Want to lose “racist” from the debate, lose the racism

JJJ says:

07:16am | 11/02/10

Exactly right, Eric & Tory. The pamphlets are NOT racist, nor is not wanting more immigrants in Australia. Racism is a belief that differences among the various human races determine achievement and usually involves the idea that a particular race is superior to others. Use of the term ‘racism’ has gotten out of control in this country. If I refer to you by your ethnicity, this isn’t racism, because I don’t think I am better than you based on race. If I paint my face black and sing on TV, this isn’t racism either (in Australia, at least!). It IS racism if I wear a shirt that says “You are s&^t because you are a different race than me”... otherwise, no. Some cultures are proud, however, which can easily be misinterpretted as ‘racism’... so it’s a thin line. And people do tend to spend time with people they can relate to, which is why groups of the same race probably live in the same areas (at least in Perth, Sydney, and Melbourne). This can be intimidating for other people who don’t speak their language… but it’s not racist.

I think it is healthy that Australians (no matter what their ‘race’) don’t want more immigrants in our country. Surely that’s a fair enough perspective? We are an understanding and tollerant bunch of people, but hate the idea that our local shop will soon be ‘invaded’ by people who we don’t know and have trouple understanding. I don’t think it’s racist and Tory has hit the nail on the head… separate the two & we will be able to have a more level-headed debate about immigration in this country.

bec says:

08:15am | 11/02/10

Like your dog-whistle comments about the ZOMGEVILOPPRESSIVE!!!!! feminists who are out to kick your puppy and steal your tuckshop money? ‘Kay!

Tim says:

08:56am | 11/02/10

Bec,
i’m coming to think that you are Eric’s puppy.
Everwhere he comments, there you are, right behind.

Macca says:

09:06am | 11/02/10

@Bec… um, what?

James says:

10:27am | 11/02/10

I hope to immigrate overseas. I hope the people there are more tolerant and welcoming than here.

Jason says:

10:40am | 11/02/10

The leaflets should say in 1788 three thousand immigrants arrived.
They killed all the Aborigines.

Chen Wi says:

10:55am | 11/02/10

I received it in my letter box. It reads ” F@ck off, Australia is full” and a slap in the face to hard working immigrants such as myself ( who a huge amount of tax and contribute to your nations GDP ). We should all go home and leave you unskilled lazy “dole bludgers” with your pathetic skills shortage.

In fact cut yourselves right off. Stop buying Chinese made products and live off your own manufacturing…. oh wait its small scale, technologically inferior, expensive and oops… non existent. just keep digging up the metals in the ground and send it to us then, morons.

Rene says:

11:09am | 11/02/10

To CHEN WI, the comments you have made, ie ” to your nations GDP ” and “We should all go home ”  *&  ” your own manufacturing”  would infer that you have not come to assimilate at all, which is a large part of the reason WHY so many Australians (of course with your own comments you do not include yourself in this category) are not happy with immigration.  Why come here then? Why not go to another country where you can better assimilate? And no, I am not what you would call a “white” Aussie.  As an aside, as a simple example of the reverse racism that does exist in Australia, in schools nowadays, you are not allowed to say “blackboard” but have to say “chalkboard” yet “whiteboard” is still allowed?  Why is that?

Sam says:

11:24am | 11/02/10

See what’s happening. The least productive members of our society (racist dole bludgers) are jeopardising our relationship with tax-paying working naturalised Australians like @Chen Wi.

Centrelink should distribute a leaflet to its “clients” that reads. “As long as you don’t pay tax, shut up”

Chewy says:

11:28am | 11/02/10

@Chen,First point dont worry about the stupid letter you are most welcome in this country. More welcome than the fool who penned the letter.
But I must take you to task on the issue of Australian manufacturing, Its a little known fact that Australia does produce,manufacture and export high quality and highly technological goods and services. We export more in manufacturing and skilled services combined than mining.
Sorry to say if you believe made in China stands for quality check the latest safety results for the great wall car.
But yeah dont worry about the letter.

Brenton says:

03:11pm | 11/02/10

Go study some biology you fool.  You can’t get rid of racism any more than you can get rid of the desire to protect your own family.  This whole debate is like listening to a bunch of flat earthers arguing over whether we live on the back of a turtle or whether we float in a void. 

Races that don’t practice racism become extinct. It’s as simple as that. 

In other words catch up with the basics of 20th century science rather than 19th century socialism before opening your mouth and inserting your foot.

Jack Thomas says:

03:21pm | 11/02/10

Might help if the writer/journo (and I use this term as loosely) actually even read the book she mentions.

Your vague waffle seems to suggest that the Left can call anyone a racist just for mentioning the issue of immigration. No need to justify it, no double standards and hypocrisy there, ey?

According to the Leftards, if you even enter the debate on immigration you also have to run the risk of being called a racist, or at least work really hard to not appear as one (whatever that means).

Why? What about the basic issue of substantiating an accusation, ie. pointing out what is said is racist, just as you are demanding others do? I’d be happy to hear how it is racist, even if it meant these chardonnay socialist muppets would stop carping on.

How about explaining how the Left’s proposals to ‘battle’ climate change work with the large increases of population you seem to be promoting?

If you want to maintain record levels of immigration, you need to build housing for all these people. I’d be prepared to wager you are the first in line to sledge any property developer who proposes to build housing near you.

Where are these new migrants expected to live when we have a major housing crisis, with record (1% in most states) level of vacancy rates in rental housing? Where are the Lefties’ policies to promote the necessary housing development?

It is about time the Leftards go back to school and look at how “their side” can cope with the continued record levels of immigration they seem to be promoting. 

Where is the infrastructure to cope? Where is the economic modelling and real policy behind their ‘argument’? Maybe we can just tack on a few more ‘000s to Kevin’s handouts?

Quote “But when he’s done lecturing us about not calling him names, he should perhaps look to the people who are giving his side of the debate a bad name, show some leadership, and pull them in to line”.

Pull who into line?
Obviously you think the Liberal MP and Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship is responsible for some random nutter who has shoved flyers into a few people’s letterboxes.

Who is giving “his side” a bad name?
Care to name someone, anyone, and put your own name to explain what this person has said that is racist? You say “drop the racism” then completely fail to point out the racism. Maybe you think some spite from your Howard Hating days 10 years ago is part of the debate?

Here’s a tip - get off your own high Leftard horse. Debate the issue properly. You are not even ‘playing the man’, just sniping from the touchlines.

Another Bec says:

04:16pm | 11/02/10

@ Tim… are you sure it’s the same bec? i’ve noticed a heck of a lot of them commenting on The Punch articles.

Sam says:

10:49pm | 11/02/10

@Brenton, thanks for cutting to the chase. So if you’re forced to choose between your race and humanity for all, which would you choose? Because you can’t evolve and stay the same at the same time.

Honestly I don’t think you or I have a choice about it. The choice is harmony or war in its various forms. How’s that for cutting to the chase?

When your racial identity becomes useless to you, you’ll gladly embrace the next identity that empowers you. The reason you feel compelled to play the race card is that you feel some fear, you lack confidence in your ability to compete, and you wish you could design your own world because you can’t see any value in some people who inhabit the existing one. What’s so bad about absorbing some foreign influences while retaining the bulk of your own identity. It’s not all or nothing overnight you know.

omegaman says:

11:41pm | 11/02/10

@ Chen Wi
I am glad your hard-working immigrant skills are capitalizing on our pathetic work-skills shortage but your email supports my argument that you immigrants need lessons in manners, in your case in particular a lesson about modesty would probably make you more likeable.
Oh by the way Australia has been rich since we were founded but you guys have been poor for like 5000 years so I wouldn’t gloat too much about chinese products. In 15 years all the manufacturing will be done in India and Africa and China won’t make anything anymore either. Then you will know where we have been. Whats it like playing catch up?

James says:

09:57am | 12/02/10

Just so you know Jack Thomas, the policy failings you talk about span both sides of the partisan divide.  The Coalition supports the current level of immigration.

James says:

04:04pm | 12/02/10

omegaman, you clearly know nothing about Chinese history, or Australian history for that matter.  Were you aware, for instance, that the convicts and settlers of the first fleet nearly starved to death?  Or that settlers did not outnumber convicts for several decades after white settlement?  Do you really believe that convicts are a rich people.

Were you likewise aware that until very recently - around the 16th century AD, far more wealth was concentrated in China than in Europe?  And that the Romans declined, in part, because all of the gold in the Roman treasury was being sent east to buy Chinese products like silk?  You need a few lessons yourself, both in manners (your sense of hospitality is very weak compared to the hospitality I have been offered by Turkish and Iranian friends), and history.  Until the last 500 years, Europe was a dirt poor backwaters where the inhabitants were too busy killing each other over the difference between transubstantiation and consubstantiation to get busy making money.  Meanwhile, China had been the greatest power the world had ever seen for more than 1000 years, with a few interruptions for European-style infighting.  In light of these major errors, I can’t help but wonder about your other opinions.

