nativism in a sentence Vocabulary – irish immigration
Home British & World English nativism
1The theory that concepts, mental capacities, and mental structures are innate rather than acquired by learning.
- ‘He initiates the central skirmish of this book by tracing a dividing line between Chomsky’s nativism and the so-called New Synthesis Psychology.’
- ‘But history leads me to agree with the author that nativism and racism are powerful populist impulses pretty much everywhere.’
2US The policy of protecting the interests of native-born or established inhabitants against those of immigrants.‘a deep vein of xenophobia and nativism’
- ‘Several of his works advocated nativism and eugenics.’
- ‘Nonetheless, this era had the same conflicts (over cultural diversity and nativism, for example) as later periods, and established lasting policies toward immigrants and aliens.’
- ‘There will be a spasm of nativism and anti-immigrant feelings that we have not seen in a long time.’
- ‘It will have its own peculiar national character, utilizing Christian fundamentalism as well as racism and nativism.’
- ‘As a result, supporters of the national ideal had to turn toward the seemingly secure foundations of biological and cultural notions of nativism: race and character.’
- ‘Her nativism became apparent in Greece when she wrote how happy she was to leave ‘the half-civilized races behind and enter Europe.’’
- ‘Nineteenth-century common-school advocates combined a desire for creating a liberal democratic citizenry with xenophobia, anti-Catholicism, and nativism.’
- ‘But one can make a distinction between nativism, which is based on resentment, and patriotism, which is based on love.’
3A return to or emphasis on indigenous customs, in opposition to outside influences.
- ‘Multiculturalism stands as the heir to nineteenth-century nativism not by any explicit hostility to Catholicism, but rather through its explicit, if sometimes obtuse, hostility to culture.’
Thanks for subscribing. Please check your email and confirm your subscription
Weekly Word Watch: welly-wanging, korowai, and Statue of Unity
‘Something extraordinary’: David Whitley on the OED
Folksonomies: how to do things with words on social media
Dunghill: a vital resource with unpleasant associations
Celebrate the OED’s 90th birthday with a £90/$90 subscription!
Most popular in the world
- catch one’s breath
Sign up for our newsletter
Stay up to date with our latest news and receive new words updates, blog posts, and more.
Thanks for subscribing. Please check your email and confirm your subscription
Please make sure that your email address is correct and try again
One of the mysteries of the English language finally explained.
Some advice to nail your writing assignments.
How to get prepositions right in a heartbeat.
In this article we explore how to impress employers with a spot-on CV.
Archaic words have a charm that never fades away, from French sounding to wondrously mysterious ones.
- News Home
- Just In
- Fact Check
Understanding nativism will help us end it
November 26, 2015 10:38:06
Nativist movements have always ultimately collapsed under the weight of their own contradictions. (ABC News: Gregor Salmon)
The “nativism” in anti-immigration movements seem to flare up once every decade in Australia and today’s victims are Muslims. We must understand it before we can reject and cure it, writes Michael Bradley.
The clue is in the name: Reclaim Australia. It’s poignant, emotive, speaking of something lost. We’re in one of those moments now, when the fear of loss underpinning all anti-immigration movements comes to the surface.
In Australia, this occurs about once a decade; the last great explosion was in the Cronulla riots of 2005. Before that, the rise of Pauline Hanson and One Nation in 1997. It’s not a coincidence that she’s back on the front pages now.
I’m going to avoid the usual loaded terminology: racism, xenophobia, Islamophobia. Instead, I’ll use a neutral term to describe popular national movements against outsiders: nativism.
I’m not so interested in name-calling as I am in exploring what causes these perennial outbursts against demographic minorities – noting that the divisions are not always racial or ethnic.
This point in a sense supports one of the nativists’ standard defences – that their opposition to the targeted minority is not racist. That is, they do not object to the outsiders because of their race (or religion). The concern is not their defining label, but the behaviours which that label predetermines.
Jews/Muslims/Catholics/Asians/gays behave in certain ways which are inconsistent with the cultural/national values which the nativists hold dear, consequently they cannot or will not be assimilated and their presence is therefore incompatible with a peaceful and happy society.
The argument of incompatibility is very old. Nativism has been around since the mid-19th century when so-called “Native American” political parties emerged in the United States whose members were white, Protestant, American-born males who objected to the large flow of Roman Catholic immigrants from Europe, especially Ireland.
Irish Catholics were considered, as they always had been in England, low class people, and they were held in deep suspicion. For one thing, it was assumed that their primary loyalty was to the Pope.
Australia had a similar experience. Catholics arrived with the First Fleet but suffered discrimination for a long time. The remnants of the Protestant/Catholic divide were still apparent in my primary school playground in the early 1970s. It’s only relatively recently that the term “Anglo-Saxon” as a popular identifier of “real” Australians has morphed into “Anglo-Celtic” – it had to, given how much of our population is descended from the Irish or the Scots.
The theoretical basis of anti-Catholicism was that Catholics could not peacefully co-exist and share a democratic polity with Protestants. Seems odd now, but it felt real to the nativists of the 19th Century.
Jews are very familiar with the phenomenon of social exclusion, often escalating to physical separation (ghettoes), violent persecution (pogroms), expulsion, and, of course, extermination. Again, the rationalised basis for these actions has always been, not hatred of Jews, but the belief that they represented a danger to the societies in which they lived but were not accepted.
The Nazis took this to the extreme view that Jews were toxic bacteria that had to be eliminated altogether; but it is a mistake to equate the position of most nativist movements, in the past or today, with that degree of dehumanisation.
The list of excluded minorities is endless: Romany, Baha’i, Asians, Africans; in every country on Earth, at various points of history those already there have objected to the arrival of others. If you listen carefully today, you can hear in Australia complaints being raised about the incompatible cultural behaviours of recent immigrants from mainland China.
As always, this is self-described not as racism, but as self-defence. The one feature that every successive group of immigrants has shared, from the first Chinese arrivals in the gold rush, through the Italians, Greeks, Lebanese, Vietnamese, Muslims and Africans, to the latest Chinese from China, is the accusation that they threaten our national values. Not because they’re inherently bad people, but because there’s something inherent in their background, whether ethnic, national or religious, which just doesn’t fit.
Pauline Hanson’s seemingly permanent exasperation is worthy of deeper analysis than it tends to receive. She says “I’m not racist” often, with conviction. She explained her position with clarity in 2010, when she was selling her home in Queensland and told the media that she would refuse to sell it to a Muslim buyer. Her reason:
Because I don’t believe that they are compatible with our way of life, our culture. And I think we are going to have problems with them in this country further down the track.
Nativists would call Hanson prescient. The current rumblings from Reclaim Australia, the more radical United Patriots Front and nascent political parties such as the Australian Liberty Alliance, echo (in their view) exactly what she warned. Their expressed concern is to protect Australia; their method is to exclude those who don’t fit in.
Nativism is a deceptively simple ideology.
It starts with the very human desire to belong. Nobody likes to be on the outer. In the quest for a sense of belonging, we easily attach ourselves to group identifiers – a football team, the cool kids at school, religion, race, nationality – and equally easily ignore that they are artificial constructs. It makes no more sense to seek to define a group of people as “Australian” than it does to distinguish Queenslanders from Victorians, or Jordanians from Iraqis. They’re all accidents of history, geography and demography.
Nativist movements have always ultimately collapsed under the weight of their own contradictions.
Reclaim Australia has, to some extent, claimed legitimacy by co-opting Indigenous Australians under its banner, along with some Asian Australians. It doesn’t take a lot of thought to see the difficulty of claiming a prior entitlement to Australian soil when, one way or another, your own presence here displaced a culture with tens of thousands of years of incumbency. Whatever the quintessential “Australian” values and way of life the nativists believe they are protecting might be, they sure wouldn’t have been recognisable to the Indigenous population of 1788.
Since nativism is really at its core about belonging (it just defines itself by the exclusion of others), it’s no surprise that it tends to attract those whose personal sense of belonging is most fragile: the poor, less educated, unemployed, socially isolated, the alienated and disenfranchised. People who feel most keenly that they are on the outer in society are the most vulnerable to the simplistic pull of nativism – the idea that they are among the true chosen keepers of the faith, called upon to protect what we have created from those who would tear it down.
Today’s victims of nativism in Australia are Muslims. There may be some violence, perhaps quite bad, before this current surge inevitably subsides. It, like all its forebears, is the final howl of impotent rage from a subset of society whose inchoate fear of change is only a reflection of how unattached to society it really feels.
These people’s anger, irrational and misdirected as it is, is real. We can understand it, reject it and try to cure it, without the name-calling.
Michael Bradley is the managing partner of Marque Lawyers, a Sydney law firm, and writes a weekly column for The Drum. Follow him on Twitter @marquelawyers .
November 26, 2015 07:22:23
Comments for this story are closed.
26 Nov 2015 7:47:29am
Seeing as you mention indigenous Australians, surely they are the prime example of why your argument is flawed.
A large group of people moving to a new country, refusing to assimilate into the existing culture and showing no respect to the existing residents.
It’s all about a critical mass, at some point the level of new arrivals cause a fundamental shift in the social structures of the country. Which is why we need a well structured immigration policy that is not too large and whilst welcoming of new arrivals, provides them with the background of the existing way of life and what is expected of them to become functioning members of society. They must be strongly encouraged to turn away from any practices that are anethema to current values as well as engaging with the wider community rather than forming enclaves or ghettos.
None of this means groups like Reclaim Australia are correct but there is an underlying message that we would do well to pay attention to.
26 Nov 2015 8:53:13am
And to facilitate this social and community engagement you are personally extending what?
26 Nov 2015 10:39:34am
Dove, extending platitudes and inventing neo-Nazi threats isn’t going to reach the many Muslims who are hopelessly steeped in the ways of Middle Eastern culture/religion. Those people only engage in dialogue with non-Muslim Australia to vent unreasonable grievances and make implied threats. How do you talk to people who see themselves as a transplanted Muslim colonialists living separate lives and have no sense of social responsibility to all Australians? Australians have been very generous to Muslims and in return we expect some respect and conformity to core Western values. There is no ‘nativist’ outrage over Chinese or Indians or Greeks because they integrate well over generations and do not threaten to wage war against us because they don’t support our foreign policies. Muslims must reach out to US – but it seems that their hearts just aren’t in it because many only view the world in terms of muslim identity. The criticisms are justified and necessary and if some Muslims can’t handle that in a liberal democracy then they shouldn’t be here.
26 Nov 2015 11:19:19am
APM, it is extremist, quite ridiculous comments like yours that convince the vast majority to discount everything you, and all the other anti-Islam extremists, say.
When you write things that are so obviously divorced from the reality that we all see and hear in our daily lives, what would you expect us to do? We all see and know Muslims that have fitted in just like every other culture that has migrated here. We don’t all live in closed systems but that you cannot anticipate the effects of your comments indicates that you probably do.
26 Nov 2015 12:08:31pm
"We don’t all live in closed systems "
…but you ignore the obvious reality that some people do.
26 Nov 2015 12:35:31pm
Desert Women, you have to get past this stereotyping obsession that conceals big problems. The issue isn’t the Muslims who integrate well but the ones who don’t and there are plenty of them. The pattern is that Muslims have NOT "fitted in like any other culture". A nations wellbeing and character is only the sum of its people, and the ME is the backward hellhole that it is because they are nearly all Muslims and nothing else. Not surprisingly, these awful behaviours and attitudes are being imported here too and there is abundant evidence of this. The sort of people we are talking about are not engaged in Australian society and would not go near The Drum so there is no risk of an honest discussion setting off some lunatic. Your type propose to do nothing at all but watch evil forces be unleashed whilst we falsely blame ourselves for the choices and ideologies of a medieval religion/culture.
26 Nov 2015 7:00:56pm
I have only two options when reading your post, APM. (1) You haven’t understood the text and realised that antipathy toward Jews and Irish Catholics in the US was just as severe as that currently held toward Muslims here and elsewhere. or (2)You have closed your mind to all data and argument that conflicts with your viewpoint. (Much as you accuse many Muslims of doing.)
A Former Lefty:
26 Nov 2015 12:40:34pm
Ah, I see "extremist" is the new catchphrase of the left now to describe anyone not of their persuasion.
Sounds a bit more growed up than calling people fascist nazis, but the intent is the same; smear and deflect your opposition, call them a minority etc.
Fact is DW that time and time again polls indicate that the majority of Australians of all backgrounds reject mass immigration and multiculturalism and have major concerns about moslem integration.
I think its you who dwells in a closed system, it must help to reinforce your ignorant bigoted views. Sad.
26 Nov 2015 2:58:05pm
Well thats a bit rich coming from a guy who’s screen name is ‘A Former Lefty’.
When your whole identity is invested in the simplistic childish notion of left vs right, well, there’s not much left to be said really.
A Former Lefty:
26 Nov 2015 6:32:12pm
So spacey, do you have reponses to refute anything Ive said or just a pathetic attempt at an ad hominem argument?
And leftists like to think they are the intellectual elite, what a laugh!!
26 Nov 2015 3:27:11pm
Former, what is your preferred term for views that are diametrically opposed to any facts or evidence? You object to delusional and now to extremist.
Surely there must be some word that describes beliefs such as black is actually white, a few is actually all, any majority, or dissenting to their own, perspective is ‘left’, that you would accept?
A Former Lefty:
26 Nov 2015 6:35:02pm
I dont object to delusional or extremist, I object to them being lobbed around by nitwits on the left who have no persuasive arguments, so they rely on personal insults to demean others and make themselves feel superior.
What you people dont get is how much of a minority view you have, even in this bastion of leftist groupthink your views are coming last and being dismantled by your opponents. Go to other media sites and read the comments and whats probably a 60/40 split decreases to probably a 9/1 split. But still you dont get it that you are on the outer with your friengs, dare I say delusional and extremist, views.
26 Nov 2015 12:47:44pm
Just about every Muslim culture is anarchic or in dictatorship or committing genocide.
Indonesia with their treatment of east Timor is at the top.
26 Nov 2015 3:44:08pm
Indonesia is very tolerant of other religions. It has been run by generals who let their armed forces get out of control. These are two different issues. You do not help anybody by mixing them up.
26 Nov 2015 5:50:12pm
Had you been to East Timor in 1999-2000 and witnessed the destruction of non-islamic, animist shrines, especially the bas-relief sculptures, you would realise that your comment was little more than PC claptrap.
A Former Lefty:
26 Nov 2015 6:53:51pm
How quickly people forget about the Dilli massacres, forced sterilisations of East Timorese women and the awful destruction of their country at the hands of the islamists post referendum.
How quickly people forget the murders of pro-independance leaders and other atrocities, arbitrary jailings and ethnic cleansing of West Papua by Indonesia.
How quickly people forget the burning of churches and the murder of Christians in Aceh in their successful bid to implement sharia law.
yes lets all ignore these inconvenient truths about islams golden haired child of leftist intolerance, Indonesia.
26 Nov 2015 4:15:43pm
The two greatest killings of other humans were committed by Europeans, on two separate occasions, in the last 100 years.
Its a bit rich to be talking about bloodthirsty muslims or Arabs.
incidentally the only other killings of humans that come even close to the same scale also occurred in the last 200 years or so but was committed by the Chinese.
If you list killing of humans in war from the most amount of people killed and work your way down you actually dont see ANY Arab or Muslim instances recorded until you get to the very bottom of the list. Christian Western nations along with the Chinese actually dominate it by a long, long margin.
Since the time the USA was the USA it has been involved in conflict, somewhere, for more than 90% of the time its existed.
This whole ‘arabs kill each other all the time’ is pure hyperbole, and while true at various times in history, the Arab world could only ever dream of killing in the numbers Western, so called ‘christian’ nations have done and continue to do.
Please do a little research and you’ll be surprised at the numbers.
A Former Lefty:
26 Nov 2015 6:41:53pm
What are these 2 great killings by Europeans spacey?
If you actually do as you insist others do, and thats research, youd be surprised that while the Nazi genocides were the largest in the last 100 (or so) years, the others being the genocides against Armenians, Assyrians and Greeks by the Ottoman Empire, collectively exceeded that of Nazi Germany.
But I guess you were being selective in you "last 100 years" claim, since the massacres by the Ottomans miss out on that grouping by a decade or so. But thats how the left twists things to suit their narrative.
26 Nov 2015 1:43:31pm
There is nothing "extremist" whatsoever in what APM wrote.
He simply and succinctly gave his opinion as to why there is this growing wariness amongst many Australians regarding the willingness of Muslims to fully integrate into our society.
A much smaller number of Muslims are actually radicalised, but an uncomfortably large number simply refuse to assimilate, and are strangely mute when it comes to condemning the horrendous activities of the radicals.
It’s people like you, DW, that always try to shut down anyone with an alternative view, by pinning false tags on them (like "rascist" , "right wing" or "extremist").
If you think APM’s views are extremist, you’re living a very sheltered and blinkered life.
26 Nov 2015 7:06:02pm
Assimilate! There’s that anachronistic term again. Up until the 1970s assimilation was official government policy. It was expected that migrants would ditch their languages and cultures at the border and become carbon copies of Aussies. Thankfully, thanks to people like Al Grasby, Australia moved to a multicultural model, accepting that both Australians and migrants could benefit from each other’s cultures. So how come I’m hearing the bogan war cry that whinges about Muslim Australians not "assimilating"? Next time you go to a Greek Glendi festival or Barossa Schutzenfest, try telling the locals that they should be chucking a barbie. And if you hear people in Australia talking in Greek, German, or any other language, perhaps you’d like to tell them to "speak English or sod off!’ Good luck with that!
26 Nov 2015 2:46:07pm
Wow Desert, the rhetoric you use would never get a posting if used by people of a different view….
