The Australian identity
On how it is evolving with immigration
Recently George Megalogenis, a highly respected journalist/author who has written extensively on Australian history and social structure, in writing about the Voice[1], suggested a three-way categorisation of Australian society — First Nations, Old and New Australians. He defined Old and New Australians in the following way:
Old Australians are non-Indigenous people who have been here for at least three generations, with parents and grandparents who were also born here. New Australians were born overseas or have at least one migrant parent.
This definition is much too simplistic and is a misrepresentation of how immigration is changing Australian society. It presumes a very 1950s/1960s static status for Australian society. Yes, what was then a largely Anglo-Celtic society used the term New Australians to describe the arriving immigrants from war torn and impoverish Europe. However, in the intervening period something remarkable and elevating has happened. We have evolved into a very dynamic amalgam of all the old and new that is now our version of the melting pot.
Research based on the 2006 census[2] shows how society had changed as a result of the post-war immigration program. This research looked at the extent of inter-partnering — both marriage and other forms of partnering — between immigrants and their descendants with the broader community.
Over thirty immigrant groups were considered and research found that almost all ethnic groups experienced increasing inter-partnering with each generation beyond the original immigrant.
The extent of inter-partnering reaches very high levels by the third generation (two beyond the original immigrant). For most ethnicities the percentage of inter-partnering is greater than 70% and for many it is greater than 80% and for some more than 90%. As expected simply by weight of numbers, the predominant “other” party in the inter-partnering is Anglo-Celtic or, according to the Megalogenis definition, “Old” Australians.
Some variation in inter-partnering was observed across the range of ethnicities but the overwhelming trend with each generation was for an ever- increasing degree of inter-partnering. The level of people’s education influenced the extent of inter-partnering with more highly educated people having a higher level of inter-partnering.
Most observers of Australian society would not be surprised by these findings. Anecdotally it is all around us. However ,what surprised me was the extent and rate at which we are being transformed by immigration.
The Megalogenis definition suggests a hard boundary between Old and New Australians. He implies that Australian society is socially rigid and that immigrants and their offspring are not integrating into the broader society. He does not acknowledge the extent of inter-partnering that is on-going and that the community rather than becoming sharply dividing on ethnic lines has, in terms of the post-war migration at least, evolved as an ever more blended community.
Certainly there is plenty of division in Australian society but in the process so far (there is more to say about this later), ethnicity hasn’t been the issue it may have been. Where we are failing is in matters of income/wealth, age, property ownership, location and education.
Typically this blending begins slowly but after three or four generations it has reached a very high level of inter-partnering. The researchers highlighted, for Greek immigrants (traditionally quite resistant to change) the following:
Almost all post-World War Two migrants from Greece arrived as couples or families with young children. As has been noted in many studies, the second generation of Greek ancestry have exhibited a relatively low propensity to marry out. The 2006 census results show a similar pattern with only 37 percent of second generation males of Greek ancestry and 31 per cent of females married out. This outcome reflects a strong tendency for first generation Greek families to concentrate residentially and to develop ethnic specific social institutions, including the Orthodox Greek church. Yet despite this ethnic solidarity, by the third generation 67 per cent of men of Greek ancestry and 61 per cent of the women have married out.
What is quite wrong in the Megalogenis definition of Old and New Australian is the lumping of everyone who has one immigrant parent in with the New Australian group. This is odd because it is a grouping that includes aging unskilled European immigrants from the 1950s and 1960s with more recent arrivals of professionals from China and India and their children and their children’s children whether they have chosen to “marry out” of the community or not. I couldn’t think of a more disparate grouping and for what purpose?
His article paints a picture of a power struggle between New Australia and Old Australia. What power struggle? As stated above, New Australia is a disparate grouping within which there is likely to be as much disagreement as agreement about whatever values you might want to think of. Old Australia is not really that cohesive either. Certainly there are plenty of baby boomers in there along with remnants of the silent generation, increasing X Gens and let’s not forget the Millennials. Along with the age differences we have wealth, property ownership and education differences that divide us much more than ethnicity.
As the 2006 Census researchers highlighted, by the third generation partnering selection was reflecting the ethnic mix of the whole population and correspondingly a negligible influence from the particular ethnic line they may have come from. The researchers commented:
These patterns point to increasing social interaction between the second and third or more generations of these ethnicities and people outside their ethnic group.
Does this mean we are evolving into some kind of well-integrated melting-pot society, arguably the first in the world? It is too early to say. It does look like that in terms of those who arrived in the second half of the 20th Century but we will not know the impact of the post 2000 largely Asian immigration wave for some decades. The 2006 Census researchers remind us of this:
For ethnic communities of more recent migrant origin from South and East Asia, the Middle East and Africa, the second generation is still young and not yet of marriageable age and there is no third generation yet. These communities bring with them cultural traditions that are quite different from those people of Southern and Eastern European backgrounds who dominated migration during the 1950s and 1960s. Whether the social integration of the second and third generations of these groups as measured by intermarriage will be similar to those of the non-English-speaking European migrant communities will not be known for several years.
We can be reasonably proud of what we have achieved so far but this is no basis for resting on our laurels. Weaknesses do exist in our existing immigration policies particularly around temporary migration and uncertainties regarding long-term residency status. Other factors particularly social media and ease of transport are enabling retention of strong connection with home.
Megalogenis makes reference to “the many glorious tribes of New Australia”. This is an alleluia to multiculturalism. That is okay but I wonder which tribe might accept one little fellow I know quite well. He is one quarter Chinese, one quarter Sicilian and the rest a mix of Irish, Cornish and English. This is what inter-partnering is doing to us. Also, like me, there are many who once had an ethnic identity but over time have matched their sense of who they are more to where they live. Ethnic identity is important at the start but it is transitional.
We are all moving on aren’t we?
References
[1] Dutton is forgetting one major detail, and it’s nothing to do with the Voice, George Megalogenis, the Age, 28 January 2023
[2] Inter-marriage by birthplace and ancestry in Australia, S. E. Khoo, B. Birrell, G. Heard, People and Place, Vol. 17, no. 1, 2009
https://tapri.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/v17n1_2khoobirrellheard.pdf