The Notion of Multiculturalism in Australia - Case Study Example

Running head:: MULTICULTURALISM Multiculturalism [Writer’s name] [Institution’s name] Multiculturalism Introduction It is a well known fact that that Australia has always supported multiculturalism and has always been dedicated towards the notion of becoming a pluralist, diverse, independent society which are based on the principals of freedom, impartiality of opportunity, patience and peace. It may be important that that notion of multiculturalism has changed as the governing bipartisan policy which has been selected to handle Australia's cultural diversity in the year of nineteen seventy. The changes taking place in the country is a personal experience for a lot of people, it is even a matter of social as well as political contention. The fact that, Australia has opened its country for different kinds of races, creed and castes; it also has to accept and set their mind set for the different kinds of values, food, lifestyle and customs. Problems of change not only exist in the policy but also in the manner that the people of the country accept change. Discussion Personal barriers of change and solutions A personal barrier is, the concept of identity and what Australians consider their own identity to be. Here, it is important to highlight the fact, that they terms like spot the Aussie are utilized in the country , this term illustrates the intensity of ethnic diversity. The reason behind the native Australian having a weak relationship with the new immigrants dates back to the white European settlers came to Australia. They did not form a strong bond with the natives. This trend left a negative effect on the natives; so many issues have risen in accommodating the new comers (Bastian & Haslam 2008). The majority of a country may be known as the power elites. They may try to make boundaries for themselves. It must be kept in mind that such nations have weak cultural heritage due to these kinds of practices, even their foundation is quite weak. This practice may commonly be found in Australia. Several factors may lead to such restricted mindset. One important factor is the limit to which the psychological representation i.e. the national identity is considered as superior as compared to the others. This makes assimilation of the new comers quite difficult as people of this identity may think of themselves better than the new comers; this may give rise to discrimination and racism in the country. This may be overcome if the people of Australia change their restricted mind set. For this, they may have to believe that others are equally as good as they are. The government can also play an important role in this regard by introducing policies which discourage discrimination. Second most important factor may be that, the national identity is usually believed to be an example for the traditions and culture to be followed within the country. Thus, if immigrants try to implement or follow their own culture in Australia they may be considered as something wrong (Berry 2001). Here, it is important for the people as well as the government to think of the national identity as a race and not to make culture and traditions apart of the identity. This may be difficult, as the flag itself has a union jack. This means that, they believe that the only true identity is of those who have their ancestors in Britain. Thus, the entire flag cannot be changed (Sibley & Barlow 2009). But the above mentioned implementation can play a prominent and positive role in order to change the mind set. The concept that, true natives of the country are white is not just a general implied relationship, and clearly followed belief of a number of people; however it has even been openly authorized by government. This may be noted in the implementation of The White Australia Policy, this was not completely eliminated till the year 1973 (Sibley & Barlow 2009). The policy in question provided a complete description of which kind of people can assimilate in Australia as well as the way they wanted the people to mold the country. Nevertheless, these days there are a small number of people who openly approve of such values in Australia. In reality, their identity in no way can be simply related with any specific ethnic group. Thus it may be pointed out that majority of Australians, who completely categorize themselves as being Australian, yet may perhaps consider their way of life as something rather different. The identity being discussed here is not at all similar to those found in Canada or New Zealand (Kalin, & Berry 2001). It is not completely considered as an ethnicity, and infact it may be explained by the current migration trend. It maybe highlighted that, citizens who identify themselves as Australians consider their identity to include their own ethnic roots. This consideration has essential proposition for immigration as well as assimilation of new comers to country. As noted, another way that people may attempt to restrict the inclusiveness of a particular identity is via making allegations regarding the type of attitude, principles and practices that are regarded as not being a part of the characteristics which may consider them a part of the native identity (Verkuyte 2003). The phrase which the natives use as ‘un-Australian’ means that the standard way of life or traditions they follow are not apart of being Australian. In a lot of instances, this phrase is used when relating to customs or manner of conduct that are conflicting with the Australian concept of equality and consensus. Thus it may be noted, that it is likely to see that preclusion might occasionally be used to safeguard positive social values. Since, the implementation of that policy considerable changes have been implemented due to the notion of multiculturalism: for instance, anti-discrimination regulations have been implemented; government agenda have turned into extremely important needs of each and every client; thus in this manner it may be said, that Australia has completely implemented the notion of diversity in the arts, their way of life and food; and they have taken initiatives to utilize cultural diversity to strengthen their financial position. They also started to value the way of life of people belonging to culturally diverse backgrounds in Australia which provides them opportunities to assimilate with other countries and cultures thus turning their society into a global community. It may be