There are points you make that is true like "We all see and know Muslims that have fitted in just like every other culture that has migrated here", however, equally Freddie Frog and APM have some very significant points "They must be strongly encouraged to turn away from any practices that are anathema to current values as well as engaging with the wider community rather than forming enclaves or ghettos" remembering the youth of other immigration of Indians, Greeks, Vietnamese etc joined our education system not formed there own.
Is there enough attention being put on the fact we have a christian/western background and their religion/way of life of Islam is extremely different to Australia’s culture, meaning simple things as respect and equal rights for women, freedom for homosexuality, even dress standards….
27 Nov 2015 11:09:26am
Every migrant group want to preserve their culture and that should not be a threat to the rest of us but rather a benefit and enrichment. Culture is not static but for ever evolving. The new migrants need to practice their culture to feel safe and happy and to gradually explore and fit into the wider Australian community. Their children are the bridge between their parents culture and the rest of the community. People who learned another language as adults are able to appreciate how hard it is. Most migrants are hard working and willing to make a new life in their adopted country and if anything in the main they are more determined to succeed than the average citizen, because it takes a lot of courage to migrate into another country and culture.
For those of us that see migrants as a threat we just have to realise that they make life for us easier because they are willing to do the jobs we would not consider. I was growing up in the seventies and the sentiment was then the Italians and Greeks are taking our jobs, yet working for the school holidays in factories made me realise that the majority of the workers were poor migrants while the bosses (formen etc) were Australian men with the only qualification required; the ability to speak English.
26 Nov 2015 4:18:18pm
Desert Women you are being socially castigated in the comments hereabouts for intolerance and nastiness. You epitomise the totalitarian ABC Left sense of entitlement and exclusivity.
26 Nov 2015 5:10:25pm
Yes APM, castigated by people whose comments constantly exude intolerance, nastiness and unadulterated bigotry. I take it to mean that I must be writing about moderation and evidence, and expressing tolerance for my fellow humans whoever they are.
if you want to call inclusivity ‘exclusivity’, tolerance and respect for facts ‘totalitarianism’ and a ‘sense of entitlement’, feel free. The last figures I saw indicated that most Aussies highly value the ABC and its objective reporting, and I am one of them. I guess it doesn’t get much worse than that as a crime in your books.
26 Nov 2015 6:57:52pm
Congratulations on your self-promotion from petulant do gooder to fully fledged secular halo hunter (aka professional virtue signaller). Personally I subscribe to the idea that I "Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity." I apply this to the lefty ISIS allies that post here on the drum.
26 Nov 2015 4:32:29pm
May I ask how you feel about it being legal to have a 12 year old wife in Victoria since 2006?
26 Nov 2015 6:11:18pm
Hi Visitor. I read the court transcript you linked in your post. I couldn’t see anything to suggest that marriage to a 12 year old child is lawful in Victoria. Moreover you must know that States/Territories have no authority in relation to marriage. If it was legal in Victoria it would have to be lawful to marry a 12 year old child anywhere in Australia. Lawfulness and State recognition of Marriage is provided and only provided for by the (commonwealth) Marriage Act. A court cannot override or purport to override, amend, supplement or otherwise re-interpret the Marriage Act unless the Act is silent, unclear, or the plain English provision (s) doesn’t make sense and requires definition or interpretation. As far as I know only the Federal Court, Family Court and the High Court (all Commonwealth) have jurisdiction to hear matters / contests under the Act. In any case, what was your point again? Cheers
26 Nov 2015 7:43:02pm
Allegory, read it properly like a lawyer.
The marriage can be conducted in another country under different laws and the accused can quite clearly claim they believed to be married to the child.
Disgusting and backwards as it is, there is a reason for the law. this is an unfortunate consequence of having immigration from other countries where the cultural norms are very different from Australian norms.
Situations such as these reinforce the argument as to where people come from really does matter. Being all PC can make you blind to such situations.
26 Nov 2015 4:49:08pm
DW your intollerent of APM for pointing out often Muslims are intollerent of non Muslims. In the Koran 5:51 warns Muslims not to befriend Jews and Christians. It seems your screaming at the wrong people.
Sir Robert of Lindsay:
26 Nov 2015 6:00:54pm
So the Quran doesn’t want you to be friends with anyone of another religion?
Thank God it doesn’t incite genocide, infantcide, parentcide, rape and murder like the Old and New Testament does!
read Hosea, Numbers, Samuel, or Exodus.
If you’re feeling particularly gory read Leviticus or Deuteronomy.
Even better stuff can be found in what Jesus allegedly says in Matthew 11:20 where he condemns an ENTIRE city to death and eternal torment in hell, or where he attacks people for NOT killing their disobiedient kids in Matthew 19.29, or Luke 12.47 where he oks beating slaves!
The biggest problem with quoting rubbish from any holy book is you can literally find ANYTHING to back any sort of perverted world view.
26 Nov 2015 7:23:48pm
Jeff. The Left will never acknowledge the intolerance of any culture except the Western one. I don’t understand how they are not embarrassed by their own obvious reticence. Some see their see refusal to mention the intolerance of non-European societies as condescending, as if they believe only the West should be brought to task because it should know better.
26 Nov 2015 8:04:06pm
APM’s arguments are not extremist they are pragmatic and sensible. Look at Europe, the goal community cohesion rather than integration has led to a massive terrorist problem. Countries which make a requirement for new migrants to integrate rather than keep their foreign culture, and which manage immigration perform much, much better then allow people to do what they want.
I used to walk through Redfern at night and found the indigenous people absolutely wonderful, yes they were discriminated against by people like me but when engaged with respect they were great people and treated me well. Recently I spent an afternoon at a park in southern Sydney and I have never seen so much hate in the eyes of the locals. Guess who?
26 Nov 2015 12:56:08pm
"There is no ‘nativist’ outrage over Chinese or Indians or Greeks because they integrate well over generations"
Ho, ho, that’s rich. Of course now, with the benefit of hindsight, ‘Reclaimers’ will say that. But what did true blue Australians think about Chinese Australians during the Lambing Flat riots, or about Greek and Italian Australians when calling them ‘wogs’ in the 1950s, or about Christian Lebanese Australians during the Cronulla riots?
To be fair the White Australia Policy (1901 to 1973) did help make the less Caucasian immigrants more ‘integrated’ by excluding them from Australia as much as possible.
"Catholics must reach out to US – but it seems that their hearts just aren’t in it because many only view the world in terms of catholic identity. The criticisms are justified and necessary and if some Catholics can’t handle that in a liberal democracy then they shouldn’t be here."
I reworded you words to resemble the mistrust of and bigotry against CAtholics (aka Papists and Fenians) that was strong in Australia from settlement to the 1920s.
At least your ignorance of history is on a par with your general ignorance.
26 Nov 2015 4:50:06pm
Demac I have never understood ‘Fenian’ to be a substitute for ‘Catholic’, let alone an unpleasant one. The Fenians were dedicated to an Irish republic. They had a hatred of the English monarchy with one of their number even trying to murder one member, Prince Alfred, on Australian shores in 1868. The White Australia Policy was promoted the labour movement as a measure to protect workers’ pays and conditions. Arthur Caldwell continued to support the policy even in my lifetime. I concede that Catholic/Protestant issues continued long past the 1920s with Catholics being persona non grata in police forces into the 60s (I think). Religion divided the Australian cricket team into the 40s under Bradman at least.
Perhaps you are enmeshed in history and unable to see beyond that? Australia has changed markedly in recent decades. That modern Australia should be your benchmark.
26 Nov 2015 6:32:54pm
"Perhaps you are enmeshed in history and unable to see beyond that? Australia has changed markedly in recent decades. That modern Australia should be your benchmark."
I think you are completely missing the point I was making about APM’s ludicrous and un-historic statement that ‘nativists’ in Australia didn’t make a fuss about earlier, non-Muslim, migrant groups whereas precisely the opposite is true. Hence the obvious historical examples.
PS: I am surprised that you are unaware of the highly pejorative nature of the term ‘Fenian’ when used in a sectarian setting.
26 Nov 2015 7:48:34pm
Perhaps you are older and have come across Fenian when it was used differently. Or perhaps you have moved in more intensely sectarian circles at some stage.
Protestantism/Catholicism was a much more volatile issue when intermarriage was verboten. I had an old aunt who married a Catholic guy. Never noticeably religious when I knew them but I imagine they were unable to attend their respective churches for many decades. Death did part them eventually. Nowadays intermarriage in Australia is widespread between people of all different faiths and backgrounds. Catholics and Protestants of a fundamental persuasion go to the same charismatic churches, having moved on from the sit down churches they grew up in but still respecting them. My b-i-l is Catholic and my sister AOG, both fundamentalists (use another word if you like). At this point in time many Muslims are intent on avoiding intermarriage within the broader community. And Jews for that matter. While those strictures remain in place it is hard for me to imagine the kind of rapprochement we saw between Catholic and Protestant. It may take generations for secularism to become more prevalent in the Muslim communities as a prelude to more regular intermarriage. I am surprised Michael does not acknowledge this as an issue.
26 Nov 2015 1:07:23pm
Desert Woman you state-
We all see and know Muslims that have fitted in just like every other culture that has migrated here.
Not the point.
The point is there is always a Muslim minority bent on murder in the name of their religion.
There are no exceptions.
That is why we have Islamic terrorist murderers here, why they have them in Britain and France and all the countries with a large Muslim population.
This situation will remain and get worse unless Islam is reformed from within.
No sign of that happening.
Expect this to spiral into tragedy.
26 Nov 2015 3:30:23pm
steve3, I cannot recall a single case of a Muslim bent on murder in the name of their religion before IS turned up. If you can, please give my poor old memory a jog along.
26 Nov 2015 4:39:31pm
Battle of Broken Hill, 1915.
Sir Robert of Lindsay:
26 Nov 2015 6:08:27pm
Thanks for the link to this little known bit of Australian history. I actually learnt something today.
These guys were Ottoman Turks in January 1915. Seeing what happened in the Dardinals 4 months later this was obviously an act of war rather than a religious statement, as by January our troops were well on the way to the middle east and war has been declared.
Great bit of history though. It’s always an awsome post when you learn something!
26 Nov 2015 4:59:28pm
"I cannot recall a single case of a Muslim bent on murder in the name of their religion before IS turned up. If you can, please give my poor old memory a jog along."
So those 23 terrorists convicted and gaoled for plotting to bomb Holsworthy Army Barracks, the MCG, and others targets……. what was their motivation ??
Commercial ? Egoism ? Human Nature ? Political ? Hijinx ?
Get your head out of the desert sand !
26 Nov 2015 7:22:23pm
The Bali bombings occurred of 12 October 2002 in the tourist district of Kuta on the Indonesian island of Bali. The attack killed 202 people, including 88 Australians.
26 Nov 2015 1:11:00pm
"many Muslims who are hopelessly steeped in the ways of Middle Eastern culture/religion."
The vast majority of the world’s Moslems do not live in the Middle East, and follow the customs of their own country. And, in any case, even Moslems of Middle-Eastern origin are only as "hopelessly steeped" in their culture as we are in ours. So the perjorative manner in which you attempt to use the term simply shows you up as a hypocrite.
26 Nov 2015 3:59:32pm
I seem to be having a ‘problem’ talking about more complex cultural/religious faultlines. Australians can ably differentiate between Muslims of different varieties based on their country of origin, and to be frank their choice of clothing, their location, and a beard, is probably a good indicator of their level of integration.
Whilst the apologists like to talk about stereotyping, they indulge in exactly that by presenting criticism of Australian muslims as something that is exclusively a white Australian phenomenon – nativists. I would bet that many immigrants of NESB background who tend to live amongst Muslims share these attitudes. Don’t forget the victim of the Parramatta outrage was of Chinese heritage. If there is a multicultural consensus that Muslims are failing to be socially responsible then this would tend to validate their claims, which is why Leftists prefer to limit their misrepresentations and snobbery to white Australians.
26 Nov 2015 5:51:20pm
So the length and shape of man’s beard is now ‘a good indication of their level of integration’???
Bloody hell, you better let all those footy players, born and bred in Australia to white anglo-saxons that their beards are proof they have not ‘integrated’ enough.
26 Nov 2015 6:50:47pm
" and a beard, is probably a good indicator of their level of integration."
Have you ever heard of Sir Henry Parkes? He was one of the prime movers in the federation of the Australian colonies into a commonwealth. Go to your favourite search engine and have a look at a picture of him. He has a magnificent beard – almost as luxuriant as mine.
I didn’t need to be "integrated" because I was born here. And there was a bust of Sir Henry outside the principal’s office at my primary school. I should know, I spent an awful lot of time outside the principal’s office and got quite fond of him, and his beard.
People grow beards for all sorts of reasons although, to be perfectly accurate, if you are a male adult, you don’t have a lot of choice. You are constantly growing a beard. Lots of men attempt to hide the fact that they are growing a beard by shaving it off every day, which makes you wonder what else they are trying to hide. Why is it that they find it so hard to "integrate" by just accepting the fact that they are adult male human beings and stop pretending that they have bald faces.
But, as I said, there are all sorts of reasons for not hiding your beard. Moslems, Orthodox Jews and some Orthodox Christian traditions see it as a religious obligation. Some hang glider pilots, mountaineers, skiers and other high-altitude adventurers see it as a way of keeping a little warmer. Some people (eg: me) simply can’t see the sense in shaving. And I would imagine that there are some people who fail to shave for purely aesthetic purposes.
So I would suggest that beards are probably not the best gauge of a person’s level of "integration".
26 Nov 2015 7:57:43pm
"Don’t forget the victim of the Parramatta outrage was of Chinese heritage."
APM, if the person was an Italian, a Greek, an Anglo-Saxon, or, dare I say it, an Arab, it would still be a tragedy. ‘Any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind’ – John Donne
26 Nov 2015 1:42:55pm
"Those people only engage in dialogue with non-Muslim Australia to vent unreasonable grievances and make implied threats."
Except no one reports on it when they condemn terrorist attacks. And then slanders them for not doing so. And that is charitably ignoring the whole problem with lumping such a diverse group of people together as if they were a single individual.
"How do you talk to people who see themselves as a transplanted Muslim colonialists living separate lives and have no sense of social responsibility to all Australians?"
Do you do much talking to Muslims? Do you actually know anyone who sees the world this way first hand? But to answer your question I’d say we give them a stake in society – reach out to them so that they feel part of the community, being part of the Australian community is what is going to give people of any group a sense of social responsibility towards Australians (though many Australians don’t feel a sense of responsibility to ALL Australians to be fair – can’t look after the ‘leaners’ after all).
"Australians have been very generous to Muslims and in return we expect some respect and conformity to core Western values."
Patronizing in the extreme and not correct on any level. Australians have historically not been generous to Muslims, certainly not above any other group and in general less so.
But also, no, we don’t get to ‘expect’ conformity – if we wanted that it should have been part of becoming a citizen. Just out of interest though – whose version of ‘core Western values’ should they conform to? Yours? Mine? Tony Abbott’s, Malcolm Turnbull’s or Bill Shorten’s?
"There is no ‘nativist’ outrage over Chinese or Indians or Greeks because they integrate well over generations and do not threaten to wage war against us because they don’t support our foreign policies."
This comment is either willful distortion or complete historical ignorance – the Chinese and Indians and Greeks were all discriminated against for many, many decades – in the case of Chinese and Indians right up into the 2000’s. Or did you forget the fear many of the same people stirring up sentiment against Muslim immigrants tried to convince us of a human wave of Asians drowning the country? Even John Howard got in on the act not to mention people like Pauline Hanson. Not to mention the many assaults on Chinese and Indians in Australia over the last ten years even.
The Greeks and Italians were discriminated against quite heavily too – try talking to people who came here from Greece or Italy in past decades and see if they think we accepted them with open arms. Go back and read the sort of divisive and often provably untrue claims made by the media against them, go back and see the sort of comments made about ‘wogs’ by the average Australian.
As for complaining about our foreign policies –
26 Nov 2015 3:51:58pm
‘Do you do much talking to Muslims?’
When it comes to APM the answer is no.
I had a running discussion with APM a little while back on another article where he was making remarks about the areas where muslims lived in Australia, that they were enclaves, that they were ghettos, disproportionately full of crime etc etc.
I challenged him because I had the experience of living in these ‘enclaves and ghettos’ for about 20 years and could see zero evidence of what he was claiming.
I then asked if he’d ever been to any of these areas. He actually admitted that he hadnt and that he avoided them at all costs.
But it was all ok you see. He knew what he was talking about because, and I quote, he ‘reads a lot’.
So has he ever talked to a muslim, let alone had a discussion with them? I’d bet my house the answer is no.
Sir Robert of Lindsay:
26 Nov 2015 6:13:24pm
My previous boss, a resident of The Shire, never met a muslim until he was in his 30’s.
Not that he was a racist, not by a long shot would I consider him one. He was and is a well educated decent human that had just never crossed paths with too many other cultures growing up in white enclave of Sutherland in the 70’s.
but he did have a slightly warped view imho as I was one who grew up with a best mate that was muslim.
26 Nov 2015 1:50:41pm
APM, you do know that over the last decade the largest proportion of Muslim immigrants to this country have come from the sub-continent (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh) rather than the Middle East? We also have fairly large muslim communities from South East Asia (particularly Malaysia and Indonesia) and southern Europe (mostly from the Balkans). Being a Muslim doesn’t mean you’re from the Middle East.
26 Nov 2015 4:17:53pm
"There is no ‘nativist’ outrage over Chinese or Indians or Greeks because they integrate well over generations", you must be kidding because when I was young in the fifties and sixties those were exactly the attitude was toward those very same group.
26 Nov 2015 4:39:28pm
You are entirely correct.
Did anyone listen to the ABC interview with Diaa Mohamed of the soon to be Australian Muslim Party?.
He made it crystal clear that he is a muslim first, Australian second. He also saw nothing wrong with the Australian Hizb-ut Tahir.