Sherlock says:

09:16am | 11/02/10

Get real. I don’t know what your smoking Gerard Oosterman but whatever it is we want some.

I’m a true blue Aussie born and bred from Aussie parents, grandparents and great grandparents etc etc. I live on the Lower North Shore and I’d suggest that as an Aussie I’m in the minority.

I share my apartment block, suburb and surrounds with people of all races, creeds and colours and we get on just fine thanks. There’s not that many Aussies in my office either yet we’re all great mates.

None of the people I know complain about being victims of racism. While every place has it’s percentage of dickheads I resent my neighbours and myself as living in some sort of racist enclave.

James says:

09:26am | 11/02/10

Very true Sherlock.  I often wonder where all the racists like Jenny et al actually live that they think everyone shares their opinions.  Where I live, there are people of all races, religions and creeds and we all get along wonderfully.  My guess is that the racists are really just cowards, who are more than happy to post their racist rants online, but if you asked them to their face, they would not have any courage in their convictions, mainly because they know it is stupid to hate people because they have a funny accent or brown skin.

Sam says:

10:42am | 11/02/10

@James, the racists like ‘Jenny’ are the dole bludging single moms with only a couple of kids. She’s jealous of all the dole money going to the 10+ Sudanese ‘family’ who would gladly leave the centrelink system if they could get a job. This country does give migrants and refugees a fair go, but I don’t think we practice any affirmative action to help these disadvantaged minorities. On the other hand, you’ve got people born into a privileged country who wouldn’t get off their fat arses to work rather than receive the dole and government housing. We’re not helping the refugees enough, and we’re helping our own too much. They live in Toowomba and Newcastle and Bundaberg. Go there, you can smell the dole bludgers in the air.

James says:

11:13am | 11/02/10

So true Sam.  I lived in Toowoomba before coming to Canberra, and the difference is massive.  The likes of Jenny would be right at home in a place like Toowoomba.  I had many conversations with locals there complaining about all the immigration.  I would reply that I found those attitudes offensive, as my own father migrated here from England, to which the racists would reply that they were talking about the dark skinned migrants, not “good” ones like my dad.  Compared to that, Canberra is a refreshing change.

Barbar says:

05:09pm | 11/02/10

The recent racist slanging match mostly stems from all those pompous Indian students complaining about being ripped off by their crappy college, this I sympathize with but hats off to the Rudd government for closing the permanent residency back-door rort previously exploited by these very same students….strange I haven’t heard a word from Gautam Gupta on that subject

soultrader says:

10:26am | 11/02/10

@T Chong
Nice to see your ill-informed, ill-thought-out, loopy left-wing comments coming to the fore once again.
Which Labor stooge do you work for? Belinda Neal or is this Belinda Neal incognito?
You are laughable most of the time TC.
You do not add to the discussion, your sort of comment is just inflammatory - I do not understand Punch and their ethics - oops yes I do - what ethics?

Voxpop says:

11:20am | 11/02/10

Soultrader I have read through T.Chongs post and cannot find fault with anything written there - I find it to be an accurate account of the dog whistling politics and nasty underhand electoral fraud (pamphlets)perpetrated by the LNP.  It is quite reasonable based on past and current performance that we be suspicious of what some can get up to - if not them personally then by extension of incitement.

soultrader says:

11:58am | 11/02/10

@Vox
Sounds just like the current regime - when they get in trouble on the economic front. they use the scare campaign to try to distract their detractors - just the same as the previous government and the one before that and etc etc. All polical parties use the same obvious strategy. To harp on about it, is such a waste of time. Why not try to improve the debate.
To espouse the extreme left wing accusations and inuendo about “those rotten LNP” without looking in one’s own cupboard for skeletons is just laughable. All those that hold extreme political views should try a bit of reasoning and rational debate once in a while, instead of the blind, repetitive, trashy party line. It really does not enhance the debate. It inflames.

Macca says:

09:12am | 11/02/10

@Andrew, did you even read the article… how and when did Tory play the race card?

Tony says:

10:03am | 11/02/10

@ Macca - the implication was clear. She complained about a brochure that objected to our levels of immigration and instantly denounced it as racist. It isn’t. It refers to all immigrants, regardless of race. Tory has, as per usual, shot her mouth off and succeeded in shooting herself in the foot.

Michael says:

01:00pm | 11/02/10

Pardon my apparent ignorance, but if discouraging or opposing immigration isn’t on the basis of race (hence the term racism), then what is it based on? In other words, why the opposition to immigration if not racism?

The Cricket says:

05:23pm | 11/02/10

Michael, that is an ignorant comment on so many levels.
You are saying that any opposition to increased immigration is necessarily racist because what other reasons could anyone have?
To begin with, a very large number of immigrants to Australia are white and English-speaking, so to suggest white Australians (who apparently are the only people who can be racists) would object to them coming here on racial grounds is clearly ridiculous.
Secondly there are plenty of other reasons people oppose immigration, most commonly bsaed on environmental reasons such as Australia’s shortage of fresh water, fertile farming land, and also to keep carbon emissions down.
T.Chong is a clown. The term “dog-whistling” is the left’s equivelent of the right’s “UnAustralian” - so misused as to be meaningless.
One more thing - I live on the Upper North Shore, and my building is full of people from all over the world. Everyone gets along fine. Those who suggest everyone on the North Shore is a) white b) wealthy and c) racist; is just displaying their own ignorance.

Eric says:

05:22pm | 11/02/10

Michael, I will pardon your ignorance just this once. Clearly nobody has informed you of some very obvious considerations.

The most basic consideration is environmental. How many people can Australia support in a sustainable manner? Some say it’s as low as six million. I’m not one of those people, but clearly for those who are, this is not a race-based concern.

There are many others, but I’ll leave you to do your own research. Or just listen to what the anti-immigrationists are actually saying.

For the record, I’m pro-immigration - just selective about it. No, not on the basis of race - on the basis of what’s best for our country.

Good luck with overcoming your ignorance problem.

Ol says:

08:56am | 11/02/10

The only lesson that Australia should learn from Europe is that you can’t use derogatory language about ethnic minorities and then expect them to integrate harmoniously with everyone else.

The Cronulla riots are an example of how racist language can be used by morons to feel superior to other people.

In many European countries, migrants have settled in fantastically and make a great contribution to society. Funnily enough, these are the countries that don’t demonise people just because they want a better life and/or are escaping persecution.

The fact that modern-day Australia was founded by migrants (migrants who did unspeakable things to the native population) is an irony completely lost on many in the anti-immigration cabal.

Macca says:

09:44am | 11/02/10

@Ol, Many European Countries?

France, Italy, England, Switzerland, Spain etc. all have their own immigration issues. I’m struggling to think of a Westernised Nation with a succesful and popular immigration policy that involves a net increase in population

Jonk says:

10:11am | 11/02/10

Ol, you’re dreaming mate. Europe harbors a lot more racist sentiment than Australia does. Our racist political parties are on the extreme fringe - theirs are all on the verge of being mainstream, with votes in the 5-10%, in some cases 15-20% range. All these parties make One Nation look like a citizenship ceremony.

I’m pro immigration but you have to know your facts before you start spouting off shit. The Australian experiment - we have more immigrants per capita than every European nation besides Switzerland (I’m ignoring Luxembourg, Liechtenstein and other mini-countries)  - has overall been so successful that incidents are the exception, not the rule. Long may this continue.

rohan says:

10:10am | 11/02/10

Southern X: Very convenient facts but far from the truth.
Macca! - Look at the US - most of their success is due to immigrants..

Southern X: since you specifically talked about Indians - The richest man in the UK is an indian.

Some stats for Indians in the US:

- A University of California, Berkeley, study reported that one-third of the engineers in Silicon Valley are of Indian descent, while 7% of valley hi-tech firms are led by Indian CEOs. Source: Silicon India Readership Survey

-  Almost 40% of all Indians have a master’s, doctorate or other professional degree, which is five times the national average. (Source: The Indian American Centre for Political Awareness.) These high levels of education have enabled Indian Americans to become a productive segment of the American population, with 72.3% participating in the U.S. work force, of which 57.7% are employed in managerial and professional specialties.

-  In 2002, there were over 223,000 Asian Indian-owned firms in the U.S., employing more than 610,000 workers, and generating more than $88 billion in revenue.

- In 2000, Fortune magazine estimated the wealth generated by Indian Silicon Valley entrepreneurs at around $250 billion

- The American Association of Physicians of Indian Origin boasts a membership of 35,000

Look under Wiki: History and Immigration to understand more.

