Multiculturalism is a big reality in Australian society. People live it daily either in cities, suburbs, schools, workplaces, buses or even trains. While in each of these places, Australians tend to mix up with others from different backgrounds. This acknowledgment of multiculturalism has attracted a debate though. The self-declared multiculturalism friends sometimes have become the real source of concern. In essence, this should not be the case. It is very significant that civil debates are conducted to discuss the aspects of race, culture and identity. This discussion examines how debates on multiculturalism have evolved in Australia and other western societies. It begins by presenting the various meanings of multiculturalism despite its application to people of diverse cultural differences within Australian society. The affected people include both the natives and the sub-state nationals, discriminated groups, and even the immigrants in the society. To highlight the deeper impact of multiculturalism, various approaches relating to multicultural issues would be brought in under various sections of this paper. Multiculturalism would be discussed as a normative issue, an ideology, and also as a feature of modern society. The central part of the discussion would consider various criticisms that have come up right from the 21st century, those that have called for a retreat from the aspect of multiculturalism. The retreat of multiculturalism has been backed by accusations of becoming a failure and blamed for social fragmentation, parallel livelihoods, and terrorism. To assess the validity of these allegations for multiculturalism as a backlash is the significant analysis that trends in modern research call for multicultural policies, attitudes and also identities. Finally, the paper attempts to present the rising interest in daily multiculturalism analysis by highlighting the processes that produce cultural differences and they get negotiated on a daily basis through urban context interactions (Castles, De Haas & Miller, 2013).
Introduction
Australian multiculturalism is a policy strategy that seeks to facilitate the effective social integration of immigrants while managing cultural diversity. This system was devised about seven decades ago and they were adopted by the government about six decades ago. The element of multicultural strategy has been prone to several misunderstandings, confusion and misrepresentation especially considering the ethnic pluralism and assimilation approaches. Such confusion have become widespread in Australia marring public debates on multiculturalism. This reality has become hardly surprising considering the fact that there are scarce public clarifications of the meaning of multiculturalism. There has also been a strong political backlash facing uncontrolled migrations into Australia. The paper outlines the principles of multiculturalism in Australia, attempts to identify the theoretical foundations, and also highlights the major confusions in line with the meaning, objective, and effectiveness of multiculturalism (Charbit, 2017).
Principles of Australian multiculturalism
Due to conceptual stretching, multiculturalism has managed to acquire several meanings. The present political debates describe it as the cultural and demographic realities facing the ethno-cultural and diverse society. Some look at it as the approval and celebration of ethno-cultural diversities. There have been many policies that attempt to promote social, non-discriminatory integration and cultural diversity. The other meaning that is suitable to multiculturalism is that philosophical, normative and theoretical underpinning that underlies the integrative policy. In the context of Australian multicultural policy, there are several strategies to be embraced by the government be it on a bi-partisan basis or otherwise.
Australian multiculturalism come about in response to the fast diversification of sources about immigration to Australia given the changing ethno-cultural composition of the society. People grew more dissatisfied with the older policies relating to assimilation and in the end, they became racially biased in selecting and admitting immigrants. Assimilation strategies ended up integrating the large waves of immigrants causing discrimination, exclusions, alienation and mainly a big waste of the human capital from immigrants who came to Australia. Sociologists have stressed out this point to a high level now. The discriminatory immigrant policy referred to as White Australia emerged as morally and politically untenable six decades ago given the racial prejudice at that time (King, 2015). This allowed discrimination to persist and it brought about a huge concern among the political elite and the population at large. It was the right time to change.
The other option of replacing assimilation and the remnants of discrimination was brought about by academic and social activists as outlined in their speeches and academic publications. New strategies have gained support, especially from public servants and politicians who have managed to forge into policy proposals. Multiculturalism has since been integrated as a policy strategy within the Australian government. The government understands multiculturalism in line with social cohesion, equality for accessing opportunities, social duty for sharing responsibilities and freedom of choice for maintaining cultural identity or otherwise.
Multiculturalism was adopted as an official policy amidst revolutions from politics and policies even though it attracted popular attitudes. The most significant element of the revolution was seen in the demand for the non-discriminatory handling of ethnic minorities and raising tolerance for immigrants through social attachments and identities. Multiculturalism managed to de-stigmatize most identities and lifestyles to the extent that it re-defined obstacles of social adaptation to becoming essential ingredients of integrating into society. From sociological studies, it is seen that integration has been portrayed as a slow adaptation to society.
