Constructing Racism in Sydney, Australia’s Largest EthniCity€¦ · Sydney is, therefore,...

Constructing Racism in Sydney, Australia’sLargest EthniCity

James Forrest and Kevin Dunn

[Paper first received, March 2005; in final form, June 2006]

Summary. Contemporary Australia is in a contradictory situation as a nation wheremulticulturalism co-exists with various forms of what are collectively called racisms. Based on asurvey of Sydney residents, this study uses a social constructivist approach to investigate thenature and sociospatial context of racist attitudes in Sydney, Australia’s largest EthniCity.Results show a mix of compositional (aspatial) and contextual (spatial) associations with racisms.The former indicate a general but inconsistent relationship between socioeconomic status andtolerance, and also between cultural diversity and tolerance. The latter, however, reveal place-based cultures of tolerance and intolerance cutting across compositional relationships. Ageography of racism in Sydney therefore adds a level of understanding which cannot beobtained from aspatial analysis alone. This helps to understand the complexity of local politicalcultures and can assist with the formulation of anti-racism interventions.

Introduction

Racism is an historical and complex societalproblem among settler societies such asAustralia, Canada, Israel, the US and NewZealand. All are countries where immigrationhas long been a significant factor in populationgrowth and, importantly, where the wide rangeof national origins of more recent immigrationstreams has resulted in increasingly ethnicallydiverse populations. Yet each country is differ-ent. In the US, a dominant ethnic group phaseof Americanism saw the emergence of a‘White nation’ until the mid 1960s (Kaufman,2004) and a potential future divide between‘Blacks’ and ‘non-Blacks’ (Rose, 1997), butwith the social position of Asians and Hispa-nics, admitted after changes to immigrationlaws in 1965, not yet resolved (Kivisto,2002). In Canada, issues of a core culture andethnic minorities assumed a particular form

of cultural pluralism prior to the 1960s withtwo ‘charter groups’—English and French—and a more recent (post-1962 and 1967changes to immigration laws) multiculturalapproach to an increasingly diverse, post-‘White Canada’ ethnic mosaic (Bourque andDuchastel, 1999). Canada went further thanthe other immigrant-receiving countries men-tioned here in enshrining multiculturalismlegally and constitutionally during the 1980s(Helmes-Hay and Curtis, 1998). In NewZealand, the issue is largely one of bicultural-ism involving the indigenous Maori andPakeha (non-Maori, but usually seen as‘White’ New Zealanders) with, as yet, littleregard for the growing cultural diversity ofthe country’s people since the ending of a‘White New Zealand’ immigration policy in1986 (Hiebert et al., 2003).

Urban Studies, Vol. 44, No. 4, 699–721, April 2007

James Forrest is in the Department of Human Geography, Macquarie University, New South Wales, Sydney 2109, Australia. Fax:þ61 2 9850 6052. E-mail: [email protected]. Kevin Dunn is in the School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences,University of New South Wales, Sydney 2052, New South Wales, Australia. Fax: þ61 2 9385 2067. E-mail: [email protected].

0042-0980 Print=1360-063X Online=07=040699–23 # 2007 The Editors of Urban Studies

DOI: 10.1080=00420980601185676

Contemporary Australian society is oftencharacterised as increasingly multicultural, butstill struggling to disengage from a legacy ofAnglo privilege and cultural dominance(Forrest and Dunn, 2006a). Exclusion of non-Europeans, embodied in an ImmigrationRestriction Act, 1901, was one of the earliestpieces of legislation passed by the federalparliament of the new Commonwealth ofAustralia. What became known as the WhiteAustralia policy lasted until the early 1970s,to be replaced by policies promoting multi-culturalism. Even so, the experience ofpost-World-War-2 non-English-speaking back-ground immigrants, especially from eastern andsouthern Europe during the 1950s and 1960s—as opposed to the English-speaking background(British) immigrants who had absolutely domi-nated migration flows for 150 years prior to the1950s—was frequently marked by discrimi-nation and socioeconomic disadvantage(Vasta and Castles, 1996, p. 4). Subsequently,post-White-Australia immigrants from Asia,especially those who were Muslims, alongwith Indigenous Australians, came to beespecially identified as key Others in thenational imaginary (Hamilton, 1990;Rajkowski, 1987; Rizvi, 1996, pp. 176–177).Australia is thus in a contradictory situation

where multiculturalism co-exists with variousforms of what are collectively called racisms(Vasta and Castles, 1996, p. 5). The latterinclude Anglo-Celtic cultural dominance, intol-erance of diversity, antagonism towards somecultural groups and xenophobia. This contradic-tion may not be unique, but rather commonamong settler societies and among all thosethat have experienced substantial immigrationin the past four decades, such as countries inwestern Europe. These nations have what aresometimes called ‘unsettled multiculturalisms’(Hesse, 2000). The unsettledness relates to com-peting ideas about nation, including earliermoreexclusive encapsulations of nationhood. Theselegacies persist, often in aminority context, per-formed in nostalgic and tragic ways but withexclusionary impacts (Dunn, 2005), or explod-ing sensationally in ‘race riots’ such as aroundSydney’s Cronulla Beach on 11 December,2005. But multiculturalism in Australia, as

elsewhere, is also unsettled by its dynamismand development. It remains an unfinishedproject, with gaps in its coverage and limits toits reach in some sections and demographics.It is a feature of each of these major immi-

grant receiving countries, however, that themajor focus of dominant culture–minorityethnic groups tensions is in the cities andusually in the largest cities. In New Zealand,Auckland stands out as the most culturallydiverse city in the country (Johnston et al.,2002, 2003). In Canada, the major immigrant-receiving cities are Toronto, Montreal andVancouver (Simmons and Bourne, 2003). Inthe US, the focus on urban areas is more wide-spread, but is an urban focus nonetheless(Johnston et al., 2004). In Australia, a majorfeature of the immigrant stream of the past 50years has been the degree to which it hasbecome concentrated in the major urban areas.Sydney’s population comprises some 43 percent of immigrants from a non-English-speaking background by ancestry andMelbourne’s 41 per cent. Over the period1996–2001, some 39 per cent of new immigrantarrivals came to Sydney, with 22 per cent goingto Melbourne and 15 per cent to Perth (Forrestet al., 2003).Sydney is, therefore, Australia’s major

immigrant receiving city, especially in termsof the large number of Asian immigrantscoming into Australia since the early 1970s(Forrest et al., 2003; Poulsen et al., 2004).Here, racial tensions are most apparent(Forrest and Dunn, 2006a). Based on asurvey of Sydney residents on attitudes tovarious aspects of racism—part of a widerstudy of racist attitudes in eastern Australia(Dunn et al., 2004)—this study uses a socialconstructivist approach to investigate thenature and sociospatial context of racist atti-tudes in Sydney. Several questions areposed: is there a culture of racism inSydney; if so, how is it constructed and posi-tioned across key social factors such as ethni-city, class and age; is there any geography tothat culture which might be used to tailorapproaches to anti-racism initiatives?There is a long-established tradition of

examining variations in attitudes to cultural

700 JAMES FORREST AND KEVIN DUNN

diversity across social groups, which has beenexplored most fully in contemporary times bysocial psychologists (for example, see Pedersenet al., 2000). However, scholarship on spatialvariations to these attitudes has beendecidedly sparse and largely non-existent inrecent decades (Pettigrew, 1959; Robinson,1987; Schaefer, 1975). Contemporarygeographical scholarship has excelled at iden-tifying how racialisation operates within placeand how racialisation is placed (Bonnett,1996; Durrheim and Dixon, 2001), but thestudy of spatial variation in racist attitudesand experiences, and of racialisation, hasbeen neglected. Yet, as shown in the nextsection, contemporary geographical theorymakes a compelling case for research on thespatially varied nature of community relationsand nationalism. Furthermore, geographershave clearly advocated the importance ofsuch spatial variations to the formulation andtreatment of anti-racism. The clearest articula-tion of this comes from Kobayashi andPeake’s (2000) programmatic statementson anti-racist geographical scholarship.Geographical variations in racism across acity mandate a geography of anti-racism.This research on the geographies of racismacross Sydney is an empirical study pointingultimately towards a geography of anti-racism for that city, using techniques thatmay be replicated for other, culturallydiverse cities in Western-settler societies.

Theorising Racism in Australia

Among a range of views about racism, it haslong been accepted that it is negatively associ-ated with affluence and educational attainment(see Nunn et al., 1978; Smith, 1981). But thenegative association between racist attitudesand class (as measured through educationalachievement and affluence variables) is not astraightforward indicator of a link betweenracism and interclass conflict. For example,educational achievement among the middleclass may have a much greater impact uponthe expression of racist sentiment than itdoes upon oppressive actions by those indi-viduals (see Yinger, 1986, pp. 36–37).

Another class-based explanation points toeffects of affluence, and specifically resourcecompetition, among the working class. Thereis a perception, that, because of a paucity ofsocial capital—education, qualifications ornon-recognition of qualifications, and alsotime of arrival—members of minority ethniccommunities form a large proportion of theworking class (Jupp, 1984, p. 11) where theyare sometimes seen as an ‘industrial reservearmy’ acting to depress all workers’ incomes(Collins, 1984; Lever-Tracey and Quinlan,1988; McAllister and Kelley, 1984, pp. 53–54). Such a competition-for-jobs basis toracism is accentuated in the current climateof economic restructuring, resulting in job dis-placement and marginalisation, especially inthe manufacturing sector where most immi-grants have traditionally been concentrated(Vasta and Castles, 1996, pp. 38–40).

