Its an abject failure and was always going to be so Though i suspect that is in fact the aim of forcing incompatible races together. Divide and conquer!

I suspect however from the comments about food that most people dont understand the difference in either intent or implementation between "multiracial" and "multicultural"!

Soren wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2011 at 11:05pm:


The word ghetto comes from the Italian word borghetto. Even the eternal city had its ghettos and subcultures. In Early Rome, the Etruscans had the best parts of Rome which were largely free from malaria - the Tuscus vicus. In later times, the Jews had their ghetto in what is now known as Trastevere.  Then there were the various Roman Mystery cults, including the cult of Bacchus, Mithras and Christianity itself.

It's interesting how Etruscan Haruspices and Augurs played such a leading role in decision making in ancient Rome. The Romans "subcontracted" the Etruscan school of Haruspicy whenever there was an important event. 

You might get an illusion of monoculturalism from the historians who were part and parcel of the Roman military machine, such as Julius Caesar and Tacitus.

Some ancient Roman historians were not even Roman. An example is Dionysius of Halicarnasus, who was a leading light in the Greek community in Ancient Rome. The Greeks had a greater status in Rome compared with others (They were not regarded as barbarians) and had considerable influences, particularly in the Hellenistic art and architecture of Ancient Rome. 

We are a multi cultured society - the label means little either way.

Leave it in place or take it away the fact will remain the same as it was before the term came into fashion.

bambu wrote on Oct 6^th, 2012 at 12:00pm:


Yep.
The left-wing intelligentsia have a lot to answer for. Students being robbed of a thorough education; being denied to learn and defend the culture they have inherited.
You actually have to defy the curriculum in order to really learn the past and the tools needed to defend it. 

Please allow me to copy these paragraphs to this topic.

In ancient world, two border city-states may fight each others only because the difference of culture. Then the nations are bigger and bigger. Each nation is composed by many different sub-culture.

Now a day, it's 21st century. No one can avoid culture intercommunion and amalgamation. Why not can we absorb the good parts and avoid the bad part from different cultures?

Multiculturalism is to protect freedom of cultures, similar to Freedom of Religious.

Freedom of thought, conscience and religion is one of the substantive human rights. [wikipedia/Human rights]

If you want to absorb the good parts of different culture. You have to keep them at first.

Multiculturalism protect different cultures in Australia just like keeping a color palette that you can try to generate any color.

What is national & cultural identity when you real respect Freedom of Religions?

I'm a Chinese, and I'm Australian citizen too. I have different culture than you. So what? What do you want to tag me another "national & cultural identity"?

You can keep your "national & cultural identity" in your home. But it's nothing in public political space. Don't you think we are equal even we have different "national & cultural identity"?

Multiculturalism is to protect freedom of cultures that it protect all Australian have equal rights to live here no matter what "national & cultural identity".

mutation wrote on Oct 31^st, 2012 at 12:35am:

When I say "I am a Chinese", It's about race just like you say "I am an Anglo-Saxon".

When I said "I am an Australian", It's about my citizenship. It's same to you say "I am an Australian"

I have the same rights with you to "say what is or isnt what should or shouldnt be Australian"

Australia is not only yours but also mine.

BTW, I speak English here is to communicate. If you understand Chinese and hard to understand my English, I can speak Chinese.



mutation wrote on Oct 31^st, 2012 at 6:48pm: