Drawing on the Works of Desmond Cahill and Michael Clyne
Introduction and Overview
Post-war Dutch migration to Australia has long been perceived as an understated success story — a community that quietly integrated, worked hard, and caused few social ripples. Yet beneath this stereotype lies a more nuanced and layered experience of cultural adjustment, identity maintenance, and gradual loss of language and visibility. Two eminent scholars — Desmond Cahill and Michael Clyne — offer complementary insights into the Dutch-Australian story, revealing how one of Australia’s largest post-war migrant groups navigated the tensions between assimilation, accommodation, and cultural continuity.
This article synthesises their key findings. Cahill explores the socio-cultural dynamics of Dutch migration, while Clyne investigates the linguistic dimension, particularly the community’s rapid language shift. Together, their work forms an essential foundation for understanding Dutch Australians not as “disappeared migrants” but as contributors to Australia’s evolving multicultural identity — even if in quieter, less visible ways than others.
Section 1: Accommodation or Assimilation? The Sociological View (Cahill)
In his chapter “Lifting the Low Sky: Dutch Australians – Assimilationists or Accommodationists?”, Desmond Cahill challenges the simplistic assumption that Dutch migrants merely assimilated into Australian society. Instead, he proposes that they adopted a more subtle form of accommodation — adjusting to their new country while retaining key aspects of their Dutch identity in private and symbolic ways.
Key points from Cahill’s analysis:
- Post-war context: Dutch migration peaked during Australia’s Second Golden Age of Migration (1947–1957). Dutch settlers were seen as “ideal migrants” — white, Protestant, skilled, and non-political.
- Cultural compatibility: Dutch values like pragmatism, pluralism, and individual initiative closely aligned with mainstream Australian norms, which eased the integration process.
- Intermarriage and identity: Dutch Australians showed high rates of exogamy (marrying outside the community), which accelerated cultural blending but also made ethnic maintenance more difficult.
- Language and religion: While many Dutch migrants were religious, their influence was often filtered through established churches. Dutch was rarely central to their sense of community, and religious practice often conformed quickly to local norms.
- Second-generation patterns: Educationally, second-generation Dutch Australians underperformed compared to other migrant groups but still achieved strong employment and economic outcomes, especially in trades and small business.
Cahill concludes that the Dutch in Australia are best described as accommodationists, not assimilated nor separate, but blending into society while retaining a sense of symbolic Dutchness — often expressed through heritage, food, and family traditions rather than political or institutional activism.
Section 2: A Language Lost? The Linguistic View (Clyne)
In his article “The Dutch Language in Australia – Some Comparisons with Other Community Languages”, Michael Clyne offers a detailed linguistic lens on the Dutch-Australian story. He explores why the Dutch language declined more rapidly than almost any other migrant tongue in Australia, and what this reveals about identity, policy, and intergenerational change.
Key findings from Clyne:
- Unprecedented language shift: Over 57% of first-generation Dutch Australians spoke only English at home by 1991. Among second-generation Dutch Australians, over 88% had shifted to English entirely — significantly higher than among Greeks, Italians, or Poles.
- Reasons for rapid loss:
- Early migration occurred during Australia’s assimilationist policy period.
- High levels of exogamy reduced home language transmission.
- Cultural values prioritised integration and pragmatism over linguistic preservation.
- Low symbolic attachment: Unlike other communities where language serves as a pillar of identity, Dutch Australians often saw Dutch as a tool, not a core marker of culture.
- Educational and policy failures: Despite multicultural reforms in the 1970s–80s, few Dutch families or institutions advocated for Dutch language education. Dutch disappeared from matriculation and university curricula, with minimal public resistance.
- Code-switching and attrition: In older generations, Dutch often survives in fragmentary, Anglicised forms with simplified syntax, gender loss, and frequent code-switching. Language attrition is observable but less marked than in less-educated groups.
Clyne argues that the Dutch case reflects not a failure but a logical endpoint of broader migrant language trajectories — hastened by early policy pressures, community pragmatism, and a lack of symbolic investment in language as cultural identity.
Converging Conclusions
While Cahill focuses on social identity and Clyne on linguistic practice, both point to similar underlying dynamics:
- The Dutch in Australia integrated with minimal cultural friction, aided by racial and religious compatibility.
- They did not resist assimilationist pressures, often internalising them as part of their own desire to succeed and belong.
- Symbolic identity remained important — but was expressed through values, traditions, and personal memory more than language or public advocacy.
As a result, Dutch Australians became pioneers of a quiet multiculturalism, showing that ethnic identity can persist in ways not always visible to the state, to historians, or even to later generations.
Author Profiles
Desmond Cahill
- Field: Sociology of religion, migration, intercultural education
- Affiliation: RMIT University (emeritus), Melbourne
- Specialisations: Catholicism, Vietnamese and Italian diasporas, interfaith relations
- Dutch relevance: Author of “Lifting the Low Sky,” examining Dutch-Australian cultural accommodation
Cahill is a respected voice in multicultural studies and religious sociology. With his pastoral and academic background, he brings a rare depth to the analysis of migrant experience. His work on Dutch Australians remains a cornerstone in reassessing how “ideal migrants” navigated identity in an evolving Australia.
Michael Clyne (1939–2010)
- Field: Sociolinguistics, bilingualism, language policy
- Affiliations: University of Melbourne; Monash University; Australian Academy of the Humanities
- Major works: Community Languages in Australia; Dynamics of Language Contact
- Dutch relevance: Author of “The Dutch Language in Australia,” the most detailed study on Dutch-English language shift in the country
Clyne was a pioneer in Australia’s understanding of bilingualism and multicultural language policy. His legacy includes not only groundbreaking research but also a tireless advocacy for community language support. His nuanced study of Dutch Australians remains unmatched in scope and insight.