Racist attitudes are also associated with aform of national ethnocentrism, in which‘Australianness’ is tightly linked to Anglo(or Anglo-Celtic) culture (Dixson, 1999;Johnson, 2002). Ethnocentrism derives froman assumption of a pre-existing culture andsociety to which newcomers are expected toconform, although it may not be overtly pro-claimed, nor even intended to be oppressive(see Kobayashi and Peake, 2000, p. 393).Nonetheless, it involves intolerance of cul-tural difference and of minorities and, in itsmore extreme forms, the superiority of one’sown ethnicity: an ethnocultural or assimila-tionist viewpoint. Multiculturalism, or liberalegalitarianism is, of course, an alternative tothis viewpoint (Kelly, 2002; Kivisto, 2002).Other scholars of racism emphasise theeffect of cultural mix in an area, or the lackof it, as respectively inhibiting or promotingintolerance (Valenty and Sylvia, 2004). Thecombined effect of these viewpoints is acomplex mix of possible outcomes, reflectingcommunity relations likely to operate differ-ently in various parts of the city, even,perhaps, cutting across social divides.

Contemporary logics impacting on the for-mation of racist attitudes (the older formswere largely sociobiological), operatethrough differentiation, which underpins

CONSTRUCTING RACISM IN SYDNEY 701

separation and exclusion of racialised groupson the grounds of cultural difference (Jayasuriya,2002). This is often expressed in terms ofsocial cohesion—failure to assimilate—andnational identity (Dixson, 1999; Phillips,1998; for survey results of such attitudes inthe Australian context, see Brian Sweeney &Associates, 1996a, pp. 2–23; McAllister andMoore, 1989, pp. 7–11; Pedersen andWalker, 1997; Pedersen, Clarke et al., 2005).There is, nevertheless, a body of researchexamining the co-existence of both old-fashioned and modern prejudice. Most ofthese studies find that both forms are stronglycorrelated and that the correlations are risingas the years go by (see McConahay, 1986).Recently, Pedersen et al. (2004) found thatold-fashioned and modern prejudice formeda single meaningful factor.However, because of the variety of view-

points, touched on above, what constitutesracism for one person may be quite differentfor another and may vary not only fromperson to person, but also among people ofsimilar social backgrounds and from place toplace (Dunn and McDonald, 2001). ThusBonnett (1996, p. 872) argued for a combinedsocial and spatial perspective on racism andsuggested the value of social constructivismas an analytical approach to understandingthe processes involved. Constructivism,according to Jackson and Penrose (1993,p. 3), works by identifying the componentsand processes of category construction, andnotions of spatial identity or culture as wellas what constitutes racism itself. Recentwork in cultural geography, for example, haswitnessed a proliferation of studies of ‘race’within the larger discourse of social construc-tion (Kobayashi, 2004, p. 239).

Survey and Data

The purpose of the University of New SouthWales/Macquarie University (UNSW/MQU) Racism Survey, conducted in late2001, was to collect data on racist attitudesin the states of New South Wales andQueensland, which together approximate 50per cent of Australia’s population. The

overall response rate was 70.3 per cent. Aspart of that survey, which was conductedby telephone, data from 1845 respondentsin the Sydney metropolitan region were gen-erated and used in this study. The samplewas area-stratified so as to draw fromwithin every second postcode, with the aimof including at least one postcode fromevery Local Government Area (LGA).Valid response sets were derived for 43 ofthe 45 LGAs in the Sydney region. Such afocus on LGAs is important, given thatthey are one of two community-basedvehicles providing access to the benefits ofgovernment services for all the people ofNew South Wales and notably to NESBgroups (the other is the network of HospitalBoard Community Service areas, but thesecover very much larger areas than theLGAs). They also act as a vehicle forlocally based multicultural and citizenshipinitiatives (as exemplified in the state ofQueensland’s Local Area MulticulturalPrograms).Much of the methodological means of scho-

larship on racialisation and ethnic relations inthe past three decades has been qualitative,using ethnographic and often deeply self-reflective techniques (for example, Twineand Warren, 2000). In Australia, the fieldhas been dominated by some excellent dis-course analysis, especially of media commen-tary, and usually of a very qualitative form.For example, Lamont et al. (2002, p. 395)admitted that their extensive field interviewswith working-class folk in France and NorthAmerica were not as qualitative as most scho-larship in the field. This same period in humangeography has seen a reorientation mostlytowards qualitative approaches, includingfield interviewing and discourse analysis(Hay, 2005). There has been a clear qualitat-ive emphasis in racism research and, relatedly,somewhat of a paucity of more quantitativeapproaches (the exception being the work ofsocial psychologists). In a less apologeticmode, Modood (2000, p. 180) asserted thatthe Fourth National Survey of Ethnic Min-orities in Britain was providing empiricalmaterial that had strong policy and public


impact. We agree that survey data on racistattitudes and experiences can have robust pol-itical effects. As we indicate later, empiricalmaterial on racist attitudes has utility forframing anti-racism.

Traditional questions used in racist attitudessurveys are somewhat limited, although wehave, for example, retained some Bogardus-style indicators of social distance (Table 1).Some of the survey questions are adaptedfrom existing research in this area. Theseinclude aspects of the ‘old racism’—belief ina racial hierarchy, racial separatism and beliefin racial categories (racialism)—as well as theextent of racism at both the general and individ-ual levels. Nonetheless, in order to deploy someof the current theoretical work on racism, newquestions were developed. These operation-alised aspects of ‘new racism’: degree of accep-tance of or opposition to cultural diversity andmulticultural values, how narrow are construc-tions of national identity (or cultural norms),protection of cultural privilege, judgementsabout the presence of ‘out-groups’, ideologyof nation and perceptions of Anglo-Celtic(‘host’ society or dominant culture) privilege(Dunn et al., 2004).

While surveys of this magnitude have acertain quantitative punch, there are alwaysquestions regarding the fidelity of responses.Do respondents truthfully answer questionsregarding their attitudes? An even broaderquestion is whether these expressions ofopinion are reflected in behaviour (in racistacts). For example, more highly educatedrespondents might more easily recognise aquestion as a test of their ‘racism’ andanswer so as to conceal their own intoleranceswhich they may intuitively perceive as reflect-ing tainted or less progressive attitudes.Equally, expressions of tolerance might bearlittle relation to continuing behaviour ineveryday life, which may be marked by state-ments of intolerance and discriminatory acts(Yinger, 1986). Whatever the potential causeof such potential infidelity, it is likely thatsurvey results on racism are, if anything,underestimations of the phenomenon. A judi-cious way to approach such data is to remem-ber that they are indictors of societal attitudes.

Sydney Attitudes to Cultural Diversity andRacism

Cultural Diversity and Nation

Researchers have long pointed to links betweenracism and narrow constructions of nationalidentity or ideology of nation (Gilroy, 1987;Hage, 1998, pp. 2–55; Goodall et al., 1994,pp. 16, 188). Yet contradictions are evident inpublic opinion on national identity, culturaldiversity and multiculturalism (cultural diver-sity is used throughout this study to denotethe presence of a wide range of birthplaceorigins). Public opinion surveys in Australiain the mid 1990s showed that 60 per cent ofrespondents were against immigrant groupsmaintaining their own cultural traditions.However, only 20 per cent agreed that multi-cultural policies should be abolished (Dunnand McDonald, 2001, pp. 34–35). Yet culturalmaintenance is a core principle of multicultur-alism (Commonwealth of Australia, 1999,p. 19; Office of Multicultural Affairs, 1989,p. vii). Similarly, the UNSW/MQU surveyfound that, while 85 per cent of respondentswere favourably disposed to cultural diversity,45 per cent were of a view that cultural diver-sity and multiculturalism were a threat to Aus-tralian nationhood (Dunn et al., 2004).

Contradictory views on multicultural valuesand notions of nationhood reflect the presenceof two competing discourses. The first, a pro-cultural diversity discourse, is based onliberal values of cultural equality, as presentedin the official rhetoric about multiculturalismsince the mid 1970s. The second relates to‘new racism’ perspectives of culture andnation which act to mitigate the wider senseof citizenship and belonging that multicultural-ism should facilitate. As to the first, multicul-turalism is often interpreted as an invitationto cultural pluralism. A recent survey of 3501Australians found that three-quarters of thosewho had been in the country for a generationand more (principally Anglo and IndigenousAustralians) identified as ‘Australian’. Only10 per cent of this group from non-English-speaking backgrounds so identified themselves(Ang et al., 2002, p. 40). The survey also foundthat “mainstream definitions of Australian


cultural identity still tend to ignore oroverlook the social diversity of the overallpopulation”, hence adoption of assimilationistattitudes. Thus a Human Rights and EqualOpportunity Commission investigationfound that

The White Australia policy has had alasting impact on the national social devel-opment of Australia. It allowed the con-struction of a populist national identitywhich excludes and marginalises groups… This has led to popular ideas of the

Table 1. Defining the variables used in the entropy analysis

Variable number Question wordinga Indicator

1 It is a good thing for a society to bemade up of people from differentcultures

Strongly disagree þdisagree:opposition to cultural diversity

2 You feel secure when with people ofdifferent ethnic backgrounds

Strongly disagree þdisagree:concern/opposition to culturaldifference

3 There is racial prejudice in Australia Strongly agreeþagree: recognition ofracism in society

4 You are prejudiced against othercultures

Strongly agree þagree: self-identifiedracism

5 It is not a good idea for people ofdifferent races to marry one another

Strongly agree þagree: belief in aneed to keep ‘races’ separate

6 Australians from a Britishbackground enjoy a privilegedposition in our society

Strongly agree þagree: culturalprivilege enjoyed by Anglo-Australians

7 Australia is weakened by people ofdifferent ethnic origins sticking totheir old ways

Strongly agree þagree: concern/opposition to cultural differenceand multicultural values

8 All races of people are equal Strongly disagreeþdisagree: belief ina racial hierarchy

9 Humankind is made up of separateraces

Strongly agree þagree: belief in‘natural’ racial groups

10 Do you believe that there are anycultural or ethnic groups that do notfit into Australian society

Yes: suggests a right to makejudgements about in-groups andout-groups

11 Age of respondents Aged 18–34: acculturated since endof White Australia policy (in early1970s)

12 Age of respondents Aged 35–64: acculturated duringpost-WW2 period of Europeanorigin of migrants

13 Age of respondents Aged 65 þ: acculturated during pre-WW2 period of dominant Britishorigin of migrants

14 Education of respondents Tertiary level qualifications15 Education of respondents Higher School Certificate level

(completed senior high school)16 Education of respondents School Certificate (completed high

school to school-leaving age)17 Birthplace of respondents Born in Australia: Anglo

homogeneity or cultural diversity.18 Birthplace of respondents Born overseas, from a non-English-

speaking background: culturaldiversity

aResponse options for Questions 1–9 used a 1–5 point Likert scale.


need for people to conform to a set of per-ceived cultural and social norms if theyare to be truly ‘Australian’ (HREDC,2001, p. 19).