Australia has not only managed to diversify its complicated culture but also has lowered social stigmatization while preventing immigrant cultural deracination and alienation. These two instances have been seen mainly among immigrants who have suffered from assimilationist reigns. There has been a tolerant slow approach that assists in the reduction of discrimination and assimilation of policies that engender their roles. There have been several impacts including stress management that is anticipated by the proponents of multicultural strategy. This is given the fact that the strategy arose as a derivation from the solid theoretical foundations.
Integrative multiculturalism
Australian multiculturalism has constantly become integrative. It seeks to maintain and sustain cohesion in society. It has further rejected and denounced social, political and cultural isolation, separatism or segmentation. Modern sociology observes social cohesion and integration which involve both outcome and process concepts. Such factors have been fitting nicely into society given its harmonious participation and smoother functioning to the society at large. Immigrants have managed this kind of integration by learning, updating skills, finding work and joining the rest of the community (Levey, 2017). Several grants from ethnic communities have come up as adaptive to the institutions that play major roles to affect the integrative initiatives while mixing results. In the end, integrative strategies have emerged as supplemental through maintaining the initiatives of culture and participating in the secondary role of multicultural programs.
Some of the central planks in Australian multiculturalism support the ethnic communities and organizations only if they serve the integrative structures within Australian society at large. A sense of belonging lies among the greatest urge that encourages social participation while strengthening unity and discouraging ethnic particularism. Australian immigrants have been encouraged to come up with culturally diverse communities but become cautious not to turn them into ethnic ghettos. There have been many intermediate structures that assist in social attachments meant for nourishing the sense of belonging. Structures should further take recognition of the modern sociological theory that supports the research of migrant alienation. Therefore, integrative ethnic societies have been discouraged by the government from informing ethnic-specific political parties, parishes or organizations that are quite exclusive ethnically. Such factors have been encapsulated in the integrative formula of Australian multiculturalism that supports ethno-cultural diversity while discouraging ethnic-specific particularism.
The value of cultural diversity is a big issue that has been highlighted as very essential for successful social integration. The ability to attain social cohesion in modern Australian society attracts a lot of social integration by stressing on Australian multiculturalism. It is important to assist social integration to achieve social cohesion. Any risk of imposing cultural uniformity, forceful cultural homogenization, and conforming is seen as quite unrealistic and dangerous. It is abundantly obvious to realize that failure of homogenization may usually end up disastrously. There can be a steeper cultural hierarchy and exclusion in the event that antagonism and divisions are tied down socially. It is true to consider the advancement of modernization and globalization (Ozdowski, 2017).
Conclusion
In summary, Australian multiculturalism has attracted a lot of confusion that have rapidly multiplied. The nature of immigrant and adaptive strategies has attracted a lot of policies that would be considered in implementing these strategies. Given such a wave of confusion, some people find it easier to feed them into local misconceptions. This calls for a lot of clarification and explanation to straighten the misunderstandings. The delivery of Australian multiculturalism has done more good to rivals who have attracted tentative answers in placing assessments of social outcomes and multicultural policies. Even though there might be no systematically comparative references, it is evident that Australian society is properly integrated, stable and cohesive enough. Ethno-communal tensions and conflicts have become so rare that the standards of ethnic concentration have become low enough in ethnic-specific crime levels. The workforce has managed to participate and integrate high levels of immigrant-political engagement and participation in multiculturalism. Few signs of tough ethnic fissures have shown signs of persistent disadvantages and alienation amongst the native. There has been continual prejudice as well. Pre-date multiculturalism seems to be getting stronger even in those societies that are yet to endorse multiculturalism.
References
Castles, S., De Haas, H. and Miller, M.J., 2013. The age of migration: International population movements in the modern world. Macmillan International Higher Education.
Charbit, Y., 2017.
King, R., 2015. Migration comes of age. Ethnic and racial Studies, 38(13), pp.2366-2372.
Levey, G.B., 2017. Multiculturalism on the Move: An Australian Perspective. Multicultural Governance in a Mobile World, p.162.
Ozdowski, S., 2017. Australian Multiculturalism. Santiago: University of Chile.
'We Love Our Lamb: Celebrating Multicultural Australia ...' Accessed May 3, 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ycwfha58ho.