What Does Multiculturalism Mean in Australia?

In a paradoxical kind of way, in Australia it has become culture to continually reinforce the fact that Australia is a multicultural society. Even though it is culture to say Australia is a multicultural society, it is not culture to say what is meant by multicultural society. In the absence of a clear definition, perhaps the best way to understand what is meant by multicultural is to consider what it is not, and by a process of elimination, find the multicultural concept that Australians are referring to.

Unlike the versions of multiculturalism in China, Indonesia, and South Africa, multiculturalism in Australia does not refer to a mosaic of distinct cultures living in geographically separate areas yet maintaining a national identity. For example, whereas South Africa has 11 official languages, Australia has one. Furthermore, with the exception of the aparthied-style permit system for Aboriginal communities, there is no policy of keeping groups separated from other groups, or preventing one group corrupting the cultural integrity of another group. To the contrary, mixing, learning, and integration is favoured. Such values are represented in the Australian government's official view on multiculturalism which proposes:

"to build on our success as a culturally diverse, accepting and open society, united through a shared future." (4)

Even though most proponents of multiculturalism favour integration and mutual influence, a few proponents have ambiguous views in regards to the importance of cultural preservation. They have wanted to preserve the cultures of out-groups even though they had no desire to live like those out-groups. Furthermore, they have advocated change in their own culture while fighting against change for other cultures. For example, Bob Brown, the leader of the Australian Greens, has campaigned strongly on behalf of Tibetan independence from China. In Brown's view, Tibetan culture is being eroded as a result of Han (dominant race in China) migration to Tibet. While that may be true, it is strange for Brown to say Han Chinese migration is changing Tibet for the worse when, in Brown's view, Han Chinese migration to Australia is changing Australia for the better.

Perhaps Brown wants to preserve traditional Tibetan culture because he believes it is endowed with enlightened characteristics that are absent from the traditional culture of Australia. The main problem with this explanation is that the traditional culture of Tibet has some parallels with Dark Ages Europe and other ideologies that Brown has campaigned against. Like the Dark Ages, Tibet was once an extremely xenophobic society with little change, little development, and was culturally entranced with a religious leader. While Brown may admire such characteristics, he has shown no desire for Australia to become a xenophobic society governed by religious dogma. As well as being ambigous in regards to cultural preservation when it comes to Tibet, Brown as also been ambiguous when it comes to Aborigines. He has wanted to preserve Aboriginal cultures even though this has meant preserving a way of life that he has no desire to live under.

Another odd perspective on multiculturalism comes from a 1998 submission to the National Multicultural Advisory Council by the Australian Teacher Education Association. The submission proposed that, due to economic restructuring, working class Australians were racist against Aborigines and immigrants, and that Australia in general was a class-based and patriarchal society. In the teacher's words:

"Australia is a multicultural society, encompassing within the breadth of its ethnic diversity, historical moves to incorporate Indigenous peoples, the highly visible Anglo-Celtic ethnic groups, immigrants from Europe, Australians of Asian backgrounds, refugees from world wars and sojourners from many places on planet Earth. Australia is a multicultural society, which has gradually developed certain laws, institutions and policies for giving ethnic minorities and national Indigenous groups (specifically Aborigines and Torres Strait Islands peoples) a voice in this society; for supporting the cultural conditions they need to exercise freedom, and for protecting them from social vulnerability and economic disadvantage - as is its obligations as a democracy. However, Australia is also a multi-racist, patriarchal and class-based society in which racial intolerance, prejudice and bigotry jostle with sexism and misogyny to win the hearts and minds of people facing the psychological and financial distresses borne of continuing, long-term economic crises, popularly labelled global restructuring. Moreover, some Australian governments at different levels continue to act in ways which seem to sanction the racist vilification of Indigenous peoples, Australians of Asian backgrounds and immigrant groups generally. Tough economic times have shown just how precarious a foothold core democratic values have in Australia, and justify this timely review of policies for managing cultural diversity and racial intolerance." (1)

Like Bob Brown's contradictory views in regards to cultural perseveration, the teachers' submission had some contradictory views in regards to racism. In comparison to traditional Australian culture, migrant groups are patriarchal, and class-based. For example, the traditional Japanese, Korean and Tibetan cultures have such entrenched social hierarchies that they have developed separate languages for referring to people of different status. Likewise, India has a religiously structured society that defines one group as so low that they are "untouchable." In addition to being class-based, many are highly patriarchal. For example, many Muslim cultures impose strict codes of behaviour on women that are not applied to men.