This is what concerns many in that many Muslims put their religious commitments before that of their country which shelters them and provides them. Diaa said he was bound by the rules of Sharia law which incidently Hizb-ut Tahir are hoping to replace the current Australian constitution with their own Islamic version within 25 years. This you can read on their website.
Having lived through terrorism and how it escalates I can see the writing on the wall, many Muslims are being quite aggresive in showing their objections or being offended by certain western traditions and values, our democracy and in particular our free speech. Who can forget the placards by Muslims at a Sydney demonstration stating "Behead those who insult Islam" Their intent is to slowly change our way of life step by step.
As time goes on a small minority group becomes stronger, bolder and more confident, fearful of no one and in particluar our laws – after all they are prepared to die in the name of Islam. Next you will see more pushes to change laws, such as Sharia law for Muslims while further erroding western values and should this be pushed back or challenged by either the government of the day or groups like Reclaim Australia you will see more and more incidences of terrorism and the like for that is how they are prepared to play the game as we are now seeing.
The government is effectively caught between a rock and a hard place..if they go hard on extreme Muslims they know well the consequences, so for the time being it’s far easier to appease. The government also know well that it takes very little to convert a moderate muslim to a radical muslim as the evidence well shows. The Australian Grand Mufti recent comments on the Paris attacks has done nothing to make me feel comfortable about where stands on behalf of muslims generally..
Apathy and ignorance will be our greatest enemy.
Vinnie Barbar Rhino:
26 Nov 2015 5:01:42pm
You your mates and your collective ignorant racists attitudes are our greatest threat.
Bogan law is as bad as of the imaginary scenarios you paint.
26 Nov 2015 10:53:34am
I’m unsure of what you’re getting at? I’m not in control of government immigration or social policy.
On a personal level, I am friends and also work with many recent arrivals of varying culture, religion and social standing. If they have difficulty with a particular issue, I’ll try and assist them in local customs and expectations. Although in saying that, none of these people would be considered "difficult" and all have assimilated into the Australian culture and way of life very well.
Dealing with the more challenging issues is more a government policy level issue that can only be supported at a local level, rather than controlled there.
26 Nov 2015 11:26:43am
Australian culture needs to be thought about on a deeper level. What is it? How is it changing? A lot of older Australians done recognise the Australia which they used to know, it’s not about being racist, it’s about acknowledging that and having an intelligent debate about it. Who are we? Who we we becoming and why?
26 Nov 2015 1:01:28pm
*All* cultures change and evolve with or without immigration. The culture of our grandparents, born around 1900, is nothing like the culture we have today. They were born without access to cars, there was no television, personal computers were just science fiction, and the idea that we could hold a device in our hand where we could argue with strangers anywhere in the world and share pictures of cats would seem completely unbelievable to the society of the 1900s. Of course older Australians don’t recognise the Australia they used to know…. its not a threat, its progress..
26 Nov 2015 3:01:44pm
I’m struggling to see where I suggested cultures don’t change over time?
And are you really trying to compare technological advancement with cultural change?
Sir Robert of Lindsay:
26 Nov 2015 6:22:59pm
"And are you really trying to compare technological advancement with cultural change?"
If they were they are more than 100% correct.
Technology is THE biggest influence on culture that has ever been. It has the power to change everyone lives in an instant, and culture isn’t immune. I’d suggest culture is the biggest loser.
Just last week I was listening to a pod cast interview with a linguist that was suggesting we are losing our Australian accent. She claimed 5yr old kids were fronting up to kindergarten with an accent closer to west coast Californian than it was to Australian after spending their formative years today watching ICarly and other Disney crap, listening to auto-tuned accents in their music, and hearing computer generated voices with American accents.
26 Nov 2015 6:37:59pm
OK fair enough,
People born 100 years ago didn’t have to deal with potential nuclear war either.
Not all change is good now is it?
26 Nov 2015 1:45:37pm
Angry Janet. I agree. As I get older and the more I see of bogans the more I yearn for bygone days.
26 Nov 2015 3:47:36pm
I wasn’t here, but I get the impression that Australia used to be 100% bogan. Correct me if I am wrong.
26 Nov 2015 4:57:25pm
Hey v, Iswide just used a pejorative! One that made my eyes roll yet again. Not so confident of your place in society that you still feel the need to put others down Iswide?
26 Nov 2015 7:11:52pm
I’m with you Angry Janet but they won’t debate because they know they don’t have a leg to stand on
26 Nov 2015 12:01:08pm
Your know me, FF, it was an honest question 🙂 And I think your actions set an example that if we complain that others don’t fit in, go and show them how to fit in
26 Nov 2015 11:06:52am
I can’t speak for Freddie, but for me personally, I extend my trust that Muslim community would do the right thing and embrace a secular society. While that means freedom of religion, it also means freedom from religion. Until the day comes when radical clerics get the boot out of their mosques by its own members for inciting hatred and your children have the right to choose their own religion without fear of being persecuted as apostates, Australian Muslims (as a community) have yet to embrace secularism.
Being born as an ethnic Chinese in Malaysia, I have every reason to be wary of the religion and what it is capable of. My grandmother was there when the nation found it’s independence, it was said, "3 races, 1 nation", fast forward half a century later, Malaysian Chinese and Indians who refuse to convert are systematically oppressed (by law), the Sharia police can detain anybody indefinitely and the courts are powerless to interfere, and being the favorite soft targets for race riots incited by political and religious leaders.
I was fortunate to be given a chance to live in Australia because of the skills I offer. Here, I have been given equality and freedom that I see too many take it for granted (and still claim oppression), something that was never granted to me and my family by the people who share your faith.
26 Nov 2015 1:25:06pm
And Chinese Malaysian migrants have easily made the transition to the Australian way of life….sure, they already spoke good English before they migrated, which makes the transition easier. This group also has supplied Australia with skills from an educated migrant base. I am unaware of any Chinese Malaysian migrants displaying open hostility to Australia after they arrive here. They are not associated with gangs and crime. I don’t feel threatened by their presence as I feel they want to be here and they want to contribute. Other migrant groups would do well to take a leaf from the Chinese Malaysian immigrant experience in Australia.
26 Nov 2015 3:42:49pm
thank you al, haven’t regretted a day for choosing to be Australian; it’s the very first country I have been in where I felt at home. It frustrates me sometimes when I see trying to weasel their way around our laws by claiming racism or bigotry (particularly in the undocumented boat arrival business).
I know first hand how tough the immigration laws are, but we are not one to be tempted to breaking them; my brother, who graduated here with honors, wasn’t able to find a job and had no choice but to return back to Malaysia. He expressed his frustrations for being rejected and all I could advise him is to be patient, to go back, work hard, get experience, and when the time comes Australia will welcome him and his talents. True enough, he just landed a job with one of the big 4 accounting firms here in Australia.
What did that reaffirm in my book? Australia’s laws can be tough at times, but they certainly are fair. So long as you play by the book, be respectful, work hard, and never blame your shortcomings on others, a lot of great things can be achieved here.
26 Nov 2015 1:25:54pm
"your children have the right to choose their own religion "
Our children have never been free to "choose their own religion". As a child, I was forced to attend Christian indoctrination sessions in which I was told that believers of other faiths were evil and should be converted or killed. We were force-fed stories of the glorious barbarism of Abraham, Sampson, David and other Judeo-Chrisitan heroes and encouraged to celebrate the genocial campaigns of the early Hebrews.
Islam and Judaism are different to Christianity in one important aspect: "prosthelitising" is actively discouraged. And Islam differs from Christianity and Judaism in two more important aspects: it’s holy book the Koran instructs the faithful in its FIRST VERSE, not to interfere with non-believers in any way; and it also recognises the followers of Christianity and Judaism as fellow "people of the Book", worthy of the respect and reverence fo all Moslems.
While the Bible preaches intolerance toward the followers of other faiths (if you are a Christian you are supposed to be intolerant of Jews and Moslems, and if you are a Jew you, like a Dalek, are supposed to be intolerant of "gentles" (anyone who is not a Jew)).
I agree with you that all kids should be able to choose whether or not to follow a religion. But I think that they should be discouraged from doing so until they reach adulthood and I believe that it should be an offence for anyone to attempt to convert or indoctrinate a child into any religion. After all, it is just another form of child abuse.
It would interest you to know that Sharia Law prohibits the act of prosthelitising for ANY religion (including Islam) so this is one area of the law in which we can definitely learn something from the Moslems.
26 Nov 2015 4:41:07pm
when I mean children, I was referring to the parent-child relationship rather than the actual maturity. So yes, I agree that only when they are adults should they decide for themselves.
speaking about Sharia Law and apostasy, a guy in Saudi Arabia just got sentenced to death for purportedly becoming Atheist.
26 Nov 2015 5:42:51pm
"speaking about Sharia Law and apostasy, a guy in Saudi Arabia just got sentenced to death for purportedly becoming Atheist."
You apparently don’t see a difference between apostasy and prosthelisation, but they are very different things. I said that Sharia law prohibits prosthelisation and Judaism discourages it, while Christianity sees it as the duty of every Christian to convert as many souls as possible.
Now, to the subject of Saudi Arabia, which is a US-backed feudal dictatorship dominated by a clan of Wahabbist zealots. The laws of Saudi Arabia resemble Sharia law in some ways, but diverge wildly in others. Calling Saudi Arabian "Sharia" is a bit like claiming that Australian law is "Christian" law.
26 Nov 2015 6:24:13pm
I do know the difference between apostasy and prosthelisation. Not once in my conversation did I link the two and I am sorry if I didn’t clarify that.
The reason why I brought it up returns back to what barbarism can be wielded in the name of Islam. The guy got sentenced under Saudi’s Sharia branch. So here is an example of someone being sentenced to death for simply leaving the religion. It may noy be your version of Sharia, but nonetheless, it is a version which is used. Like how western Christianity is moderated and can coexist with secular Australia, so too must western Islam adopt the same steps to be accepted in our secular society
A Former Lefty:
26 Nov 2015 7:06:32pm
Clearly V you dont understand much about the koran. In fact Id go as far as sayin you know NOTHING about the koran.
The verses as presented in the koran arent presented in the order that mohammad claimed to receive them, so the first verse you refer to has been abrogated by later verses. The verse you refer to doesnt even mention what you claim for a start so its hard to make sense of exactly what you are claiming.
As for moslems not proselytising (thats the correct spelling), its called dawah and the koran clearly states it is an essential obligation for moslems. IN fact the charmin Mohammad Elomar of ISIS beheading fame had his own Youtube channel called Street Dawah where he proselytised on the streets of Sydney.
And Im assuming that you are also ignorant of the fact that the ‘barbaric’ Christian and Jewish prophets from the OT you mention are honoured in islam in the same way and with the same stories recounted in the koran.
A little bit of knowledge goes a long way, I encourage some of you people to try it.
26 Nov 2015 4:45:14pm
Spot on Good Grief !
Your experience of the wonders of multi-cultural Malaysian living with Islam ascending, is a timely warning to the ignorant & na?ve intellectual elites that are hijacking much of the debate on MSM and almost all the debate on social media, especially regarding this subject. From their well paid positions in their inner urban citadels , far from the sources of irritation and multi-cultural experiences of the suburbs, they pontificate on the "bogan attitudes" of the rest , who are in the midst of the not so " inclusive "experiences of Islam in this country.
The twisted logic and hypocrisy of our "progressive" Q&A types here and in media circles everywhere , believe we can fight terrorism with flowers and candles ? They believe these groups of Islamists can be pacified and brought into the progressives ideological fold of peaceful co-existence via some political solution they would surely embrace ?
The reality is that the hundreds of thousands of global supporters of the Islamic caliphate don’t want a solution for multi cultural living ! They just want to increase the momentum on the taking over and ridding the joint of all the infidels like you and me, and the not so committed Muslims. They back their hero soldiers on the terrorism front lines . They are pleased to die for the cause to reach the ultimate prize earlier than the standard less committed Muslim. They snub their nose at any local authority that is forced to act in protection of the rest of the local "natives" in the community , and their Islamic supporters scream ‘victim’ to attract the progressives powerful marketing cabal to maintain & strengthen their hold in the communities they hope to soon be their own completely.
I had to laugh at a couple of tweets displayed on another of the "progressives" current favourites , the Q&A special on Domestic Violence last night , where lots of victims can be paraded for the cause. Were we see their awful hypocrisy with
tweets like .." With over 70 woman dead each year to DV , and we are worried about ISIS ?" Oh dear ! And a slow afternoon’s work with their women folk for our ISIS friends is poo pooed by these ‘knuckles" on twitter !
And what about the Labor & Greens hypocrites of inner city Leichhardt Council yesterday vetoing their own proposed refugee hub at their own harbour-side Callan Park, after they realised their own backyard is probably not that smart a location to compassionate, after all ! Best send those Syrian refugee types out with the "bogans" of south western Sydney !
Treating the ever increasing numbers of Islamic followers as just the same as those of eras past of Catholic or Protestant groups, will be at our own peril for our future generations.
The Islamic caliphate is the ultimate goal being led by their adored martyrs, and their soldiers of Allah, and
26 Nov 2015 3:08:05pm
Likes all the other do ial justice worriers I am going to loght a candle.that will gix it.idiots
26 Nov 2015 9:16:50am
Probably one of the most classic cultural clash within former colonies of the British Empire is that between Protestant Anglos and Catholic Irish…. they form their ghettos, their network of commercial/political power….. Why on Earth don’t they assimilate? Are you worried about that? Should we do something about it? …. and above all, what’s the pattern of assimilation: We all convert to Protestantism or do we all convert to Roman Catholicism?
26 Nov 2015 10:40:10am
Better still Alpo we insist that science is taught in all schools, government and church schools, and perhaps in time reality will kick in. It should become unlawful for a politician to mention his religion.
26 Nov 2015 11:02:12am
Tom1: How myopic. People also die for nationalism, for economical reasons etc.
How about we just ban all ‘isms’ and not just pick on religion all the time.
26 Nov 2015 2:35:05pm
Do you really believe science isn’t taught in religious schools today? There comes a level of ignorance where your participation in a discussion is pointless.
26 Nov 2015 6:25:50pm
I have no idea whether science is taught in Muslim schools, or to what extent it is taught in other religious schools, but I do know that there was no Ministry of Sport in the Government led by Abbott.
My argument is that enlightenment may, in time make the cause of one religion over the other irrelevant.
26 Nov 2015 10:54:43am
And I find it strange that you think religious persuasion is the main issue we are discussing here.
26 Nov 2015 11:28:12am
Find it strange no more, Freddie. We are talking about culture, and religion is part of culture. Is your reply: "Neither", a form of support for multiculturalism?
26 Nov 2015 11:27:15am
Alpo, I will tell you what would happen if we all converted to either Protestantism or to Roman Catholicism. As soon as we did they would very quickly break up into different schisms of either of those religions. That is how protestanism started in the first place. It is all about power and who has the power within anysuch religion and such ism and such group. As soon as you create them internal power struggles break them up to reform into different veriants of them.
The power struggles within Islam, Sunni’s and Shia, is no differnt to the historical struggles with Christinity and or you could say within Judaism. Judaism was rife with internal power struggles at the time Jesus came along and out of those internal power struggles we ended up with Christinity and with it the Roman Catholic Church.
That is the problem with history and such debates they are the same old same old repeating itself in slightly different variants and little learnt from any of it.
26 Nov 2015 12:49:50pm
"That is the problem with history and such debates they are the same old same old repeating itself in slightly different variants and little learnt from any of it."
I find it cute when the new atheists/agnositcs whatever they want to call themselves
want to conveniently blame everything on religion,
While claiming to be about science, evidence and logic,
they willfuly ignore that power struggles and conflict,
which funnily enough are repeated throughout history
tend to happen when people get together and form groups
and also if you look at history
it turns out people tend to get together and form groups
Group forming and conflict are inherent parts of human nature
and while you may choose blame it on religion,
you can beleive religion is the cause
it doesn’t make it true
26 Nov 2015 6:31:33pm
Sure Billybob,there will always be something else to fight over, but cut out all of the religious wars over history, and still today, at least the causes of conflict would be halved.
26 Nov 2015 4:03:34pm
That may be true here, but it certainly was not the case where I grew up in North London. We had protestants Catholics and Jews in my class at school. There were no religious issues at all. Catholics and Jews are very well integrated in the UK – there are no issues at all.
26 Nov 2015 9:51:45am
"A large group of people moving to a new country, refusing to assimilate into the existing culture and showing no respect to the existing residents." While I agree with everything you wrote after this quote, there is a MAJOR difference between the first fleet to they current wave. The people of the middle east are coming to a country with a culture and technology equivalent to and in some respects superior to their own, thus assimilation is advantageous. For the First fleet, only a brain dead idiot would want to degenerate (assimilate) to a culture and technology that was still literally in the stone age status.
26 Nov 2015 11:40:32am
Sam, well actually in different to your claim, the Aboriginal peoples of this land may because of diistance and separation from the rest of the world not gone through the relatively recent bronz age and iron age that Britain and Europe had. The advantage they did have was 40 to 60 thousand years culture of understanding this land they lived on.
Now how long has it been since the British came here, a bit over 200 hundred years. I wonder if we will still be here in another 40 to 60 thousand years, yet alone manage to gain as good an ability to live in harmony with the land?
I would say that after only a bit over 2 hundred years it would be a bit early to start making such claims of superiority. That is if we are talking about longevity yet learning to live in harmony with the land. Ripping it off for short term economic benefit of a few is not the same as learning to live in harmony with the land and I would suggest far from it.
26 Nov 2015 12:41:42pm
So it’s ok for "us" to not assimilate but not for "them" whoever they are.
26 Nov 2015 3:36:23pm
So lazarus, do you want to be sleeping effectively in the nude in the open with a stick to hunt with????????????????
26 Nov 2015 9:52:14am
The "Reclaim Australia" people are touching on a truth as are those who want a more compassionate refugee program. Moving to an extreme on either side is undesirable.