These two contradictory discourses, ofAnglo-centrism (pro-assimilationist) andpro-diversity (pro-multiculturalism), areperceptible within the attitudes of Sydneyrespondents on the topic of cultural diversity.

Normalcy and Privilege

Critical social theorists have referred to thenormalcy of racism: a context of White privi-lege associated with a way of life and thinkingwhere racism is not consciously seen, or is con-sidered an exceptional aberration (Bonnett,1996; Kobayashi and Peake, 2000, pp. 393–397). Except, of course, that it is not a privilegeof Whiteness (although see Hage, 1998) but ofAnglo or Anglo-Celtic privilege in the Austra-lian context (Johnson, 2002). Pedersen andWalker (1997, p. 565) have observed of con-temporary Australian society that, alongsidean “apparent egalitarianism”, there is a strongstrain of new racism aimed at “defend[ing]the privileges of the dominant culture”. Mostrespondents to the UNSW/MQU survey (83per cent) recognised that there is racial preju-dice in Australia and this compares with 79per cent from an earlier survey who were con-cerned that racism was ‘rife’ (Brian Sweeneyand Associates, 1996a, p. 23; 1996b, pp. 11–12). Recognition of Anglo privilege was lessapparent, but still a majority (57 per cent)agreed that it existed.

Out-groups

Previous discussion suggests that there ismuch about contemporary racism in Australiawhich is linked to historical constructions ofthe country’s national identity, to questionsof acceptance or otherwise of cultural diver-sity and of who does or does not ‘belong’.Intolerance of Indigenous Australians, forexample, is an enduring form of racism thatis linked to stereotyping based on supposedwelfare dependency, drunkenness and failure

to ‘assimilate’ (Brian Sweeney and Associates1996a, 1996b; Pedersen et al., 2000). Anti-Asian and anti-Muslim sentiment (the latteroften manifest as anti-asylum-seekeropinion) has been found in more recentattitude polling in Australia (Klocker, 2004;Pedersen, Clarke et al., 2005; see alsoMcAllister and Moore, 1989). In the UNSW/MQU survey, 45 per cent of respondents ident-ified a cultural group or groups that they feltdid not fit into Australian society (for anexpanded discussion of this issue, see Forrestand Dunn, 2006a, pp. 179–183)

Belief in the ‘Old Racisms’

Arguments that ‘racial groups’ should be separ-ated from each other (that intermarriage is not agood idea) or that some ‘racial groups’ are notequal to others (the notion of a racial hierarchy)and the related notion that there are ‘natural’(and different) racial groups, are variouslyreferred to as the ‘old racisms’ or as ‘blatant’or ‘old-fashioned’ racisms (Pettigrew andMeertens, 1995). Support for including suchquestions in the UNSW/MQU survey comesfrom Jayasuriya’s (2002, p. 41) coupling ofissues of inferiority and inequality (the ‘old’racisms) with differentiation (the ‘new’racisms) as the two basic logics of racism inthe contemporary Australian context.

Results from the UNSW/MQU surveyconfirm that old racist sentiment remainspart of contemporary thinking. More thanone-in-eight Australians believes in someform of racial supremacy. Some 13 per centbelieve that these ‘races’ should be kept sexu-ally separate in terms of the undesirability ofinterracial marriage. Nevertheless, the pro-portions involved are small and are mainlyolder people with lower education achieve-ment levels. On the other hand, the beliefthat there are natural ‘racial’ categories,defined as ‘racialism’ (Hannaford, 1997;Miles, 1989) is widespread.

Prejudice—Symbolic Racism

Respondents were asked two questions aboutprejudice and a related question about cultural


hegemony. One focused on recognition ofracism in society generally (‘There is racialprejudice in Australia?’) and the other onself-identification as a racist (‘You are preju-diced against other cultures?’). Some 12 percent of respondents agreed with the pro-position that they were prejudiced againstother cultures according to the UNSW/MQU survey, compared with 83 per centwho recognised that there is a generalproblem with racism in Australia. Thissuggests that otherwise endemic racism isseen mainly as a problem affecting otherpeople which, apart from those who self-identify as racists, tends to support Kobayashiand Peake’s (2000, pp. 393–397) argumentthat racism is most often seen as an aberrationassociated with a relatively small minority.The third aspect, the privileged cultural pos-ition of Anglo-Australians, bears out notionsof contemporary Australian society as, onthe one hand, increasingly multicultural or atleast culturally diverse, but on the other, stillseen to be struggling to disengage from alegacy of Anglo privilege and culturaldominance.

Sydney as EthniCity

Sydney provides an ideal context in which totest ideas about the nature and constructionof racism in Australia. Since the early 1980s,post-White-Australia settlement patternsembodying an increasingly Middle Easternand Asian immigrant stream have focusedon Sydney. In the decade to 1996, Sydney’sshare of Australia’s total population born inAsia and the Middle East increased from 6per cent to 13 per cent (Birrell and Rapson,2002, p. 11). Since then, Sydney’s share ofnew immigrants has continued to increase,with 39 per cent of total new arrivals locatingthere between 1996 and 2001 (pp. 11, 15).Sydney continues to dominate among arrivalsof the post-White-Australia period, mainlyindependent (skilled) and business migrantsfrom China, the Philippines and Hong Kong,along with smaller streams of refugee groupsfrom Lebanon, Vietnam and now from eastAfrica (Forrest et al., 2003, pp. 503–504).

Outwardly at least, Sydney, Australia’s pre-eminent EthniCity, displays evidence of thesuccess of multicultural policies in absorbingthe diversity of post-World-War-II immigrantstreams. Analysis of ancestry data from the2001 census supports a transitory-natureview of ethnic migrant enclaves (Forrestet al., 2003). This indicates a strong tendencytowards spatial mixing or assimilation whichplaces Sydney (and other Australian cities)among the least segregated of cities of devel-oped nations in the English-speaking world(Poulsen et al., 2001, 2004). In substantialpart, this relates to the great diversity ofnational and ethnic origins among immigrantsto Australia which has acted to prevent anybuild up of a smaller number of particulargroups leading to widespread segregationsuch as found in many US cities.

Spatial Analysis

To test for the culture of racism in Sydney andits geography, we adopt an approach bringingtogether the social constructivist perspectiveset in a quantitative analytical approach. Thelatter is an entropy procedure based on infor-mation theory which groups urban sub-areas(Local Government Areas—LGAs—in thiscase) based on commonality of profilesacross the range of attitudinal and socio-demographic variables (Table 1). The vari-ables comprise respondents’ answers to the10 attitudinal questions asked in the UNSW/MQU Racism Survey, aggregated to theLGA level, along with aspects of ethnicity,age and education from the 2001 Census foreach LGA. The advantage of this approachis that variable loadings on each group (ofLGAs) profile can be related to majoraspects of old, new and symbolic racisms pre-viously discussed. The answers to the attitudi-nal questions were recorded on a 1-5 scale asindicated in Table 1. Among the 2001Census data used for the socio-demographic(compositional) information for each LGA,education was preferred to occupation orincome, otherwise a large number of womenwho work part-time or are in domestic duties


would be marginalised in the assessment ofsocioeconomic status.

A major attribute of the entropy procedureis that it is not constrained by issues ofnormal distribution. Its ability to characteriseand group observation areas with aminimum of information loss is reviewed inJohnston and Semple (1983). In summary, itgroups LGAs with similar responses acrossthe attitudinal and compositional variables.Unlike other grouping procedures, theamount of within-group variance for (1 … n)groups at each iteration is minimised byretesting all possible groupings of obser-vations. The number of groups selected isdetermined subjectively based on a decreasingamount of variation accounted for by furtherincreasing the number of groups. In theSydney case, 14 groups of LGAs accountedfor 73 per cent of variation across all 18 attitu-dinal and compositional variables (Table 2)—the groups are ranked here on the socioeco-nomic status/education variables. Four ofthese are single LGAs; another four comprisejust two or three LGAs. The other six groupsare made up of larger numbers of LGAs.

