cultural ghetto

Assimilation, multiculturalism or cultural ghettos by GDL

The case of a Mauritian artist revisiting Australia has sparked passionate debate among the Mauritian community in Australia. The debate was even echoed by  the Mauritian media.
It all started when a local artist, Mr Lindsay Xavier  expressed surprise to see the Mauritian sega singer back in Australia after his pitiful performance the year before.
According to Mr Xavier, last time the artist in question, arrived on stage two and a half hours late and only performed for forty minutes all while repeating the same songs.                                                    
Mr Xavier made the point on Emission Kontak that the those who were at the concert were disappointed with his performance as felt that they were taken for a drive.                                             " All I am asking is quality. An artist should always give the best of himself in front of a paid assistance. It is not asking too much from a professional. " he said.
 Following on from what he witnessed last time, Mr Xavier explained that he will surely not attend the next show. Mr Xavier was backed by the Secretary of the Mauritian Community Welfare Association of Sydney and a radio broadcaster, Mr Lamvohee, who advocated that these shows are not doing any good  to the community and that some of the artists here can do a better job.                   The concert went ahead and it was not surprising that the turnout was meagre. However, despite the low attendance the artist made a better performance than last year. It was obvious that a lesson seems to have been learnt there.
Unfortunately, some in the same Mauritian community attacked vehemently Mr Xavier, and Mr Lamvohee,  to the extent of personal attacks and libel. Their attacks were based on the grounds that both Mr Xavier and Mr Lamvohee are downgrading Mauritian artists and the Mauritian sega.
On Emission Kontak, Mr Xavier brushed aside these accusations as false and malicious, that it was clear  that some have not understood, or deliberately deformed and misconstrued the facts, preferring to attack the messenger rather than the message.

The debate was amplified by a member of the community from Melbourne who went as far as accusing  the Mauritians  of Sydney of not being true blue Mauritians and lowering their self-esteem.  All this  because they did not attend  the sega show in Sydney (!!!) while there was 500 or more Mauritians attending the concert n Melbourne. It was a clear strategy of reigniting the old rivalry of Sydney v/s Melbourne.

The lesson to be drawn from this episode is that the Mauritians of Sydney look more opened and have not closed themselves in their Mauritian cultural ghetto. It is true and clear that Mauritians of Sydney do not flock together as much as those of Melbourne.
Sydney is a bigger metropolis and  a  more sophisticated city. Such a situation seems to have taken its toll on the Sydney inhabitants in general, not only on Mauritians. In Sydney there are more things happening, there is a wider choice of leisure and entertainment. It is therefore  normal for people to be exposed to a different lifestyle and influenced by the prevailing atmosphere.

This episode also denotes that Mauritians of Melbourne are more linked with their motherland and more embedded in their culture to the extent of  always being together at sports and cultural events. While it is not a bad thing it itself, whereas those of Sydney are more likely to think and decide where to go and have a good time.

GDL.

Obama winner or loser ?

A win for Obama or a lost for Romney ? by gdl.

While 50.2 percent of Americans rejoicing of the reelection of Barak Obama, there are still 49.8 percent of Americans who think that Obama' first term as President of the USA was a failure.
Those who disapproved Obama's social, economic domestic policies, as well as his military and foreign policies, are said to be more on the conservative side, or coming from the conservative states.
These so called conservatives, accepted the Mitt Romney's policies no matter how controversial they are seen by the other side. Romney's voters are categorised to be from the right ( traditional Republicans) and from the far right( followers of the Tea Party). They reject social policies like the rights of marriage to gays and lesbians, are anti-abortionists and more inward looking. They opine that America should lead the world (unipolar) and confrontation with the Arab world (an open war with Iran for example) and accusing China of currency manipulation are good policies!!!
Obama's first term has not been overwhelmingly good. America has a deficit of $16 trillion dollars and an unemployment rate is nearly eight percent. There is a looming  "fiscal cliff" of $600 billion to face on the 1 January of 2013. However, Obama ended the war in Iraq, withdrawing the troops from Afghanistan and killed Osama Bin Laden, are the positive highlights of his first term. He  has also managed quite well the Global Financial Crisis and there are ominous signs that the America's economy is recovering, although still very ailing.
The results from these elections show that the USA is divided into 2 blocks. On one side the progressists, and on the other the conservatives. The victory at the electoral colleges,( state based) means nothing besides the popular vote. The popular vote is the real reflection of the Americans' mood in terms of real democracy.
Obama knows that he has 49.8 percent of Americans watching, and expecting him to fall and fail. But,  as he will not be standing for elections again, he has nothing to lose in opening up and compromise with the Senate and House of reps to overcome the "fiscal cliff" on one side, and bring down the deficit to a reasonable level on the other. These are  the real challenges for Obama and his team. The "reasonable" budget deficit acceptable by the IMF is normally three percent of GDP while America's deficit is nor more than 50 percent of its GDP, actaully 84 percent !!!! .
Surely, this is a mammoth job for the Democrats, let alone unachievable by the Obama's administration in the next forr years. It is virtually impossible for them to even balance the budget in the next for years. Again the legacy of Barak Obama, when he will definitely leave office, will not be bright in this field and will leave Hillary Clinton, (who is poised to be the next Democrate candidate to the Presidency ) to " please explain ".
But so what the USA have always lived the deficit anyway...