Perhaps Indians in the UK face similar obstacles that do not allow them to perform.

This includes ignorant fools who quote statistics without researching properly.

Tim says:

10:31am | 11/02/10

Rohan,
“This includes ignorant fools who quote statistics without researching properly.”
What like yourself?
Quoting random statistics does not an argument make.

rohan says:

10:47am | 11/02/10

Tim,

Statistics quoted were not random.besides, you can only have a debate when people are prepared to listen.if they are not, might as well use the same approach

H of SA says:

11:19am | 11/02/10

Tim you really should have let that slide through to the keeper.

Analysing and critiquing statistics is legitimate.

Ignoring relevant statisctis is not.

It only serves to generate a perception you are not interested in listening.

marley says:

11:26am | 11/02/10

SouthernX has highlighted the problems the UK has with some aspects of immigration from the sub-continent.  Rohan has highlighted the success the USA has had with some aspects of immigration from the sub-continent.

Both statements have an element of truth to them.  But the reason sub-continental migrants do less well in the UK than in the US has nothing to do with culture and a great deal to do with the differences in the respective immigration systems of the two host countries.

The US, like Australia, has long had an active skilled-migrant program targetting the well-educated middle class who have something to offer economically to the country.  The UK for many years operated a reactive immigration program which gave visas primarily on basis of family ties,  rather than a pro-active progrram looking for the “best and brightest.”  As a result, the USA got migrants from the subcontinent who were, by and large, well educated, skilled, entrepreneurial and middle class, and who adapted quickly.  The UK , on the other hand,  historically tended to get much less educated, working class or subsistence farmer types.  Their subsequent struggles to adapt are entirely due to the nature of the UK’s migration program with its emphasis on family over skills.

Tim says:

12:16pm | 11/02/10

H,
Southern X quoted statistics (true or not, I don’t know) about Indians in the UK.
Rohan then quoted statistics (from Indian sources) about Indians in the US.
Neither really analysed or critiqued what the statistics mean. I am sure there could be many reasons for both.
Marley’s comment above probably gives a reasonable assessment.

rohan says:

02:56pm | 11/02/10

@Tim:

You are welcome to analyse what the statistics mean. From your first comment, it looked like you took an exception; your second comment about “Indian sources” kind of revealed that regardless of statistics or logical explanation, your stance will not change..BTW, you are to check or verify these stats….I personally dont have a “indian source” (biased or not) ; you are welcome to look at it in more depth

Tim says:

09:18am | 12/02/10

Um Rohan,
i had no problem with you Stats.
you were the one who put the sources there. The first two clearly state:
Silicon India Readership Survey and Indian American centre for Political Awareness. These are clearly from Indian sources.
I didn’t say whether I thought they wrong or not.
I think its interesting to see that you assume i have some sort of view that I won’t change because I said that it is silly to put random statistics without any analysis about those statistics.
What was the point of this article again?

eye4aneye says:

06:01pm | 11/02/10

But the country is full - with the exception of skilled migrants (of any race/religion etc) that make up an identified shortage in skills why should we have any further immigration?

Infrastructure is struggling and I see no point in increasing infrastructure needs with non beneficial migration.

If we let everyone in because things are bad where they come from things will soon be as bad here.

Patrick says:

09:06am | 11/02/10

Spoken like a true racist.

Watcher says:

09:15am | 11/02/10

The riots probably have a lot more than just race issues attached.  What about the basics of just having a lot of people living in close proximity in a less than hospitable arrangement.  That is enough to test anyone.

E says:

10:35am | 11/02/10

Im pretty sure the riots were because the detainees found out about the Oceanic Viking ‘special deal’ and realised that the way to get what they wanted from KRudd was to cause a problem. Unfortunately for them the media didnt make a big deal and so they remain stuck behind bars.

Sam says:

11:16am | 11/02/10

@Biff, My family once tried to immigrate to Sweden. We arrived by plane without a visa, we filled in some forms at the airport, we were taken to a secure processing centre that was more like a 4 star hotel. We were fed, entertained, and our application was processed (and rejected) in 2 weeks. We went back to the country we left from, thinking “well, it was worth a try, pity, it was such a nice place”. No riot necessary when people treat you with respect. Contrast that with Woomera and Christmas Island… we make cattle out of fellow human beings. It’s not only racist, it’s down right despicable.

Immigrants and refugees could bring the country towns back to life if they were forced to live and work there for the first 5 years in Australia. Then a steady influx of immigrants and refugees would be the only thing preventing the country towns from their current state of mere existence. Think of all the jobs and businesses that would flow from population growth in country towns. After 5 years, you get your PR, and you’re welcome to try your luck in the cities, although by that time I imagine many will have set up viable lives in the country. Imagine that in the future we could travel through Australia’s countryside and experience a different cultures in every town. Think of the tourism. The Anglo’s would still own the land and the businesses, but at least they won’t be deserted. And over a couple of decades, this would address the gap of understanding that some of us have regarding other cultures. It would also address the over-reliance on farming and mining that tends to limit the growth of country towns. I’m sure there will be issues, so it would need real commitment from the government. I could see it working, I could also see it failing.

I suppose Australia opening it’s doors is not as bad as closing them, but it’s also not as good as opening the doors and welcoming people with a plan that doesn’t involve a queue at Centrelink. My parents immigrated as “skilled workers”. My Dad couldn’t get a job for 2 years and my Mom hasn’t yet. If you want migrants to integrate well and quickly, the government has to play an active part.

Chief says:

12:18pm | 11/02/10

@sam Hang on a second. Christmas Island is overflowing because we are being overrun be Illegal immigrants. I have no problem with Asylum seekers being brought here from the refugee camps etc, but if their going to pay people smugglers thousands to get here, they can just go to the back of the line. Secondly Christmas Island is sheltered, has foxtel, internet, TV, comfortable beds, showers etc, so these eople are quite comfortable.

Tony says:

12:24pm | 11/02/10

@ Sam

if we could legislate for that even I would vote for it and I am against most current forms of immigration (particularly family reunions where the family has nothing to offer this country). If we could get them to stop moving to our already overcrowded cities, then bring it on, I’ve changed my mind.

Sam says:

12:49pm | 11/02/10

@Chief, come on mate, these people want to work for their families and get on with life, not spend 4 years being “processed” or “waiting for a vacancy to pop up”. Let them in, don’t spoil them with Centrelink payments while they “look for work”, rather give them jobs cleaning the streets and parks and beaches. Let them live, but make them work for the honour of living in Australia. That would be kinder and fairer for everyone. The problem is Centrelink’s existence, not the refugees.

Ben says:

02:27pm | 11/02/10

@Sam
Is it kinder and fairer to those that have already spend four years (by the way, there are people in these camps that have been there for much longer than four years) in a refugee camp that these queue jumpers be allowed straight in?

It is an unfortunate fact that Australia can only take a finite amount of refugees.  Whilst I believe that it would be great if we took more than we do now, I don’t believe that they should come from those that can afford to dodge the system, whilst others are left to suffer in squalid camps.

Sam says:

02:51pm | 11/02/10

@Ben, the system stinks. It’s setup to give the impression that we’re doing what we can when infact we are desperately trying to delay the flood. Just like the relief effort for Haiti, embarrassingly obvious ulterior motives are at play, and I’m not buying the official line.

Oh, if only we could run away to the moon and leave this damned Earth to the poor and the meek. I’m sure Jesus would understand.

eye4aneye says:

06:08pm | 11/02/10

@ Sam - legislate to force them to live in country towns? how is forcing someone to live somewhere in the country different to xmas island? and at least in xmas island they have airconditioning and various amenities provided. Despite what you may think they have performed an illegal act (illegal immigration is actually illegal strangly enough) and I see no problem with detaining people on that basis alone let alone the risk that they may have previous criminal history (which is one of the main things looked at in thei background checks while detained).

rohan says:

10:16am | 11/02/10

Jonathan,

I am not sure which foreigners you are talking about..I have only heard criticism where certain people were attacked. Perhaps the criticism is a reaction to the attack? Isnt that normal?

Have you been researching the latest economic and population demographics to understand the kind of issues underlying immigration strategy and policies?

If not, thats why you are racist as whatever issues you are finding you are attributing this to migrants…

Your last comment sums it up perfectly - whenever you dont like something, perhaps you should attribute this to immigrants without cause.

Voxpop says:

11:06am | 11/02/10

Indeed Rudd can’t be accused of racism based on those comments - he was talking about the criminality of people smuggling and the exploitation and abuse of asylum seekers.

Phill says:

01:29pm | 11/02/10

i was going to make comment on this.  If you read this comment and see racism there I would say it is more your racist thoughts coming through then Krudd’s.  HE mention race in no way, merely people’s “job”.  I beleive people smugglers are not limited by skin colour?  Maybe you have your own mental image of people smugglers you interjected onto this comment?

