Introduction
The concept of multiculturalism does not have a straight forward definition because it depends on the context of its usage. Again, it is not easy to have a universally acceptable definition because there are more people putting in their contributions about this concept, therefore leading to numerous definitions of the same.
For example, multiculturalism in the United States of America is used in both social and political contexts. It is used to show that the differences that exist among people on the basis of their cultural orientation, gender, ethnic or racial backgrounds and other diverse opinions, should not be a source of division but should be viewed as a source of strength for that particular group (Higley, Nieuwenhuysen, and Neerup, 2009).
Basically, multiculturalism advocates for treatment of all people with respect and dignity because this is what leads to the massive growth and development of a nation. This paper shall address this concept in details using the example of Australia as well as identify how it has changed before, during and after the Howard government.
The Concept of Multiculturalism
In Australia, the view of this concept is not very different from that of the USA. This is because multiculturalism is viewed in both the social and political contexts and is seen as a tool that should help in the development of the country other than in its destruction.
The term was in use widely in the 1990’s but its use has declined with time, with many people wondering what became of it (Cope, et al, 1991). Castles, et al, (1990) says that the term is slowly being replaced with the term ‘integration’.
This term deals with the diversity that exists in the modern day society. According to Lyle (1983), this diversity comes about because of the differences in cultural and ethnic orientations, among other factors.
This definition is especially true for the modern day Australia, whose policy is that it is a multicultural society and this is not going to change. To further enhance multiculturalism, the government of Australia has put forth measures to it intends to act on in response to the diversity that is present in the country as a result of multiculturalism.
This country, that is part of the other countries in the commonwealth, has pointed out several dimensions that the policies that deal with multiculturalism should take. The first dimension is one that deals with the cultural orientation of the people.
The Australian government clearly stipulates that each of its citizens have the right to express themselves culturally in the different ways that culture can and is expressed but within the limits prescribed by the law. Consequently, the Australians are free to express their culture through language and religious affiliation without any interference.
The other tenet of multiculturalism as stipulated by the government is the social justice for all the citizens. Every person is en titled to fair treatment regardless of their class, religious background, political affiliation, gender and ethnic background, among other barriers of fair treatment.
The last dimension of this concept as viewed by the government is the economic dimension. This tenet gives every Australian citizen a right to be recruited or employed anywhere in the country where they can use their skills and knowledge. This should happen regardless of the person’s sex, political, ethnic and religious background.
The dimensions of multiculturalism discussed above are applied to all Australian citizens without discrimination and are articulated in the country’s documents of the National Agenda. Consequently, the people with Aboriginal background, the Anglo-Celtic group of citizens and those who do not speak English but are citizens of Australia receive the same treatment from the government (Bell, 2006).
Limitations of Multiculturalism
Even though the Australians enjoy the rights expressed in the National Agenda, there are also several limitations to these rights. First, the rights of Australians concerning multiculturalism are founded on the assumption that every Australian citizen is committed and is also working towards the realization of the common goal of the nation.
They should also be committed to those things that are geared towards unifying the country. This is the first and most important factor underlying the implementation of the rights of multiculturalism (CAAIP (Committee to Advise on Australia’s Immigration Policies), 1988).
The policies also call for Australians approval of the basic structures and the overarching principles governing the country. Respect for and obedience to the constitution and other laws that govern the country, showing tolerance and fair treatment to everyone regardless of the things they possess that bring about diversity and freedom to express oneself are some of the ways that the citizens can express their approval of the laws of the land.
The use the national language, in the case of Australia, English, and fair treatment of people of both sexes is also a way of showing acceptance of the basic principles of the country.
Finally, for one to enjoy their rights of expression of their culture they have to recognize that there are others who have a different cultural orientation and they too have the same right. This therefore, calls for tolerance and acceptance of others culture without acting in a manner that will offend the other party (Bell, 2006).
In summary, these policies that have been formulated to address the concept of multiculturalism in Australia are designed to help in making Australia a better place for its citizens with social justice and economic efficiency as its overarching principles.
Multiculturalism before the Howard Government
Before the introduction of the concept of multiculturalism, Australia used another policy known as ‘assimilation’. This meant that any immigrant settling in Australia had to forsake their culture and adopt that of the natives in Australia (Elder, 2005).
One of the factors that led to the change of policy from the idea of assimilation to that cultural pluralism and later multiculturalism is the World War 2 and its effects. Precisely, there was increased awareness on the devastating effects of racism learnt from the Nazi party’s actions. This made people start doubting the positivity of the White Australia Policy, which encouraged racism, and was being practiced then (Lopez, 2000).
That was an external factor. Internally, there were several groups which advocated for an end of the policies which encouraged racism. These groups included the church and other human rights groups.
