John Roskam, Exectutive Director of the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA), on the 7:30 report on Thursday night.

Before I really get started, this statement is self-contradictory to the point of absurdity; John claims that multiculturalism is a term that was useful at a time of mono-cultural immigration, and uses that as an argument against multiculturalism in a time of poly-cultural immigration. This makes less sense than the Chewbacca Defence.

Putting that aside, John is wrong about what Multiculturalism was and is. Multiculturalism as a term was first used in 1973 and as a policy was really kicked into gear by Malcolm Fraser’s government (1975-1983). The cliff notes to Australian immigration policy include that there was a large influx of migrants after world war two from various countries in western Europe and that there was a bipartisan consensus in the seventies, under Malcolm Fraser’s Prime Ministership, to accept higher numbers of immigrants from Asia, and in particular, refugees (including those coming by boat) from Vietnam. So at the time that multiculturalism became official policy, Australia was already accepting new arrivals from a range of cultures.

Indeed, the idea that there was ever a time “when arrivals to Australia were basically from the same culture” is highly questionable. It certainly wasn’t the case with the wave of western European migration after World War Two and I’m pretty sure it wasn’t the case when there was an influx of migrants around the gold rush of the 1850s. One may even question if it was the case in the early colonial years when there were tensions between the government and rebel Irish Catholics, but the use of “basically” might get John off the hook here.

Additionally, Roskam’s proposition that “Australia is basically one culture. It is a Judeo-Christian liberal democracy” leaves me to only assume that he doesn’t actually know what culture is. It’s reasonable to make an argument that Australia’s political culture is centred on a broad principal of liberal democracy but “Judeo-Christian liberal democracy” doesn’t go anywhere near to implying, for example, what music, foods, or values are popular or common in Australia, let alone anything about the less tangible aspects of culture. Australia hasn’t contained “basically one culture” for at least tens of thousands of years.

All that said, I do agree with John’s comment at the conclusion of the piece.

We should have this debate and it is good that we are talking about it, but we can’t talk about it without identifying what multiculturalism is, how it worked in the past and how it can work into the future.

This is a good idea. I would invite John Roskam to identify what culture is, what multiculturalism is, how multiculturalism was conceived as a theoretical alternative to assimilation, and how it has evolved from theory to operate in practice. Or at least get one of his research fellows to prepare a paper on the subject for him to read. Once he’s done that, and when he’s willing to base his arguments in facts instead of indulging in fantastical mythologising, I’d be happy for him to appear as the main contrasting interlocutor to Malcolm Fraser in a story about multiculturalism and immigration policy.