https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/...011001-eng.cfm

Canada has several ethnic diasporas each numbering over a million but I think not over 50 diasporas like in America since Canada doesn't have a big enough total population.

https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia....0born%20abroad

Quote:
....... According to the 2016 census, nearly 21.9% of Canada’s population was born abroad. As of 2010, Canada was the G8 country with the highest proportion of immigrants, ahead of Germany (13%) and the United States (12.9%). Canada not only has been built on immigration, but has prospered from it. The way that new immigrants are welcomed and integrated into Canadian society, along with Canada’s economic situation, make Canada a country of choice for emigrants from around the world.

Canada’s diasporas are hard to quantify, but census data can be used to estimate the size of a given diaspora based on the various origins of residents.

In 2016, the census identified over 250 different ethnic origins in Canada.

The largest diasporas in this country include the communities of Chinese origin (1.77 million), Italian origin (1.59 million), Indian origin (1.37 million) and Ukrainian origin (1.37 million)
.....
.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-27-2022, 11:16 PM
 
1,458 posts, read 1,315,686 times
Reputation: 1167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoisite View Post
Forgive a decrepit old biddy here but can you please explain the difference between ethnic fractionalization vs. diversity? I'm not familiar with the word fractionalization and don't know what it means. I tried to look it up but the definitions I found were confusing, didn't make any sense to me.
Seems like a measure of how fractured a society is; how likely people are to consider others "different from me" and for that perception to be strong enough to influence how they view or act towards that "different" person. So a high score is not necessarily a good thing.

I can understand how the US has such a high score given its ongoing history of racial issues, but Canada? It could reflect the Francophone-English speaking divide, as it plays out in official languages, broadcasting etc.

I don't think Australia is quite the utopia of togetherness that its score suggests.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2022, 12:27 AM
 
Location: Brisbane
5,021 posts, read 7,426,595 times
Reputation: 4476
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bakery Hill View Post
Seems like a measure of how fractured a society is; how likely people are to consider others "different from me" and for that perception to be strong enough to influence how they view or act towards that "different" person. So a high score is not necessarily a good thing.

I can understand how the US has such a high score given its ongoing history of racial issues, but Canada? It could reflect the Francophone-English speaking divide, as it plays out in official languages, broadcasting etc.

I don't think Australia is quite the utopia of togetherness that its score suggests.
The country above Canada on the list is Andorra, which is pretty much an entirely white country where 95% of the population speak one of 4 languages (Catalan, Spanish, French and Portuguese) with each one of those 4 above 10% of the population.

Belgium also sits just above the USA, which is of course a county well know for the division between Flanders and Wallonia on historical and Linguistically grounds, they sometimes talk about splitting the county in two, and possibly would if the largely neutral Brussels did not exist in the middle.

Its certainly not an ultimate end measure of diversity that is for sure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:52 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top