pointed that regardless of the fact that multiculturalism was a success, it may be pointed out that the implementation of multicultural policy was not at all faulty, or that nation’s accepting the policy and its terms as its importance for national and individual welfare could not be improved. It may be appropriate to mention that, a suitable time to pay attention to present multiculturalism to find out and rise above any limitations and to control the benefits which may be attained from the diversity as the country moves ahead crossing the hurdles of the upcoming difficulties of the new era (Haslam, Rothschild, & Ernst 2000). The fact that Australia has a mindset to accept the changes which come with the notion of multiculturalism; it may be the first step towards the success of it’s implementation. It may be noted that, the success does definitely depend on accepting the changes. The extensive economic and social changes which took place recently have greatly affected all parts of life: family structures, working measures, sex roles, the mode of communication, and the present business practices. With such vast changes being implemented no doubt resistance is expected, however in order to face such challenges the government will have to set an agenda which can be accepted by the whole nation. They must also highlight the fact that the varied man power might be good economically for the country as new ideas may be generated in the area of business. It may be pointed that Australia has been a country with diverse populations since the beginning. Before the permanent European settlement came to Settle in Australia in 1788, it was noted that a lot of aboriginal cultures and civilization amongst the indigenous and Torres Strait Islander settlers. Even though the majority of settlers who had their settlements in Australia near the nineteen and eighteen centuries belonged to the British Isles, even other settlers from different culturally different backgrounds. The gold rush of the 1850’s made different kinds of community come to the country and most of them even settled in Australia. Ever since the World War II, approximately six million immigrants from more then one fifty countries have settled in Australia. A lot of migration from extensively different backgrounds resulted in new difficulties for government as well as the society. So much so the government policies effected the lives of these communities who belonged to diverse backgrounds, during the nineteenth as well as first half of the twentieth century, such a varied mind set was not acceptable in a lot of ways and in a number of cases were prejudiced. In 1950’s and 1960’s, the need for the government services to take action against the growing complication of community requirements, as well as the requirements of huge numbers of immigrants. It may be said that it was implemented to fulfill the needs of people who spoke English and respected as well as accepted the Australian life style. It may also be pointed out, there was a requirement for governments to describe more in-depth the notion regarding the relationship among the host community and immigrants. The existing policy of assimilation was extremely considered seen as archaic, useless and objectionable. Thus, since the start, the concept was handled in a wrong manner by the government which led to not accepting the change and new comers by the host society. Assimilation in a society was only possible if the immigrants would be welcomed by the host society. The possibility of such a warm welcome would take place if the government assured the society ample security a both physical and financial against the newcomers (Haslam, Rothschild, & Ernst 2001). It may also be pointed out that, government has to even consider the well being of the new comers so that the assimilation can be possible equally from both ends. For this, the government must take certain measures to design a policy which protect their rights in every way. Give them the right to earn a living and free life without any discrimination. The first step towards making Australia a successful multicultural society is by giving them a clear definition of the term. The term multiculturalism may be defined as: an expressive sense, it may be considered as merely a word which explains the cultural as well as ethnic diversity of the current society of Australia (Paluck & Green 2009). They have always been a multicultural society. This notion of being and accepting themselves as a multicultural society is what it a simple term for them (Hirschfeld 1996) However, they are still not as success as it seems. They may be able to achieve success in this case if the government and people make efforts to deal with the cost of this diversity in the well being of the people and society a single entity. Such a notion will give both ends the feeling of being apart of the society. Once both feel the same way they will learn to accept the life style in a more positive manner. The three core issues which Australia has to deal with in making it a successful multicultural society are as follows: Cultural identity: the right of each and every member of the society, in vigilantly set limits, to convey and share their own cultural tradition, as well as their language and religious conviction ;( Hong 2003) Social justice: the right of each and every member of the society to impartiality of conduct as well as opportunity, and the elimination of difficulties due to creed, customs, traditions, religious conviction, mother tongue , sexual orientation or place of birth; and Economic efficiency: the necessitate to sustain, improve and make valuable use of the abilities and aptitude of each and every member of the society, despite of their background. The solution of the core issues of multiculturalism must be applicable to every member of the Australian society, regardless of the fact if they are indigenous, Anglo-Celtic or non-English-speaking background, even if their birth place is Australia, the solution of these issues may be implemented on them (Rothbart & Taylor 1992). Multiculturalism is a society like the one being described may also be resolved by a lot of other methods. They are described below: Such a multicultural society should have a policy with a strong foundation with the prime principal to make the member of the society unite and becoming committed to Australia, keeping in mind its well being as well as their future more then their own personal differences. It