The true challenge is finding a balance between allowing others to come here and protecting the culture that constructed an environment that makes Australia a desirable place to come to.
26 Nov 2015 1:28:16pm
A truly secular nation built around a workable human rights framework would be a good start.
26 Nov 2015 3:49:38pm
My feelings to that are; sort of. Whilst caution should be applied in all things, the fact is that we more often then not balance too far to the side of reclaim australia, and not compassion. As an example, Australia used to process refugees in Indonesia, and then resettling them where that was possible.
This system prevented un-monitored immigration, as well as providing compassion. However, that system became unpopular due to the number of refugees coming through, and was replaced by a closed border and mandatory detention for any asylum seekers. It was only after that that boat deaths started, giving a justification for deterrent treatment. Add some slurs (Que Jumpers), and a terrorist attack or two, and you have a great deal of public support for something beastly.
My ideal system (Barring the creation of a haven country composed entirely of refugees through an improbable series of events including a major tectonic shift) would be to give the asylum seekers work rights in Indonesia, and guaranteed housing in an Australian run accommodation center, allowing all arrangements to be made, including some of the english lessons and cultural lessons certain sections of the population demand. It won’t stop the boats immediately, but it will do it better (with alot less cruelty) then what we’re trying now.
26 Nov 2015 9:57:22am
I get all tingly when the leftists tell me whats wrong,corr-blimey
26 Nov 2015 11:32:19am
Like Karl Marx who said,
‘Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand’
‘The first requisite for the happiness of the people is the abolition of religion’
Very confusing this Left/Right divide.
26 Nov 2015 2:58:02pm
A little to the left, a little to the right, whatever.
26 Nov 2015 9:59:16am
Around 200,000 people migrate to Australia every year and 1 in 3 Australians were born overseas.
"They must be strongly encouraged" by what means and consider that you cannot be "welcoming" whilst you strongly encourage someone to change to meet your expectations.
You want to tell people where to live? Who to associate with? What to think?
The diversity of culture is what makes our nation great and the only racial group with a right to whinge about new arrivals is the racial group that has been here for over 60,000 years.
Mitor the Bold:
26 Nov 2015 10:58:58am
Imagine walking into a pub, sitting in a corner and then declaring that not only that you will not be drinking but you will everyone else that they should not be drinking. Then you make sure that anyone from your sect will not be allowed to drink because they will otherwise be ostracised.
Then, you tell the people in that pub that the things they know through science, like evolution, are wrong and even forbidden, and that although you have to allow your children to be exposed to these ideas you reserve the right to instruct children that these facts are false. And you use the taxes from these people in the pub to make schools that reinforce this message to children, who then become adults and deny the values that come from these facts and the culture that arises from this rational enquiry.
Then, imagine that these children feel like they’re not part of the wider society they live in, and are seduced by ideas about paradise and God. Are you surprised? Or are you more surprised that it’s taken so long to happen?
We are reaping what we’ve sown. Really, what did you think would happen when we encouraged medieval thinking to flourish? Did you really believe it was self-correcting? Clearly, it is not.
26 Nov 2015 11:45:23am
sorry Mitor just be get this straigt. Are you talking about strict methodist views on temperance as followed by The Salvation army, or is it the strict medieval beliefs of catholics and thier indoctrinating religious based schools?
26 Nov 2015 12:45:58pm
And why would some do that? Who are you complaining about – fundamentalist Christians, Temperance League, Tea Party, fundamentalist Muslims or is it a rant at everything you dislike in general.
26 Nov 2015 1:15:55pm
Sorry MTB, you’re falling for Reclaim Australia’s flawed assumptions. Can you please provide examples of when a recent immigrant group has dictated to the rest of the Australian community what they should or should not do, how they should live?
26 Nov 2015 3:12:42pm
FatAndy: I feel you’re post is weasling out of the real issue. Groups have come here and asked for and got changes to rules relating to foods, for example.
They have also pushed for the recognition of their religious laws.
Whether you call this ‘dictating to the rest of Australia’ is another issue.
26 Nov 2015 4:20:55pm
Rules in relation to foods???
No they havent.
Are talking about food labelling, such as kosher or halal?
You’ll actually find that its the people selling their wares that CHOOSE to have this labelling as it opens up new markets for them to exploit.
That, in a nutshell, is capitalism.
Ive never ever seen any migrant group demanding for certain foods not to be sold, or for restaurants to change their menus banning me from eating whatever the hell I want.
You’re going to provide some evidence to your claims.
26 Nov 2015 5:45:02pm
No they haven’t.
There might be foodstuffs that were not available before because there wasn’t a market for them but that is true about gluten-free, vegan and Vietnamese food too. Nobody has insisted on any changes to what other people eat.
And just who exactly has formally pushed for adopting ‘their’ religious laws. Maybe there has been the odd placard advocating Sharia Law but so what, it is never going to happen is it. And does that mean that we should apply the same test to every nutjob out their that shouts at a radio shock jock to ‘bring back hanging’ or ‘send them back where they came from’ or ‘re-criminalise homosexuality’ – would these qualify as people ‘dictating to the rest of Australia’ too?
26 Nov 2015 3:40:36pm
The Charlie Hebdo attack comes to mind (why limit ourselves to Aust).
These Islamists attacked a core tenet of French life (freedom of speech/expression), by attempting to dictate what we can and can’t laugh at.
26 Nov 2015 5:34:41pm
AGB: Whilst the Charlie Hebdo attack was indeed a terrible act it did not change one aspect of French life, apart from security. It most certainly did not change their attitudes to freedom of expression – I suspect nothing would do that.
So what is your point? That they tried to influence society through violence – but they failed, so they are just terrorist murderers aren’t they. And they should be seen as just that – failures, civilian killers and morally bankrupt.
What do you say about certain right wing, Christian fundamentalist politicians in this country who try and change society and law on issues such as same sex marriage or abortion to suit their own religious based views? How dare they try and change popular thinking to serve their own narrow ideologies.
And remember failed terrorists (and make no mistake IS will fail – it might not go away entirely but it will not succeed in its core goals) achieve nothing in the end. IS won’t end up with a stable state and a seat at the UN, they won’t legally trade with the world and they won’t make any other countries and their peoples change the way they think. In fact the only effect they will have on group consciousness would be to strengthen the resolve NOT to change.
26 Nov 2015 11:10:04am
"Around 200,000 people migrate to Australia every year and 1 in 3 Australians were born overseas."
it’s not 1/3, it’s around 28-29% and a very large percentage of these people come from countries who have very similar cultures to our own already.
"They must be strongly encouraged" by what means and consider that you cannot be "welcoming" whilst you strongly encourage someone to change to meet your expectations."
Actually, you can be. For example, If I invite a vegetarian to a BBQ full of meateaters, should I change the menu to fully vegetarian? There’s no issue with being welcoming to the vegetarian without changing the entire scope of the event to suit them. Maybe we simply provide a different form of food that allows the vegetarian a meal whilst enriching the overall experience.
"You want to tell people where to live? Who to associate with? What to think?"
No, no and no.
What I want is the government to set up the overall program to allow it to happen organically and allow the new arrivals to drop cultural practices that do not fit our way of life and engage with the wider community.
"The diversity of culture is what makes our nation great and the only racial group with a right to whinge about new arrivals is the racial group that has been here for over 60,000 years."
So, you agree with my point that badly managed large scale immigration without assimilation into the existing way of life is a bad thing for the current residents.
26 Nov 2015 2:01:37pm
"I want … new arrivals to drop cultural practices that do not fit our way of life"
1. What you (or any individual) wants is no way to run government.
2. New arrivals in the past 100 years have all gradually merged into Australian society, so why do we need spend taxpayers’ dollars on a government programme?
3. Why shouldn’t those programmes also deal with Australian-born recalcitrants so that they fit in with our welcoming, informed, multi-cultural, non-prejudiced and non-racist way of life?
4. Who determines "our" way of life?
"It’s not 1/3, it’s around 28-29%"
Do you not understand primary-school maths, or are you quibbling about tiny percentages that don’t affect the general argument?
1/3 is 33.3%, but it’s close enough to 28-29% to give a fair and reasonable idea of the proportions involved, especially if the whole sentence is preceded by "around" (as you yourself have quoted).
26 Nov 2015 3:57:52pm
1. What? Would you like to elaborate?
2. You’re joking right? We already have many, many programs to help recent immigrants. The money is already being spent, I’m simply suggesting directing some of it better.
3. We have those programmes for current residents, they’re called "schools".
4. Society, through our government’s and laws. These will obviously shift over time, I’m suggesting that the shift should be small and measured over time. The core principles however, should never change.
Are you honestly suggesting I don’t understand primary school maths whilst supporting the idea that 28% is 1/3 or "close enough"?
Numbers and words have meanings,
and exaggeration of figures is often used to mislead. if you’re not worried about small amounts let’s call it a quarter then hey?
26 Nov 2015 3:17:42pm
‘it’s not 1/3, it’s around 28-29% and a very large percentage of these people come from countries who have very similar cultures to our own already.’
Now, we are down to about 15% of that migration figure. According to you we dont have to worry about the other 15% or so because they are ‘like us’ anyway.
Now of that 15%, most of them dont actually follow Islam (that seems to be what youre afraid of). In fact the top 10 or so countries of origin by immigration size are as follows:
So out of those countries muslims will certainly come from Malaysia, and a few from India.
Now to put this in perspective, the 10th nation in that list comprises just 0.5% of the Australian population.
Based on these numbers, the actual numbers of migrants arriving from so called ‘muslim nations’ is surprisingly small. We also musy acknowledge the fact that of those muslims who do arrive actually fit into the community very well, dont advocate for sharia law, and become law abiding citizens.
It really seems like you and others are simply being paranoid.
26 Nov 2015 4:37:31pm
Where did I say I was solely focusing on Muslims?
My comment is a statement in relation to all immigrants. And no, sorry I’m not "afraid" of or "paranoid" about any immigrants in particular, just outlining my position in relation to the article.
26 Nov 2015 5:05:38pm
Oh ok, my bad.
So youre generally against all migrants. Is that the vibe??
In which case youre even more paranoid than I thought.
26 Nov 2015 6:41:05pm
Yes it is your bad, as I’ve never, not once, said I’m against migrants.
I thought you would have run out of straw by now but I guess I was wrong.
26 Nov 2015 2:38:14pm
Paul01: Why are they coming here? In general they come here for a pluralistic democratic society.
Some come here and want to change our society to the type of theocracy they fled from.
We should be allowed to voice our concern over this.
26 Nov 2015 11:16:22am
Tell me Freddy Frog this. Did the British assimilate into the native Aboriginal culture when they came out here as exiles in their boats? Other than a few of them going native and living with the Aboriginal peoples, they didn’t, did they.
As for critical mass, the Aboriginal peoples of this country outnumbered the new British arrivals for many many decades yet the British saw no problem in fundamentally shifting the social structures of the country.
As for Muslims they have been here since the very early days of colonisation of Australia. Now how long ago was it that we had the White Australia policy, something the author failed to mention. Not that long ago really. All this seems is simply another version of it for those who were probably against getting rid of the White Australia policy in the first place, if they had been old enough to vote then.
The other thing the author failed to mention was that Abbott and the LNP under him, whether intentional or not, and I will leave others to decide that, fed this sort of ignorance that underpins this so called nativism. I think the word itself rather glosses over its inherent nastiness as used by such groups.
26 Nov 2015 1:30:34pm
It would be a very odd occurrence, for a group of 19th century migrants from a country that had just invented the industrial revolution, to assimilate into a culture that had not evolved in 40000 years.
26 Nov 2015 4:24:56pm
Al, that is the problem with the term assimilate, isn’t it. It serems you also failed to understand my point. The British came to this land and thought they did not have anything to learn from its local inhabitants.
Inventing the industrial revolution did not actually mean they knew how to live and survive in this country. Industrial Britain and this land at that time were two very different things. Those who bothered to learn from the local Aboriginal peoples learnt how to survive off this land while others died with water and food around them.
26 Nov 2015 11:34:16am
The reason why your analogy to indigenous Australians is flawed is that the immigrants coming in aren’t:
1) Openly seeking to conquer the country.
2) More technologically advanced and thus capable of conquering the country with relative ease.
3) Entering in equal numbers as the white settlers (relative to the population of the current residents).
26 Nov 2015 1:17:15pm
where did I say it was equivalent to what occurs today?
I was suggesting that it’s what happens when large scale immigration is managed badly. It’s an extreme example that I don’t expect to occur but it does provide us with an outlier of the kind of effects that can occur. Effects that will occur on a smaller scale but must be managed none the less.
26 Nov 2015 2:24:59pm
Er, let’s expand this to the broader context:
1. That’s exactly what Islam seeks to do. ISIS is merely an instrument of Islam. Why the calls for Sharia Law in Western countries or laws specifically applicable to Muslims where Muslims are a large minority?
2. Strength and capability is being gained by those who do wish to impose their beliefs. Have you noticed a few issues around the world lately? Add on top the ability to move mass numbers of people around the world with relative ease, and with the assistance of useful idiots.
3. Western countries are doing a fantastic job at committing cultural suicide trying to appease the tiny proportion already living in said countries. Wait until this becomes a large minority, and then, point 1.
You’re just failing to look at history, look at the present activities, connect the dots and foresee consequences. Anyway, my guess is the horse has bolted.
26 Nov 2015 12:07:11pm
I don’t know of any large group in this country that has not assimilated. Most Muslims I know go about their daily business and mingle wit the rest of us. Or are talking about some fictional group stuck between the ears of people like Pauline Hanson?
26 Nov 2015 12:49:51pm
Define what you mean by "critical mass" and "current (often referred to as Australian) values" then maybe we can begin to debate this issue.
The problem is that it’s all so unspecific. Fear usually is unspecific because it’s an irrational emotion.
We have these unspecified numbers which our country supposedly cannot hold and then we have these values which apparently we all share. And then try and explain all this to someone whose only desire is to not be killed or tortured.
"Sorry I appreciate you are fearing for your life but you see we are concerned about reaching "critical mass" and we’re not sure that you fit with our "values". Terribly sorry mate (being Australian and all we use the word "mate") you’ll have to go somewhere else".
26 Nov 2015 3:12:26pm
Are you suggesting that we have no culture?
Otherwise perhaps you’d be the one to define it? I’d start with things like freedom and equality.
And you can’t put an exact number on what that critical mass would be because it completely depends on where the immigration is coming from, their beliefs and their willingness to adapt to our way of life.
And I don’t know where you’re going with the talk about people "fearing for their lives", we’re talking about total immigration not humanitarian immigration.
26 Nov 2015 4:28:53pm
Ok, Freddie, what is ‘Australian Culture’.
Define it for us.
Freedom and equality arent ‘Australian Culture’. You might at a stretch say it could be ‘western culture’, but you’d have to include any nation that allows for democracy, one person one vote. That is the very definition of ‘freedom and equality’.
So on that list youd have to include such inconvenient nations like the predominantly muslim Indonesia or Sri Lanka, along with several nations of the middle east like Turkey, Israel, Kuwait, Tunisia, Lebanon, Turkey, and Morocco, or nations like Japan which certainly doesnt conform to so called ‘western’ values but which certainly believes in equality and freedom.
Really, equality and freedom are more like motherhood statements than actual culture.
So try again.
What is ‘Australian Culture’.
26 Nov 2015 5:37:50pm
Re-read the question I made above and have a go at answering it then. Are you suggesting that we have no culture?
And I said I’d start with freedom and equality not that it it ends there.
26 Nov 2015 5:38:21pm
Islam doesn’t encourage democracy. After all its Islamic Ideology we are discussing and not nationality.
26 Nov 2015 5:49:44pm
Well as you know Australia not being very good at helping people "fearing for their lives" is a particular source of embarrassment and shame for me (and for many people) so I often harp back to it.
You’re the one suggesting we restrict what other people do so you’re the one that’s going to need to be specific. We need precise numbers and precise definitions of "Australian values" or else there’s not really much to talk about.
You have to admit that "cultural values" are a pretty wishy washy concept. I mean there’s a fair bit of disagreement on here. And then you get all those good old Aussies who beat up their partners and sell ICE to 11 year olds and how are these fitting with "Australian values" and what do we do about those?
As a side note I used to live in London in a real mixed area including lots of people who happened to be muslim. Every night there’d be people out on the street drinking tea and chatting away all night (it’s cheaper to socialise if you don’t drink). There were some great restaurants and there was a great atmosphere. Then on the weekend when the football was on and alcohol fuelled fans turned up the place just became unpleasant. As a football fan myself I used to dread the weekend coming around with tube closures, police everywhere and drunken idiots starting fights. Maybe there’s things that we can borrow from other cultures which might improve things?
You wouldn’t be able to get a decent coffee in Australia without all those Italians coming over in the 50s!
26 Nov 2015 6:45:23pm
Australia is extremely good at helping people who fear for their lives so I guess we’ll have to disagree.
26 Nov 2015 5:45:29pm
FGR Are you fair dinkum…Fear is an irrational emotion???
I think most people would agree that fear is a very rational and most necessary self prerservation emotion.
I salute your compassion but suggest that our culture is too important to not be defendied against 7th century dictates.
26 Nov 2015 7:22:28pm
Fear is a totally irrational emotion.
Yes there are many things in life where we need to guard against risks – minor to existential and life and death.
But the safest way of dealing with a threat appropriately, of not over or under reacting, is to assess it quite dispassionately.
Which is the antithesis of what any emotion does. Fear is an emotion trying to masquerade as an analysis.
Fear is always irrational. Sometimes it is justified. Sometimes fear is totally unjustified. The problem is the emotion of fear can’t evaluate the validity of itself.
Fear can’t tell fear whether it’s fear is justified or not. That is the essence of irrationality.
Sir Robert of Lindsay:
26 Nov 2015 1:04:13pm
"refusing to assimilate into the existing culture and showing no respect to the existing residents."