Towards a Geography of Racism in Sydney

Patterns of intolerance in Sydney arecomplex, in terms of both attitude mix andassociated socio-demographic profiles amongthe 14 groups of LGAs brought out by theentropy analysis (see Tables 2 and 3). Nor isintolerance the preserve of the Australian-born alone, as highlighted by the attitudes ofdifferent birthplace groups to aspects of intol-erance (Table 4). Compared with the Austra-lian-born, the most intolerant groups aregenerally Asians, especially those fromnorth-east Asia (principally China and HongKong); southern Europeans have quite highlevels of intolerance, surprisingly, perhaps,exceeding that of Middle Eastern immigrants.More specifically, southern Europeans(mainly from Italy, Greece and the formerYugoslavia) have the highest level of intoler-ance towards racial intermarriage, an aspect ofthe ‘old’ racism, with those from north-eastAsia not much more tolerant. Interestingly,

Middle Eastern immigrants are among themost tolerant in terms of admitted personalprejudice, rather more tolerant in fact thanthe Australian-born on this issue.

Among the ‘new’ racisms, feelings of inse-curity with different cultural groups and adesire to avoid social assimilation arehighest among Asians and Middle Easternbirthplace groups; again, north-east Asianshave the strongest degree of intolerance onboth of the ‘new’ racism questions. This ispotentially significant, in that those opposedto multiculturalism (those who agree thatAustralia is weakened by immigrant groupsretaining their old ways)—47 per cent of theAustralian-born—are mainly concernedabout cultural pluralism or cultural segre-gation. Finally, southern Europeans stand outas being personally prejudiced against othercultures; all other birthplace groups, includingimmigrants from the Middle East, are belowAustralian-born levels of intolerance in thisattitude. Findings for this birthplace–attitudemix may well, therefore, lead to exacerbationof levels of intolerance in some culturallydiverse regions of the city, as well as beingpresent in areas dominated by people ofAnglo backgrounds.

The approach used here is, first, to examineconstructions of attitudes and their compo-sitional correlates across the 14 entropygroups. Then, secondly, to aggregate theentropy results presented in Tables 2 and 3into a comprehensive construction of the inci-dence of racist attitudes in Sydney. In the dis-cussion which follows, the Local GovernmentAreas referred to are those identified inFigure 1.

Cultural Diversity and Nation

Contradictory views about national identity,cultural diversity and multiculturalism, notedearlier, are a lasting legacy of the formerWhite Australia policy. The relevant ques-tions are

—opposition to cultural diversity (Qu. 1);—concern or opposition to cultural difference(Qu. 2); and


Table 2. Entropy analysis of racist attitudes and social contextual attributes among Sydney LGAs

Identify

out-groups

Cultural diversity and

nation

Self as

racist

Recognise

racism and

privilege

Old racisms: separation,

hierarchy and racialism Ethnicity Age Education

Question number (10) (1) (2) (7) (4) (3) (6) (5) (8) (9) Australian-born NESB 18–34 35–64 65 þ Year 10 Year 12 Tertiary

Average 45.96 8.75 10.97 44.34 14.61 11.07 40.84 12.55 11.39 76.98 71.96 18.39 37.37 47.26 15.37 31.27 46.03 22.70

Standard deviation 11.81 6.23 8.59 12.29 9.33 7.87 12.98 6.14 6.14 7.69 10.29 11.99 4.70 3.02 3.76 13.32 6.47 7.22

Group

1 223.74 28.74 0.14 233.23 7.61 0.04 36.94 21.44 20.28 210.31 221.50 16.04 12.90 26.50 26.40 220.17 9.98 10.19

2 2.54 28.74 22.87 6.58 24.66 27.37 1.39 20.75 6.67 24.99 2.25 29.27 22.41 0.43 1.98 220.15 8.75 11.40

3 214.92 23.24 29.97 213.76 27.84 22.16 8.02 23.53 24.50 21.86 21.50 23.04 3.21 22.13 21.09 214.91 6.57 8.34

4 24.04 1.25 210.96 5.66 214.60 8.93 19.14 212.54 8.61 3.02 7.26 27.28 26.09 20.19 6.28 210.86 3.43 7.43

5 20.50 0.34 210.96 226.16 25.52 211.06 222.66 23.46 6.80 24.25 2.68 211.72 21.37 20.95 2.33 212.33 5.32 7.01

6 28.46 28.74 1.53 219.34 214.60 13.93 215.86 212.54 211.38 21.98 211.53 12.84 20.92 21.61 2.53 26.40 2.20 4.20

7 2.14 3.83 0.15 0.65 0.71 23.99 3.58 21.20 0.10 2.87 4.84 25.88 23.67 3.12 0.55 23.28 1.16 2.02

8 23.77 26.01 26.02 2.56 26.62 16.92 9.54 2.00 25.90 2.64 28.92 10.57 1.32 22.32 0.99 22.19 2.49 20.30

9 12.22 13.76 2.09 4.47 12.83 22.78 28.60 1.75 4.06 10.04 28.67 12.52 20.26 20.88 1.15 20.48 1.24 20.76

10 1.60 4.53 15.49 6.42 5.43 8.82 20.89 7.07 3.99 29.51 28.93 13.48 0.82 0.31 21.13 4.04 20.06 23.97

11 1.50 22.02 0.63 0.44 4.14 22.58 21.12 5.21 22.03 24.03 27.58 11.62 21.10 21.24 2.34 5.96 21.40 24.56

12 10.52 21.79 0.68 13.22 22.06 22.97 0.86 22.15 2.58 7.96 15.98 215.66 25.55 1.90 3.64 14.72 29.00 25.72

13 11.84 0.50 13.87 13.66 21.98 24.53 223.71 5.74 0.57 7.01 15.82 214.27 0.10 4.39 24.48 21.04 212.17 28.87

14 21.91 2.95 1.06 5.95 22.26 21.49 211.01 21.59 0.52 20.90 8.94 27.95 4.30 1.46 25.77 17.99 28.58 29.41

Note: All values in the table are percentages and expressed above or below (2) Sydney means. Question numbers are shown in parenthesis.

708

JAMESFORRESTAND

KEVIN

DUNN

—concern or opposition to multiculturalvalues (Qu. 7).

Inner western and south-western districts ofSydney (groups 9 and 10), strongly supportall three of these viewpoints. LGAs in thesegroups have high levels of cultural diversity.They also span a wide range of socio-demo-graphic characteristics, but with an above-average proportion of people with lower edu-cational achievements—low to low-middlesocioeconomic status (SES)—as well asabove-average proportions of immigrantsfrom non-English-speaking backgrounds.This is a region where working-class Anglo-Celtic-Australians and non-English-speakingbackground immigrant community groupsare intermixed, but where cross-culturalcontact and developing familiarity have notyet generated acceptance of cultural diversity.Chicago School suggestions of ‘contact’-gen-erated tolerance are clearly tempered by localand social circumstances, and the relativelyrecent—only over the past two to threedecades—presence of large numbers of cultu-rally diverse groups. Both Paradies (2005) andPedersen, Walker et al. (2005) have recently

reminded scholars of Allport’s (1954) fourconditions necessary for contact to have abeneficial, rather than negative impact, oncommunity relations. These comprise equalityamong groups, a sense that wider goals arebeing pursued, an absence of intergroup com-petition (such as competition for jobs) andsome sense of official sanction promotingcontact and the wider endeavour.

Sydney’s higher SES areas (completed highschool and tertiary education) largely reject theviewpoints enshrined in each of the three ques-tions. Areas involved include northern parts ofthe city (group 3 in particular) and the gentrify-ing inner city (group 1). There is very strongsupport for multicultural values (Qu. 7) here,although some disagreement on the other twoquestions; the northern beachside suburb ofManly (group 5) is more ambivalent aboutsupport for cultural diversity. Yet in terms ofcultural diversity, the two main entropygroups here (groups 1 and 3) are very different.Levels of cultural diversity in the inner city aremarkedly above-average, but in the northerncity areas they are below average; youngerworking-age (18–34) populations are acommon factor here.

Table 3. LGAs in each entropy group

Group 1 Group 6 Group 10 Group 14Sydney Ashfield Concord Blacktown

Fairfield CamdenGroup 2 Group 7 Liverpool CampbelltownMosman Baulkham Hills Strathfield PenrithWoolahra Drummoyne

Hornsby Group 11Group 3 Pittwater BankstownKu-ring-gai Warringah CanterburyLeichhardt HurstvilleMarrickville Group 8 ParramattaNorth Sydney Botany RockdaleSouth Sydney BurwoodWaverley Randwick Group 12Willoughby Blue Mountains

Group 9 GosfordGroup 4 Auburn SutherlandHunters Hill Kogarah Wyong

RydeGroup 5 Group 13Manly Hawkesbury

Wollongdilly


Table 4. Aspects of tolerance and intolerance in Sydney

Birthplace groups

AustraliaNew Zealand/UK/North

America South and south-east Asia North-east Asia Southern Europe Middle East Total

Q2 Feeling secure with different cultural groupsNot secure 10.3 11.4 16.4 19.6 12.5 17.2 11.0Ambivalent 13.1 13.9 16.4 13.0 12.5 6.9 13.2

Q7 Australia is weakened by groups retaining old waysDisagree 35.9 37.3 39.3 50.0 41.7 43.1 37.4Agree 47.3 18.1 16.4 34.8 43.8 39.7 45.6

Q5 Not good for people of different races to intermarryAgree 11.9 10.9 13.9 17.4 20.8 12.1 12.7Disagree 76.7 80.3 76.2 71.7 79.2 77.6 76.8

Q4 Personal prejudice against other culturesAgree 14.8 12.4 12.3 15.2 18.7 10.3 14.3Disagree 75.9 80.3 77.0 69.6 75.0 79.3 76.8

Note: All values are percentages of each birthplace group.