Tim says:

09:53am | 11/02/10

Yawn,
By your comment you are effectively stifling debate.
People do have legitimate concerns about the things that Morrisson and Abbott have mentioned, but you dismiss it as “racist dog whistling”.

DG says:

10:01am | 11/02/10

Just for the record - the motive for making an arguement does not affect the validity of the arguments that are made.

If no arguments are made just a simple, unsupported statement, a good option is to ignore it. The worst option is to launch into ad hominem attacks.

Better still, despite the person making the statement having the burden of proof - begin by stating why the statement is false.

Why does their reason matter?

Patrick says:

10:49am | 11/02/10

The motive matters entirely DG, if someone is seeking to cut immigration for, say environmental issues, is very different from somebody wanting to cut immigration because they dislike brown colored people.

DG says:

11:34am | 11/02/10

If a person says “I don’t want more people in this country, I like having my space”, but they also happen to be racist - how does their racism detract from their like for having their own space? Do we disregard their argument because they are racist or do we respect that increased immigration will mean that they have less space and is contrary to the desires of that member of the electorate.

How about a person who claims that immigration contributes to social disharmony in some areas and that we should be careful about inviting social disharmony into our suburbs. Is their argument valid? Is their arguments any less valid if they happen to be racist?

My point is that the arguments must be considered in their own light - free from any consideration about the person making the argument or their motives for making the argument. If I make an argument as “devils advocate”, is my argument less valid because it is insincere? of course not.

This is why I maintain that the reasons for a person making an argument are irrelevant. The only think that needs to be addressed is the argument.

omegaman says:

11:55pm | 11/02/10

That’s not true, my ethnic friends and colleagues tell me all the time how racist I am (especially when I ask them when they’re heading home) and it doesn’t bother me one bit. In fact I am proud to be pro-Australian. Its only the anglo countries that are obsessed with racism anyway, everyone else is more racist than us, they don’t even have anti-racism laws in most of the world and guess what…life goes on and no-one loses any sleep over it.

So how come you aren’t as outspoken about Japanese immigration laws with the same vehemence? They’re hardly an open society. Maybe you are a reverse-racist racist?

In the future, in about 10 years, when China and other Aisan nations are dictating the pace of the world economy and europe and america become even bigger basket cases racism will be par for the course and your views will be wasted air. You can read about that future by downloading some of the published articles on the Office of National Assessments website, where they project that “corporate” nations like singapore and china will hold more allure than crappy problem-ridden democratic nations like the western world. World opinion is changing Patrick, but its not changing the way you think it is. Democracy isn’t spreading, and neither is the rule of law. Totalitarians are about to give us a run for our money in the material wealth stakes.

Ricky says:

04:56pm | 11/02/10

Well said Dolly Lama.Spot on.

rohan says:

10:19am | 11/02/10

Weirdo:

Is there a different tax scheme for immigrants? I think they are taxed at the same rate..

Jarod says:

10:34am | 11/02/10

immigrants do pay tax, the party is just getting bigger and more rad.

Ricky says:

05:01pm | 11/02/10

Your right Rohan, immigrants do pay tax.When they could be bothered to get a job that is.Because Centrelink seems to be a new shrine many minorities worship…..

rohan says:

08:20pm | 11/02/10

Ricky:

I will accept your point if you can point me to some relevant and current statistics..
I am sure you have it somewhere as you sound so convinced

James says:

10:34am | 11/02/10

Let unpack this last claim.  “99% of the worlds basket case nations have socialist style governments”.  Not quite.  Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Sri Lanka, and Sudan are some of the major sources of refugees that do not have socialist governments.  The only real socialists left are in North Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia (maybe), and Burma, if you use a very loose definition of socialist.  Go and ask a Burmese refugee if they think the ALP is socialist compared to their government.

“ALP - a socialist party”.  Again, wrong.  Its roots are social democratic (and if we extend your logic to the other side of politics, all conservatives would be Nazis, which they very clearly are not).  If you can not understand the difference between socialist and social democratic (which the ALP does not even qualify for any more), then you should just stay quiet on the matter. 

But like you say, some people will never learn, or for that matter let facts get in the way of their opinions.

Willy K says:

10:53am | 11/02/10

James….  Tell me what style governments do they have?  They are ALL socialist based - certainly not market economies!

Your small list of ‘Real’ socialist countries is a joke.  Most of the worlds govts are socialist based!  Tell me what style of govts thaey have then?  Market?  Of course not!

The ALP is a socialist based party that believes in forced distribution of wealth - always has.  Just because they now say they are not does not make it true!  Even your leader stated that he is an ‘Old fashioned Christian Socialist’... well who knows what he says he is now!  And Gillard is a socialist.

And finally the last correction of your mad spray - the NAZI Party was SOCIALIST!  How were they remotely Conservative??? 

Next time use facts not bigoted fantasy.

Patrick says:

10:54am | 11/02/10

Indeed James, I propose Godwin’s law be extended to comparisons with Communism and socialism .

James says:

11:26am | 11/02/10

Hi Willy K,

The Nazi party socialist?  Why is that?  Because it has the word socialist in its name?  I guess you also think that North Korea is a democracy, because its official name is the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea?  Also on this point, I bet you do not believe anything else Kevin Rudd says, so why believe him when he says he is a socialist?  I had no idea politicians were so honest - in my books, Rudd lies as much as Howard or Keating or Hawke or Bush or Obama or any other politician you care to mention.  Are you really as naive as you make out?

Please, the “Nazi party is socialist” meme is without any factual basis at all.  Read any history book by any reputable historian, and you will find all the facts that you need.  I mean really, who do you think you are fooling? 

You call me bigoted because I do not think that Afghanistan is socialist?  Here is a thought - read a few books about politics and economics.  You might learn the difference between a market based economy and a socialist economy.  By your definition, the Liberal Party and the US Republican Party are socialists, as they both redistribute wealth to as great an extent as the ALP.

Patrick,

Good call.  So often the silly Nazi comparisons are outed for what they are thanks to Godwin, but just as often these silly Stalin and Soviet Union ones fly under the radar.

Saskia says:

12:24pm | 11/02/10

James.

My mother grew up in NAZI Germany and I can assure you that the govt. was Socialist!  My family to this day will never vote Labor as they say - ‘its the closest party to Socialism’.  Revisionist history does not make it not so!

They actually wanted to come to Australia because of its politics (being similar to the UK) where they thought the Conservative Party was great for its strong stance against Socialism and its evils.

There you go.  A reason why many many migrants came here.  Lets not fall for the Socialism trap.  A failed creed in every sphere tried. And a slippery slope to big brother as we have seen with the Rudd govt.

Nafe says:

12:33pm | 11/02/10

@ James, Believe it or not, the Nazi’s were also Socialists

James says:

12:55pm | 11/02/10

Oh yes, of course the Nazis were socialists.  You assert that to be the case, and your parents lived in a Nazi occupied area, so you must know.  There is a wealth of historical work and evidence showing that this is patently false.  The position that the Nazi party was not a far-right wing conservative movement is the revisionism.  And it worries me, as it looks a lot like a vehicle for the rehabilitation of far-right racial politics.

They put socialists and communists in concentration camps with the Jews = anti-socialist.

They came to power by forming a coalition with a grouping of conservative parties, and with the backing of the very conservative President Hindenburg, in order to offset the power of the socialist and communist parties in the Reichstag = conservative.

The actual socialist wing of the Nazi Party was expelled in the late 1920s.  Hitler, Goebels, Himmler, and so many other prominent Nazis are on the record as saying that National Socialism was completely different to Bolshevism, and they discussed the differences at length.  On the basis of the evidence (which does not include feelings), the Nazi Party was a nationalistic, far-right, racist conservative political party.

Sam says:

01:30pm | 11/02/10

crikey, as if socialism was to blame for the holocaust!!! It would just as farcical but a lot easier to blame “blonde people”!!!

Willy K says:

01:33pm | 11/02/10

NAZI Party - Conservative???  Are you for real?  The most radical non-democratic anti-free market party probably ever!

What a total joke.  I’m sure Winston Churchill will agree with you!

NAZIism is the antithesis of the Conservative, democratic, liberal, small govt, free market political parties of the western world.

It has more in common with Communism and its bastard off-shoots socialism and Worker/Labour/Labor Parties

marley says:

03:19pm | 11/02/10

There’s a big difference between state capitalism and socialism.  The Nazis pursued the former objective, not the latter.  The means of production were never, in Nazi theology, going to be in the hands of the workers;  rather, they would be in the hands of wealthy industrialists closely tied to the State.

