6 ms·

Lol what are you on about. Plenty of countries have a very multicultural society, and they do great. Look at Melbourne, Australia, we have huge immigrant popul

Lol what are you on about. Plenty of countries have a very multicultural society, and they do great. Look at Melbourne, Australia, we have huge immigrant populations, and all the different cultures have made this an awesome place to live - E.g. I highly doubt you'd find a more diverse selection of restaurants per capita anywhere else. This election wasn't about race. Don't project your bigotry onto all Trump supporters. And the 'world elite' is not actually the group of people that aren't racist, it's the middle class that isn't racist. The 'elite' and the 'worker class' are actually pretty similar in how bigoted they are.

njloof 10y ago
Sounds great, but I thought Australia was gravely concerned about so-called "boat people."
jwdunne 10y ago
That's interesting. The anti-immigration right in the UK hold your immigration system up as the way forward. We have a multicultural society in the UK that many are rejecting, with racial tensions at a high. The difference is that many immigrants are working class. They are scapegoated to great success with the white working class. I disagree with that - I think the real problem is meagre infrastructure investment to support new arrivals but perhaps the Aussie style system works on the other end of the spectrum: focus only on valuable people where value is how much money they would earn.
- theparanoid 10y ago
  Indonesia has an immigrant group of success, Chinese, which resulted in the pogrom of 98'.
- ddeck 10y ago
  It's also interesting given the relative immigrant populations: As of 2011, 26% of the Australian population was not born in Australia.[1] That's around double the UK. The only nations with higher proportions are Luxembourg, Switzerland and Israel. As the parent pointed out, Melbourne is particularly diverse, with 30% of the population not born in Australia. I presume they are referring to focussing on skills based migration schemes vs humanitarian. As someone pointed out below, Australia's policies towards political and humanitarian refugees have many critics. [1] http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/lookup/4102.0main+features102014 http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/lookup/4102.0main+fe... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Australia#Migration_program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Australia#Migra...
- gaius 10y ago
  It is not as simple as that. For example the Bangladeshi community in the UK was largely pro-Brexit. They wondered why white Europeans got favourable immigration treatment vs their own people.
  - vetinari 10y ago
    Because white Europeans were coming from other EU countries and UK is still an EU member. Bangladesh isn't. For example, Ukrainians and Russians (i.e. also not EU members) have exactly the same treatment as Bangladeshi.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- notahacker 10y ago
  To be honest, the anti-immigration right hold up Australia as a model for an immigration system as a rhetorical tool rather than an explicit model because (i) it's a prosperous liberal democratic country that can't be glibly dismissed and (ii) there's widespread public perception that it's unusually hostile to the idea of accepting immigrants and doesn't let many in. Of course the reality is that Australia lets in far more migrants per capita than the UK, but that's certainly not the objective. There are people on the anti-immigration right that want to see more skills discrimination in visa awards but are quite happy with the overall numbers arriving every year and are entirely comfortable with the idea of a large percentage of the UK population being born overseas, but they're definitely a minority.
  - XorNot 10y ago
    Also because they're confusing the asylum seeker boat-people policy with "immigration policy". Probably quite deliberately.
vondur 10y ago
I've heard it's very difficult to emigrate to Australia, is that not the case?
MAGA_Australian 10y ago
I guess you don't live in one of the suburbs terrorised by the African gangs like APEX? Melbourne is a multi-culti shithole and I'd know, I live here.
pipio21 10y ago
In my opinion Australia is one of the most monocultural countries in the world, and I have visited over 100 countries. It is a monoculture because they basically exterminated natives like they were bunnies in order for some guys to take all the territory to themselves. There is only one culture in Australia precisely because all the minorities are not significant. It is one thing to have a Muslim or two, completely different having tens of millions. Who is the owner of the land in Australia? White families. I have a friend in Australia who has so much territory he needs a plane to move around it. It is normal there. What makes Australia a great place to life is having a continent almost as big as the USA,with comparable natural resources, but with less than 13 times less population. In a similar country like China there lives 65 times more population. In fact most of China is mountains so the actual density is even higher in populated places.
- nikcub 10y ago
  Paraphrasing Barry Humphries recently, on growing up in Melbourne in the 50's: "I grew up in a Melbourne that pretended to be a home county of England. An English garden, never an Australian tree or shrub to see. A picture of Churchill on the wall. I never saw an Aborigine or indigenous Australian, and the first time I saw a kangaroo was at the London Zoo"
- lumberjack 10y ago
  What the OP is referring to is that in Melbourne you have neighbourhoods of people of Greek ethnicity and then adjacent to them neighbourhoods of people from former-Yugoslavia and then adjacent to that neighbourhoods of Sicilians, Chinese, Polish...etc. There is no single WASP culture. I think you already went completely off mark when you started thinking in terms of white and non-white.
- skissane 10y ago
  > In my opinion Australia is one of the most monocultural countries in the world That seems to me to be a rather odd statement. Australia today (and since the 1970s) has a large and ethnically diverse immigration intake. Over the last five years, the top five immigration source countries (in order) are India, China, UK, Philippines, South Africa [1]. In 2015, 28.2% of Australia's population was born overseas, compared to only 13.7% of the US population – per capita Australia has a significantly higher immigration rate than the US. If you are looking for a country deserving the title of "most monocultural", a country such as Japan is far more fitting of that title than Australia. [1] https://www.dss.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/05_2015/country_of_birth_by_migration_stream_-_april_2010_to_march_2015.pdf https://www.dss.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/05_2015... > It is a monoculture because they basically exterminated natives like they were bunnies in order for some guys to take all the territory to themselves. As regrettable as it was, I don't think what happened to indigenous Australians was hugely different from what happened to the indigenous populations of the US and Canada. And, just like the US and Canada, the question of contemporary ethnic/racial diversity is in numerical terms far more determined by the diversity of immigration source countries (both contemporary and historical) than by the surviving indigenous population. > There is only one culture in Australia precisely because all the minorities are not significant. Around 12% of Australia's population has (South/East/Central/Southeast) Asian ancestry. The Asian minority is concentrated in the major cities, so if you live in a major city (but especially Sydney and Melbourne) it is higher than 12%. And, the European-descended population exhibits a mix of ethnicities too – while about 45% of the population report British or Irish ancestry, 4.6% report Italian and 4.5% German. So "all the minorities are not significant" is a very odd (and quite possibly offensive) thing to say. > What makes Australia a great place to life is having a continent almost as big as the USA,with comparable natural resources, but with less than 13 times less population. The US has far more water than Australia, which is part of why it has 13 times the population. So I'd question how true "comparable natural resources" really is.
nathan_f77 10y ago
Is that true about Melbourne? I mean, I believe that there are large immigrant populations, and that you have a lot of diverse restaurants. But I struggle to believe that they "do great" and that there is a lot of unity. I know New Zealand is a deeply racist country, and I had always heard that Australia was even worse.
- SCdF 10y ago
  > I know New Zealand is a deeply racist country Yeah? I'd be interested in some reading about that. I always thought we were not perfect (who is?) but OK, certainly compared to other countries with similar cultural makeups (i.e. the Maori have been treated not amazingly, but not remotely as bad as the US / Can / Aus treatment of their indigenous people). FWIW: I come from a massive place of ignorance about this, being a white aucklander in CS. Interested in reading more.
  - crummy 10y ago
    I don't have any actual data but NZ seemed to have a fair bit of anti-Asian sentiment.