is quite obvious that each and every member of the society should fully acknowledge the fundamental composition and values of Australian society. All must follow the same constitution and the regulation of rules, patience and parity, parliamentary democratic system, giving them the freedom of speech as well as religious conviction, English as primary mode of communication, and impartiality of the genders. It may be noted for the balance to remain in a multicultural society, it must impose responsibilities along with providing them all the rights. This may be the right for an individual to follow his/her own culture and way of life involves a mutual liability to understand the rights of others and to communicate their observation and principles (Poynting, Noble, & Tabar 2001) Here one must point out an example, where cross-cultural comparisons demonstrate the insight of Australia's first Prime Minister Edmund Barton. He assumed that, ethnic homogeneity should be the foundation of the Australian society. More culturally harmonized countries are more successful in gaining public commodities, are more self-governing, less dishonest, have higher output and less discrimination, are more naive as well as worry more for the underprivileged, increase social along with economic assets quicker, have lesser offense rates, are more defiant to external distress, and have improved their population for instance by providing them with more foreign funds. If individuals consider themselves to be extremely different or diverse from the native population they may suffer from anxiety and disappointment, this in turn will make them try to gain more inclusiveness (Paluck 1992). It may mean that the new comers might try to assimilate their own identity with that of the native identity. But if the native identity is based on the nation that assimilation is something extremely important, and then they may believe that the native identity may be in danger, thus facilitating hostile discrimination approaches like injustice and bias. They might even use some other means to gratify their identification requirements, usually resulting in the empowering of the subgroup (Prentice & Miller 2007). Even though extremely elite superordinate identities might restrict identification via individuals of different subgroups, and might make them feel as extremely different identities. Being members of extremely inclusive groups makes people try to attain more individuality. Suppose the native identity (i.e. is in this case the Australian one) is not much attractive, it may be considered little importance to the new comers (Prentice & Miller 2007). The only way multiculturalism can be successful in Australia, the value of ethnic identities should be recognized, at the same time also encouraging diverse ethnic groups to interrelate and pleasantly live together. As pointed out earlier, this needs a subtle balance among encouraging the members of both groups to take part with an important and consistent Australian identity as well as accepting and giving importance to ethnic subgroup diversity. Another way to make the Australian accept multiculturalism is to educate the youth (Hirschfeld 2006). If children are given education in which the school provides courses regarding how other races and people are similar to them, then the element of discrimination may be eradicated completely from Australia. Conclusion To conclude it may be said that, while group differences are evaluated as extremely diverse as well as un-crossable, individuals belong to the host cultures oppose assimilation of the new comer’s culture whilst individuals belonging to the immigrant groups have a hard time identifying with the traditions of the country. This results in marginalisation and isolation, but at times it may also results in assimilation. As per the above discussion it may be said that, the only way the Australians can accept the identity of new comers, and give them time to assimilate is if they consider their own identity to be less superior or equal to them. References Bastian, B., & Haslam, N. (2008). Psychological essentialism and social identification: Immigration from two perspectives. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 11 , 127–140. Berry, J. W. (2001). A psychology of immigration. Journal of Social Issues, 57 , 615–631. Haslam, N., Rothschild, L., & Ernst, D. (2000). Essentialist beliefs about social categories. BritishJournal of Social Psychology, 39 , 113–127. Haslam, N., Rothschild, L., & Ernst, D. (2002). Are essentialist beliefs associated with prejudice? British Journal of Social Psychology, 41 , 87–100. Hirschfeld, L. A. (1996). Race in the making: Cognition, culture, and the child’s construction of human kinds . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Hong, Y., Chan, G., Chiu, C., Wong, R. Y. M., Hansen, I. G., Lee, S., Tong, Y., & Fu, H. (2003). How are social identities linked to self-conception and intergroup orientation? The moderating effect of implicit theories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85 , 1147–1160. Kalin, R., & Berry, J. W. (1995). Ethnic and civic identity in Canada: Analysis of 1974 and 1991 national surveys. Canadian Ethnic Studies, 27 , 1–15. Paluck, S. L. (2009). Reducing intergroup prejudice and conflict using the media: A field experiment in Rwanda. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96 , 574–587. Paluck, S. L., & Green, D. P. (2009). Prejudice reduction: What works? A review and assessment or research and practice. Annual Review of Psychology, 60 , 339–367 Poynting, S., Noble, G., & Tabar, P. (2001). Middle Eastern appearances: “Ethnic gangs”, moral panic and media framing. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 34 , 67–90. Prentice, D. A., & Miller, D. T. (2007). Psychological essentialism of human categories. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16 (4), 202–206. Rothbart, M., & Taylor, M. (1992). Category labels and social reality: Do we view social categories as natural kinds? In G. R. Semin & K. Fiedler (Eds.), Language and social cognition (pp. 11–36). London: Sage Sibley, C. G., & Barlow, F. K. (2009). The ubiquity of Whiteness in majority group national imagination: Australian=White, but New Zealander does not. Australian Journal of Psychology, 61 , 119–127. Verkuyten, M. (2003). Discourses about ethnic group (de-)essentialism: Oppressive and progressive aspects. British Journal of Social Psychology, 42 , 371–391. Read More

