I like to challenge people’s thinking. I’m naturally curious about why people think the way they do, so I often share ideas that provoke discussion. Sometimes that blows up in my face, but it also provides valuable insight into people’s reasoning and occasionally leads to genuinely thoughtful conversations. Thankfully, there are still people on social media who are willing to think beyond slogans.
A surprising number of people responded to my post yesterday about a Sunni Ashura procession in Australia by saying they don’t want to live in a multicultural country, with several claiming it goes against everything they believe in.
The interesting thing is that my original post wasn’t actually about multiculturalism. It was about the unequal treatment of religions. I was disappointed that very few people addressed that central point—the apparent inconsistency in how expressions of different faiths are treated in the public square. Instead, the discussion quickly shifted into anger about Muslims.
But those responses raised a different issue that I think is worth exploring.
Whether we like it or not, Australia is a multicultural society. So what exactly is the alternative being proposed? And what is it about multiculturalism that people believe is fundamentally incompatible with their values? I ask because people from many different cultures and faiths live together peacefully in Australia every day.
Some will point to One Nation’s call for a “monoculture”. But how do you realistically achieve that after decades of immigration from every corner of the world, with multiculturalism now woven into the fabric of Australian society? What would that even look like in practice? That part is rarely, if ever, explained.
And even One Nation has stated that freedom of religion is a fundamental democratic right, just as important as freedom of speech. If that principle is applied consistently, then Sunni Muslims remain free to hold Ashura processions.
So is this really about multiculturalism? Or is it about not wanting to live alongside people from particular religious backgrounds?
They are different questions, and I think it’s important we don’t pretend they’re the same.
Perhaps the questions we should all be asking are these: What do we actually mean when we say we oppose multiculturalism? What practical alternative are we proposing? Are we objecting to a system of cultural diversity, or simply to the presence of certain groups within it? And if it is the latter, are we willing to say that openly?
If we’re going to have this debate, let’s at least be honest about what we’re really debating.