Source: UNSW/MQU Racism Survey (2001).

710

JAMESFORRESTAND

KEVIN

DUNN

In between these two attitudinal positions isa group of areas where respondents havemixed views, some agreeing, some disagree-ing on all three questions, and with noticeablevariations to the strength of views held. Twoouter, rural–urban fringe districts (group 13)are strongly opposed to cultural differenceand to multicultural values, but only mildlyagainst cultural diversity. A group of outerwestern and south-western suburbs (group14) is opposed to both multicultural valuesand to cultural diversity, but has few concernsabout cultural difference. Both groups of areasare dominated by the Australian-born and bylower SES (mainly year 10 schooling)

populations. These outer-suburban areas arewhere local conflicts over non-Christianplaces of worship have been prominent inrecent times (Dunn, 2004). Respondentsfrom Sydney’s north-western and northernbeach suburbs (group 7), while opposed tocultural diversity, are only mildly concernedabout cultural difference and multiculturalvalues. Like the other two groups, theseareas are mainly Australian-born, but ofmiddle to higher SES; while this mayhelp to account for greater ambivalence ontwo of the questions, respondents from theareas in this group are clearly closer to thosefrom the working-class suburbs in their

Figure 1. Local Government Areas in Sydney. Scale: 1 cm ¼ 6.5 km.


concern over—disagreement with—culturaldiversity.

Normalcy of Racism and Anglo Privilege:Symbolic Racisms

The survey results for Sydney confirmKobayashi and Peake’s (2000) view thatracism is seen by most people as an aberrationof a relatively small minority. The questionsare

—recognition of racism in society (Qu. 3);—self-identification as racist (Qu. 4); and—that cultural privilege is enjoyed by Anglo-Australians (Qu. 6).

Socioeconomic status is the major differen-tiating element in area responses to thesequestions; the impact of age and culturaldiversity is less apparent.One of the major issues here is the distinc-

tion between a potentially endemic form ofracism in Australia, based on recognition ofracial prejudice in society generally (Qu.3)—others are racially prejudicial—and self-identification as prejudiced against other cul-tures (Qu. 4)—I am racially prejudiced—onthe part of a relatively small minority.Results can be discussed in terms of a four-way classification from ‘others are not racistand neither am I’ through ‘others are racistbut I am not’, ‘others are not racist but I am’to ‘others are racist and so am I’. Interestingly,privilege, associated as it is with an assimila-tionist or ethnocultural perspective on thetreatment of non-Anglo ethnic immigrantgroups, is less obviously linked to overtlyracist attitudes. And whereas with the twoquestions on endemic and personal racismthere is a general (although not always con-sistent) negative relationship withsocioeconomic status, this does not apply torecognition of Anglo privilege, where bothlower and higher SES respondents recognisethat Australians of a British backgroundenjoy a privileged social position in thiscountry.High SES LGAs on Sydney’s northern dis-

tricts, inner Sydney and the largely gentrifiedinner city (groups 1, 3, 7) are strongly of the

‘others are not racist and neither am I’persuasion. Most are above-average in thepresence of Australian-born residents andinclude a wide range of age-groups. Butwhile rejecting racist attitudes, they agreewith the existence of privilege. This latterresponse suggests a strong recognition of aform of the ‘new racism’ whereby ethnic min-orities are culturally disadvantaged by thedominant cultural group’s understanding ofnational culture and identity (see Forrest andDunn, 2006a).The notion that ‘others are racist but I am

not’, accompanied by a strong sense of privi-lege among Anglo-Australians, is prevalentin a small number of LGAs mainly inSydney’s eastern and inner western districts(groups 6, 8). Most here have above-averagelevels of cultural diversity, are mainlymiddle-aged to older and of generallymiddle to higher SES. The exception in com-positional terms is the inner city, which is gen-erally younger to middle-aged, associatedwith extensive gentrification. It is as thoughthere is a culture of the inner-city regionwhich transcends compositional character-istics—such a feature is also found inaspects of political behaviour (Forrest et al.,1984).Strong levels of self-identification as

racists—LGAs where ‘others are not racistbut I am’—are found in two outer, rural–urban fringe areas (group 13),strongly working-class, middle-aged anddominantly Australian-born with lowerlevels of cultural diversity. There is a lowawareness of racist attitudes in society gener-ally or of Anglo privilege, which suggests thatthey are comfortable in their particular attitu-dinal niche.Highest levels of racism by Sydney stan-

dards and recognition of Anglo privilegeoccur in several inner western and south-western LGAs of lower SES but with highlevels of cultural diversity (group 10); anabove-average number of respondents saythat ‘others are racist and so am I’. Signi-ficantly, perhaps, these are areas with thehighest numbers of recently arrived immi-grants from Asian and Middle Eastern


countries where contact has not yet led tointergroup social acceptance and where, onthe evidence presented in Table 4, ethnicgroups are as intolerant as the Australian-born.

Belief in the ‘Old Racisms’

Variation in belief in the perceived inferiorityof some groups and associated notions of‘racial’ inequality (‘old racisms’) are associ-ated most strongly with lower levels of edu-cation, but not generally with age or levelsof cultural diversity. The relevant questionswere

—belief in a need to keep races separate(intermarriage) (Qu. 5);

—belief in a hierarchy of races (Qu. 8); and—belief in ‘natural’ racial groups (Qu. 9).

The ‘old racisms’ are largely a feature of areaswith higher proportions of lower SES groups.However, ‘old racisms’ are also a feature ofsome more affluent, inner northern LGAs,with older age profiles, such as Manly,Mosman and Hunters Hill. One explanationof the inclusion of this affluent group ofLGAs may be their older age structure,which contrasts with the younger age structureof the outer, lower SES areas. Conversely,areas with negative—agree to strongly agreewith—responses to all three ‘old racism’questions (group 3) are also higher SESLGAs, in northern and north-westernSydney. The most tolerant—disagree tostrongly disagree with—groups (groups 6and 1) are in parts of inner western Sydneyand inner Sydney respectively. The lattercan be described as places of long-establishedcultural and social (in terms of both age andclass) diversity. Long-standing cross-culturalcontact, in cosmopolitan inner Sydneyespecially, has resulted in stronger levels ofcultural acceptance.

A widespread acceptance of ‘racialism’, ofnatural racial categories, is reflected in thehigh average incidence and relatively lowstandard deviation on this question (Qu. 9).This attitude was prevalent across 6 of the14 groups of LGAs (groups 9, 12, 8, 4, 13

and 7). No common socio-demographiccharacteristics stand out and there are no par-ticular spatial patterns.

A much smaller number who believe in theseparation of the ‘races’ (no intermarriage)stand out in a few LGAs (groups 10, 13 and11). All are lower SES areas in westernSydney. This is a little surprising in terms of the-ories about frequency of contact associatedwithsocial acceptance because, inmany of these dis-tricts—although not all—cultural diversity isstrong. However, it is consistent with findingsnoted above for these areas in terms of symbolicracism and attitudes brought out among theAustralian-born and other immigrant groupsin Table 4. Rather more believe in the notionof a hierarchy of ‘races’, again mainly inlower SES LGAs in outer, inner western andsouth-western districts (groups 9, 12 and 10),but also in some higher SES areas in themainly inner city, culturally diverse region ofLGAs. Some areas of higher relative diversity,such as in groups 8 and 11, have strongerlevels of disagreement with the notion of‘racial’ hierarchy, yet there is an above-average agreement with the need for ‘racial’separation. It is of some concern that residentsof some of these culturally diverse areas, cogni-sant of the fallacy of ‘racial hierarchy’, nonethe-less express some preference for ‘racial’separation. Other culturally diverse areasshow higher levels of opposition to both formsof ‘old racism’, such as those in groups 3 and 6.

Cultural Diversity and Out-groups

Attitudes to cultural diversity and to the exist-ence of out-groups in Sydney as a whole canbe summarised as moderately tolerant. Thisdiscussion focuses on two questions

—opposition to cultural diversity (Qu. 1); and—judgements about in-groups and out-groups(Qu. 10).

In general, higher levels of education andinner-city location combine to typify areaswhich are least antagonistic towards other cul-tural groups. Thus acceptance of culturaldiversity and absence of any recognition ofout-groups is a feature of four groups of


LGAs: in the inner city (group 1); in the gen-erally middle-status inner west and easternsuburbs (groups 6 and 8); and in Sydney’shigher-status northern suburbs (group 3).Three of these groups have above-averagelevels of cultural diversity, but the fourth—the northern suburbs—lacks cultural diversitybut has high educational levels. Again, wepoint to a contextual effect of inner-citycosmopolitanism. At the other end of thescale, opposition to cultural diversity andidentification of out-groups are strong charac-teristics of inner western and outer south-western LGAs (groups 9 and 10), all withhigh levels of cultural diversity and ofmiddle to lower social status. More weaklyheld opposition is a feature of the northernbeaches and north-western Sydney LGAs(groups 4 and 7); these have low levels of cul-tural diversity (a dominance of Australian-born) and are mainly of higher social status.In between, only a few groups of LGAsstand out, while some others are close to thecity average on both questions.