njloof 10y ago

Sounds great, but I thought Australia was gravely concerned about so-called "boat people."

jwdunne 10y ago

That's interesting. The anti-immigration right in the UK hold your immigration system up as the way forward. We have a multicultural society in the UK that many are rejecting, with racial tensions at a high. The difference is that many immigrants are working class. They are scapegoated to great success with the white working class. I disagree with that - I think the real problem is meagre infrastructure investment to support new arrivals but perhaps the Aussie style system works on the other end of the spectrum: focus only on valuable people where value is how much money they would earn.

theparanoid 10y ago
Indonesia has an immigrant group of success, Chinese, which resulted in the pogrom of 98'.
ddeck 10y ago
It's also interesting given the relative immigrant populations: As of 2011, 26% of the Australian population was not born in Australia.[1] That's around double the UK. The only nations with higher proportions are Luxembourg, Switzerland and Israel. As the parent pointed out, Melbourne is particularly diverse, with 30% of the population not born in Australia. I presume they are referring to focussing on skills based migration schemes vs humanitarian. As someone pointed out below, Australia's policies towards political and humanitarian refugees have many critics. [1] http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/lookup/4102.0main+features102014 http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/lookup/4102.0main+fe... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Australia#Migration_program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Australia#Migra...
gaius 10y ago
It is not as simple as that. For example the Bangladeshi community in the UK was largely pro-Brexit. They wondered why white Europeans got favourable immigration treatment vs their own people.
- vetinari 10y ago
  Because white Europeans were coming from other EU countries and UK is still an EU member. Bangladesh isn't. For example, Ukrainians and Russians (i.e. also not EU members) have exactly the same treatment as Bangladeshi.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
notahacker 10y ago
To be honest, the anti-immigration right hold up Australia as a model for an immigration system as a rhetorical tool rather than an explicit model because (i) it's a prosperous liberal democratic country that can't be glibly dismissed and (ii) there's widespread public perception that it's unusually hostile to the idea of accepting immigrants and doesn't let many in. Of course the reality is that Australia lets in far more migrants per capita than the UK, but that's certainly not the objective. There are people on the anti-immigration right that want to see more skills discrimination in visa awards but are quite happy with the overall numbers arriving every year and are entirely comfortable with the idea of a large percentage of the UK population being born overseas, but they're definitely a minority.
- XorNot 10y ago
  Also because they're confusing the asylum seeker boat-people policy with "immigration policy". Probably quite deliberately.

vondur 10y ago

I've heard it's very difficult to emigrate to Australia, is that not the case?