I’d actually become a card carrying member of UPF when and IF they could ever spell out exactly what "our" culture and "our" way of life is.
To date all I see are platitudes and motherhood statements, along with a lot of hate and bile spewed out at some "other" people, with a healthy dose of mob rule to boot. It’s not really the sort of "culture" I’d be supporting.
When and IF "our" culture is ever defined, maybe then we could ask these "others" to adhere to it.
26 Nov 2015 3:22:52pm
Well I can tell you what the Australian culture is not.
People killing people in the name of some imagined god and having kids carrying posters stating death to infidels while participating in a march protesting about someone publishing cartoons in Europe having content they did not agree with.
26 Nov 2015 4:33:56pm
What about when people kill, not because of religion, but for, say, political reasons?
Are those deaths morally superior?
Because the ‘west’ has become involved in many wars, particularly in the last 100 years, that have had nothing to do with religion, but have caused the deaths of quite literally 10’s of millions of innocent people.
The deaths of innocents are horrific, and barbaric.
It takes a special kind of moral bankruptcy to claim that the taking of lives due to religion is worse than the taking of lives to achieve political goals.
Sir Robert of Lindsay:
26 Nov 2015 5:38:03pm
I agree Peter, you’re 100% correct.
I was brought up around the Fairfield area in western Sydney a 6th generation Aussie, who had a best mate that was an Egyptian muslim with a family that treated me like one of their own (who couldn’t love barbequed egg plant?). Our circle of friends included a Yugoslav, two Malteze and an Irish guy, and in our teens one awsome Sri Lankan and his Vietnamese offsider. My dads best mate was an Italian concreter. The Australian "culture" I grew up with was one of seeing the melting pot that IS our nation living together and just getting on with life. There were a million "wog" jokes told, but we all knew our ethnicity came a poor second to our friendship and respect for each other, and still does now we are all in our 50’s.
Throughout my childhood I copped a heap of abuse from two Aussies families that thought I should hang with "my own kind".
Of the guys I grew up with the Egyptian became an accountant who worked his way up to one of the top spots in the then P&O, and is currently working for a large insurance company. The Yugoslav owns a glazing business, the Malteze brothers own their own smash repair shop, the Irish guy just paid $3.4 million for a property in north west of Sydney – CASH! The Sri Lankan is an aircraft engineer, and the Vietnamese guy took over his parents restaraunt in Cabra a few years ago.
Of the two Aussie families that used to give me a hard time, my brother stills goes and visits one of the boys in Long Bay occasionally. His brother joined a bike gang and was killed in the mid 90s during a bar fight in Moree. One of the girls became a heroin addict and had about 10,000 kids to different blokes. These guys were brought up with hard working parents I looked up to as a kid, yet all bar one of the six kids have been little more than gutter trash their entire lives (one joined the Navy and moved interstate a long time ago)
Culture means different things to different people. I’m really happy with my version, but if anyone can show me the error of my ways I’ll be glad to listen.
26 Nov 2015 3:24:05pm
So, just for the sake of argument, what IS expected of them in this society that you feel that they do not already have a grasp upon? Paying Taxes? Not everyone here does that. Gainful employment? They’ll gravitate towards that of their own accord. Respect to women? Many branches of Islam are actually positive in their treatment of women compared to others (some sects had no-fault divorce sooner then us). By stating that they need this kind of heavy educative background, you not only imply that they are, in fact, incompatible, but that they also would not assimilate themselves.
P.S. As to the formation of ‘ghettos,’ that can be attributed to a lack of affordable accommodation or support outside of their own ethno-religious groups (Pauline Hanson isn’t the only person who would be discriminatory to Muslims in selecting buyers).
26 Nov 2015 3:27:01pm
Good point. After all, your approach went so well in 1930’s Germany.
26 Nov 2015 4:14:19pm
And what is your ideal number of migrants that should be allowed into Australia every year,most people seem to want fewer migrants but when asked what is the current level few have any idea what it is.
26 Nov 2015 5:57:51pm
That’s my point, there’s no ideal number, it totally depends on the immigrants, their culture and their willingness to assimilate to our way of life.
26 Nov 2015 7:34:12pm
Surely it isn’t just their willingness to ‘assimilate to us’. Surely it is also what they can bring to our country and how we can ‘assimilate to them’.
Like – letting the extended family wither away and living in our western nuclear family world is a massive degrading of ‘our culture’.
We don’t have all the answers Freddie. We get stuff just as wrong as many other cultures.
Surely every culture is an experiment. ‘How should we organize our lives, what works, what doesn’t?’.
Why wouldn’t we look at all the cultures of the world, ours and others and cherry-pick all the successes, ours and theirs.
If we can show others our improvements; Great. If they can show us their improvements; Great.
26 Nov 2015 5:06:02pm
Freddie. I agree. I also don’t subscribe to the notion that we should let anyone through the gate simply because they put their hand up. I sense the ‘racist’ labelling for feeling this way is beginning to wear a little thin for most, including myself.
The problem is not about a particular race, religion or colour for me. It’s about certain combination of character traits that have somehow led to groups of very jaded people who in many cases are unwilling to share a smile, let on own any kind of pleasantly with you. Let me be clear. Islam isn’t particularly what identifies them. I observe many Islamic people around my area for instance. They seemingly come from parts of Africa and asia and are warm and integrate quite well.
I also recognise that not all people at the heart of this critism demonstrate anti social characteristics. It’s just unfortunate that too many of them do.
I’m not sure what the answer is, but I think most people just like myself are simply sick of the rewardless indulgence. And the French took the same gambles as us.
26 Nov 2015 7:54:46am
"Today’s victims of nativism in Australia are Muslims."
"These people’s anger, irrational as it is misdirected."
This article is amongst the worst I have seen here. We have entered a Left parallel universe. Apparently the many muslims who prefer the ways of the ME to Western life even when born here don’t have a pathology but white Australians do for being concerned about dangerous trends in our society. Many muslims DO "threaten our national values".
The Cronulla riots weren’t some spontaneous act of aggression against newcomers and paranoia; there were many instances Lebanese Muslim men travelling to Cronulla to bash and harass white Australians. These were racist attacks. The police and politicians did nothing because apparently whites have something called privilege and so can’t be victims of racism. It was inevitable that the locals would take matters into their own hands.
26 Nov 2015 9:22:01am
The "national values" prevalent in the 1950s were threatened by a generation of young Anglo-Celtic Australians. They destroyed those conservative "values" in front of your eyes and changed Australia forever….. in the process, not a single time the name of Allah was mentioned!
….. As you pursue the fictitious Muslim "enemy" in your mind, others are turning your world upside down.
26 Nov 2015 1:47:45pm
@alpo …. We finally agree on something.
26 Nov 2015 9:28:05am
You imply the Lebanese Muslim men are 100% responsible for starting it. You really believe that?
26 Nov 2015 10:44:02am
YES. I have not seen any evidence that anyone in the Shire was doing anything to harm or annoy Lebanese Muslim men before the riots. ASIO warned against the Lebanese Concession because they thought these people were too much of a risk.
26 Nov 2015 12:47:55pm
So the Bra Boys didn’t bash Lebo’s like they boasted on TV, radio, facebook etc?
26 Nov 2015 3:14:47pm
Actually they didn’t. The Bra Boys starting making noises after the "Lebanese" counter-riots; along the lines of try-it-in-Maroubra-see-what-happens. So the "Lebanese" rioters did. Then community leaders brokered peace between Bra Boys and "Lebanese".
26 Nov 2015 11:07:25am
MrMix I wouldn’t go as far as 100%. But having been on the receiving end of racism, aggression and violence from "Lebanese" youth for years before the Cronulla riots, I was frustrated that the problem was ignored in much of the subsequent discussion.
26 Nov 2015 12:20:06pm
Are you saying is not possible??
26 Nov 2015 10:21:23am
"Many muslims DO "threaten our national values". "
So do many white people. And the real kicker is that many doesn’t equate to all. That is the mistake the ‘nativists’ make. And for the record, the UPF is no better in my mind than the radical clerics advocating Sharia Law – I don’t want anything to do with either group!
"The Cronulla riots weren’t some spontaneous act of aggression against newcomers and paranoia"
No, you are right – it was an act of aggression orchestrated by extreme right-wing media personalities in response to some incidents of anti-social behaviour by individuals from a given cultural group. (Never mind that the same individuals involved in the response demonstrated the exact same anti-social behaviour that they objected to – no, they still deserve defence from you don’t they?)
26 Nov 2015 10:52:16am
Hang on, back up. You are avoiding the cause. What of those marauding Lebanese men continually spoiling for fights with Shire people and disrespecting women and lifeguards? Anyone who dodges that is engaging in a massive untruth by omission. The so called Muslim revenge attacks were also far more violent. They assembled in their cars outside Lakemba Mosque (of course) and in convoy travelled to the Shire with weapons to stab and bash and destroy hundreds of cars.
26 Nov 2015 11:43:10am
"You are avoiding the cause. What of those marauding Lebanese men continually spoiling for fights with Shire people and disrespecting women and lifeguards?"
Schoolkids learn that ‘He hit me first’ is not an adequate defence of their actions if they engage in violence. Would that some adults could learn the same.
But my point was that the response by white people 1) didn’t help the situation (as it provoked a more violent response) and 2) demonstrated that they are capable of just the same sort of antisocial behaviour that the Lebanese men reportedly demonstrated.
26 Nov 2015 12:01:49pm
The usual anti-Muslim claims I see APM. The Cronulla riots were a shock jock instigated act of violence by people who have nothing to be proud of except their capacity to wear a flag. I was wondering when you would try and rewrite history to excuse their behaviour.
26 Nov 2015 12:50:06pm
So you think Martians looking from above in 2005 would think that a persecuted group was motivated to take to the streets, not because they demanded to be free of racial attacks, but were indulging in a random mass act of racism led by a radio announcer that most of these young men would not even listen to?
26 Nov 2015 1:52:15pm
Utter BS. It was a spontaneous act of people’s justice in the wake of continuous provocation and gangsterism by Lebanese thugs. The ALP government did nothing to prevent it and stopped the police from policing as well, all in the interests of appeasing the Leb muscle they use in their electorates.
26 Nov 2015 12:17:27pm
The most telling detail, APM, is when you speak of "Lebanese men" but chose only to demonise the Lebanese.
The great untruth by omission is carried by you.
Some Lebanese men spoil for fights; some Muslim men carry out terror attacks; some US white supremacist men shot five protesters at a demonstration in Minnesota; nearly every mass killing in the US over the last 40 years has been perpetrated by men (black men, white men, Latino men, libertarian men, rich men, poor men, American men, Muslim men, Christian men, atheist men); Australian men are currently killing more than one woman a week here in Australia.
These are some facts concerning violent behaviour throughout the world.
You highlight only violent behaviours committed by Muslims, and, predictably, infer that Muslims are somehow more prone to violent behaviours.
However, if you look at all violent behaviours, you would see that the striking correlation is not between Muslims and violence, but between men and violence.
A significant majority of violent acts, throughout the world, are carried out not by Muslims, but by men.
26 Nov 2015 12:53:47pm
So white boys inflicting violence on Lebanese boys was ok, but Lebanse boys taking revenge on white boys is very bad because they were much more violent than the white boys.
Didn’t you think something like that might happen or were you so happy about Bra Boys bashing Lebo’s you forgot all about what might happen next?
Ban Champagne Socialists:
26 Nov 2015 10:37:30am
Agree. The article is typical left wing dribble.
– Australia’s Muslims have no reason for grievance: they live in the best country on the planet.
– Australia’s Muslims suffer no worse discrimination than any other group in society (Catholics are regularly the subject of ridicule from the ABC and Fairfax. Muslims never are).
– Portraying Muslims as victims is the line islamic terrorists use to justify their actions (but that’s the Left for you: they hate the west and reckon we’d all be better off if Islamic State wins).
26 Nov 2015 11:48:38am
So Ban Champagne Socialists, I guess you would have no trouble with white Anglo Saxon/Celtic people coming here. But, what if they voted for the left? Would they still be welcome?
Blame the west:
26 Nov 2015 1:12:51pm
Anglo Saxon/Celts who vote left are most welcome (those with such political leanings provide light relief for the rest of us).
Similarly, as the PM said, those who don’t like Australia are free to leave. That includes islamic extremists who want to destroy our way of life.
26 Nov 2015 1:00:15pm
So why are morons like yourself demanding they apologise for the actions of muslim extremists while not apologising for the actions of Martin Bryant, Ivan Milat and other white mass murderers on behalf of the Caucasian population.
26 Nov 2015 5:27:30pm
So who is the moron lazarus here. I would assume it is the person who does not know or understand the difference between mass murder and terrorism.
Never fear lazarus, I will guarantee that when the next Caucasian goes on a murdering spree shouting that he is doing this for all the Caucasians out there and that is the only true dogma, there will be many Caucasians speaking out and saying he does not represent them.
Be of interest for a certain religious sect out there to compare the Caucasians response and there own in the past. Of course it would not be the Caucasians fault but the discrimination that Caucasians receive and the only way to stop such murders in the future is for every one else to change there ways.
26 Nov 2015 3:23:36pm
Every single part of your post is absolute garbage. This is nothing but fearmongering and neo-Nazi propaganda.
you say muslims are not ridiculed on here…take a look at the posts!
lastly I bet there isn’t one single person reading or commenting on here who actually supports the IS or their actions. The accusation is untrue and inflammatory and an outrageous attack on those with a social conscience.
26 Nov 2015 7:47:05pm
"Catholics are regularly the subject of ridicule from the ABC"
I have gained the impression from ABC programs that it has a strong Catholic background among its staff. I have never detected any anti-Catholicism. Seems to me Muslims are taking a fair old beating on this ABC site. Not only are you making stuff up, but through your choice of screen name you advocate changing Australian law to make it illegal to hold socialist views. While you may think it amusing to advocate the fining of (or is it jailing followed by some other solution) of people with socialist views, I wonder if there are others – apart from Muslims – you would go after next.
26 Nov 2015 10:39:55am
This is kind of like using the term "silent majority" in order to achieve some sort of moral superiority. Which "national values" are you talking about? The "national values" of a Cory Bernardi or the "national values" of a Lee Rhiannon? Hint, I find that both are an anathema. I have more values in common with Muslim/Hindu/Buddist migrants that I have worked with than with those two politicians.
26 Nov 2015 12:57:54pm
Like the "peaceful" Buddhists in Myanmar burning Rohingya homes and businesses, rounding them up into enclaves and not letting them out?
Or the "peaceful" Hindu supporters of the BJP who threatened an Aussie tourist?
26 Nov 2015 10:42:04am
If I were you, I’d be more worried about the creeping "re-aristorcatisation" of Western societies than terrorism / Muslims. The re-introduction of inter generational extreme wealth, shrinking middle class (particularly America), and the transference of private sector risk onto the tax payer (e.g. GFC bailouts of large corporations including banks) along with reduced productivity worldwide and a failure to invest in new industry and our children’s development all smack of a slow but sure return to pre-WWI aristocracy where a small number of obscenely wealthy elite dictate terms to their peasants (if you think this is a bit extreme, ask the average American what is happening over in the US).
Taking the above into account, and assuming you really are a "righty" (you seem to love these imagined groups), then that is where your concerns should be. This degradation of the democracy, free market and the idea of meritocracy going on in front of your eyes is far more likely to impact on you than your imagined Muslim threat.
But then again, maybe you are not really a righty……
26 Nov 2015 11:44:47am
Unless he is one of those ‘righties’ that uses dog-whistle politics to distract people away from issues that will really affect them and benefit him – like your aforementioned ‘re-aristocratisation’.
26 Nov 2015 11:52:08am
Yes Andrew, and Trump is a classic example of stirring up fears of outsiders so nobody notices what’s really happening.
Goodness, imagine if he won?
26 Nov 2015 2:10:41pm
Indeed Optimist. Further, it surprises me that very few people question a system that has rewarded a man like Trump. He is a grub who made his money buy, to a large degree, dis-engaging his moral compass (if he ever had one). And he was rewarded for it. What kind of system allows such a thing?
26 Nov 2015 10:44:01am
APM: I thought the Cronulla riots were Alan Jones’ proudest hour. Well next to Julia Gillard’s father "Dying of shame " anyway.
26 Nov 2015 1:02:03pm
Spoken like a true right wing nut job.
26 Nov 2015 6:35:32pm
Lazarus: You obviously did not pick up on my sarcasm. However you can be forgiven, I am more comfortable being called a Left wing nut job, but neither is actually true.
26 Nov 2015 11:07:10am
On your last paragraph my old friend from the Shire pointed out at the time that Cronulla is the Sydney beach most easily accessible by train and that generations of Westies had been coming there and causing problems for the locals APM. Muslim kids were following a well-worn trail. Whether they were more aggressive and troublesome or just more visible I don’t pretend to know.
26 Nov 2015 11:10:58am
Nobody’s going to make you wear a burqa.
26 Nov 2015 2:07:01pm
Some say that would be a pity.
26 Nov 2015 2:31:12pm
"This article is amongst the worst I have seen here. We have entered a Left parallel universe".
I was just thinking to myself how well written this article is. It doesn’t resort to name calling and makes many valid points….yet in response you just straight in with the digs at the "Left".
The article is excellent, you just disagree with it which is fine.
How people reacted in Cronulla is widely accepted to have been one of the lows in Australia’s history and criticised by almost every public figure including both sides of politics….yet here you are seemingly siding with the extremist elements which inflamed the situation and made it racial based.
I think you exist in a ‘right’ parallel universe alongside those of the UPF who think that schools should have pictures of Hitler in the classrooms. Its an absolutely insane position to have in my opinion and I will NEVER accept it.