Constructing a Geography of Racismin Sydney

From the previous discussion, there is evi-dence of a distinctive geography of racialintolerance in Sydney that transcends aspatial(compositional) relationships. Such com-positional relationships do occur, but arestrongest, in the case of socioeconomicstatus, only at the higher and lower ends ofthe range and then with variations, especiallyamong the ‘new racism’ dimensions. Rather,in various groups of LGAs, there is evidenceof a particular combination of attitudes suchthat a geography of racist attitudes can be con-structed using all the attitude variables fromthe entropy analysis (Figure 2)Respondents from higher SES, generally

older LGAs on Sydney’s north side andeastern suburbs (Region I) are more acceptingof cultural diversity at the national level andof multiculturalism; there is lesser acknowl-edgement of personal racism and greaterdenial that racism is general in Australiansociety. There is, however, recognition of

Anglo privilege, arguably among the ‘newracisms’, but lesser identification of out-groups. In this region, these attitudes arecommon to all age-groups, in spite ofmarked variation in levels of cultural diver-sity. Respondents from upper-middle status,largely middle-aged LGAs on Sydney’supper north shore (Region II), on the otherhand, are generally opposed to cultural diver-sity, although this varies across the region, andpeople there are more prepared to identify out-groups. However, like the higher-status LGAsin Region I, rejection of racism in society gen-erally is accompanied by recognition of Angloprivilege. There is, however, greater acknowl-edgement of personal racism in this region,although people are, on the whole, neutralon ‘old racist’ attitudes. Both of theseregions have relatively low levels of culturaldiversity.The inner city (Region III) has previously

been identified as having an interesting mixof cultures, classes and age-groups alongsideparticularly tolerant and pro-diversity atti-tudes. It stands out on its own in this regard.Other parts of inner to middle suburbia, onthe other hand, exhibit a wide range of atti-tudes, some very tolerant, some not. Thusrespondents in Region IV, a combination ofeastern and inner-middle LGAs, are generallyaccepting of cultural diversity, recognise thatothers are racist and that Anglo privilegeexists, yet support ‘old racist’ attitudes, butdo not identify any out-groups. Closer in tothe inner city, Region V shares many of thecharacteristics of Region IV, but respondentsare more likely to deny that racism exists inany form and are generally tolerant. Thatthis is an area long identified with Italianand Greek immigrants who began settlingthere in the 1950s and 1960s may suggestacceptance of diversity based on a longperiod of mutual contact, as opposed to themore recent immigrant streams in majorparts of Region IV, which includes manynon-Christian immigrants.To the south and west of these regions,

respondents in Region VI hold neutral viewson issues of cultural diversity at the nationallevel and on multiculturalism; they are mildly


concerned about racism generally and Angloprivilege. There is, however, an above-average presence (albeit the overall average islow) of those who are personally racist, whilethere is a strong rejection of values associatedwith the ‘old racisms’. Respondents inRegion VII, still part of the inner westernLGAs, oppose cultural diversity and multicul-turalism, but exhibit little evidence of racismin either its general or personal forms.However, there was a strong attachment tothe ‘old racisms’ and agreement that there arecultural groups that do not belong in Australia.Parts of Region VII have Muslim immigrantpopulations and this is the location of one ofSydney’s major mosques; other parts have astrong Asian (Chinese and Korean) pre-sence—both groups are among those com-monly identified as out-groups (Dunn et al.,2004; Pedersen et al., 2005).

Sydney’s western and south-western LGAsdivide into two main regions. In Region VIII,attitudes to cultural diversity and to multi-culturalism vary, but around a middle pos-ition, from generally unconcerned about

diversity or multiculturalism to mildlyopposed; they are mildly aware of racismgenerally and of Anglo privilege; they rejectracism in themselves and in others whilesharing some aspects of ‘old racisms’.Region IX, covering south-western Sydney,on the other hand, is the least tolerant part ofSydney. Here, there is opposition to culturaldiversity and to multiculturalism; personaland general racism is admitted and recog-nised; cultural privilege is seen to be stronglypresent; however, respondents are less likelyto identify out-groups. There is a younger tomiddle-aged complexion to this region and itis home to a very wide range of immigrantgroups and nationalities, European, MiddleEastern and Asian, including a number ofrefugee groups. It is also an area of highunemployment and strong competition foremployment opportunities.

Finally, Sydney’s outer commuter andrural–urban fringe districts combine intoRegion X. Younger to middle-aged, withpockets of older people, this region is moreculturally homogeneous, dominated byAustralian-born residents. Attitudes on issuesof cultural diversity, and on multiculturalism,range from mildly to strongly opposed.However, there is little recognition ofendemic racism, or of Anglo privilege, butthere is strong support for ‘old racism’ atti-tudes. This region is like Region IX, therefore,in being among the least tolerant areas inSydney, although the dimensions that arerelevant in each of these regions vary.

There are parallels in the above patterns oftolerance and intolerance with local politicalcultures, exemplified by recently formedminor political parties (Smith, 2005). Thusthe Unity Party was formed in 1998 tomobilise support for multiculturalism(Healy, 1999; Money, 1999; State ElectoralOffice, 2003c). Its main support base hasbeen in inner-city to middle-ring suburbandistricts. The party has also attracted signifi-cant support in the south-western suburbs(Region IX), the least tolerant of the Sydneyregions. Among two right-wing minorparties—Australians Against Further Immi-gration (Newman, 1995), formed in 1989,

Figure 2. Geography of racist attitudes in Sydney.Scale: 1 cm ¼ 3.5 km.


and the One Nation Party (Johnson, 1998),formed in 1997—on the other hand, Austra-lians Against Further Immigration presentsan anti-immigration, anti-multiculturalismplatform, arguing that “the people havenever been consulted on, or given theirconsent to, the interwoven policies of immi-gration and multiculturalism” (State ElectoralOffice, 2003a). Their support is strongest inouter suburban (lower to middle class) andsome middle suburban regions, such asRegion X and western Sydney generally.Relatedly, One Nation argues that “the cul-tural, ethnic and racist makeup of Australiamust not be radically altered through immi-gration without the express consent of theAustralian people” (State Electoral Office,2003b). Its support base focuses on outersuburban areas, especially in western andsouth-western Sydney (Regions VI, VIII, IXand X).Such a geography of political cultures

across Sydney, like the geography of attitudes,reflects historical demographic and urbantrends. For example, the inner city is thehome of Hage’s (1998) cosmo-multicultural-ists (younger, sometimes affluent, oftenalthough not necessarily tertiary educated,and culturally diverse) and an emergent politi-cal culture that Young (1990) might havecalled a politics of difference. Some recentscholarship has suggested that the inner cityholds significant emancipatory potential(Lees, 2004). Others have gone so far as tosuggest that inner cities are places wherepoorer communities retain a grasp on theirneighbourhoods and where intolerance and‘race’ are not as significant as previouslyasserted (see Maginn, 2004). Within Sydney,the areas adjacent to and within the inner-city gentrification belt are areas of greater tol-erance. It may also be that inner-city living inAustralia is driven in part by a cultural prefer-ence for cosmopolitanism (including theexperience of cultural diversity), such thatanti-racists self-select into these areas of toler-ance. Research into the geography of attitudescan add substantial value to the emergentscholarship on the cultures of urbanism(Zukin, 1986).

Conclusions

This construction of racism in Australia’slargest EthniCity indicates a mix of compo-sitional (aspatial) and spatial (contextual)associations, but with the latter standing outsufficiently to emphasise the importance ofan ‘everywhere different’ conclusion. Thesocial construction approach we have beenguided by eschews any fixation upon asingle social variable (such as class, orcross-cultural contact/diversity) and hasallowed us to weave through the analysis,our interest in contextual variables. Evidencefrom discussion of the major dimensions ofprejudice suggests a relationship betweensocioeconomic status and tolerance, suchthat class-based cultures underpin racist atti-tudes—although this is most clear only atthe upper-middle SES (non-racist) and lowerSES (racist) ends of the scale, and even herenot consistently so. In some cases, attitudinalvariation can be linked with a stronger orlesser level of LGA cultural diversity, but inother cases it cannot.Age structure emerges as a relatively unim-

portant variable. There are glimpses but nobody of evidence in the geography of racialprejudice in Sydney to suggest any uniformityof generational differences in attitudes, noteven in the prevalence of ‘old’ versus ‘newracisms’. This interpretation, based on thegeography of attitudes, also contrasts withnon-geographical analyses, where olderpeople, taken as a whole, have been found tobe more inclined to ‘old racist’ attitudes andidentification of out-groups (Dunn et al.,2004). A wider reconstruction of all the attitu-dinal dispositions discussed here indicates thata geography of racism adds a level of under-standing of racism in Sydney and is a basisfor future work; findings presented herecould not have been obtained from aspatialanalysis alone. From the evidence of vari-ations in attitudes across the city, evenamong people of otherwise similar socialbackgrounds, it is apparent that spatialcontext is important: place matters.Consistent with results from earlier

research, the range and mix of attitudes


revealed here, and the contradictions, withinand among the regions, indicate a diversityof racist attitudes in Sydney. Variationsamong LGAs with the same level of culturaldiversity bear out these contradictions, as dovariations among the dimensions discussedduring the earlier deconstruction—the fivedimensions—phase of this study. These areconsistent with contradictions between socialcontact and social conflict theories of accep-tance and friction respectively (see Valentyand Sylvia, 2004), but with the added sugges-tion that local attitudes may relate to the pre-sence of certain immigrant groups ratherthan others—those that are still regarded as‘Other’ (see Dunn et al., 2004, p. 414;Forrest and Dunn, 2006a, pp. 179–183).That a fuller understanding of racist attitudesis also linked to understanding cultural ordominant group (Anglo) privilege is anotherarea which remains to be analysed and onewhich leads ultimately into issues of nationalidentity, citizenship and related issues of thesupposed social compatibility of immigrantgroups, of those who may be seen to ‘fit in’and those who may not. One thing in particu-lar which does come out of this study is theimportance of incorporating both compo-sitional (social and demographic) and contex-tual (place-specific) characteristics into futureanalysis of attitudes to racism.

