Social Inequality In Australia

As global surveys have come to reveal, Australia is among one of the most desired countries of migration (Peace, A 2015, p. 239). To this effect, it is without doubt that Australia’s international image is that of multicultural harmony and prosperity. Broadly speaking, these assessments are correct (Habibis, D & Walter, M 2015, p. 8). However, they only demonstrate a very superficial understanding of the social realities of Australia. Beneath the façade of social cohesion, xenophobia and structural disadvantage sometimes seem only just below the surface of everyday life. This paper will thus argue that multiculturalism, as defined in the Australian context, can underpin social inequality for particular ethnic groups. In this paper, the implications

‘Multiculturalism’ has been an organising principle of Australian policy ever since the early 1970s. A brief look over the many statements of multiculturalism over the past twenty-five years have come to reveal three common themes: the value of preserving cultural identity, and the importance of attaining social equality and maintaining social cohesion (Greig, A, Lewins, F & White, K 2003, pp. 113 – 114).

However, these three themes have yet to be equally emphasised. Over the years, we see a shift from a particularly strong emphasis on social equality to a priority of social cohesion (Greig, A, Lewins, F & White, K 2003, p. 116; Jakubowicz, A 2006, pp. 260 – 261). This shift is explicit in the Commonwealth Government’s definition of multiculturalism. A definition which accepts the maintenance of an individual’s cultural identity, however, provided that this ethnic identity is expressed ‘within clearly defined limits’ and upon the premises that the individual ‘should have an overriding and unifying commitment to Australia, to its interests and future first and foremost’ (DSS

373; Hage, G 1988, p. 66). Operationalised as the national ideal, elements of the ‘common culture’ thus transform into a type of resource that Bourdieu refers to as ‘cultural capital’ (in Hage, G 1988, p. 53). In simpler terms, the consumption patterns, lifestyle choices, and social attributes that are typical of Anglo-Celtic culture become symbolic goods in which an individual can possess in order to further their sense of national belonging (Habibis, D & Walter, M 2015, p. 41; Hage, G 1988, pp. 52 – 53).

At its most basic level, multiculturalism therefore conceives of a cultural hierarchy that ranks different ethnic groups in terms of their proximity to the ‘common culture’. In this respect, it perpetuates relations of domination and subordination that carry with them judgements about the value of different ethnic groups (Habibis, D & Walter, M 2015, p. 5). As this paper will go on to highlight, this hierarchical structure consequently informs the cultural identities of the ethnic ‘other’ in various ways that perpetuate their social