Nothing To See Here:
26 Nov 2015 6:32:36pm
Lots of classrooms have pictures of Jesus and the Queen of Australia ….absolutely insane…
26 Nov 2015 7:56:35am
"Today’s victims of nativism in Australia are Muslims. There may be some violence, perhaps quite bad, before this current surge inevitably subsides. It, like all its forebears, is the final howl of impotent rage from a subset of society whose inchoate fear of change is only a reflection of how unattached to society it really feels."
Only sensible bit of the whole article.
James in Brisbane:
26 Nov 2015 10:14:53am
That’s it – this issue is all about social class. These people are not an even cross-section of society, they are almost exclusively from lower socio-economic groups. They are marginalised, powerless and angry. So like all animals at the bottom of the pecking order, they look for another more marginalised, less popular than themselves to pick on. It’s instinctive and biological. Chickens do it, wolves do it, dogs do it, people do it.
26 Nov 2015 11:40:08am
Muslims come from all social classes. I wouldn’t say they were ‘at the bottom’.
26 Nov 2015 2:15:35pm
Actually as a demographic they most certainly are.
Its also completely predictable.
The majority came with nothing.
It takes time to settle, get jobs, pass on inheritances, pass on family businesses etc etc. They’ve only been coming in numbers for about 40 years. Its far too soon to see large numbers of any group move up the ‘socio’ chain in such a short period of time.
Its starting to happen though.
26 Nov 2015 4:37:41pm
You are obviously too young to remember Pakistani doctors and Lebanese lawyers.
26 Nov 2015 2:22:28pm
Because Islam is an ideology terrorists come from all classes, and income and education don’t appear to be predictive factors.
26 Nov 2015 3:55:37pm
its funny APM. You are an extremist.
I find it amusing when one extremist calls another extremist an extremist.
26 Nov 2015 6:48:02pm
Spacey, you have just redefined the word "extremist" to cover all Australians who criticise muslim Australia as a default position and is really just abuse. You have made the moral equivalence of comparing me to Islamists. Who is extreme? Why am I as "amusing" as an Islamist?
26 Nov 2015 7:56:42am
Race is an artificial construct? I am not sure this statement is accurate. Doesn’t ‘t the science shows there are numerous objective differences between the races – unique blood types susceptibility to disease, bone densities, occurrence of twins, testosterone levels and date I say it – a difference in average IQs. Of course we shouldn’t discriminate against individuals but have we become so p.c that we can’t acknowledge that there are differences?
26 Nov 2015 8:56:36am
m – I think the article conveniently twists "leftist" (though I do not like that term) views for its own benefit. If one suggested for example that the racial differences between "white" and indigenous Australian’s were an artificial construct, I dare say the author and his ilk would be up in arms. The premise of the article is the real artificial construct in this case. I agree religion is an artificial construct but again it does seem that the "left" legitimizes the construct when bandied out in articles concerning Islam – we cannot criticise it otherwise we are "racist" – but wait, if race is an artificial construct then surely racism is not real??
26 Nov 2015 9:16:18am
Mate race is a social construct and geographical separation is the main factor that leads to the development of different cultures at least historically. Not sure where your outdated views come from , genetically the construct of different races is absurd given how genetic similarity. Some races are smarter than other races?
Most things you listed are merely stereotypes.
The Biscuit Bunyip:
26 Nov 2015 9:18:36am
There is more genetic diversity within a (so called) ‘race’ than there is between ‘races’. For example, there are more genes involved in eye colour than skin colour. So yes, race is an articicial construct. At the end of the day we are all the same, bar some minor easthetic differences.
26 Nov 2015 9:53:49am
?Race is an artificial construct? I am not sure this statement is accurate.?
In biological taxonomy ?race? is at best an informal rank, which due to the history of immigration and intercultural interaction is no longer relevant to the vast majority of the human population (north sentinel island and similar isolated communities being the possible exception.
This just leaves us with the social construct definition ?race?, so the statement seems prima facie accurate. However, as outlined below there are no distinct characteristics or set of characteristics that allow every individual to be neatly placed into a specific race. By way of example, if a biracial couple had several children and some of the children had considerably darker skin than the others how would you define each of the children?s race? Their physical characteristics may mean they are classified as a different race, yet their genetics and ancestry mean they are essentialy identical. As such, any classification system that labels them as anything different from each other is totally artificial.
?Doesn’t ‘t the science shows there are numerous objective differences between the races??
No it doesn?t, there is no one characteristic that is found in any one ?race? and not another. They may show up more often in certain ?races?, such as sickle cell anaemia or lactose intolerance, but they are not group defining, such that any person from any ?race? can have any of the characteristics. One does not immediately become ?sub-Saharan? if they have the sickle cell gene mutation, or ?Asian? if they are lactose intolerant, nor do they become ?Caucasian? if they have vitiligo or albinism.
There is no consensus that there is any difference of IQ between different ?races?. There may be some difference between different cultural groups, but this can be explained by the cultural bias (i.e. toward western culture) in the tests and the emphasis different cultures place on academic achievement (i.e. east Asian cultures and more particularly east Asian immigrants in wester countries)
There is no problem with acknowledging the differences between separate individuals and groups of individuals with different ancestries (a more useful definition then ?race?), however compartmentalising people because of these differences and suggesting that differences make them inferior (i.e. claiming they have lower IQ) is not acceptable. Unfortunately many people have trouble doing the first without simultaneously doing the second.
26 Nov 2015 2:21:57pm
‘By way of example, if a biracial couple had several children and some of the children had considerably darker skin than the others how would you define each of the children’s race?’
Correct. Im more than biracial I, have around 8 different ‘races’ coursing through my veins.
My daughter has many of the characteristics of her Mapuche grandmother. The almond shaped eyes, the dark olive skin, the fine chiselled nose… but her eyes are green and her hair reddish.
My son the caucasian skin (his mother) but with the facial features and strong muscular body type of his Carib-African grandfather.
What race are my children??
26 Nov 2015 9:58:40am
Congratulations, you’ve just failed human biology 101.
A Former Lefty:
26 Nov 2015 12:52:31pm
Sociologists (arts grads) talk about "social constructs" using memes.
Biologists and geneticists (scientists) talk about science using evidence.
I bet I know on which side the leftist commentators lie here.
But as someone of mixed race, have I been socially constructed? Or is the reality that my genes represent my mixed racial heritage that brought together genetic lines that have been separated for perhaps a hundred thousand years or more? ie races?
26 Nov 2015 4:31:07pm
The term ‘meme’ was coined by a famous biologist to describe the way ideas & culture move and develop.
26 Nov 2015 7:57:24am
I am old enough to have seen different "waves" of immigrants who have come to Australia. The little Italy, the little Greece etc. I remember the calls of "wogs", dagos, spaghetti munches etc. It is only natural that people in a new place with new ways and often a different language should cling together. Their children however in most cases growing up in their new home fairly rapidly assimilated and while keeping some of the old customs threw off most of them and became indistinguishable from other Australians. To me this wave seems to be very different a majority of second and third generation children have not integrated in fact quite the opposite. The enclaves get bigger not smaller and seem more distant to us than their parents did. This is not helped by their religious leaders preaching a message of non integration, staying separate because we are the decedent west, kaffirs, infidels. This wave is different in ways that previous waves were not.
26 Nov 2015 9:16:54am
Bev, you are very good at writing dodgy anecdotes and opinions that sound authentic but actually aren’t. This another in the series.
if you cared to check, you would find that Muslims are represented across the occupational scales and throughout the population generally. I’m sure you can’t even pick a Muslim in a crowd unless they are wearing some distinctive form of dress. We all have views but only some are supported by facts.
26 Nov 2015 11:12:34am
What percentage in relation to other ethnic groups?
Do the children of other ethnic groups show a growing disdain for Australia?
26 Nov 2015 2:58:20pm
My doctor is a Moslem, as are all the doctors in my town. When my mother was in hospital a few months ago, most of the doctors and nurses who treated her were Moslems. My Middle-Eastern Politics lecturer at University was a Moslem. The "Ghans" who made it possible to construct the Adelaide-Darwin telegraph were Moslems. Two of my high-school teachers were Moslems. My neighbours over the back fence when I was growing up were Moslems.
I grew up with Irish catholics, Irish protestants, Eastern Orthodox Poles, Marionite Christian Lebanese, Lebanese, Syrian and Egyptian Moslems, Polish Jews, German Lutherans, Australian Seventh-Day Adventists and Jehovahs Withnesses, Chinese Buddhists, Italian Catholics, Orthodox Greeks, Maltese Catholics, even some Mauritians (I have no idea what their religion was). The degree to which the families integrated with those around them varied, but not according to any pattern that would indicate that the level of integration was in any way correlated to the ethnic or religious character of the family.
Another thing that I noticed was that, regardless of the religion, the "holy men" of the family’s religion plays a much greater role in their lives than would have been the case in their home country. And this is pretty much what you would expect to happen. I remember being at my first girldfriend’s house (she was from an Irish Catholic family) and listening to her mother calling the local priest (a Father Kelly) to ask his permission for her daughter (my girlfriend) to go the school end-of-year social. father Kelly had been in the country for about a month, having grown up and spent his entire life in Ireland. Oh, by the way, my girlfriend was FOURTH GENERATION Irish-Australian.
So I would be very surprised if the same thing didn’t happen in Moslem communities. The "holy men" in such communities form the kernel around which the community grows and often become the bridge between new arrivals and their new society, helping to arrange government services, accommodation, translation and interpreting services and the like.
Of course, we could probably reduce the dependence of new arrivals on "holy men" by being more pro-active in engaging with new arrivals and providing them with the support that, at the moment, they seek out from the holy men.
26 Nov 2015 5:09:45pm
Bev, surely you haven’t forgotten Ned Kelly, have you? I could also add a long list of other’s, all non-muslim, who did not like authority and who committed atrocities and mass murders, some of who were in far more recent time and are currently sitting in our prisons.
26 Nov 2015 11:29:21am
As usual you offer no counter argument. If you think my opinion is wrong tell us why.
26 Nov 2015 12:42:43pm
Bev, I have already said Muslims are represented across all occupations and throughout the population. If they had not integrated, I doubt you would find them in all walks of life as they are.
By all means keep spreading your biased messages but also be aware that I and many others know they are without foundation.
26 Nov 2015 3:17:22pm
Very general answer could apply to other groups probably to a far greater degree. Notice you did not address the other question.
26 Nov 2015 4:22:25pm
Bev, how about a bit of logic? I don’t need to specify any figures. If Muslims are fitting into all different sorts of jobs and professions and are happily living across the country, you can’t honestly say they are not integrating.
Disdain for Australia – is that your other question? I have seen clips of some IS nutters saying and doing atrocious things but nothing from ordinary Muslims going about their very normal lives.
A Former Lefty:
26 Nov 2015 12:54:48pm
Bev, when will you understand that we shouldnt expect our moral elite to offer a counter argument, we should just shut up, listen and believe.
Dont you know this??
26 Nov 2015 3:27:40pm
Says the guy who’s posts so far constantly abuse anyone or anything he perceives as being ‘leftist’ in an effort to close down debate.
26 Nov 2015 3:37:32pm
Bev I think your opinion is just an opinion.
In those previous waves of immigration I’m sure you were amongst the people who got on the bandwagon of fear about what implications that would have on society as well. I think time may have just distorted your perspective.
I think this wave of immigration of Muslims is no different to any other ‘wave’. The newcomers always receive a negative and suspicious reaction from those with xenophobic attitudes.
I think that Australia faces a bigger threat from Neo-Nazi "patriots" who have hijacked the cause against the perceived threat from Muslims. This is exactly what the IS wants to happen.
One thing that I’m sure about, if you marginalise these people then this will cause more division and problems down the track.
I think almost all 2nd – 3rd generation muslims in Australia have assimilated quite well. This is just a perception that can be distorted by your own assumptions and perspective. When I listen to Aly from the project I see an Aussie…what do you see?
26 Nov 2015 12:39:32pm
And your writings DW are invariably based on wishful thinking and rationalisation to support your preconceived opinions.
The ABS performed an analysis of middle eastern migrants from census data. It is titled "CENSUS 2006 – PEOPLE BORN IN THE MIDDLE EAST". Suggest you read it. The only ME migrant group who integrate well into Australia are Israelis.
26 Nov 2015 9:27:20am
Most Muslims don’t see you as an "infidel", just like most Catholics don’t see you as a "sinner", stop the stereotypes and you will see that things will "magically" change.
26 Nov 2015 12:22:19pm
"Most Muslims don’t see you as an "infidel", just like most Catholics don’t see you as a "sinner"". Thats because like all religions most people are not practicing. So what your basicly saying is we only have to worry about the religious musliums?
26 Nov 2015 1:13:55pm
…. if you want to worry about religious Muslims and religious Catholics and everybody else, be my guest. Just try to have a good sleep from time to time, it’s not worthy of losing it by becoming paranoid about religious people.
26 Nov 2015 2:26:50pm
Nice strawman nathan.
I have a few so called ‘muslim’ mates.
Some of them havent been to mosque since they were young teenagers, some of them do all their prayers but don’t go to mosque, and one in particular never misses prayers at the mosque.
Not one of them has tried to convert me, none have tried to kill me, though they’ve had ample opportunity if they really wanted to, and none of them consider me to be an infidel.
26 Nov 2015 10:08:18am
That’s not the first time you’ve claimed that religious leaders in Australia preach non integration. Clearly you claim some expertise on the topic.
26 Nov 2015 11:09:40am
Did you read the article by a young Pakistani women in the Fairfax press? For me it put in place pieces of the jigsaw puzzle which were confusing. In a nutshell the influence and power that the Mufti’s and others wield in Australia is infinitely stronger than in her original homeland. There what her parents said, others said and what people did were her frame of reference. Here that is not the case (according to her) the overriding message is on of remain separate. The other stems back 20 years to the writings of Keysar Trad now removed from the internet. His message then was very different to now he wrote very strongly about non integration, not having western friends and discouraging young Muslims to adopt western ways. He now is much more subdued but still is has hints of the past. Does a Leopold change his spots?
26 Nov 2015 7:56:57pm
Let me give you a hint, from Dove’s question.
What is the statistical basis for your claim. The evidence base?
And by that I do not mean anecdotes, individual cases. I mean the body of statistical data.
The Pakistani women was one instance. Keysar Trad was one instance. Not a body of evidence.
You seem to be assuming that because a few people in the muslim community are saying some stuff – they are – that somehow this disproportionately impacts all other muslims, but other previous waves of migrants weren’t disproportionately influenced by similar small groups in their midst.
Effectively you are saying that muslims are more easily swayed by fringe voices than other groups. With no evidence to back that up.
26 Nov 2015 11:34:20am
see Bible and Koran.
Son of Zaky:
26 Nov 2015 12:40:48pm
Easy. All of them.
Allow me to take you through a contrarian scenario Dove.
I happen to think homosexuals should have the right to get married if they’d like to (although I do have some minor issues with the idea, they’re not of an intensity that I would vote against it should that become necessary). From what I understand that puts me in line with the views of the majority of Australians.
We are a society which is making halting, stumbling steps (never fast enough for some, but you come to expect that) towards "integration" of homosexuals. It has been a long process over my lifetime, and it will be an improvement in many people’s lives when it happens (probably well after I’ve left the stage).
Religious leaders in this country DO NOT want to "integrate" on this issue, nor do their devotees. You will, I’m sure, be aware of this, as I suspect you will be one of the ones to drop by and argue the case should any religiously-affiliated views appear on this site. As will I.
Whimsically, and just to stir the pot a bit more, I’d put it to you that Indigenous Australians may also perhaps not be the most liberal-minded on this issue either – I’ll just hang that out there for you to have a ponder on at your leisure.
Here’s my problem (perhaps it should be yours too?) – at some point I have to rank my grievances and my aspirations, as no matter how appealing it may be to think otherwise, you CAN’T have it all.
Given the choice I have to make between my professed desire for homosexuals to be given a better deal than they currently receive over any other thoughts I may harbour about the rights of people to believe whatever they want to believe, I find myself strangely un-attracted to the idea of wanting more people who are going to be arguing with me on this issue in this country. That is dispassionate pragmatism, not emotionally-loaded bigotry.
Christians who want to take their private religious views and impose them on others irritate me immensely. I have no reason to believe adherents of any other religion would be any different. Some may even be worse.
As someone firmly enamoured with the idea of a secular state with private religious freedom for all who need it, I have a great deal of difficulty advocating for religiously-minded people when I cannot be sure of their long-term intentions. Presumably you can.
26 Nov 2015 3:03:35pm
Not all religious people oppose same sex marriage and many even openly cast the magic spells of spiritual union. Even Islamic Imams in both the UK and USA do this, and plenty of Christian folk down under.
There is massive difference between what individuals may practise in their own time and laws which would bind everyone else. I think the example a cracker, but irrelevant
Son of Zaky:
26 Nov 2015 4:11:00pm
The example is indeed a cracker, but it’s only irrelevant to someone with a closed mind. Someone who compartmentalises their thinking and refuses to see consequences to actions. Someone like you, apparently.
It’s hardly news (in fact, I’d almost be tempted to call it "irrelevant") that there are a range of views amongst religious adherents. Unfortunately, discussions are conducted using the MEAN value of those views – those embodied by the standard teachings of those faiths. In other word, the nett effect that the religious grouping has on matters – to which the outlier influence is part, but does not speak for. If you’re in any doubt about this, flick back to the comments in any articles pumped out here by the Christian lobby.
I’d put it to you that the MEAN Christian viewpoint on any social topic in Australia is more moderate (a question of degrees, obviously) than the corresponding MEAN viewpoint from Islam. Feel free to disagree.
Seeing as we (I presume you also reckon gay marriage is still okay?) have so much difficulty with prevailing Christian views on what should otherwise be a simple matter, I struggle to see how people with a more extreme MEAN viewpoint help in any way.
It’s a case of deciding whether you want problems to get sorted, or whether you want to make a messy situation even more messy and unpleasant just so you get the thrill of arguing sanctimoniously. I prefer the former.