MAGA_Australian 10y ago

I guess you don't live in one of the suburbs terrorised by the African gangs like APEX? Melbourne is a multi-culti shithole and I'd know, I live here.

pipio21 10y ago

In my opinion Australia is one of the most monocultural countries in the world, and I have visited over 100 countries. It is a monoculture because they basically exterminated natives like they were bunnies in order for some guys to take all the territory to themselves. There is only one culture in Australia precisely because all the minorities are not significant. It is one thing to have a Muslim or two, completely different having tens of millions. Who is the owner of the land in Australia? White families. I have a friend in Australia who has so much territory he needs a plane to move around it. It is normal there. What makes Australia a great place to life is having a continent almost as big as the USA,with comparable natural resources, but with less than 13 times less population. In a similar country like China there lives 65 times more population. In fact most of China is mountains so the actual density is even higher in populated places.

nikcub 10y ago
Paraphrasing Barry Humphries recently, on growing up in Melbourne in the 50's: "I grew up in a Melbourne that pretended to be a home county of England. An English garden, never an Australian tree or shrub to see. A picture of Churchill on the wall. I never saw an Aborigine or indigenous Australian, and the first time I saw a kangaroo was at the London Zoo"
lumberjack 10y ago
What the OP is referring to is that in Melbourne you have neighbourhoods of people of Greek ethnicity and then adjacent to them neighbourhoods of people from former-Yugoslavia and then adjacent to that neighbourhoods of Sicilians, Chinese, Polish...etc. There is no single WASP culture. I think you already went completely off mark when you started thinking in terms of white and non-white.
skissane 10y ago
> In my opinion Australia is one of the most monocultural countries in the world That seems to me to be a rather odd statement. Australia today (and since the 1970s) has a large and ethnically diverse immigration intake. Over the last five years, the top five immigration source countries (in order) are India, China, UK, Philippines, South Africa [1]. In 2015, 28.2% of Australia's population was born overseas, compared to only 13.7% of the US population – per capita Australia has a significantly higher immigration rate than the US. If you are looking for a country deserving the title of "most monocultural", a country such as Japan is far more fitting of that title than Australia. [1] https://www.dss.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/05_2015/country_of_birth_by_migration_stream_-_april_2010_to_march_2015.pdf https://www.dss.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/05_2015... > It is a monoculture because they basically exterminated natives like they were bunnies in order for some guys to take all the territory to themselves. As regrettable as it was, I don't think what happened to indigenous Australians was hugely different from what happened to the indigenous populations of the US and Canada. And, just like the US and Canada, the question of contemporary ethnic/racial diversity is in numerical terms far more determined by the diversity of immigration source countries (both contemporary and historical) than by the surviving indigenous population. > There is only one culture in Australia precisely because all the minorities are not significant. Around 12% of Australia's population has (South/East/Central/Southeast) Asian ancestry. The Asian minority is concentrated in the major cities, so if you live in a major city (but especially Sydney and Melbourne) it is higher than 12%. And, the European-descended population exhibits a mix of ethnicities too – while about 45% of the population report British or Irish ancestry, 4.6% report Italian and 4.5% German. So "all the minorities are not significant" is a very odd (and quite possibly offensive) thing to say. > What makes Australia a great place to life is having a continent almost as big as the USA,with comparable natural resources, but with less than 13 times less population. The US has far more water than Australia, which is part of why it has 13 times the population. So I'd question how true "comparable natural resources" really is.

nathan_f77 10y ago

Is that true about Melbourne? I mean, I believe that there are large immigrant populations, and that you have a lot of diverse restaurants. But I struggle to believe that they "do great" and that there is a lot of unity. I know New Zealand is a deeply racist country, and I had always heard that Australia was even worse.

SCdF 10y ago
> I know New Zealand is a deeply racist country Yeah? I'd be interested in some reading about that. I always thought we were not perfect (who is?) but OK, certainly compared to other countries with similar cultural makeups (i.e. the Maori have been treated not amazingly, but not remotely as bad as the US / Can / Aus treatment of their indigenous people). FWIW: I come from a massive place of ignorance about this, being a white aucklander in CS. Interested in reading more.
- crummy 10y ago
  I don't have any actual data but NZ seemed to have a fair bit of anti-Asian sentiment.