I can think of at least two non-white Australians that were famous.

1. Yvonne Goolgong (tennis)

2, Catherine Freeman (Olympics Track and Field)

They were not immigrants but were Aborigines. I'm sure there were others.

Crocodile Dundee was white.

Good on you...there's two that I had thought of.

I can think of at least two non-white Australians that were famous.

1. Yvonne Goolgong (tennis)

2, Catherine Freeman (Olympics Track and Field)

They were not immigrants but were Aborigines. I'm sure there were others.

Crocodile Dundee was white.

Good on you...there's two that I had thought of.

Yet you didn't bother to list them.

I feel funny telling this to someone who is by their own account of mixed heritage but perhaps growing up in such a color-blind Utopian society you really are ignorant in matters of race.

One reason non-white immigrants to America might find it easier to assimilate and become American is that they see famous and successful Americans who look like themselves. If not Americans, they see others go to America and become rich, famous, successful, admired in America (Jackie Chan, Yao Ming, etc). Australia - like America - is a country of immigrants. Unlike America, immigrants to Oz apparently have few if any role models like themselves unless they themselves are white. Sure, after the immigrant is there long enough they might learn of someone (the famous people you refuse to mention for your own reasons) but they don't know of them when they arrive and by the time they do come to know and appreciate these people, it's too late. I'm not stating any of this as fact. I'm just throwing stuff out there for discussion to try and answer the question why immigrants have a hard time assimilating in Australia.

mr. H. my question to you is the same you have for me, how do you determine what the rest of the world means? If you are using popularity based on population then china and india rule. The US 300m plus and it's marketing machines touch every corner of the globe which makes it hard for me to understand what you mean when you say the rest of the world.

When talking about fame, I think the difference is that America has a culture of celbrity, whereas the Australian culture is one with more modesty and a blase attitude.....in another recent thread (perhaps the Book of the Decade thread?)someone alluded to this in saying that there are some things that occur in Australia that would make the person famous in America, but locally it's just absorbed as passe.

I can see your point, koheesti, about immigrants having people to admire and aspire to. I think Aussies have that, but because we don't celebrate them, their "fame" is muted.

I can see the faces of Chinese, Aboriginal, Pacific Island,....people that are very successful chefs, designers, athletes, sportsmen, singers, actors, political activists, artists etc....but I couldn't name them.

They are available to admire or aspire to....but they are not celebrated to become household names.

When talking about fame, I think the difference is that America has a culture of celbrity, whereas the Australian culture is one with more modesty and a blase attitude.....in another recent thread (perhaps the Book of the Decade thread?)someone alluded to this in saying that there are some things that occur in Australia that would make the person famous in America, but locally it's just absorbed as passe.

That might explain why so many Aussies go to Hollywood to find work. At least they're good at it.

But it doesn't explain why they are so racist and intolerant of immigrants (according to the thread topic).

When talking about fame, I think the difference is that America has a culture of celbrity, whereas the Australian culture is one with more modesty and a blase attitude.....in another recent thread (perhaps the Book of the Decade thread?)someone alluded to this in saying that there are some things that occur in Australia that would make the person famous in America, but locally it's just absorbed as passe.

That might explain why so many Aussies go to Hollywood to find work. At least they're good at it.

But it doesn't explain why they are so racist and intolerant of immigrants (according to the thread topic).

I don't think the OP was stateing that Aussies are racist....I think he was using hyperbole for dramatic effect to put the point across that it is all just smoke and mirrors, a storm in a teacup, a mountain out of a molehill (I just can't fit Muhhamed and the mountain into the list of metaphores, unfortunately).

I think the OP is asking why are some things sensationalised and other things of equal import, are not.

I think its important to have new frontiers. Frontiers act as a "safety valve" for concentrated populations and new locations for economic exploitation and growth. I think there's a growing sense worldwide that there are fewer and fewer new frontiers to conquer and that instead of G Bush's malapropism of "making the pie higher" there is a sense that there's an ever diminishing slice of pie to be had by everyone. The immigrants are coming for your slice and they don't seem to be playing by the established rules when they are. personally, I don't believe that as the rules are crafted just so they may. If you have a beef, perhaps its with your government.

When one looks at an Australian population density chart one can see that large parts of the population are quite concentrated and new immigrants may be seen to be taking from "established" interests. That could be a source of conflict. That and most easily assimilable have already emigrated.

By contrast you can see that the population of the US is more spread out and smaller groups of immigrant populations can flourish anywhere (pretty much), without feeling the need to have BIG groupings, which could form the nucleus of their "New Jerusalem". Just a thought. I may be talking out my ass here.

I think its important to have new frontiers. Frontiers act as a "safety valve" for concentrated populations and new locations for economic exploitation and growth. I think there's a growing sense worldwide that there are fewer and fewer new frontiers to conquer and that instead of G Bush's malapropism of "making the pie higher" there is a sense that there's an ever diminishing slice of pie to be had by everyone. The immigrants are coming for your slice and they don't seem to be playing by the established rules when they are. personally, I don't believe that as the rules are crafted just so they may. If you have a beef, perhaps its with your government.

When one looks at an Australian population density chart one can see that large parts of the population are quite concentrated and new immigrants may be seen to be taking from "established" interests. That could be a source of conflict. That and most easily assimilable have already emigrated.

By contrast you can see that the population of the US is more spread out and smaller groups of immigrant populations can flourish anywhere (pretty much), without feeling the need to have BIG groupings, which could form the nucleus of their "New Jerusalem". Just a thought. I may be talking out my ass here.

Interesting idea, that has merits. There4 will always be resentment toward interlopers. You have to realise that the map you gave (which I'm not sure what the units are...person's per sqkm?) shows the reality of the situation.....vast areas are simply unihabitable. Crikey, there were some areas with no available data! Near on 60% of the land is wasteland.

Even so, the densities are not that bad compared to many places in the world.

This is an example of what kids in America were taught in the 1970's about America being a "melting pot" of people from around the world. Did they ever have anything like this in Australia?

Schoolhouse Rock - The Great American Melting Pot

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWJ4udW41Ns...feature=related