@ferdie: "the active promotion of cultural pluralism, so that rather than encouraging 
migrants to adapt to the national culture, or even leaving them to their own 
devices, the government will deliberately encourage migrants (and their 
offspring) to remain within society as separate "ethnic" groups. It actually 
opposes the assimilation of immigrants into the nation's culture.
In the normal course of events, immigrants would've been able to adapt to 
the national culture, and their children and grandchildren could become 
fully part of the nation's mainstream culture. Instead, all of these people 
are now being told not to adapt, but to retain a separate identity from that 
of host nation, thus ensuring divisiveness.
An important tactic employed in this process, related to cultural pluralism, 
is that of structural pluralism whereby it is believed that "rather than 
leaving migrants to engage in their own cultural practices or not, as they 
please, Governments should actually encourage migrant groups, by explicit 
funding and other policies, to maintain their own institutions, their own 
kind of ... languages, news media, clubs, societies, schools, sporting and 
other recreational groups, and, possibly, economic institutions like shops 
and professional services. This should be done, not to help provide a 
stepping stone into the wider society, but because it is a good thing in its 
own right and an end in itself". It is this "trend to institutionalise 
cultural distinctiveness through organisations" that enables the government 
to artificially "enable all cultures brought to Australia by migrants to be 
maintained and developed". As one commentator noted, "In its extreme form, 
structural pluralism entails an apartheid-like separatism and carries the 
potential for dividing rather than unifying society."
An integral part of political multiculturalism is for the government, and 
other pro-multiculturalists, to force their views upon the entire 
population, thus making it the "official ideology" of Australia. For their 
purposes, it is seen as imperative that multiculturalist ideas are forced 
upon children in their formative years, so as to shape the views of the 
coming generations. Thus, Lorna Lippman (then Director of the Victorian 
Office of Community Relations) has demanded that "Social institutions and 
particularly educational institutions, have to contribute to 
multiculturalism" and that they "retain the term 'multicultural' as being an 
official ideology in Australia with widespread adherence, particularly from 
education authorities". It is seen that "the education system must play an 
active role in bringing about ... a stable multicultural society". To this 
end "General education at primary and secondary level now includes 
multicultural study programmes", for which it has been recommended that 
"general curriculum be re-examined and that Multicultural emphasis be 
reflected in all subject areas" (emphasis added).
It is through political agitation and action, via the power of government 
policies and resources - and supported by liberal-internationalists in the 
media and the education system, that multiculturalism has become the 
dominant ideology, which is now being forced upon modern Australia.
Multiculturalism needs to be recognised for what it is: a political 
ideology."
    @rifty: "<quote>
Please bear in mind that Ferdie is not writing or plagiarising articles
on multiculturalism. He is writing about something he dreamed up all by
himself - multi culti ism - which bears no resemblance to what normal
people understand by multiculturalism.
Rifty
Academic and Computing Help
<url>"
{'source': 'USENET', 'other_information': '{"reply_count": 1, "forum_name": "soc.culture.australian.20140821.mbox"}', 'file': 'data/output/usenet-soc.culture.parquet'}