Here, it is important for the people as well as the government to think of the national identity as a race and not to make culture and traditions apart of the identity. This may be difficult, as the flag itself has a union jack. This means that, they believe that the only true identity is of those who have their ancestors in Britain. Thus, the entire flag cannot be changed (Sibley & Barlow 2009). But the above mentioned implementation can play a prominent and positive role in order to change the mind set.

The concept that, true natives of the country are white is not just a general implied relationship, and clearly followed belief of a number of people; however it has even been openly authorized by government. This may be noted in the implementation of The White Australia Policy, this was not completely eliminated till the year 1973 (Sibley & Barlow 2009). The policy in question provided a complete description of which kind of people can assimilate in Australia as well as the way they wanted the people to mold the country.

Nevertheless, these days there are a small number of people who openly approve of such values in Australia. In reality, their identity in no way can be simply related with any specific ethnic group. Thus it may be pointed out that majority of Australians, who completely categorize themselves as being Australian, yet may perhaps consider their way of life as something rather different. The identity being discussed here is not at all similar to those found in Canada or New Zealand (Kalin, & Berry 2001).

It is not completely considered as an ethnicity, and infact it may be explained by the current migration trend. It maybe highlighted that, citizens who identify themselves as Australians consider their identity to include their own ethnic roots. This consideration has essential proposition for immigration as well as assimilation of new comers to country. As noted, another way that people may attempt to restrict the inclusiveness of a particular identity is via making allegations regarding the type of attitude, principles and practices that are regarded as not being a part of the characteristics which may consider them a part of the native identity (Verkuyte 2003).

The phrase which the natives use as ‘un-Australian’ means that the standard way of life or traditions they follow are not apart of being Australian. In a lot of instances, this phrase is used when relating to customs or manner of conduct that are conflicting with the Australian concept of equality and consensus. Thus it may be noted, that it is likely to see that preclusion might occasionally be used to safeguard positive social values. Since, the implementation of that policy considerable changes have been implemented due to the notion of multiculturalism: for instance, anti-discrimination regulations have been implemented; government agenda have turned into extremely important needs of each and every client; thus in this manner it may be said, that Australia has completely implemented the notion of diversity in the arts, their way of life and food; and they have taken initiatives to utilize cultural diversity to strengthen their financial position.

They also started to value the way of life of people belonging to culturally diverse backgrounds in Australia which provides them opportunities to assimilate with other countries and cultures thus turning their society into a global community. It may be pointed that regardless of the fact that multiculturalism was a success, it may be pointed out that the implementation of multicultural policy was not at all faulty, or that nation’s accepting the policy and its terms as its importance for national and individual welfare could not be improved.

It may be appropriate to mention that, a suitable time to pay attention to present multiculturalism to find out and rise above any limitations and to control the benefits which may be attained from the diversity as the country moves ahead crossing the hurdles of the upcoming difficulties of the new era (Haslam, Rothschild, & Ernst 2000).

Read More