James says:

04:15pm | 11/02/10

Nice comment Willy K.  All that shows is your complete lack of knowledge of Weimar and post-Weimar politics in interwar Germany - indeed politics at all.  It is entirely possible to be conservative and authoritarian, as was the Nazi Party, or left wing and authoritarian, as was the Communist Party.  Likewise, it is possible to be conservative and democratic, as is the Liberal Party, or left wing and democratic, as was the Labor Party (even though now it is centre-left and democratic).  Neither left nor right has a monopoly on democracy.  It is only fairly recently that free markets have become the province of the right wing - it was not until after the Great Depression that free markets economics held sway amongst conservatives.

I too am a conservative - well, centre-right really - and your knowledge of history and politics dismays me.  Yet another indictment of our education system, if adults like yourself do not even command a rudimentary knowledge of world history and politics.

Willy K says:

06:50pm | 11/02/10

James I realise that I am arguing with a fool - but anyway.

Describe how on Earth the NAZI Party was Conservative?  You still have not.

You have read some dud textbook and have some neat little table that you categorise politics by I bet!. 

Resorting to a personal attack because you have lost the argument is the last resort of the intellectually obstructed.  Admit the error and move on.

Hehe says:

08:54pm | 11/02/10

Willy & Saskia watch way too much Glenn Beck.

James says:

08:19am | 12/02/10

The only thing I will admit is that your are clearly unable to understand the difference between left and right, and that it is not worth arguing with you.  The proof of the nature of Nazi Party ideology can be found in any history of World War Two.  Joachim Fest in his biography of Hitler displays it quite well.  As does Winston Churchill’s history of the war.  Given that you clearly get none of your information on the the Nazi Party from reliable sources or historians - and from the Herald Sun comment page instead - it is pointless.  I have shown you some historical evidence, I have told you where you can find it for yourself, and your response is that the work of the most esteemed historians and leaders like WInston Churchill write dud textbooks.

Henry says:

11:24am | 12/02/10

James…  you sir are a rolled-gold Nutter!

You still have not explained how the NAZI’s are conservative!  Total joke.

So you are right and Churchill is wrong?  Hahaha. 

Someone made a too deep an incision into your frontal cortex.

James says:

12:45pm | 12/02/10

No Henry.  I am saying that Willy K is wrong, and that every historian and political scientist in the last 60 years is right.  At least read some of the most basic sources on the topic before engaging in a conversation about political ideology.  No serious commentator or historian has shown that the Nazis were a left wing movement.  If you have evidence otherwise, I am sure that the Journal of Politics and History would love to peer review your article arguing that to be the case.  Good luck with that.

Jane up too late again says:

11:56pm | 12/02/10

James. I must take issue with your assertion: ““ALP - a socialist party”.  Again, wrong.  Its roots are social democratic.”  I well remember Comrade Whitlam.  The ALP Consititution also defines the party as a Democratic Socialist party.  Their roots are Socialist and, as supporters (until tbe bitter end of the White Australia Policy) divisive and racist.  Darwin and Canberra (the two towns I grew up in) were always an interesting mix of people with different ethnic backgrounds.  Friends of mine from those days are aghast at what is occurring in this country.  Among those friends I am, as a native born Australian, in the minority.  None of them are Hypenated Australians and we all have respect for each other as individuals.  I remain, with my friends and family, vehemently opposed to Multi-culturalism.  I don’t care what color my neighbour is.  I don’t care what religion they follow.  I enjoy celebrating cultural events with my friends. They are all Australian - no other qualifications, no hyphens and no other racist nomenclature - simply Australians. What does disturb me is the cultural cringe the ALP still employs and the notion that native born Australians are the pimples on the ALPs “arse end of the world”  It isn’t and nor are we. In terms of immigration.  It must be slowed down, the country simply isn’t coping either environmentally or structurally.

marley says:

11:35am | 11/02/10

That is exactly what the debate needs to be about.  I don’t know what the ideal population is, but I certainly get the impression that the major cities are struggling under the weight of incoming migration, both from rural areas and from abroad.  I also wonder about the demographics of migration - we’ve got an aging population, but increased migration is no solution if the overall age ratio of the new arrivals is not substantiallly lower than that of the existing population.  And should we be addressing short term skill shortages through migration at all?  Or should we just take well-educated people with good English skills and leave their occupations out of the equation? 

I think these are all legitimate questions but they do tend to get subsumed by the asylum seeker issue (which is a tiny fraction of migration to this country) and by the simplistic slogans coming from both ends of the political spectrum.

Chad says:

11:03am | 11/02/10

I’m a Cardiovascular Surgeon and I’m Chinese. One day I may help someone you know. I do not care what country they come from.

Davida James says:

11:12am | 11/02/10

The “desire to be Australian” you refer to is an interesting one.  With UK and Kiwi immigrants outnumbering any other group, if we are only discussing ending immigration as a whole ( as suggested in the pamphlet) why not start with the largest totals first.  Stop immigration from the UK, NZ, USA, South Africa, Italy and Germany and voila…...75% of the issue is addressed.  Let’s not confuse facts.

I have friends here in Brisbane who would never dream of renouncing their heritage.  They seek out reminders of home (specialty food shops selling UK and SA foodstuffs, friends who also came from the UK /SA etc)  Ever been to the pub during an Australia/All Blacks clash?  Many proud Kiwis?  Yet this is never the content of the numerous nationalist rants….
It is far easier to take aim at a group of Somalians or burka-wearing women.  They LOOK different.  It’s time to remember assimilation is a generational concept which takes time.  Next time the child of an immigrant treats you at a hospital, does your taxes, runs as your local member or repairs your car, remember their father/mother probably worked on the Snowy Scheme, cut cane, planted crops or contributed to AUSTRALIAN industry in the ‘50’s and ‘60’s.  Back then they were also considered as different/interlopers and not welcomed by all.

Sam says:

11:40am | 11/02/10

@Saskia,
(1) For your information Russians are neither from the UK or NW Europe.
(2) If you have “assimilated” then why didn’t you change your name to “Susan”. No, you “integrated”. Assimilation robs us of our individual identity and it’s not necessary for a harmonious society. I’m a Muslim Arab and I’ve integrated very well.
(3) I challenge you to produce statistics to prove your contention that blondes at proportionately underrepresented in centrelink queues. It seems to me that the dark people (ooo racist!) don’t want to stay on centrelink, whereas the blondes seem to regard it as a lifestyle choice.
(4) Australian society is not fracturing, it’s an election year, and the debate has begun. Take the year off if you wish, you won’t miss anything significant. Just a whole lot more talk and no action. It’s a democracy, that’s how it works.

Henry says:

12:08pm | 11/02/10

Spot on Saskia.  Look at the way you have been vilified for daring to have an opinion against PC sheep-think.

Australians don’t want migrants setting up ‘mini-countries’, whether they be Asian, Arab or Kiwi dole bludgers.  So migrants have given us some nice food - so what?  They came here because of our culture - so try and join in! 

I know there are some great Chinese doctors there are also Uni’s full of OS Chinese/Asian students studying medicine due to the lure of its dollars who have shocking English skills and non-existent bedside manner.  They are also taking the places of Aussie kids.

Why are we selling our country down the river to foreigners who are simply here for an easy ride off the back of previous Australians hard work? 

If your cultures are so great etc then why didn’t you stay and fix up your own great countries of origin rather than cut and run to Australia - a nation you accuse of being racist and where you show zero respect for its culture?  A majority of Australians feel this way because we have been taken for a ride by foreigners.  I for one are glad to see many young Australians finally being proud to say they are Australian and so sick of being told we don’t have a culture and how bloody good other migrant cultures are.

Saskia says:

12:14pm | 11/02/10

Russia???  I am of Dutch heritage.  But regard myself as 100% Australian.

My family made total effort to assimilate and learned English and studied the legal system and history before they sailed out on the boat in the 50’s.

I cannot understand why any clear thinking person would choose to emigrate without making this effort and really desiring to be part of the new country they CHOSE to be a part of.

The whole multi-cultural thing is so boring.  Get over yourselves.

Rover says:

12:17pm | 11/02/10

@Sam - I don’t agree with Saskia but how on earth can you claim that her post says blondes are under-represented in Centrelink queues?
The fastest way to undermine your own argument is to verbal your opponent.

Bob says:

12:28pm | 11/02/10

@Saskia - ‘be Australian’ - ???

What, you mean black and eating Witchetty grubs?

Sam says:

01:13pm | 11/02/10

@Rover, she claimed that non blondes are a bigger drain on Centrelink, without taking into account that blondes are proportionally underrepresented in most populations outside her preferred part of the world (being the UK and NW Europe). It’s simple, she prefers blonde hair. She even prefers a blonde dole bludger who isn’t interested in finding work to a black refugee dole recipient who cannot find work because of inherent language difficulties and prevalent racist attitudes.

