Maybe all should read

[native pepper]

There seems to be a bit of misinterpretation here, of course moving to a new country can be difficult coming to terms with the changes in culture language and understanding, but people do it every day. Fitting in has nothing to do with colour, race or culture, it's the effort people put in to integrate themselves into the new culture and language which counts. Many of my friends are from other countries, but they've made the effort to fit in and become as Aussie as they can and it works.

In my experience, most Aussies accept those who make that effort to become Australian as best they can and help them and during my travels it's the same just about everywhere. But when it comes to religion, that's not the case in many places especially large population areas.

From my point of view, couldn't care less what someone looks like or where they come from, it's how they come across and relate to me and our community that counts and having seen and experienced a lot of discrimination during my life, I can understand how some people feel. But we have a culture very different to the rest of the planet and irrelevant to what some think, it's a good and inclusive one if you make the effort to become an Aussie. Those that find it difficult, complain and don't make an effort sticking to the ways they escaped from, are mostly all religious people and cause themselves and other problems.

Religious multiculturalism doesn't work in any way, but our culture has benefitted and grown from the introduction of some cultural input from everyone who has come here and made it a much more varied and acceptable culture by that integration. But many religious, don't make the effort and demand they retain their cultural religious approach and that's what fractures societies in the long run and we are seeing that worldwide now.

We are no longer a christian country, the majority don't believe it any more and that's reflected in the dwindling church attendance which is now very low. We have a unique cultural belief and it's not religious and not based on any ideology and it's made us very unique in the world.

Having travelled this planet a lot, like others I know how we are accepted worldwide unless you're one of those drop kicks who tend to create problems where ever they go, but every country has those morons sadly. I've been accepted just about everywhere, because I made the effort to not stand out and showed an interest in how others live and think, giving many a good laugh at my feeble attempts to learn their language and respect their cultural norms trying to fit in whilst there.

That's the way it should be for those coming here or moving anywhere and the majority make that attempt successfully, sadly there's a growing number of ideologues who refuse to fit in and they are the problem worldwide.

[Izabarack]

Edmund Barton put out his statement in 1907. It's unfortunate that the timing coincides with the existance of the Immigration Restriction Act 1901. Also known as the White Australia Policy. The act was current from 1901 until 1958. Against that background, its easy to understand that Barton believed an Australian was white, in Racial terms, and that the Australian Flag, complete with a Union Jack in the corner, was every Australan's beacon of Allegience. Remember too, that First Nations peoples were not Australian citizens for many years after Barton's statement.

What does give me hope is that the current crop of younger Australians are very competently capable of critique of Barton's attitude in our current context. At a recent school asembly, it was fantastic to see my 11 year old Great Grandaughter join with her schoolmates to sing the National Anthem while facing the National flag. But here is the nuance. The musical intro to the National Anthem included the sounds of a diggerdoo. The assembly started with a 10 second Acknowledgment of Country and the school ethic of Tolerance, Inclusion, and Respect seemed to be painted on every wall in the School Assembly hall.

All my kids, grandkids, and greatgrandkids can read Barton's statment and know he was a product of his time. They also know that it's their time to define what being Australian is all about. Hopefully, they will all remember Toleremce, Inclusion, and Respect while they go about doing that.

[Noggins]

Edmund Barton put out his statement in 1907. It's unfortunate that the timing coincides with the existance of the Immigration Restriction Act 1901. Also known as the White Australia Policy. The act was current from 1901 until 1958. Against that background, its easy to understand that Barton believed an Australian was white, in Racial terms, and that the Australian Flag, complete with a Union Jack in the corner, was every Australan's beacon of Allegience. Remember too, that First Nations peoples were not Australian citizens for many years after Barton's statement.

What does give me hope is that the current crop of younger Australians are very competently capable of critique of Barton's attitude in our current context. At a recent school asembly, it was fantastic to see my 11 year old Great Grandaughter join with her schoolmates to sing the National Anthem while facing the National flag. But here is the nuance. The musical intro to the National Anthem included the sounds of a diggerdoo. The assembly started with a 10 second Acknowledgment of Country and the school ethic of Tolerance, Inclusion, and Respect seemed to be painted on every wall in the School Assembly hall.

All my kids, grandkids, and greatgrandkids can read Barton's statment and know he was a product of his time. They also know that it's their time to define what being Australian is all about. Hopefully, they will all remember Toleremce, Inclusion, and Respect while they go about doing that.

The bit about First Nations Peoples is the point where I disagree with your statement.
The Aboriginal mobs Never formed a Nation, ( and still can't) due to all the different languages and constant infighting amongst different clans of the same tribes or people.
The only legally recognised First Nations are the Canadian Indians , but a lie repeated enough becomes fact ( Borman WW11-Germany (?) )
What is Not taught in schools is the actual history of the Aboriginal people, but a very whitewashed ( for the want of a better word) version of the way they lived .
All references of the Negrito people has been deleted from Aboriginal history. But many a settler's diary wrote of how they were hunted and killed , then eaten.
The known documented references to these people came from Missionaries' diaries and pictures in 1941 - FNQld
The Tasmanians beleive it or not, ( the last of the mixed Negrito people,) were saved from extermination by the second coming by the rising seas, which kept the invaders out.

Welcome to County
Great Theatre, but as a custom = follow the money for that one.

[T1 Terry]

Ron, yet another that I wish to agree to disagree
Would Europe be considered a nation? What about the UK, neither speak the same language and are well known for their fights with those on the same continent and/or islands ....
Not sure if you have ever noticed, but the indigenous don't even all look the same, much like those from the UK and Europe .....

T1 Terry

[Izabarack]

The bit about First Nations Peoples is the point where I disagree with your statement.
The Aboriginal mobs Never formed a Nation, ( and still can't) due to all the different languages and constant infighting amongst different clans of the same tribes or people.
The only legally recognised First Nations are the Canadian Indians ..............

Chicken and the egg argument there. "Nation" a word of abstract meaning currently used to define an area of land with a consensus recognised administration that frames and instigates laws inside borderrs. "Nation" includees some sense or implication of ownwership by the citizens of that nation. Marbo established that Terra Nullis was a failed argument and recognised ownership of the majority land area and coastal fringes to First Nation and their decendents.

Canadian Indians are recognised by laws established by an emergent Nation or Country that esablished a internal frameework of laws that apply in that instance.

Conflict between clans or tribes or religious differences do not negate a description or defination of a nation. Hindu and Christian adherants in India, for example, regularly clash violently. Sectarian violence within Great Britian is another contempory example. Welsh and Garlic and English are three languages still commonly used within GB and the existence of the languages in daily use do not collapse the notion of GB as a nation.

But back to the OP. Barton's missive is from a time and attitude long past. Barton's call for discrimination based his personal defination of an exlempar Australian is rejected by a majority of comntempory Australian citizens. Currently arguiments about the national flag and the 26 th January are standout examples of rejection of the old ideas. The current design of the National Flag and the 26th as either Invasion Day or the foundation of Australia anniversry are divisive. Patently stupid to have a Zero Sum game ongoing over those two issues.

As already argued, it seems that a younger generation is in the process of defining what it means to be Australian.