In terms of future applied work, findingsfrom this study are potentially important inpolicy terms, specifically regarding communityrelations (anti-racism) initiatives. There is arange of means by which anti-racism can beadvanced (see categories and reviews in Para-dies, 2005; Pedersen, Walker et al., 2005).Many such initiatives are delivered at the com-munity (LGA) level, rather than through one-on-one workshops with individuals. Group-level initiatives need to be sensitive to the con-texts of racism within a specific community(Dunn and McDonald, 2001, pp. 38–41;Paradies, 2005, pp. 14, 23; Pedersen, Walkeret al., 2005, pp. 26–28). Thus our discussionof the geography of racism in Sydney broughtout in Figure 2, for example, identifies theneed for at least four types of regionalisedresponse to racism. There are those localities

that are already culturally diverse and wherepeople are currently making decisions aboutracism and about community relations, othercultural groups they have contact with and onnational identity (Regions VI and VII). Anti-racism initiatives in those areas should bedifferent from those where diversity is amuch more recent phenomenon and wherethe ‘issues’ are becoming more palpable andperhaps problematic (Regions VIII and IX).In other regions, cultural diversity is low andthe issues are still being considered, or an apriori stance of intolerance has become appar-ent (Regions X and II respectively). In stillother areas, there is both a strong diversityand a robust basis for harmonious communityrelations. The geographically informed analy-sis outlined in this study provides anti-racismcampaigners with the means to prepare region-ally sensitive programmes that would address‘unsettled multiculturalisms’ across a majorimmigrant-receiving metropolis like Sydney.

Part of this situation of ‘unsettled multicul-turalisms’ is the recent emergence of minoritypolitical parties of the left and right respect-ively and avowedly pro- and anti-multicultur-alism, where previously the structuralassimilation of NESB immigrant groupsoccurred through membership of one orother of the major political parties, the left-leaning Labor or right-leaning Liberalparties. While far from representing any fun-damental change to the nature of politics inNew South Wales brought about by the newpolitics of immigration and multiculturalism,as claimed for English politics by the BritishNational Party after recent (May 2006)Council elections there, the sentimentsechoed by each of the Australian minorparties do suggest a geographical base toincreasing polarisation of political responseswhich relates to the geography of toleranceand intolerance found in this study that alsodeserves further attention.

References

ALLPORT, G. (1954) The Nature of Prejudice.Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

ANG, I., BRAND, J. E.., NOBLE, G. and WILDING,D. (2002) Living Diversity: Australia’s


Multicultural Future. Artarmon: Special Broad-casting Services Corporation.

BIRRELL, B. and RAPSON, V. (2002) TwoAustralias: migrant settlement at the end ofthe 20th century, People and Place, 10, pp.11–25.

BONNETT, A. (1996) Constructions of ‘race’, placeand discipline: geographies of ‘racial’ identityand racism, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 19, pp.864–883.

BOURQUE, G. and DUCHASTEL, J. (1999) Erosionof the nation-state and the transformation ofnational identities in Canada, in: J. L. ABU-

LUGHOD (Ed.) Sociology for the Tewnty-firstCentury: Continuities and Cutting Edges,pp. 183–198 Chicago, IL: University ofChicago Press.

BRIAN SWEENEY AND ASSOCIATES (1996a) Areport on a national quantitative survey ofcommunity attitudes towards Aboriginal recon-ciliation. Brian Sweeney and Associates, SouthMelbourne.

BRIAN SWEENEY AND ASSOCIATES (1996b) Reporton supplementary qualitative research oncommunity attitudes to indigenous citizenshipand a document of reconciliation. BrianSweeney and Associates, South Melbourne.

COLLINS, J. (1984) Marx’s reserve army oflabour: still relevant 100 years on, Journal ofAustralian Political Economy, 16(March), pp.51–65.

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA (1999) Living inharmony. Department of Immigration andMulticultural Affairs, Canberra.

DIXSON, M. (1999) The Imaginary Australian:Anglo-Celts and Identity—1788 to the Present.Sydney: University of New South Wales Press.

DUNN, K. (2004) Islam in Sydney: contesting thediscourse of absence, Australian Geographer,35, pp. 333–353.

DUNN, K. M. (2005) Repetitive and troublingdiscourses of nationalism in the local politicsof mosque development in Sydney, Australia,Environment and Planning D, 23, pp. 29–50.

DUNN, K. M. and MCDONALD, A. (2001) Thegeography of racisms in NSW: a theoreticalexploration and some preliminary findings,Australian Geographer, 32, pp. 29–44.

DUNN, K., FORREST, J., BURNLEY, I. andMCDONALD, A. (2004) Constructing racism inAustralia, Australian Journal of Social Issues,39, pp. 409–430.

EADE, J. (Ed.) (1997) Living in the Global City.London: Routledge.

DURRHEIM, K. and DIXON, J. (2001) The role ofplace and metaphor in racial exclusion: SouthAfrica’s beaches as sites of shifting racializa-tion, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 24, pp. 433–450.

FORREST, J. and DUNN, K. (2006a) Racism andintolerance in Eastern Australia: a geographicperspective, Australian Geographer, 37, pp.167–186.

FORREST, J. and DUNN, K. (2006b) ‘Core’ culturehegemony and multiculturalism: perceptions ofthe privileged position of Australianswith British backgrounds, Ethnicities, 6, pp.237–264.

FORREST, J., HAY, A. M. and JOHNSTON, R. J.(1984) In what ways are the suburbs different?,Politics, 19, pp. 97–101.

FORREST, J., POULSEN, M. and JOHNSTON, R.(2003) Everywhere different? Globalisation andthe impact of international migration on Sydneyand Melbourne, Geoforum, 34, pp. 499–510.

FORREST, J., POULSEN,M. and JOHNSTON, R. (2006)Peoples and spaces in a multicultural nation: cul-tural group segregation in metropolitan Australia,Espace, Populations et Societes, pp. 151–164.

GILROY, P. (1987) There Ain’t No Black in theUnion Jack: The Cultural Politics of Race andNation. London: Hutchinson.

GOODALL, H., JAKUBOWICZ, A., MARTIN, J. ET AL.

(1994) Racism, Ethnicity and the Media.St Leonards, Sydney: Allen & Unwin.

HAGE, G. (1998) White Nation: Fantasies ofWhite Supremacy in a Multicultural Society.Annandale, Sydney: Pluto Press.

HAMILTON, A. (1990) Fear and desire: Aborigines,Asians and the national imaginary, AustralianCultural History, 9, pp. 14–35.

HANNAFORD, I. (1997) Race: The History of anIdea in the West. Baltimore, MD: JohnsHopkins University Press.

HAY, I. (Ed.) (2005)Qualitative Research Methodsin Geography, 2nd edn. Sydney: OxfordUniversity Press.

HEALY, E. (1999) The Unity Party and the attemptto mobilize Australian electoral supportfor multiculturalism, People and Place, 7, pp.51–62.

HELMES-HAY, R. and CURTIS, J. (Eds) (1998) TheVertical Mosaic Revisited. Toronto: Universityof Toronto Press.

HESSE, B. (Ed.) (2000) Un/settled Multicultural-isms. London: Zed Books.

HIEBERT, D., COLLINS, J. and SPOONLEY, P. (2003)Uneven globalization: neoliberal regimes, immi-gration and multiculturalism in Australia,Canada and New Zealand. Working Paper No.03-05, Centre of Excellence for Research onImmigration and Integration in the Metropolis,Vancouver.

HREOC (HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUAL OPPORTU-

NITIES COMMISSION) (2001) I want respect andequality: a summary of consultations with civilsociety on racism in Australia. HREOC,Canberra.


JACKSON, P. and PENROSE, J. (Eds) (1993)Constructions of Race, Place and Nation.London: University College London Press.

JAYASURIYA, L. (2002) Understanding Australianracism, Australian Universities Review, 45, pp.40–44.

JOHNSON, C. (1998) Pauline Hanson and OneNation, in: H. G. BETZ and S. IMMERFALL

(Eds) The New Politics of the Right: Neo-populist Parties and Movements in EstablishedDemocracies, pp. 211–218. New York: StMartins Press.

JOHNSON, C. (2002) The dilemmas of ethnicprivilege: a comparison of constructions of‘British’, ‘English’ and ‘Anglo-Celtic’ identityin contemporary British and Australian politicaldiscourse, Ethnicities, 2, pp. 163–188.

JOHNSTON, R. J. and SEMPLE, R. K. (1983)Classification Using Information Statistics.Catmog No. 39. Norwich: Geo Books.

JOHNSTON, R., POULSEN, M. and FORREST, J.(2002) Rethinking the analysis of ethnic resi-dential patterns: segregation, isolation or con-centration thresholds in Auckland, NewZealand, Geographical Analysis, 34, pp.245–261.

JOHNSTON, R., POULSEN, M. and FORREST, J.(2003) The ethnic geography of New Zealand:a decade of growth and change, 1991–2001,Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 44, pp. 109–130.

JOHNSTON, R., POULSEN, M. and FORREST, J.(2004) The comparative study of ethnic residen-tial segregation in the USA, 1980–2000,Tijdschrift voor Economische en SocialeGeografie, 95, pp. 550–569.

JOHNSTON, R., POULSEN, M. and FORREST, J.(2005) Ethnic residential segregation across anurban system: the Maori in New Zealand,1991–2001, Professional Geographer, 57, pp.115–129.