 Very few cultures around the world champion gender equality and egalitarianism the way traditional Australian culture champions it. Ironically, an open-minded attitude would propose that the migrants might have something to teach Australia and some of their patriarchal and class-based values could culturally enrich Australia. Unfortunately, the potential for cultural enrichment is difficult to discuss because the cultural differences in migrant communities are ignored in the process of criticising the gender discrimination and class inequality in Australian society. In order to deal with the problematic nature of diversity, the teachers accept that genetic diversity exists, but put themselves in denial about the existence of cultural diversity. In their state of cultural denial, their assimilationist campaigns can then be disguised as anti-racism campaigns.

The teacher's criticism of Australia can be seen as a simple adaptation to the ambiguous nature of multiculturalism. In a diverse society, it is difficult to make a stand in support of something because those who have different values would shoot it down. It is; however, easy to take a stand against something. For example, if Bob Brown were to promote religious guidance, mono-cultural living, and xenophobia in order to make Australia more like traditional Tibet, he would find himself the target of ridicule from all those Australians that have no desire to live in such a society. However, by taking a stand against the Chinese government, Brown doesn't need to promote any values and need not fear being targeted. He can criticise freely, without fear of being criticised himself. The teachers' criticicisms of Australia can be seen in the same vein. Had the teachers promoted gender equality or egalitarianism, they could have been charged with racism and cultural assimilation from migrants who lack it in their own cultures. However, by attacking others as racist, and not obviously promoting assimilation, the teachers were able to avoid the charges of racism that they laid at others.

Unfortunately for the teachers, the obscure way they went about promoting their values left many groups trapped between two cultures with no real cultural identity, and prone to suffer criticism from others. As the teachers did not define the substance of an Australian identity, those who wanted an Australian identity could only do so via hollow flag waving. The Cronulla protests of 2005 can be seen as an example of superficial flag waving dominating codes of behaviour defined as Australian. Most of the protesters were young, and products of the teachers' educational philosophies.

In addition to causing problems with Australians who wanted an Australian identity, the teachers' concept of multiculturalism also caused problems for ethnic Australians that were told to preserve their cultures, but were also told to be egalitarian and support gender equality. For some migrant groups, the two simply can't be married. Furthermore, if the ethnic individual tried to break free from his or her minority identity and act as a mainstream Australian, then they carried with them the negative stigma of someone who had assimilated. For example, Australians of Asian heritage who assimilated were sometimes called 'bananas' by their communities in reference to them being yellow on the outside but white on the inside. Likewise, Aborigines who had assimilated were called 'coconuts' by their communities in reference to being black on the outside but white on the inside.

It wasn't only ethnic communities that criticised non-whites for embracing aspects of mainstream Australia. When the Aboriginal actor Deborah Mailman was used on the TV drama The Secret Life of Us, some viewers became concerned that she was being portrayed as a mainstream Australian. Film producer Jeff Puser criticised the role as:

"she had exactly the same problems as white Australians." (2)

In effect, Mr Puser was saying she was a coconut. Of course, if the role had been more ethnically defined, there would have been even more concerned citizens complaining about the reinforcement of inaccurate Aboriginal stereotypes. The end consequence of such political sensitivities was that non-white faces rarely made it onto Australian television, and non-whites were excluded from national debates.

Because ethnics have been encouraged to preserve their cultures, non-ethnic Australians have been able to maintain control of the political debate. Not only was this seen with non-ethnic teachers dominating activist campaigns, it was also seen in a 2005 survey of intellectuals by the Australian Public Intellectual Network. The survey asked 200 scholars to list 10 important and influential thinkers. The list they produced had 8 white men in the 10 most influential Australian intellectuals. Men occupied 17 of the top 20 places. Not a single Australian with African, Asian, or South American ancestry made the grade. (3) To put things into perspective, if someone like Barrack Obama had migrated to Australia, he would be encouraged go away and play the bongo drums at some multicultural festival. Meanwhile, those Australians that maintained the image of being neutral (people without a strongly defined identity and strongly in favour of multiculturalism) could control the national agenda.  

While politicians such as Bob Brown see multiculturalism as a strategy to win votes, and teachers see it as a means of empowering their activism campaigns with notions of racial tolerance, for the ordinary Australian multiculturalism means something different. Around 23 per cent of Australians were born in a foreign country. Around 4 in 10 have at least one parent born in a foreign country. Understandably, with a diverse range of influences shaping them, few Australians like the idea of a "model" Australian being defined. Furthermore, they have little desire to conform to any kind of model that has been defined. For such Australians, multiculturalism represents freedom from compulsion. It means that people from all walks of life can determine their own destiny free from the activism campaigns pressuring them to be pig shooters, ute drivers, feminists, communists, bommerang throwers, football players or whatever other type of person that activists want them to be.

 

1)http://www.atea.schools.net.au/publications/multicult1.html

2) Pieces of the action Sydney Morning Herald, April 23, 2005 http://www.smh.com.au/news/Film/Pieces-of-the-action/2005/04/22/1114028529703.html

(Top)