It’s a line of thinking perhaps best left to people who are prepared to make tough, holistic choices, and not those who hand-wring about everything in isolation.
Ask your gay friends what they think about homophobic ideas – the ones I know wouldn’t discriminate favourably towards anyone who has them just because they wear a chador.
26 Nov 2015 4:42:25pm
While the phrase ‘homosexuals are an abomination’ remains in the Bible, all Christians support the sentiment.
26 Nov 2015 5:23:29pm
I’d have to challenge that statement.
The fact is that not all christians believe that homosexuality is an abomination.
Ask many christians if a homosexual can be christian and you will definitely find support for it.
Stretching that a little the same goes for Islam and the brand of ideology groups like IS propigate.
Reading comments here there are some who quite simply cannot unbind the teachings of Islam from the teachings of IS which is, put simply, a bastardised reading of certain selected texts from a very old book.
Ironically when you point out that the bible has some pretty horrific passages in it the usual apologists point out that most of the bad bits are in the old Testament and that most Christians ignore it. The problem with that is of course is that Jesus quoted frequently directly from the Old Testament and that if you throw away the Old Testament and only read the New, it simply doesnt make sense. Why would Jesus sacrifice himself if you completely ignore the whole Adam sinned bit?
It would be a little like watching Star Wars: Return of the Jedi as a stand alone movie. Wouldn’t make sense… Who’s the walking carpet, why is that guy frozen in concrete, whats with the princess, why does everybody out up with the annoying gold robot, why does the Skywalker guy give himself up to the bad guy in black???
Anyhow, when pointing out that muslims don’t all believe the same thing, and that what IS teaches isn’t actually Islam, the usual suspects simply state that its untrue and they want all of us to die because we are infidels. Apparently christians are capable of ignoring certain texts, but muslims are not. Apparently christians can ‘interpret’ texts in different manners but muslims cannot.
They simply cannot accept that, like christians, not all scripture should be treated equally, and all scripture can be twisted to mean whatever those who twist it want it to mean, whether those doing the twisting believe themselves to be christian, jews, muslims or ‘other’.
26 Nov 2015 6:33:55pm
Why not aim to eradicate all religion? We almost did it with Christianity before folk music came along and wrecked it for everyone.
26 Nov 2015 6:35:54pm
"Whimsically, and just to stir the pot a bit more, I’d put it to you that Indigenous Australians may also perhaps not be the most liberal-minded on this issue either"
Zaky – you are correct, but for exactly the same reasons you raise for the rest of the religious based opposition to the concept. The indigenous people had a religion of their before Christianity arrived and many still have a strong faith. That religion also prohibits homosexuality just like the rest of them do.
26 Nov 2015 7:40:42pm
I would gladly quote the Q’uran’s instructions on non- integration, but quotes rarely get through. In a nutshell, it’s ‘not on’ and involves violence.
26 Nov 2015 10:15:21am
Hi Bev, I think you are taking too dim a view of the situation. We have had muslim people in our area since WW2 and never a hint of trouble. Any migrant group who are undereducated and have grown up with conflict are going to take time to settle here. We have plenty of examples from the First Fleet onward.
Unfortunately for us, Australia does not live in a vacuum and the rest of the world has the same problems we do.
The solution is to embrace change and work to improve the situation. Most of our new arrivals have come here to escape the Middle East situation and build lives and careers for their children. There is a rogue element taking advantage of their situation, but that is not the norm for the many peace-loving Muslim people who have made Australia their home.
26 Nov 2015 12:09:40pm
Oaktree, Muslim peoples were living in Australia within a matter of decades of the arrival of the British first fleet with its convicts. We also had groups of people of Muslim background coming in during the 1860’s and 1880’s and since, as we did with Chinese and others of other asian background.
It seems there are some here in Australia who would like to bring in their own version of the White Australia policy which we only managed to get rid of 50 years ago.
Is it not interesting how they have created the very same argument against just about every group of immigrants who have come to Australia including of course the Irish. We even had the anti- General Monash lot who were against giving Monash command of the Australian Armed forces during World War 1 because he was of German decent and because he was of Jewish decent. That is even though he was born in Australia, but to them he wasn’t British, of British decent.
26 Nov 2015 12:21:06pm
Partially true. That said point out to me another ethnic group who have come to Australia and have growing enclaves rather ones which diminish with time and whose children (even to the third generation) show less rather than more inclination to blend in with the rest of Australia.
26 Nov 2015 1:20:23pm
Bev, new arrivals tend to gather in enclaves and spread out once they’ve assimilated. I’m guessing that, in maybe 40 years from now, Australian tourists in London will have ventured beyond their enclaves in Earl’s Court, Hammersmith and Fulham, and may even be seen in such far-off, alien landscapes such as Leyton, Golders Green and Rickmansworth.
26 Nov 2015 3:22:11pm
Bev, I am descended from religious refugees who came from Germany in the 1830s, just after South Australia was set up.
They established "enclaves" in the Adelaide Hills.
Although mine was the sixth or seventh generation of these people, I had cousins who could still speak German, even though we were all born after the second World War.
During the First World War, these communities (the fourth or fifth generation of Australians) had the German sounding names of their towns changed to make them sound more "English," and many of their citizens were interned, for fear that they still had contacts in Germany.
What I remember of my religious upbringing was that our sect was right, the other branch of that particular denomination was only partially wrong, all other Christian denominations were wrong, the Catholics were more wrong than everybody else. Non Christians were heathens.
One of the effects of the Second World War was to break down the insularity of these communities, (although places like Hahndorf now exist by proudly showing off their German heritage to hordes of tourists).
So it took several generations, and over a 100 years for this "ethnic group" to appear to integrate into the mainstream.
26 Nov 2015 10:35:26am
"To me this wave seems to be very different a majority of second and third generation children have not integrated in fact quite the opposite."
You would probably have to provide some sort of evidence that this is in fact the case, rather than just saying it ‘seems’ like it. Look at our university campuses – there you will see plenty of examples of young adults from Islamic backgrounds mixing well with all other cultures.
"This is not helped by their religious leaders preaching a message of non integration, staying separate because we are the decedent west, kaffirs, infidels."
Its also not helped by the fact that we have started wars in areas from which their ancestors have come, and that every terrorist attack around the world (affecting white people) is well publicised and they are being publically portrayed by idiotic former PMs as the enemy.
Step 1 in radicalisation is making young people feel like outcasts from the society in which they live. This is something that our media and our leaders have been doing. Only then are these young people be susceptible to the religious leaders seeking to establish a power base amongst the disaffected.
The best answer to this whole problem is to share opportunities and connectedness such that we don’t have people who become that disconnected and desperate as to reach out to people who want to use them.
26 Nov 2015 3:33:23pm
Universities students are a limited subgroup.
Which came first. I would suggest mainstream Mufti’s preaching separation (not hatred or incitement) and planting the seeds comes first. The message of non integration is absorbed and acted out. Like a self for-filling prophesy they feel isolated from the the rest of Australia. This in turn makes some vulnerable to suggestions from those who preach hate and Jihad.
26 Nov 2015 5:26:07pm
Hmmm, it appears as though regardless of how many examples are given, by several different posters, none of the examples given are good enough for you, Bev.
Apparently all the examples given are outliers, and not mainstream.
Could it possibly be that its you who simply refuses to accept that what you label ‘subgroups’ are actually very valid reflections of the whole??
26 Nov 2015 5:48:30pm
I keep reading what you ever so politely suggest and see a pattern emerging. Assertion after assertion with no supporting evidence or analysis. Then when someone calls you out, you ask a question that contains another unsupported assertion and when they don’t answer you claim victory despite the fact that you offered nothing other than an unsupported assertion in the first place. You have spent to much time listening to Alan Jones.
26 Nov 2015 10:55:20am
Exactly right Bev.
The author, most politicians and many from the left side of politics will not have it that Muslim migrants have provided significantly more problems for the host country than any other migrant group that has come to this country.
The evidence of difference is overwhelming yet will not be spoken about.
Unfortunately for law abiding Muslims there are many of their faith all over the world killing and maiming people in the name of their religion. Almost every terrorist incident around the world over the past 15-20 years has been claimed by Islam.
This alone straps baggage and suspicion on any Muslim coming to this country or any country for that matter and few it seems are any hurry to dispel this suspicion.
Add to this the following .
Most people going to the Middle East to get involved in problems they or their parents left behind are nearly all Muslims;
Those that have attacked and killed offices of the law or their workers are Muslims;
The only siege brought about by ideology that I can recall has been by a criminal Muslim in Sydney where 2 people died;
Laws have been are still being enacted to stifle the efforts of Muslims to inflict further harm on their host country;
Which migrant group has conducted wild demonstrations with its attendant violence and damage over cartoons or something written about a god, Muslims;
Which migrant group has tried to impose parts of their culture and beliefs on their hosts, Muslims; and
Which migrant group has proven so difficult to integrate into Australian society despite some being here for 2 generations or more. Muslims.
Is it not understandable why many Australians are wary about this group.
Finally, large enclaves of Muslims do nothing to foster integration and assimilation, they may as well be in some city in the ME.
They have an obligation to cast aside those parts of their culture that have seen their homelands turned into failed states, no one is asking them to jettison it all but they must make a legitimate attempt to fit in and not simply blame others for their own isolation. A good place to start is to cast aside some of their out of touch leaders who, it would appear, are fostering the divide if not inciting hatred between Muslims and other Australians.
They have an ideal opportunity to show us all where they stand with what is currently happening in the world but sadly all the blame is being laid at the feet of the rest of us and that’s a cop out.
26 Nov 2015 11:56:40am
"The evidence of difference is overwhelming yet will not be spoken about."
You might provide some evidence then. You have made a series of assertions, but they are not the same thing. Hint: Provide facts and statistics next time.
"Which migrant group has tried to impose parts of their culture and beliefs on their hosts"
"Which migrant group has proven so difficult to integrate into Australian society despite some being here for 2 generations or more"
Historically: White people for both. Incidently, neither of those are true for Muslims as a whole (the second is untrue because many have integrated very successfully, and many others have not all been here for 2 generations or more).
"The only siege brought about by ideology that I can recall has been by a criminal Muslim in Sydney where 2 people died"
The siege was clearly brought about by mental instability. Anyone can buy a flag.
"Which migrant group has conducted wild demonstrations with its attendant violence and damage over cartoons or something written about a god"
Which group conducted wild demonstrations with its attendance violence over the building of a building in Bendigo?
"Almost every terrorist incident around the world over the past 15-20 years has been claimed by Islam."
Who is this Islam guy? Or do you mean to group together all Islamic people into a homogenous group and hold them all responsible for the actions of a few. Because I could say that it is awful how Christianity bombed abortion clinics, shot a bunch of children in Scandinavia, and continue to protest at funerals of dead servicemen in the US – but I know that would be a stupid thing to say.
26 Nov 2015 1:59:27pm
Still banging the drum that the Sydney siege had nothing to do with Islam. Same as trying to deflect the fact that in this world by sheer number of terrorist attacks and the numbers killed can be equated with a few other incidents by non Muslims.
26 Nov 2015 3:45:54pm
Still baning the drum that it did?
Fact: He’d just learned that he’d lost his last appeal and would have to face charges for a serious crime.
Fact: Both the AFP and ASIO stated at the Coroner’s Enquiry that they could find no connection between Monis and ANY extremist group.
Fact: He was mentally ill.
Fact: For a guy supposedly doing the work of a terrorist he couldnt even provide his own flag.
Fact: He regularly contacted authorities, including Brandis’ office regarding contacting overseas terrorist organisations. Interestingly both ASIO and the AFP could find no evidence he had actually done so.
Fact: He had issues with a certain news channel and the way that they had portrayed him, and bingo bango he takes people hostage right across the street from that station.
My conclusion? He didnt have any contact whatsoever with any terrorist organisation. He couldnt even bring the right flag. He was mentally ill. He had a persecution complex. He was a notorious attention seeker. He’d just realised he was probably going to jail for a very long time. He committed suicide by cop.
26 Nov 2015 1:11:08pm
Hoddle Street was by muslims, the Hilton Hotel bombing again muslims, Martin Bryant a muslim, Ivan Milat a muslim?
Unabomber a muslim, Timothy McVeigh, Sandy Hook killer, Columbine killers, Dylan Roof, Anders Brevic all muslims as well?
26 Nov 2015 3:43:29pm
Wake up lazarus, the action of random nut cases can not be compared to the actions of a centrally controlled fanatical group that coordinated and/or educates the simple minded through the internet, pray groups, etc.
26 Nov 2015 5:33:58pm
Yes, Ive heard this story before.
Whenever its a white person committing terrorist like acts, for some reason you guys trip over yourselves trying to say it isnt terrorism.
McVeigh? Terrorism. Breivilk? Terrorism. Dylann Roof? Terrorism.
Interestingly in each of these cases the usual suspects cannot help but try and say it isnt terrorism. Somehow, its different.
In fact a recent study has shown that since 9/11 more acts of terrorism by right wing extremists have been perpetrated in the USA, than ‘Islamic’ inspired terrorists.
The christian, right wing has attacked on more occasions, and killed more people than any other terrorist group.
Additionally, the primary targets of muslim terrorists, are…. other muslims!! Which makes sense. Which would be more offensive to this mindset. Those who claim to believe the same things as you, but reject your teachings? Or those who you already know do not accept ‘allah’.
A Former Lefty:
26 Nov 2015 7:38:44pm
I thought these were all the actions of "lone wolves"?
Isnt that the narrative about islamic terrorism that we unwashed are supposed to accept? But seriously, why have you had t search back to the 1970s to find terrorist attacks that didnt involve islam?
And why do you naive lefties think the world begins and ends in Australia and the USA? Arent you aware of the atrocities against hundreds of thousands of people throughout the world that certain organised groups of islamists have committed?
And you compare that to Ivan Milat??
Son of Zaky:
26 Nov 2015 11:18:01am
I’m probably of your generation too Bev, and you offer up some interesting points to springboard off of – which I’m of the belief are better done in a more generalised manner than they currently are.
My contention is that the "multiculturalism" debate ignores technological advances. The previous examples of "assimilation" were driven by a relative inability to maintain contact with the former homeland – you came, you were stuck, news and personal contact was extremely limited (by modern standards), you got over it somehow (but no doubt never completely). They were "successes" not of the inherent brilliance of the Australian experience, but of the pragmatism born of having no other options. It is frequently overlooked that all that has changed, and the old certainties of "eventual compliance" no longer apply – regardless of whatever origin.
Second and third generations are always going to be the problem. Unfortunately, way too many people yell at the first generation – personally I happen to think they’re far more genuine than they are given credit for being. However, once the regime, or dictator, or people in your neighbourhood trying to kill you, have moved on in your former homeland (as they all will eventually) I’m not surprised the subsequent generations will harbour animosity about being somewhere they’ll never quite fit into. Instantaneous communication of the sort we have now will only exacerbate that.
In the distant past the world changed very little and people died younger – the natural turnover of mindset was very high, and could exist within the glacial pace of societal change. Things now move rapidly at the same time we keep older mindsets alive for longer. I’m not sure sufficient attention is paid to this basic fact.
I’m also entirely unconvinced that Australia is now the ideal place for people of ANY strong religious affiliation to be moving to – we as a nation seem to be moving in the opposite direction away from religiosity. I can’t help thinking that Syrian Christians, Iraqi Muslims, Nepalese Hindus or whatever other exotic flavours of belief in the primacy of deity over secular governance is really going to be comfortable here. I do also wonder if those who can’t see a problem and who simultaneously hold hopes of advancement on matters like homosexual recognition can spot the obvious incompatibility in their twin approaches.
I’m extremely disappointed all round with the standard of this so-called "debate" – I dislike bigotry immensely, but I also have a big hang-up with stupidity. There’s a lot of both around.
26 Nov 2015 1:09:42pm
Interesting idea, Son. I’d not thought about it in terms of technological advances.
One of which is that we can have this "debate" online. As you say, the standard of some of the comments is pretty awful, but there is some good thinking here as well.
Son of Zaky:
26 Nov 2015 3:49:35pm
The technological aspect came to me a while back when I was thinking about the "wogs" that I grew up with ozmq.
It occurred to me that although their parents had fled the aftermath of a totally destructive war, grinding poverty ("economic refugees" I suppose), and the search for some peace and quiet, there’s absolutely nothing that says that mindset of relief and gratitude automatically transfers to subsequent generations.
The "wogs" I (to my shame now) taunted at school just had to battle their way through it. The "old country" was not an obtainable reality, either through travel (air fares were a significantly bigger part of anyone’s pay-packet, and overseas travel wasn’t the easily-obtained "right" it is now) or through a technological screen presence that simply didn’t exist at the time.
Imagine if those "wogs" could get onto Facebook and talk with others in the old country, be told things "are pretty good now – your parents are living in the past", and even to Google Earth or YouTube their way around a place where they wouldn’t be called "wogs". Do you think they’d successfully "integrate" and become part of the great myth which is voluntary Australian multiculturalism? Do you think they’d not hate their parents for causing them to be here, and rebel against everything those older ones stood for? Do you think they’d take all that crap and feel the only option was to tough it out? I certainly don’t.
They did it because the great god of modern inanity, "choice", wasn’t on the table. Now it is.
What is happening now is only a surprise to the blind. Even leaving aside the religious aspect (to all the bigots – no, that doesn’t mean I’m "refusing to talk about Islam"), I simply do not think that past so-called immigration "successes" can in any way be extrapolated forward into the age of Twitter.
If we can manage to bust that shibboleth we might even be able to get somewhere on this issue. Spread the word.
26 Nov 2015 1:28:30pm
Unfortunately if religion and non-religion are unable to live together the only solution is to separate people into different regions. I think that inevitable as long as there is a core of religious people who wish to kill non-believers.