By 1960, these groups, which were very active in speaking against the white Australia policy in the 1950’s, got support from other quarters which included the journalists and the students body from various universities, among others.
Their first achievement in this campaign came when dictation test for those who wanted to migrate to Australia was dropped. The non-Europeans who wanted to migrate to Australia were also allowed to undertake the skilled migrant program. Consequently, students of Asian origin were allowed undertake their studies in Australia and also, more people who were not Europeans got a chance to live in Australia especially in the 1970’s.
The church together with other groups continued being vocal on this issue of racism especially with regard to one’s language, cultural orientation and religious background. The groups emphasized that everyone had the right to live in Australia and practice their culture, religion and speak their language without any barriers (Jones, 2003).
More pressure was put by Jerzy Zubrzycki on the government to end this culture of assimilation and instead adopt a policy of ‘cultural pluralism’. Jerzy Zubrzycki was one of the members of the academic movements challenging some of the policies that were used by the government of Australia (Theophanous, 1995).
Their breakthrough came around 1971, when the movement changed its name to ‘multicultural society’ and some of its members appointed to the advisory committees in the immigration departments. Here, they were able to implement their ideas. In 1973, the White Australia Policy was completely dropped, with the government opting to choose the immigrants on the basis of their qualifications (Birrell, 1984).
The racial discrimination act was also formulated in 1975, during the tenure of Malcolm Fraser as the opposition immigration spokesman. Multiculturalism was embraced by many people and continued to be practiced throughout the country. The concept received support from the Prime Minister, Bob Hawke, in 1980’s when he ordered for the setting up of an office where multicultural policies would be made and enacted (Australian Council on Population and Ethnic Affairs, 1982).
Collins (1988) states that around the same time, the concept was fully adopted by many and there were programs that had been established to help the immigrants and also the lobby groups with financial and any other kind of assistance that they required. Establishment of multicultural radio stations was also a step to show the success of multiculturalism.
Multiculturalism during the Howard Government
John Howard led the Australian government between 1996 and 2007. During his tenure, he did not show a lot of support for multiculturalism, instead he even criticized it. As a result, the support this concept received from the government decreased and conversely, the idea of assimilation received massive support (Das, 2006).
This however does not mean that the government abolished multiculturalism completely. National Multicultural Advisory Council (NMAC) was established in 1997, with support from the government even though every other policy that was formed after this did not regard the concept of multiculturalism.
Instead, Australian values were emphasized. A report on multiculturalism submitted by National Multicultural Advisory Council (NMAC) in 1999 stated that although it recognized that the citizens were involved in the success of multiculturalism, there was a greater need to recognize that Great Britain and Ireland also contributed immensely towards Australia’s democracy and peaceful coexistence of people in the country.
To further show his lack of support towards multiculturalism, only a single statement on multicultural policy was given out. This happened in 2003 and the statement was supposed to serve its purpose until 2006. This was a long period of silence on such a crucial matter of national importance (Greg, 2006).
Another thing that showed his contempt towards multiculturalism was his reluctance use the term in official speeches that he made. Again, term which was in use in the title of the immigration department was removed and the department given another name that did not include ‘multiculturalism’.
Das (2006) further says that Howard encouraged the immigrant to integrate into the native Australian society which is largely white Anglo-Saxon. Howard says that failure to do this, the national values that show patriotism and nationalism would be down trodden.
This is a view that was shared by another vocal critic of multiculturalism, Blainey, According to Blainey (1984), acceptance of the concept of multiculturalism would have devastating effects on the government. This would lead to failure because of concentrating on the rights of the few immigrants at the expense of the majority of the population who are the natives.
Howard’s zeal for eradication of this concept saw him introduce the Australian citizenship test, which had earlier been removed because it hindered efforts geared towards multiculturalism. The national identity also ceased to be referred to as multiculturalism (Slade, and Mollering, 2010).
In 2007, before he left office, Howard made remarks disregarding multiculturalism. He is quoted to have said that the Australian natives should not be made to apologize because of their identity; instead, they should be proud and push for it to remain. He explained his point further by saying that the concept of multiculturalism is different from that of multiracialism and the two should never be confused (Modood, 2007).
To elaborate this, Howard said that multiracialism simply meant the acceptance of the core values upheld by the natives of a country by the immigrants who settle in that particular country. He asserted that he is comfortable with the practice of multiracialism but not multiculturalism. He said that he believed in this because of the positive effect that is got when people from different societies come together (Castles, and Miller, 2009).
Multiculturalism after the Howard Government
The debate on multiculturalism did not end with the end of John Howard’s tenure in office. This concern is fueled by the danger of terrorism attacks that is being experienced by people all over the world. There was also a concern about how best to bring about social cohesion in the country that is characterized by cultural diversity.
