The critique of Australian multiculturalism that has been advanced at the Alor.org blog here over the years is the only one made in Australia which has argued that multiculturalism was, and is, a political weapon used by the globalist elites to ethno-racially replace Anglo-Saxon Australians, and Whites generally. The freedom movement does not dare go there, or even dare tackle the immigration issue, which is a major defect.
The article extracted below deals with new problems facing this pernicious White genocidal doctrine of multiculturalism, but I must note these remarks first: "Multiculturalism and the promotion of diversity was originally intended to counter the "whiteness" of Australian society that was a legacy of its founding, Kurti says."
"[But] diversity is now being deployed not only to assault any Australian norms with which it is deemed to conflict, but also to foment conflict between Australia's ethnic communities." The quote is from "Director of the Centre's Culture, Prosperity & Civil Society program Peter Kurti." Well, there is an outside confirmation of what I have been arguing for years. Can you imagine say China having elites actively work to dilute, if not destroy "yellowness"? There is something very wrong here, going to the very existence of Western civilisation, and its precarious survival.
As detailed below, the academic New Class are now worried that multiculturalism is self-destructing with some imports being inconsistent with the universalistic liberal regime that allowed Anglo-Saxon Australia to be destroyed in the first place. Well, it all comes down to this, that the self-destructiveness of the diversity cult has been known since Biblical times, and warned against by all great philosophers. But after World War II it was decided by the globalists that the White race, particularly Nordic/northern Europeans, needed to be phased out, having done their job in setting up civilisation, and so the Great Replacement began, with lots of money for academic scribblers and associated race traitors.
So, sow the wind, reap a whirlwind. History will repeat itself, hopefully for the last Spenglerian cycle.
The elites could have lived as masters of the universe, unknown to the masses, but they choose now a planet that will be degraded and ultimately destroyed, with no safety for them in the long run in their walled and crumbling citadels.
"Multiculturalism in Australia, which has been based on a social compact that said people were free to pursue their cultural and religious beliefs provided they abided by the law, has been under serious threat since Hamas' invasion of Israel on Oct. 7 last year, a new report from the Centre for Independent Studies (CIS) argues.
The events of that day and the subsequent protests have caused "bitter political division and polarisation," the report says.
"Far from fostering social cohesion and the civic virtue of tolerance, multiculturalism appears to have encouraged cultural separatism and helped fan hostility between different sections of the community."
The report notes that after breakaway Labor Senator Fatima Payman announced the formation of The Muslim Vote "it was denounced ... as an insult to Allah" by an Islamist Muslim cleric, who went on to describe Muslim members of Australian parliaments as "apostate" and said they sought a different form of power that would enshrine sharia as the dominant form of law in Australia.
"Declarations such as this openly and directly challenge the political, legal, and social norms of this country. They also call into question the viability of the compact upon which Australian multiculturalism has always depended," writes one of the authors, Director of the Centre's Culture, Prosperity & Civil Society program Peter Kurti.
"Tolerance of diversity in Australia is only possible if bounded by a commitment to the spirit of Australian law and order. This entails, in part, that Australian streets, parks, and campuses do not become the arenas in which overseas conflicts are played out. And yet this is precisely what appears to have happened."
Diversity Being Used to Foment Conflict
Multiculturalism and the promotion of diversity was originally intended to counter the "whiteness" of Australian society that was a legacy of its founding, Kurti says.
"[But] diversity is now being deployed not only to assault any Australian norms with which it is deemed to conflict, but also to foment conflict between Australia's ethnic communities."
The past 60 or so years of multiculturalism have been broadly successful, he says.
"Most of us think it's been good for the country, and most of us want it to continue."
But the decisive defeat of the Voice referendum suggests "popular enthusiasm for diversity might be on the wane," and Australia may be about to see "the emergence of a form of post-multiculturalism."
That isn't something that today's political leaders are equipped to handle, Kurti said.
"The danger is that the leaders on whom we must depend will fail to grasp the critical role government must play in enforcing duties of shared responsibility and mutual tolerance. And if that is the case, Australian multiculturalism will inadvertently, and perhaps inevitably, sink from damage of its own creating."
Damien Freeman, a fellow of the Robert Menzies Institute at the University of Melbourne, believes "diversity alone is not going to achieve social cohesion," but that "social cohesion is not going to be derived from sameness" in an increasingly diverse country either.
"There will be fewer shared values in a more diverse society, however, and so it might prove necessary to open our minds to new possibilities for social cohesion. A preoccupation with unity, sameness, and shared values might distract us from other possibilities."
No Place for Government in Promoting Social Cohesion
The challenge of promoting social cohesion in contemporary Australia is something that must be met by using the resources of society, not the state, Freeman argues.
One way that might be achieved is what he calls "Toryism": "The idea that we belong to small institutions, such as families, through which we are connected to larger institutions, such as countries. These are institutions that we naturally belong to, as opposed to groups that we choose to identify with because of shared identity characteristics."
"Strengthening such ties of belonging would anchor social cohesion in a shared sense of feeling at home in one's society," he said.
Jonathan Cole, Director of the Centre for Religion, Ethics, and Society, argues for what he calls a "cultural-free market" in which the government has little to no role.
"The purpose, and if not the purpose, then the effect, of the government's intervention ... in matters of culture and diversity is to subsidise languages, customs, and religious beliefs and practices that otherwise might struggle to survive and thrive in a genuinely free market of culture," he writes.
Doing so "entails yet another instance of the growing reach and scope of the state (intrusion) into the natural operations of social life," he said.
Absent government intervention, people would still be free to retain and maintain their cultural and religious practices and to pass them on to their children.
"It just means that they will not receive government financial support, and hence taxpayer subsidies, to do so."
The only role for government is the promulgation and enforcement of criminal law to protect Australia's social cohesion from politically- and religiously-motived violence, and anti-discrimination law to protect people from the effects of prejudice, such as discriminatory hiring and firing decisions.
However, the inevitable long-term result of immigration is assimilation, Cole argues.
"It has been so for millennia and remains the case everywhere on the globe, including in Australia," he said.
Bryan Turner, Professor of Sociology at the Australian Catholic University and emeritus Professor at the City University New York, contends that multiculturalism must also contend with populism, the Australian form of which is more akin to America's than Europe's.
"One common feature of populism is that it is occurring in countries that have low and declining birth rates, where the labour market has depended on migration. When the labour market was attracting guest workers, the fear of diversity did not trouble populists," he said.
"When society appears to depend on migrants with allegedly higher birth rates, populism flourishes," he continued, which represents "a challenge to liberal values regarding diversity and inclusion."
Yes Bryan, it is those universalistic and ethno-destructive ideologies that need to be replaced.