Sam says:

01:38pm | 11/02/10

@Rover, why don’t you jump in the ring instead of sitting on the fence and commentating. Take part in your beloved democracy, lest your informed opinion is drowned by others’ (and your own false sense of superior debating skills!). Verbal me, we can all verbal each other senseless tonight. And tomorrow we’ll all wake up and it’ll be like groundhog day, nothing has changed in spite of our galant attempts to have our voices heard.

Saskia says:

01:47pm | 11/02/10

Sam…

Where did I mention non-blondes?  I said migrants from the UK and NW Europe - I never mentioned race once.  Its to do with culture, language and ease of assimilation.

Your lies just add to the failure of your argument and go to show that people like you that want to stifle free speech are the greatest danger to a free country.

H of SA says:

01:49pm | 11/02/10

Henry, you say overseas Medicine students are taking places from Aussie kids…..this is incorrect.

Overseas students pay full fees, thus allowing Uni’s to fund more course places for Australians.

Additionally they bring extra money into our economy. We’d be much poorer (literally) withouth them

Sam says:

01:49pm | 11/02/10

@Saskia, It’s people who think they are “Australian” that need to get over themselves. What’s so wrong with “human being” and what’s so much better about “Australian”. People are more worthy of our respect when they embody humanity rather than a stereotype of what “Australian” is supposed to mean. Perhaps your pride is derived out of a sense of belonging rather than out of respect for the person who you happen to be. Afterall, most people have little choice over at least 50% of the factors that influence who they see when they look in the mirror. You have no choice about your genetic makeup, and your early developmental years. I hope to God somebody will have the heart to see the human being inside you rather than judge you based on your height and hair colour and whether you enjoy hanging out with your friends at the local pub. Humans come in all sorts of shapes, colours, and they have all sorts of attitudes. You can relate to those who seem different by relating to their most inner human traits. The search for happiness, the need for peace and security, the hope of prosperity, the love of family and friends.

(“Human being” > “Australian”), and I think most Aussies aren’t that full of themselves.

Sam says:

02:01pm | 11/02/10

@Saskia,

“Where did I mention non-blondes?  I said migrants from the UK and NW Europe - I never mentioned race once.  Its to do with culture, language and ease of assimilation.”

Aha, pull the other one. Maybe you need to google the word “racism”. Sounded to me like you said “I think we need more people who look and speak like me. Me me me, I’m the best, chuck out the rest.”. That’s all I heard from your words.

Sam says:

02:10pm | 11/02/10

@Henry, trust me, nobody came here for the “culture”, they came for economic reasons. And no migrant is telling you not to have a bbq and a couple of quiet ones while you watch the cricket. On the other hand, some of you lot are questioning why we cover our hair or why why don’t love beer and cricket to the same extent.

Your country (and the rest of the capitalist world) is constantly on offer to the highest bidder. That’s your system, the one that you guys are proud of. Well, now the high bids are coming from overseas, so the answer is increase your bid. You were very happy with the system when you were the highest bidders, but now economic circumstances have changed and you want a return of protectionism. Backflips, no principles, just jealousy, xenophobia and hypocrisy. That’s all it is.

Tim says:

02:11pm | 11/02/10

H,
the problem is not student’s who come over here to study, it is the government importing already qualified people that takes the place of Australians.
It is undoubtedly a lot cheaper for the government to not have to train our own citizens in these professions.
There will always be places for skilled migrants where skills shortages arise but importing skilled migrants while neglecting our own education sectors is beyond silly.

Willy K says:

02:30pm | 11/02/10

I think Sam has shown his true colours!

I agree with Saskia.  Its 2010 - fix up your own countries!  Whats that..?  You don’t know how??  Hahahahaha…  great cultures! 

No wonder the British dominated the planet from a small island.

Sam says:

02:44pm | 11/02/10

@Saskia, free? what’s bloody free in this country? It’s as expensive as hell. You mean free speech. Does that only apply to you does it?

No wonder I want to stifle free speech. It’s hard work countering your racist European predispositions.

For the record people, there is no more racism in any part of the world than Europe. Europe is the source of cultural elitism. The notable exception being the British who continue to be unimpressed by the idea of being part of Europe. God save the Queen, and bless the English for being English rather than European.

Faye says:

02:45pm | 11/02/10

C’mon Bob. How far back do you want to take the whole ‘The country belongs to X’.
Stone ages? Oh, X tribe bludgeoned Y tribe and took over, who were then massacred by Z tribe, followed by a more advance civilisation of people, the A tribe, who were….hence the land belongs to X tribe.

Civilisations come and civilisations conquer. Long ago this was the way the world worked. How many countries are lived in by people who broke in and oppressed the original people? Most countries have a history of this. I’m not saying it is right, but its the way the world works.

And the Australia of today - our economy, our system, our Government, our infrastructure - transport, buildings, etc - were all built by a majority white populace, contributed and aided by minority races who came in and integrated.
Would you prefer to live in a desert eating Witchetty grubs and having useless tribal wars since it belongs to the Aborigines or would you say that Australians have built a great Australia we live in today?
Its deplorable that Aborigines were discriminated upon but why should we suffer the sins of our ancestors? What have we got to do with them in the past?
Similarly, an Aborigine born today has no right to tell me that we ‘ruined’ his life because we did not. Given the world is what it is today, we all have to make the best of it, improve ourselves, remember the mistakes of the past and move on.

rohan says:

02:52pm | 11/02/10

@Willy K:

” fix up your own countries”

Then why did Saskia immigrate to Australia?

Another question, if Saskia immigrated based on social principles similar to the UK - then why not immigrate to the UK?

Sam says:

03:30pm | 11/02/10

@Will K, don’t you worry mate, we’ve got your measure and then some.

There’s nothing to fix in our country. Our country is AUSTRALIA. What’s your country? Oh, I forgot, you’ve got blonde hair, so you’re entitled to this patch of Earth, and you get to decide who else can seek a better life here.

Your name:Mickey says:

03:54pm | 11/02/10

Your comment:Sam, so blonde people want to stay on benefits and dark people want to work? Yeah, excellent contribution to the racist debate. Do you see the irony of your contribution?

Sam says:

03:59pm | 11/02/10

@Mickey, perhaps one flawed rebuttal will cancel out the flawed argument, since they both share the same flaw. If you see the flaw in my blondes at Centrelink analogy, then you’ll see the flaw in Saskia’s UK and NW Europe argument. My objective is achieved either way. Cheers.

H of SA says:

04:08pm | 11/02/10

Hi Tim,

Outside of medicine I don’t know too much about how migration is being used to address skills shortages or alternatively create too much competition when there is enough local labor.

My comment was toward Henrys about students - but in the area of employment in medicine we have a shortage of doctors in general - whih is more acute in country areas where they struggle to find enough Australian born doctors willing to work so fa removed from metropolitan centres. For this reason migrant doctors are recruited specifically to work in rural areas. So in medicine migration is not denying anyone work.

As for the general comments re education. I agree I would like to see education better funded in this country. That money has to come from somewhere and while I am willing to pay more tax I am also glad we have full fee paying overseas students subsidising our higher education system.

Saskia says:

05:09pm | 11/02/10

Sam has created a false issue. 

I never mentioned ‘blondes’ once.  He imagined that I said that.  I simply stated the belief that most Aussies share - that we are better off with immigrants of a similar culture to ourselves.  Logical for any nation to want that.

If i happen to prefer blonde’s or Anglo-Saxon-Celtic-Norse peoples over others it is simply a private personal preference.  Just like some people prefer Grange over XXXX, or Caviar over McDonalds.

RB says:

05:11pm | 11/02/10

I couldnt agree more Saskia.The problem isnt Migration per se, but the type of migrant(eg, Indian, middle eastern) that we allow to come.They have no intention of assimilating & often openly show contempt for our way of life & heritage.They live in enclaves & bring the same backward mentality they were supposedly leaving behind in the first place.How are they contributing…?

eye4aneye says:

06:15pm | 11/02/10

@ Chad - Glad to have you in the country I’m always happy to welcome skilled migrants of any persuasion that bring benefit to the country I hope your very happy living here.

Rover says:

07:11pm | 11/02/10

@Sam, sorry mate, didn’t have time to reply to you as I got busy at work this afternoon and have only just got back to The Punch.

I have no intention of verballing you or anyone else, I don’t think it helps the conversation on this site.

As I said, I disagree fundamentally with Saskia’s view of where migrants should come from.

But I had to re-read her post a couple of times after reading yours to try to work out where you got the blonde jibe from.

Misrepresenting what other posters say (particularly when blonde is not the No.1 natural hair colour across most of the UK and Europe) makes it hard to take your point of view seriously.