JUPP, J. (1984) Ethnic politics inAustralia: a researchagenda, in: J. JUPP (Ed.) Ethnic Politics in Austra-lia, pp. 4–13. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.

KAUFMAN, E. (2004) The Rise and Fall of Anglo-America: The Decline of Dominant Ethnicity inthe US. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UniversityPress.

KELLY, P. (Ed.) (2002)Multiculturalism Reconsid-ered: Culture and Equality and its Critics.Cambridge: Polity Press.

KIVISTO, P. (2002) Multiculturalism in a GlobalSociety. Oxford: Blackwell.

KLOCKER, N. (2004) Community oppositiontowards asylum seekers in Port Augusta, SouthAustralia, Australian Geographical Studies, 42,pp. 1–17.

KOBAYASHI, A. (2004) Cultural ‘race’ approachesto cultural geography, in: J. S. DUNCAN, N. C.JOHNSON and R. H. SCHEIN (Eds) A Companion

to Cultural Geography, pp. 238–249 Oxford:Blackwell Publishing.

KOBAYASHI, A. and PEAKE, L. (1994) Unnaturaldiscourse: ‘race’ and gender ingeography, Gender, Place and Culture, 1(2),pp. 225–243.

KOBAYASHI, A. and PEAKE, L. (2000) Racism outof place: thoughts on whiteness and an antiracistgeography in the new millennium, Annals of theAssociation of American Geographers, 90, pp.392–403.

LAMONT, M., MORNING, A. and MOONEY, M.(2002) Particular universalisms: North Africanimmigrants respond to French racism, Ethnicand Racial Studies, 25, pp. 390–414.

LEES, L. (2004) Emancipatory City? Paradoxesand Possibilities. Thousand Oaks, CA: SagePublications.

LEVER-TRACEY, C. and QUINLAN, M. (1988) ADivided Working Class. London: Routledge &Kegan Paul.

MAGGIN, P. J. (2004) Urban Regeneration, Com-munity Power and the (In)Significance ofPower. Newport, NSW: Ashgate-Gower AsiaPacific.

MARKUS, A. (2001) Race, John Howard and theRemaking of Australia. Crows Nest, Sydney:Allen & Unwin.

MCALLISTER, I. and KELLEY, J. (1984)Immigrants’ status, earnings and politics,in: J. JUPP (Ed.) Ethnic Politics in Australia,pp. 53–68. St Leonards, Sydney: Allen &Unwin.

MCALLISTER, I. and MOORE, R. (1989) Ethnicprejudice in Australian society: patterns, inten-sity and explanations. Office of MulticulturalAffairs, Canberra.

MCCONAHAY, J. B. (1986) Modern racism,ambivalence, and the modern racism scale, in:J. F. DOVIDIO and S. L. GAERTNER (Eds)Prejudice, Discrimination and Racism, pp. 91–125. New York: Academic Press.

MILES, R. (1989) Racism. London: Routledge.MODOOD, T. (2000) Anti-essentialism, multi-

culturalism, and the ‘recognition’ ofreligious groups, in: W. KYMLICKA andW. NORMAN (Eds) Citizenship in DiverseSocieties, pp. 175–195. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.

MONEY, J. (1999) Xenophobia and xenophilia:Pauline Hanson and the counterbalancing ofelectoral incentives in Australia, People andPlace, 7, pp. 7–19.

NEWMAN, S. (1995) Population policies ofAustralian political parties: explicit and implicit,People and Place, pp. 46–47.

NUNN, C. A., CROCKETT, H. J. and WILLIAMS, J.A. (1978) Tolerance for Nonconformity: ANational Survey of Americans’ Changing


Commitment to Civil Liberties. San Francisco,CA: Jossey-Bass.OFFICE OF MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS (1989)National Agenda for a Multicultural Austra-lia. . .Sharing Our Future. Canberra: AustralianGovernment Printing Service.

PARADIES, Y. (2005) Anti-racism and indigenousAustralians, Analyses of Social Issues andPublic Policy, 5, pp. 1–28.

PEDERSEN, A. and WALKER, I. (1997) Prejudiceagainst Australian Aborigines: old-fashionedand modern forms, European Journal of SocialPsychology, 27, pp. 561–587.

PEDERSEN, A., BEVEN, J., GRIFFITHS, B. andWALKER, I. (2004) Attitudes toward indigenousAustralians: the role of empathy and guilt,Journal of Community and Applied Social Psy-chology, 14, pp. 233–249.

PEDERSEN, A., CLARKE, S., DUDGEON, P. andGRIFFITHS, B. (2005) Attitudes towardindigenous Australians and asylum seekers:the role of false beliefs and other social-psychological variables, Australian Psycholo-gist, 40, pp. 170–178.

PEDERSEN, A., CONTOS, N., GRIFFITHS, B. ET AL.

(2000) Attitudes toward Aboriginal Australiansin city and country settings, Australian Psychol-ogist, 35, pp. 109–117.

PEDERSEN A., WALKER, I. and WISE, M. (2005)‘Talk does not cook rice’: beyond anti-racismrhetoric to strategies for social action, AustralianPsychologist, 40, pp. 20–30.

PETTIGREW, T. F. (1959) Regional differences inanti-Negro prejudice, Journal of Abnormal andSocial Psychology, 59, pp. 28–36.

PETTIGREW, T. F. and MEERTENS, R. W. (1995)Subtle and blatant prejudice in western Europe,European Journal of Social Psychology, 25,pp. 57–75.

PHILLIPS, T. (1998) Popular views about Austra-lian identity: research and analysis, Journal ofSociology, 34, pp. 281–302.

POULSEN, M., JOHNSTON, R. J. and FORREST, J.(2001) Measuring intra-urban residential segre-gation: a knowledge-based method for classify-ing intra-urban enclaves, Environment andPlanning A, 33, pp. 2071–2082.

POULSEN, M., JOHNSTON, R. and FORREST, J.(2004) Is Sydney a divided city ethnically?,Australian Geographical Studies, 42, pp. 356–377.

RAJKOWSKI, P. (1987) In the Tracks of theCamelmen. North Ryde, Sydney: Angus &Robertson.

RIZVI, F. (1996) Racism, reorientation and thecultural politics of Asia–Australia relations, in:E. VASTA and S. CASTLES (Eds) The Teeth areSmiling: The Persistence of Racism in

Multicultural Australia, pp. 173–188.St Leonards, Sydney: Allen & Unwin.

ROBINSON, V. (1987) Spatial variability in atti-tudes towards ‘race’ in the UK, in: P. JACKSON

(Ed.) Race and Racism: Essays in SocialGeography, pp. 161–189. London: Allen andUnwin.

ROSE, P. (1997) Tempest-Tost: Race, Immigrationand the Dilemmas of Diversity. New York:Oxford University Press.

SCHAEFER, R. T. (1975) Regional differences inprejudice, Regional Studies, 9, pp. 1–14.

SIMMONS, J. and BOURNE, L. S. (2003) TheCanadian urban system, 1971–2001: responsesto a changing world. Research Paper No. 200,Centre for Urban and Community Studies,University of Toronto.

SMITH, A. W. (1981) Racial tolerance as a functionof group position, American SociologicalReview, 46, pp. 525–541.

SMITH, S. (2003) Electoral support for Australiansagainst further immigration, one nation andunity at the 1999 and 2003 New South Walesstate elections. Honours thesis, GeographyProgram, University of New South Wales,Sydney.

SMITH, S. (2005) Chasing the ‘race’ and ‘ethnic’votes: profiles of minor parties and their pos-itions within the Australian political landscapesof ‘racism’, 1999 and 2003 New South Walesstate elections, in: T. KHOO (Ed.) The BodyPolitic: Racialised Political Cultures in Austra-lia, pp. 1–9. Proceedings of the AustralianStudies Centre Conference, University ofQueensland Australian Studies Centre,Brisbane, and Monash University NationalCentre for Australian Studies (http://www.asc.uq.edu.au/bodypolitic/; accessed 20 April2006).

STATE ELECTORAL OFFICE OF NEW SOUTH WALES

(2003a) Australians against further immigra-tion. Registered party information sheet, p. 1.State Electoral Office, Sydney.


(2003b) One nation NSW political party.Registered party information sheet, pp. 1–12.State Electoral Office, Sydney.


(2003c) Unity Party. Registered Party Infor-mation Sheet, p. 1. State Electoral Office,Sydney.

TWINE, F. W. and WARREN, J. W. (Eds) (2000)Racing Research, Researching Race:Methodological Dilemmas in CriticalRace Studies. New York: New York UniversityPress.

VALENTY, L. O. and SYLVIA, R. D. (2004)Thresholds for tolerance: the impact of racial


and ethnic population composition on the votefor California propositions 197 and 209, TheSocial Science Journal, 41, pp. 433–446.

VASTA, E. and CASTLES, S. (Eds) (1996) The Teethare Smiling: The Persistence of Racism in Multi-cultural Australia. St Leonards, Sydney: Allen& Unwin.

YINGER, J. M. (1986) Intersecting strands in thetheorisation of race and ethnic relations, in:

J. REX and D. MASON (Eds) Theories of Raceand Ethnic Relations, pp. 20–41. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

YOUNG, I. M. (1990) Justice and the Politics ofDifference. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UniversityPress.

ZUKIN, S. (1986) Gentrification: culture and capitalin the urban core, Annual Review of Sociology,13, pp. 129–147.


Constructing Racism in Sydney, Australia’s Largest EthniCity€¦ · Sydney is, therefore,...

Documents

Transcript of Constructing Racism in Sydney, Australia’s Largest EthniCity€¦ · Sydney is, therefore,...