just said im from here and there was no indentity.

lack of that identity isent always a bad choice…if you can drew up an theory that identity leads to nationalism and nationalism usually into violence of some sort…

A good fact is a lot of australian words are really derived from chinese words

didint you speak english in there :confused: :confused:

Im just asking since most people assume that australia was a country in 1788 but it was not. Australia had many changes and the country we know as australia was formed in 1901. Before that they were just colonies(thats why there was so much immigration at the start) and basically different countries

Because of that all the states have different types of cultures.

You go to queensland and you have rugby and a mixture of local brews and imported things(they drink more fancy).In NSW you have rugby and cricket and tooheys (type of beer). Victoria you have the AFL and Victoria bitter(type of beer) .And south australia where its AFL and carlton draught(type of beer)

In different regions of australia there is as much difference as some european countries in what they do. But after 1901 we were held together by a sense of partiotism and a sole identiy of being australian.

But also if you look inot concentrations of (lets just say ethnic) groups you will find they are concentrated in the east and mainly south east while on the west coast a very very unique culture developed.

But when the talk was about cultures, a date more closer to the arrival of that culuture migth be impropriate one…and actual creating one sort of state isent exactly the same as forming the civilications.

And im sure there is as many varietyes in australia as there is inside many european nations as well, but the culuture, when speaking in global levels is visible under these variations, as its by its contiunity represent the civilacation itself. And europe (western) and Australia shares that same contiunity

I might make a reply for australian culture on the holidays. I was definate before but now im not to sure if i will have enough time

if it isent about revailing some previosly unknow theory how australian culture and civilications arent exported but some miracluosly the aborginals have transformed via speeded up evolution to full fletch european-lookalikes and build the civilication by themself, Dont bother to waste your and my time on that. I propaply dont have any different wievs from your culture that you couldnt blame me, only difference seems to be the orgins of the civilication, not the cultural contest of it.

???

what?? Ok I admitt, bit overexaggerated expression (and more of generalisation as i werent talking about australia along, but other western countryes as well), but you propaply get my point…

In here they all carry guns…and normally one of the some 8,000 police mens fires a gun one or two times per year…there are armed crimes, but in very, very rearly, so some sort of armed police/gendarmeire would be enough…so guess they just need some penis-extension to make them feel comfortably cocky enough to ‘protect’ us…
It would build confident among the nation if they wouldnt carry guns, i guess…but then you would require the overal gun levels to be low as well…
I think they should ban all firearms, exept sport related, including hunting ones…its an awfull kind of sport, killing animals with no change to survive 😡 …
…anyway, and with no guns in the street other than exceptional occasions, police woulndt need them either…

Thats part of it. But when you have some individuals from a particular ethnic group, however few in number, questioning whether they are subject to the laws of the country they live in, it prompts a debate….

yeas it does but my point is that unlike you tryed to say, immagration rising from the individual motivates cannot be seperated from other immigration movements and therefore make it some hyppocritical excuse for facist immigration policy. laws are mere tools of ruling factors own agendas and justificates only their status to the power so to an old anarchist like me, the lawfactor doesent bite

The debate about multiculturalism is not about immigration. It about whether new arrivals should actively seek to retain the culture and life style of their “old country” rather than actively embracing the culture and lifestyle of modern Australia.

Similarly, reporting of Australia immigration policies, in particular the detention of illegal entrants seem like outright misrepresentation at times. Whether you agree with them or not (which is another issue in itself), only illegal entrants who refuse to leave are placed in detention until their status can be determined. In that respect its not that much different to the situation in a lot of European countries or the US and Canada. But whatching Eurpean TV, it sounds like all arrivals are detained, and that Australia has a strongly anti immigration policy. In realty, immigration levels are at historically high levels, and 25% of the Australian population was born overseas.

well you confuse the issue there yourself. In largescale statistics, you cannot descripe immigrant to some other class from merely his motives. The human race is on constant movement, wheter in bigger populations or in smaller scales. Wheter they ‘lose’ themself in the mist of the new culture or replace it, isent directly relevant to the nature of the immigration itself but the livelyness of the destinative culture.

7. Not applying for NCO school in my army time…thougth that easiest way possiple was the best solution…it werent 😡 😡

1. Kummeli

Top ten camoflage patterns in aircrafts

10. Swedish one on Viggens