I agree with Tory that this leaflet is racist. I feel sick when I see bumper stickers and T-shirts with the word FULL stamped over a map of Australia. Yes, our infrastructure may be creaking but we are still much better off than so many other countries, and we can afford to share that with more people.

Sam says:

10:39pm | 11/02/10

@Saskia, you’re not only racist, you’re deluded. “Caviar”? that’s hilarious. Look, I’m a much bigger snob than you, but at least I’m open to snobs from all races. Looks like you’re yet to learn what your mother learnt from WWII (I’m making an assumption in her favour, because the alternative is unthinkable!). Please say you don’t dream of belonging to a new definition of master race? Don’t tell me you believe you already do?

Hilarious.

Cimbom: says:

08:46pm | 12/02/10

Faye, the issue isn’t whether you physically played a role in what Indigenous Australians experienced but the fact that you, and other white people, BENEFITED (and continue to benefit) from their subordinate position. At the very least, that should be acknowledged.

Henry, at present, places in university are earnt, not reserved for white kids. If “Australians” are under-represented in medical school it means one thing. They cannot compete. They are too used to their cushiony private schools which inflate their ENTER scores (and their egos) and give them a sense of entitlement to having everything handed to them on a gold platter. A bit of dedication and genuine effort goes a long way. Especially if you’re white and live in Australia. You have nothing to complain about then.

omegaman says:

12:09am | 12/02/10

Soultrader if there was one functioning black country in the world I would probably emigrate there if it offered the prospect of a better future, and I might even validate myself in that society by getting a black girlfriend. But for some reason, probably because of my white skin,  there isn’t one single functioning black country in the world. Anyway it sounds like a stupid thing to do in reverse, doesn’t it?

Bug Catcher says:

11:20am | 11/02/10

Jane: In Australia these days, one would be ill advised to put their true name to anything, whether it be a Political comment, neighbourhood squabbles or blogging.
People who disagree will come and get ya!!!
Burn your house, kill your dog, blow up your car in the drive way etc etc. You see, that is how things are done in Australia these days if your are brave enough to have an opinion and put your real name to it!!
It is called Multiculturalism!
I am shakin’ in me jox just writing this…..........

Voxpop says:

12:03pm | 11/02/10

Bug Catcher I’d say there’s far more chance that the author of this pamphlet would be the type to “Burn your house, kill your dog, blow up your car in the drive way etc etc.”

eye4aneye says:

06:21pm | 11/02/10

@ Jane - the author quite probably is racist…...doesn’t make his view any less valid than anyone elses.

Personally I disagree with the pamplet authors view we have previously and still do need skilled migration - However I do not agree with other forms of migration which add to Australias infrastructure/services burden for no benefit

Greg says:

12:26pm | 11/02/10

You forgot the most important reason:
Immigration can extend party branch stacking to the national level by importing welfare dependant ALP voters.

Sam says:

12:00pm | 11/02/10

@John, insightful, thank you.

Sam says:

01:54pm | 11/02/10

I’ve always thought there were remnants of the old South Africa in WA. Thanks for the advice David. “Apartheid”, here we come.

x says:

04:04pm | 11/02/10

More taxpayers!

Sam says:

01:56pm | 11/02/10

@E, no, the moral obligation is to accept refugees. The obligation to accept immigrants is purely economic.

omegaman says:

12:20am | 12/02/10

I bought two immigrants off a people smuggler last week. He was selling them at a discount near the entrance to the train station. I didn’t really need them, I thought I would get them as a Christmas present later, you know in 2010. A Christmas present from Christmas Island.
Anyway now the neighbours have complained about all the immigrants we are keeping in my street and we think we are going to have to call the council to come and pick them up, cause actually they’re kinda expensive and basically why shouldn’t the government take care of them? the government fixes all my other problems.
Its late. I’m tired.

Sam says:

03:39pm | 11/02/10

@Auds, that’s what happens when people derive their personal identity from their national one. We will see each other as different until there are so many insignificant differences being pointed out that we come to see each other as the same. Just a bunch of imperfect creatures. Should be a fun couple of centuries in the meantime.

Mickey says:

04:02pm | 11/02/10

Sam, you are missing the point. Humans need to feel they belong to something. At the moment is broken down along nationalities and religion. You seriously think removing nationalism will fix this? There will always be conflicts over something.  I dont care if we all live in the “global village” and are all the same religion and skin colour. Our descendants will still find something to differentiate themselves from one another and then fight about which is better or try to convert the other side. Human nature.

Ish says:

04:02pm | 11/02/10

From your generalisations you imply that everyone has this racism in built into them and that it sticks with them for life. Why then are there so many inter-racial relationships? Why do we not see people of different races fighting in the streets just because they think they should?

If racism was so ingrained like you claim nobody would be getting along with anyone and that is not the case.

Bill Heterosis says:

10:12pm | 11/02/10

No COF! Your contributions were probably the best of all of ‘em in that Morrison article! They were eloquent & so on the mark. I reckon Penbo should be paying you for your articulations - but he doesn’t pay any of his writers let alone commenters, hehe. Anyway, keep up the great advice (if you choose).

H of SA says:

01:52pm | 11/02/10

“i believe that if you are religious you should forfeit your right to vote”

Oh I see Jason, so somebody holds a different opinion to you and they should not be allowed to vote.

I’ve seen some good examples of anti-religious bigatry before, but this is a rare example of bigotry combined with totaliarianism.

COF says:

02:25pm | 11/02/10

“Skygod” the straw man most atheists use to justify their own leap of faith into chaos.
An imaginary old man with a flowing white beard who answers all your prayers is not necessarily the majority view of religion or theism in general. Get a new routine.
Some people may believe there is order to the universe, a plan, while others may believe the universe is a hotbed of eternal chaos. One is theism, one is nihilism - you make the choice.
Atheism is a reactionary philosophy - even one of the most prominent atheist philosophers of the 20th century, Bertrand Russell (author of the teapot), moved towards agnosticism in later life because it was the most logically satisfying position for him. And it is - there is no position without proof, unless you have faith. But what’s the purpose of having faith in chaos? What truth does it reveal?

Bob says:

02:44pm | 11/02/10

Way to go, Jason! Let’s start a religous debate too! I mean, the pamphlet at the head of the article doesn’t mention religion any more than race, but we know what they were thinking…

Faye says:

02:54pm | 11/02/10

COF, very well put.
I don’t believe in a fella in white robes and a flowing white beard.
What is wrong in believing in an order in the universe?

Why isn’t logical to believe so?
As human beings this doesn’t necessarily change our viewpoints of each other and the world - as long as we are peaceful, compassionate and humane - I honestly don’t see why believing in a higher power has to be as destructive as they all say it is.
Regardless of what religion (or none) a human has, it is humanity’s tendency to err. But what makes us human is our ability to think inwardly, change and reflect upon our deeds.

rohan says:

03:06pm | 11/02/10

@biff:

Perhaps you should make a distinction between immigrants and refugees on your comments. With regards to refugees themselves, there are those that apply legally and or not.

By making blatant statements about migrants, you are just obfuscating the whole argument

Sam says:

03:11pm | 11/02/10

@biff, I have house rules, but my house isn’t hogging all the land and resources between me and the Australian horizon!!! How much land and resources is a fair allocation for 20 million people? If we don’t let them in slowly, they’ll just swim here one day and we don’t have enough bullets to stop them. Then it won’t be immigration, it will be an invasion. Immigration is our only hope of taking them in in a controlled manner and integrating them so that our identify won’t be diluted into the history books. We don’t have a reasonable long-term alternative. Every membrane will eventually give in to increased pressure on one side. It’s just a question of time mate.

BTW, I couldn’t give a rat’s about the environment since we obviously don’t give a shit about out fellow human beings. So even if we have a lovely planet, it’ll still be a hell-hole if we can’t learn to see the human rather than the citizen (or not).

When you use the world “illegal”, you demonstrate your lack of compassion and consideration of their circumstances. People fleeing famine and war couldn’t give a rat’s about what’s legal, and neither would I if I was in their shoes. The fact that there seems to be a problem in enforcing these “laws” is proof enough that they are unsustainable or at best only partially enforcible.

Greg says:

05:18pm | 11/02/10

@Sam, the government has already lost control of our borders and the people smugglers are determining our immigration policy. It is already an invasion, and the numbers will ramp up if our sovereignty is not defended. As for our identity, it is already being diluted.

Accepting them slowly is just like paying protection money to the mafia. The illegals and not the government are calling the shots.

Membranes to not give way to increase pressure if it is equalised on both sides. We do have enough bullets, and more people are prepared to fire them to enforce our laws.

Greg says:

02:59pm | 11/02/10

So you would be happy to reduce immigration as long as only white people were prevented from coming?