During the Labor Government of 2007-2010, under the leadership of Kevin Rudd, the concept of multiculturalism received much support (Markus, Jupp, and McDonald, 2009). His support is signified by his decision to have the Parliamentary Secretary for Multicultural Affairs and Settlement Services and also the National Multicultural Advisory Council established.
One of the mandates of the latter was to provide the government with the useful advice on ways of improving social cohesion and also eliminating racism and other vices attached to this due to diversity that existed in the country (Jupp, 2007). This move was aimed at creating an environment of tolerance to all people despite their differences. Diversity was supposed to be treated as strength for the country and not a weakness.
This committee gave some recommendations to the government which included: making sure that every citizen had access to essential services rendered by the government to its citizens. Again, the government was supposed to address the issue of discrimination together with other vices such as prejudice with a lot of seriousness.
The government was also advised to create opportunities where the people of Australia would put in their contribution in projects that are beneficial to the community as a whole. The overriding advice was that the government needed to do all it could to ensure justice was upheld in all its institutions and the people in Australia lived in a community that had social cohesion without some people feeling left out.
These recommendations were received positively by Chris Evans, who was the minister of immigration then.
The Gillard government, which came into power in 2010, has not been an ardent supporter of multiculturalism and this led to the government removing the term from the title of the immigration department of the country. This has attracted a lot of criticism from many people including the Federation of Ethnic Communities Councils.
Currently, every Australian state has established laws which govern the people on multiculturalism. The modes of operation of the bodies that enact these laws are different because each one has its own laws and mandates. For example, the policy dealing with multiculturalism in New South Wales is enacted by the Community Relations Commission for a multicultural NSW while that doing the same in Victoria is called the Victorian Multicultural Commission (VMC).
Conclusion
The issue of multiculturalism remains to a contentious one in Australia. One of the ways which has helped in promoting understanding of this concept among the people is dialogue with the people. However, it is still not clear how multiculturalism can be used to bring about a positive impact in a community with a lot of diversity. This becomes more difficult because of the government’s leaders holding varying opinion during their tenure in office and being replaced with leaders of a different opinion after an election
Reference List
Australian Council on Population and Ethnic Affairs., 1982. Multiculturalism for all Australians—our developing nationhood. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service:.
Bell, J., 2006. Australia: state of fear. The Age, Opinion, 27 January, 2006, p. 15
Birrell, R., 1984. Australia’s Immigration Policy: Changes and Implications. Sydney Fontana.
Blainey, G., 1984. All for Australia. North Ryde, NSW: Methuen Haynes.
Castles, S., and Miller, M., 2009. The age of Migration: International Population Movements in the Modern World. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Castles, S., et al., 1990. Mistaken Identity, Multiculturalism and the Demise of Nationalism in Australia. Sydney: Pluto Press.
CAAIP (Committee to Advise on Australia’s Immigration Policies)., 1988. Immigration: a committee to Australia. Canberra: AGPS.
Collins, J., 1988. Migrants Hand in a Distant Land. Sydney: Pluto Press.
Cope, B., et al., 1991. Immigration, Ethnic Conflicts and Social Cohesion. Melbourne: Bureau of Immigration Research.
Das, S., 2006. Howard’s way: multiculturalism is out, assimilation is in. The Age, Opinion, 27 January, p. 15.
Elder, C., 2005. Immigration history in M Lyons & P Russell (eds), Australia’s history: themes and debates. New South Wales: University of New South Wales Press. pp. 98–115.
Greg, C., 2006. The Conspiracies of Multiculturalism. The Betrayal that Divided Australia. New South Wales: Sunda Publications.
Higley, J., Nieuwenhuysen, J., and Neerup, S., 2009. Nations of Immigrants: Australia and the USA compared. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Jones, G. W., 2003. White Australia, national identity and population change in L Jayasuriya, D Walker & J Gothard (eds). Legacies of white Australia: race, culture and nation. Perth: University of Western Australia Press. pp. 110–28
Jupp, J., 2007. From White to Woomera. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lopez, M., 2000. The Origins of Multiculturalism in Australia Politics 1945-1975. Carlton South: Melbourne University Press.
Lyle, A., 1983. A Selective Annotated Bibliography of Multiculturalism in Social Alternatives. Queensland: University of Queensland.
Markus, A., Jupp, J., and McDonald, C., 2009. Australia’s Immigration Revolution. Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin.
Modood, T., 2007. Multiculturalism-a civic idea. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Slade, C., and Mollering, M., 2010. From Migrant to Citizen: testing language, testing culture. London: Macmillan.
Theophanous, A. C., 1995. Understanding Multiculturalism and Australian Identity. Carlton South: Elikia Books.