Australia: Multicultural melting pot threatened by hardliners

More on Australian policy debates. Peter Kurti is right; advocates of hard or deep multiculturalism undermine support for multiculturalism, given “anything goes” cultural tolerance, rather than placing this in a rule of law and human rights context with limits. He goes a bit too far in his views of the role of the state; there is place for the state to encourage soft multiculturalism, including respect for religious freedom, but in balance with other rights.

A more sophisticated discussion can be found in Clifford Orwin’s 2009 article, Shallow diversity — our national muddle:

In fact, we Canadians do have a way of life. It’s called liberal democracy. It offers us unprecedented freedom to live as we wish and, in this sense, it does indeed “foster diversity.” It does so, however, only on condition of a far more significant underlying unity.

As long as you observe prevailing liberal democratic norms on all fundamental social questions, you’re free in merely secondary matters to continue in the ways of your ancestors.

As to the question of whether Australia needs a multiculturalism act, Canada’s multiculturalism act is more aspirational than prescriptive, leaving the heaving lifting to the courts and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Multiculture melting pot threatened by hardliners | thetelegraph.com.au.