And you call other people racist?

Scoop says:

03:23pm | 11/02/10

@Greg - Not real big on the subtleties, are you mate? My point is that so many complain about immigration and claim they are not being racist, but what they are really against is the immigration of Asians, Africans and Arabs. What I was pointing out - in case you missed it - is that most of the immigrants to Australia are white, which these racist idiots don’t realise because they are too wound up about being “swamped” by other races. I think our immigration rate is about right.

biff says:

05:03pm | 11/02/10

Sorry to inform you Scoop but NZ is being used as a transit lounge by people who have the ultimate aim of settling in Oz. Stop bashing NZers.

marley says:

05:10pm | 11/02/10

Scoop - just to be accurate, if you cut Brit and Kiwi migration into Australia, you would be cutting the intake by 25 to 30%, not 75%.  Current migration intake is more diverse than you seem to realize.

Greg says:

05:12pm | 11/02/10

@Scoop – Not real big on the truthful facts, are you mate? There is no point in being subtle to you, as you are just plain wrong. Most of the immigrants to Australia are not white. The government’s 2008-09 immigration report shows that less than 18% were from the UK, and this number includes non-white British immigrants. Of the top ten source countries, the only other majority white source of immigrants was the USA at 1.7%.

Chinese and Indian migrants were 50% higher than those from the UK, and that doesn’t include coming through the backdoor – NZ immigrants are not counted in the statistics (but more than half are non-white).

So it is clear that more than 80% of migrants (and 100% of refugees) are non-white, which can be verified by opening your eyes in any city.

We are being swamped, that is a fact, and calling me names won’t change it.

James says:

06:31pm | 11/02/10

If you have a problem with non-whites coming to Australia Greg, that is the very definition of racism.  You sir are a racist.  And no one, anywhere, represents you.  Racists are a fringe element in both Australian society and politics, and have no real influence.  Political parties may sometimes dog whistle to you, but they will never, ever do anything to pander to your racism.  An example, Mr Howard increased our refugee intake, and never would have dreamed of implementing a racially selective immigration policy, and very rightly so too, as the man had principles, morals, and an education.  You are on the margins, and even though everyone you know probably say they share your views when they speak to you, behind your back they call you a racist and laugh at the things you believe.

Rowdy says:

03:20pm | 11/02/10

“MILLIONS of immigrants
arrived in the last 222 years

That’s more than Australia
More than the Aborigines
More than Newcastle-on-Tyne

What a disaster! “

Pray tell…what do the Geordies have to do with the other things you have written? Newcastle-Upon_tyne is a lovely place and the Geordies are a fantastic people, but what do they have to do with a racism debate in Australia??

H of SA says:

04:20pm | 11/02/10

Howay Man,

Geordies rule! Haha I don’t hink Alfred was being anti-Geordie though, I think he may indeed BE Geordie

Rowdy says:

05:22pm | 11/02/10

@Alfred Deakin and H of SA…..Ha Ha!! Well i thought as much…When asked at the Tyneside Irish Centre on Gallowgate where I was from, I told the lady about as far away from the Toon as you could get. Her answer: So what part of Ireland are you from?....Ya gotta laugh….one of the best years of my life spent living in the Toon…Howay the Lads!!!

H of SA says:

04:21pm | 11/02/10

I think Tory’s point about the kind of attitudes Scott Morrison MP is encouraging is now well and truly proven

Here we go again says:

04:23pm | 11/02/10

I don’t agree with flyer.  Just about everyone I know would agree also.  Think I am not racist? I couldn’t give a sh*t.  And there are a lot of people out there like me.  See the flaw in this argument perhaps?  If not, I couldn’t care less if you are offended.  You can live with it…

originalaussie says:

08:41am | 12/02/10

I agree, so called ‘multi-culturalism’ is racism in a different dress.
(i said I wasn’t going to comment on this blog, couldn’t resist this)

Douglas Reeves says:

07:53pm | 11/02/10

I would have loved to have had children but In post-feminist countries like Australia, stable, family-oriented providers are seen as “weak”, “patriachal” and “oppressive” - whereas young women prefer having illegitimate children by deadbeat “bad boys” to feel “independent”, “progressive” and “liberated”.
How is it that the single most admired group of Australian men are the ANZACs and yet women are obsessed with their exact opposite - the so-called bad boys?
My wonderful grandfather taught me the value of the ANZAC ideal: Does this man have courage, physical and moral? Is this man loyal? Is he a good friend? Is he a protector of the weak? Is he capable of laughing in the face of adversity? Does he value egalitarianism?
Every man I know who has these qualities or who tries hard to live up to this ideal is the most wonderful friend, boyfriend, husband and father.
most bad boys are at the bottom line bullies, cowards and narcissists. As the Titanic sank, these guys would be the ones trampling over pregnant women and children to get to the lifeboats.
Women who are obsessed with the superficial can’t complain when they get a guy who treats them superficially. The same goes for blokes in relation to women.
The media the media people dont know anymore

marley says:

07:59pm | 11/02/10

Seems to me that “white Australia” disappeared about 40 years ago, to be replaced by “Australia” - a country broadly capable of welcoming and integrating new migrants.  I personally don’t give a rat’s ass what colour the skin of a new immigrant is, I only care about his intellectual and moral quality, and what he ( or she) can contribute to our development.  The rest is pure dross.

COF says:

09:30pm | 11/02/10

You’re neither, charlotte. You’re an obscurantist - not intentionally mind you.

brett says:

08:16am | 12/02/10

Well I must be racist because I believe, black people are better at Athletics, and Boxing, but terrible at swimming. I believe Chinese are the most intelligent and wear glasses more than any other race. I think people from the USA are loud and think themselves more important than others.
To suggest there are no common characteristics between races is just lubricious. Everybody knows it,  and that’s the big frustration in this debate. Stop lying to yourself. I would rather an Australia that shares common a culture among it’s people. This divisive multicultural idea of ethnic suburbs they don’t even resemble Australia is a social disaster.

Davida James says:

09:36am | 12/02/10

This brings up an interesting point.  It is all fine and well to drag race ( and the inherant blame game into the argument).  I think it has been historically well utilised ( ” you dear, fine patriots are being disadvantaged by the invasion of “them”,  as they take your jobs, rape your land, destroy your culture, mock your beliefs etc etc”).  It is effective and the easy out.  Consider, however, a bigger picture view…..

As Australians, we may not have designed the Capitalist model, but we certainly have embraced it.  Anyone remember pre-1950’s mass consumerism?  The norm was often mum, dad, grandparents, kids, perhaps the odd uncle/aunt sharing ONE home, domestic/childminding duties, appliances, motor vehicles etc.  But alas, how did this enable the consumerist market to grow?

Enter the emergence of the nuclear family.  Divide and conquer.  Now we need 3 homes (one for the grandparents, one for mum, dad and kids and one for aunt/uncle).  3x the appliances, 3x the cars etc.  But wait, there’s more.

Risking stagnation of consumer demand, western society is now embracing post-nuclear family market trends.  Divorce and single-parent families help.  Homes now often involve 4+ ( grandparents, mum in one, dad in another, aunt in one, uncle in another) and the fun continues.  Multiple cars, childcare becoming outsourced, more and more appliances…..you get the idea.

Issues surrounding the availability of food, water, shelter and such are very real.  What do we have?, do we have enough?, where is it allocated and to whom? are valid questions.  Australians have the right to ask.  Can current levels of consumerism be increased, will our standard of living have to be dragged back in line with other parts of the world, can we sustain or increase the future tax-base to support an aging population?  I wish I had all the answers.  I don’t ( and anyone claiming to must be genius).  Maybe greed has become the new need?

All I know is if the social/economic sustainability of this nation relied on sending back several boats, kicking a few ” foreigners” off welfare or being hateful and petty with an anonymous letter drop, well let’s see…..Thing is it doesn’t and never will.  So now for the new ideas?

James says:

09:55am | 12/02/10

Me: It is for our tax bank.

A POLITICAL GAME OF CHESS: I thought I told you not to tell me that…

Simonious says:

02:43pm | 12/02/10

Who is WE pal. You dont speak for ME. I want their propaganda. Especiallly on interent filtering.

marley says:

01:46pm | 12/02/10

Shane - you’re assuming all migrants are “needy.”  Some are, but many bring with them education, skills and indeed money, and have much to contribute.  That “needy” migrant could be the one with the skills to rebuild the roads and bridges, or run the medical center, or locate the next big gold deposit.  He could be the one to use his entrepreneurial flair to set up a business employing you or your neighbours.  He doesn’t want you to adopt him, he wants you to hire him, or work for him, or buy his products.

The issue isn’t (or shouldn’t be) whether or not to have immigration;  it should be what kind of immigration to have.