Son of Zaky:
26 Nov 2015 4:18:56pm
Personally LL, I’m damned tired of these veiled (sic) references to Islam, which only stir the pot unnecessarily.
If you’d have just said "…who wish to impose their will and religious beliefs on others" we’d still be friends, and I’d consider you’d have made a useful contribution with your comment without needing to go down the cheap, low road.
That isn’t "ignoring reality", "refusing to talk about Muslims", "being an apologist for people who want to kill us" or any of the other stupid labels that get thrown around.
It’s just trying to frame the discussion in such a way that a few more people may wish to join it without being shouted at by someone.
26 Nov 2015 1:49:20pm
I agree with most of your points. Communication though I had not really thought through does ring a bell. A dear friend (unfortunately now dead) of our family was a Hungarian who escaped from Hungary during the 1956 uprising against the Soviet Union (he was 12 at the time). Because of the communist regime he had little or no communication with his family until the Iron curtain was lifted. He did get back to Hungary for a visit to see his mother and siblings before she died but his roots were firmly planted in Australia.
26 Nov 2015 3:11:59pm
And this is the problem with making assimilation optional (multiculturalism). The assimilation that used to take one generation to achieve, now takes three.
26 Nov 2015 6:34:59pm
Italians next door to us still speak Italian amongst their group of friends. When they went back to Italy for a visit, the language had moved on and they had some difficulties in conversation.
We all have our backgrounds and we cling to the familiar.
My doctor is Muslim and she is lovely. I have also worked with some very polite and friendly muslim colleagues of both genders.
There are some crime families of all sorts of religions and backgrounds, and some fundamentalists also of many religions. We need to recognise that the biggest problem has always been the charismatic people who lead individuals into giving their all to a cause.
26 Nov 2015 8:04:56am
Where to start….some of the people arguing against Muslim immigration are racist, some are not.
The author appears to be one of these people you rarely travels outside of the safe leafy suburbs into the real world.
Perhaps he has a driver so he has never heard a Australian Muslim complain about Muslim immigration.
I guess he takes the view that all world views are equally valid? That there is not any reason for new immigrant to assimilate to Australian culture and values.
At what point is saying that multiple wives is wrong racist? At what point is forcing women to dress head to foot in a black cloth bag.
I bet if you stopped and talked to most people who are worried about Muslims most people have got any issues with people wishing to come to Australian and embrace a new way of life.
Michael you’ve given it a name "nativist" likely over a dinner party conversation talking about those awful western suburbs types. But you clearly don’t understand what it is you’ve given a name to.
But I guess that’s the thing about lawyers, they see the world differently to the rest of us. where we see trouble they see litigation and at least two lawyer getting work.
26 Nov 2015 9:29:51am
"At what point is forcing women to dress head to foot in a black cloth bag."…. Are you ever asked Muslim women whether they are "forced" into wearing their traditional attires? Or are you just basing your views on your own prejudice?…. Have you ever spoken with a Muslim person?…. Please do, you will be surprised!
26 Nov 2015 11:06:40am
Alpo: I generally agree with your outlook on life, and I abhor politicians who make the Muslim faith a means of gaining political advantage. Especially if they at the same time boast about their Catholicism, or give press conferences outside churches of any denomination.
However it is almost certainly a display of their religion to wear whole of body, or head covering. This alone points out a difference between Muslims coming to this country and the greater majority.
It does seem, if world examples can be taken notice of, that marked different religious beliefs can be a cause of dissent.
I know some wonderful Muslim people, but unfortunately there are many, some here, but mostly overseas that openly promote the eventual Muslimisation of the world.
It seems a forlorn home that religion will not cause differences, especially with those that want to expand those differences.
Humanity, hopefully one day will realise that if there is a god, it is called science, and serves all mankind.
26 Nov 2015 3:25:30pm
"However it is almost certainly a display of their religion to wear whole of body, or head covering."
Actually it is nothing of the sort. If it were, it would be a terrible choice because the women of all the other religions of the Eastern Mediterranean dress in exactly the same way.
The practice of wearing head-to-toe black clothing is a REGIONAL curiosity of the Eastern Mediterranean. Walking around the streets of Beirut, Tyre, Sidon, Damascus, Iraklion, Sitia, Valetta, Nicosia or anywhere else around that neck of the woods and you will see women of Catholic, Marionite, Druze, Moslem and even Jewish faith wearing the same garb. But the Sufi family with whom I stayed in Sidon chose to wear mainly western garb, and I never saw any signs that this was frowned upon.
Oh, by the way, when in the Middle East, you will see plenty of Arab men done up in head-to-toe black robes. I’ve never been able to get my head around the physics – its totally counter-intutitive to me – but they insist that the heavy black robes are the most effective way of keeping cool in the baking desert sun. As they have been wearing this garb for many centuries, I defer to their experience on the subject.
But anyone who feels that cultures should not force people into uncomfortable, impractical and, in some cases dangerous clothing should take a walk down George or Collins Street any afternoon and look at the office workers streaming out of the glass boxes with their suit-coats, ties, impractical shoes and long trousers in 40 degree heat. The see how far you get walking down the street in the most comfortable garb for hot weather (your birthday suit) and see how far you get.
26 Nov 2015 11:36:06am
So why do women who do not wear head covering and are not forced to (example Iran, Iraq, Lebanon) in their country of origin wear it here?
26 Nov 2015 12:37:34pm
You should ask those women why do they wear their head scarf, rather than assuming why they do so. You should also understand how many of them actually wear the head scarf. You wouldn’t like them to assume things about your behaviour, wouldn’t you? The more we communicate, the more we understand, the less ignorant prejudice builds up in the community.
26 Nov 2015 3:42:03pm
I assume nothing. I do however find it a bit odd that women who didn’t or didn’t have to suddenly decide to wear it on arriving to Australia. I ask again why do you think it is happening?
26 Nov 2015 2:12:53pm
I have much better things to do, than obsess about what other people chose to wear.
26 Nov 2015 2:38:33pm
Dear Bev, I’d suggest that you do not know any muslim women.
What you are describing is a form of political control completely unrelated to religion. I suggest that you actually have a look at how liberal women are in places like Iran and Lebanon. There are websites dedicated to celebrating their ‘liberalness’ (for want of a better word) and their flagrant display of womanhood and sexuality.
My opinion, brought about by having some close friends who are muslim, is that muslim women are fiercely independent, and generally speaking, it is they who rule the roost. Men will not (I’d say cannot) force these women to do what they dont want, in much the same way it happens in western cultures.
I have an expression where I come from, and oddly enough some Afghani friends have stated that they have a very similar expression (Im unsure if english has the same or equivalent expression), but basically it goes ‘the man is the head but the women is the neck. Where the neck turns the head must follow’.
26 Nov 2015 4:35:59pm
I am well aware of these facts. As I did name countries where women are much freer that I know of. In this respect and others Islam is not monolithic in their treatment of women. It still does not answer the question as to why a change when they come here. You suggest political control which is probably close to the truth. If it is the truth the message is "I am different" , "I do not want to integrate and I wear this out of choice to show that".
26 Nov 2015 4:45:26pm
‘Men will not (I’d say cannot) force these women to do what they dont want, in much the same way it happens in western cultures.’
Just wondering Spacey,
What planet do you come from?
26 Nov 2015 3:43:35pm
"So why do women who do not wear head covering and are not forced to (example Iran, Iraq, Lebanon) in their country of origin wear it here?"
Probably for the same reason that my Australian-bogan accent got noticeably stronger and distincly more bogan while I was living in Ireland and Greece.
I’m not sure if you have ever spent significant periods of time living in countries with cultural heritages different to our own, but I would recommend it as a learning experience for any Australian, especially those who struggle to understand the behaviours of new migrants.
I rarely eat a popular, dark-coloured yeast extract spread while in Australia (culinary tip – it is excellent as a spread on toast with a tin of baked beans over the top). But when I am overseas, I feel naked without a jar of it in my backpack.
People get homesick, and one of the ways of coping with this is to surround yourself with little reminders – little links back to the "old country". I am very grateful that, in my experience, the Greeks and Irish among whom I lived were not offended or threatened by my nostalgic peculiarities and, in some cases were genuinely interested – although very few asked for a second taste from my jar of salty black paste.
So when I am in Australia and I come across someone who is obviously holding onto some reminders of their homeland, I return the compliment by expressing an interest in their custom/clothing/foodstuff/musical instrument or whatever it is. I’ve learnt a lot from doing this and, if you do it respectfully, you almost always receive an enthusiastic and often grateful response.
Come on Bev – theres a whole world of different ways to live out there and you will never experience any of their delights while you remain in your shell, jumping at shadows. "Different" does not mean the same thing as "dangerous".
26 Nov 2015 7:52:19pm
I have traveled and studied overseas. Having read those comments which refer to integration I do see one thing. Most are referring to those they meet in an academic situation or as doctors nurses and other professionals. Professional people and well educated people do tend to be less religious or pay lip service to religion. They do integrate and mingle better than those on the lower rungs. Therein I feel lays part of the problem they are looking at a subset (a small one) and extrapolating their experience to all. If you asked those living next to an ever expanding enclave you would get a different answer. Those living in the average suburb a different answer again.
26 Nov 2015 1:31:35pm
Yes I have spoken Muslim’s read my post, I work with Muslims. Being Islamic does not mean your part of some mono-culture. again reread my post.
26 Nov 2015 10:58:19am
I know quite a few muslims, and have seen with my own eyes thousands of muslim women.
I have yet to see one here in Australia ‘dressed in a black bag’.
The first step in any debate is to define the terms. If you want to define as ‘muslim’ all who wear (or force their wives to wear) black bags, then I suggest we are talking about a very small group of persons indeed!
In fact, I’ll even let you have that specific debate uncontested, if you also concede that non ‘black-bag’ wearers present no problems.
26 Nov 2015 3:13:06pm
"At what point is forcing women to dress head to foot in a black cloth bag."
I spent a fair bit of time living on the Greek Islands in my young adulthood and, as a child, grew up in Sydney’s western suburbs. Back then, there were a lot of Greek migrants around the block and all the women and girls wore black from head to toe, with veils and the whole kaboodle. My aunt, a devout Catholic, would not leave the house on a Sunday without her black veil and ALWAYS wore head-to-toe black on Fridays.
When I was on Crete and some of the smaller islands of the Mediterranean, the standard garb for expecially older women was heavy black robes, black boots, a black cowl covering all but the face, and a black gauze veil. I saw the same thing among women on Malta, Cyprus and Corsica, as well as in Calabria and other parts of southern Italy.
I remember thinking at the time "why do they put up with this?" with all the fervour that a male feminist can muster.
But my next stop was Paris (best city in the world), where I saw an endless procession of young women teetering unsteadily down the street on high heels that forced their hips and lower backs into absurd postured and would, no doubt, lead to serious postural problems in later life. I saw women wearing dresses so tight that they must surely have cut off circulation to the extremities and, with all the male feminist fervour I could manage, I thought "why do they put up with this?".
I’ve grown up a bit since then. I’ve seen how western culture and advertising can make otherwise sensible human beings indulge in all sorts of damaging behaviours, degrade themselves in all sorts of disgraceful ways and to act in all sorts of violent and anti-social ways. And I’ve realised that Islam has a lot of catching up to do if it wants to compete with western civilisation when it comes to forcing people to act against their own interests.
26 Nov 2015 8:13:18am
Wow, what kind of school did you go to if you felt there was a ‘problem’ in the playground between protestants and catholics? I wouldn’t have had a clue who worshipped what god or how, my only concern was whether the kid was nice to me or not. Perhaps if we stopped projecting our own guilt onto others, we might stop calling each other names and recognise that the more likely drivers out there are fear, not hate. Perhaps instead of the reported $27,000,000 (yes that is a lot of zeroes) spent on ‘deradicalising’ youth, we should be spending some money and effort on abating people’s fears. Otherwise all we are doing is adding fuel to the fire, now as well as fear, people are angry that their tax dollars are spent pandering to a small minority to make them ‘like’ the rest of us. Again, I don’t care which god you worship or how you do it, all I care about is whether you treat me the same way I treat you. As a child that meant if you weren’t mean to me, I was happy to play with you. Not much changes in adulthood really.
26 Nov 2015 9:10:05am
He’s talking about parts of Sydney, Susan. Sydney people always say "Australia" when they mean "Sydney".
26 Nov 2015 10:27:38am
Only too true: many articles here seem be written by people who think that Australia ends somewhere about the last decent coffee shop from the Sydney CBD.
I find Sydney inhabitants struggle with the concept that another Australian could not care less about what happens in their city.
26 Nov 2015 9:19:46am
There was a divide and a strong one when I was growing up. Inter marriage between protestants and Catholics was frowned upon. Different public service departments were enclaves of protestants or Catholics we had the Masons (protestant) or the Knights of the Southern Cross (Catholic). This has all been swept away now as the authority of the churches no longer rules to a large extent our lives.
26 Nov 2015 3:46:52pm
Thank God that bigotry has gone. My father tried to get a job during the Depression and was turned away as he was a "Mick". Those days were shameful and I am glad they have gone. Too many people judging others cos of their religion and now you seem to want to pick on people because of their religion. What a heroine.
26 Nov 2015 4:13:30pm
"Inter marriage between protestants and Catholics was frowned upon."
Tell me about it. My first girlfriend was Catholic and the fact that I was an atheist from a Protestant family was a BIG problem for her family. My great grandparents had an integrated marriage. My great grandmother was a devout Catholic and my great grandfather was an Orangeman (Irish Protestant loyal to Britain). They never came to an agreement on whether the children were baptised as Catholics or Protestants. My great grandmother would simply wait for her husband to go to work and have the local priest come to the house to perform a Catholic christening.
The divide between catholics and protestants goes back to the early days of the penal colony and was entirely class-based. Most catholics arrived here in chains and were used as slaves by the predominantly protestant "squatocracy". The vicious criminal gang known as the Rum Corps, who engaged in the torture of convicts as a recreational activity and laid the philosophical foundations of the Liberal Party, was predominantly Protestant.
I am sure that if Tony Abbott or John Howard could have divided Australia on denominational grounds they would have done so. But, as you say, the church has lost a lot of influence in Australia and very few of us still identify by our christian denomination (even those who still follow the Christian faith). But it didn’t matter because they had the Moslems (as well as the usual suspects – the unemployed, single mothers, teenagers, trade unions and such).
It started with the Rum Corps and Squatters, and has continued on with the Nationalist Party, the United Australia Party, the Country Party, the National Party and the Liberal Party. We really need to get rid fo this dark stain on our society.
26 Nov 2015 9:23:07am
thats probably ok if others follow the same code and believe in "do unto others" but we have an element that wants to do us in because we believe in this fair minded approach to people and life. I am not sure public beheadings and caged burnings of christians allows for us to hand out a flower in peace and goodwill. Sometimes groups of people just hate who we are and want to destroy our way of life. We should be ready to challenge this to protect who and what we love.
26 Nov 2015 2:42:10pm
I’m not sure Christians shooting abortionists is entirely appropriate either.
26 Nov 2015 4:47:01pm
You are correct lazarus in pointing out that this is also bad.
26 Nov 2015 9:50:45am
Obviously you are not old enough to recall the sometimes fractious relationship that existed between students attending Catholic Primary Schools and Public Primary Schools. Being in that geriatric age group I can well recall as a kid the morning ritual as the public school bus rolled past our catholic school. We, the Catholics would line the fence shouting in unison "Public rats, stink like cats" as the public kids responded with "Catholic dogs, smell like frogs". And then we all finished up at the local public high school playing on the same team and becoming great mates.
26 Nov 2015 10:12:59am
‘Wow, what kind of school did you go to if you felt there was a ‘problem’ in the playground between protestants and catholics’, i went to college with people who had to be covered by a scrum of people to get out of pubs to avoid being shot because they were either prodies or Catholics. I know people who go on holiday for the marching season. As for the rest of your post, i think your quite right, but if people listen to the likes of alan jones, bolt and read the daily bellylaugh what do you expect from a country whose population is 53% functionally illiterate and do not take the time to go beyond the soundbite or headline?
26 Nov 2015 10:16:57am
Susan, you would have to be at least in your early sixties to recall the horrible sectarianism that infected Australia in the post war period (although it certainly existed well before that). I remember it as a schoolboy.
It was largely a hangover from the Protestant business and political class (usually of English heritage) versus the Catholic working class (usually) from Irish and Scottish heritage.
Prime Minister Menzies belonged to the former group but did his best to win over many Catholics and degrade the sectarianism. He was largely successful and many Catholics rose to senior positions in the public service and anti Catholic organisations like the Masons went into a decline.
I can clearly remember when Phillip Lynch (Liberal Party) became Treasurer, there was plenty of newspaper comment on his Catholicism as he had previously struggled to win preselection because of his religion.
The Skeleton Inside:
26 Nov 2015 10:36:40am
Susan, I went to a Catholic school in the country in the 60s and 70s and we used to sing songs bagging out the ‘publics’ and they would do the same to us. We were taught that all Protestants would go to hell.
There were also many continental immigrants who were also not like us, wogs and dagos, and we didn’t really like them either.
Now both groups are mainstream, and we’ve been through the Vietnamese others, who would never fit in, Pauline Hanson’s waves of Asians and now it is the Muslims. Give them time.
Then it will be another group. The martians perhaps? I know they will NEVER fit in
26 Nov 2015 1:16:16pm
Susan: How unkind you are! Fancy suggesting the derailment of somebody’s lovely gravy-train. Naughty! Naughty!
Funny how it is that so many of us with abundant life experience can come up with thoroughly practical, effective – and free! – methods of frustrating the Head-Hackers’ recruitment of gullible and vulnerable kids.
26 Nov 2015 3:56:17pm
"Wow, what kind of school did you go to if you felt there was a ‘problem’ in the playground between protestants and catholics?"
Well it sounds very much like the school I went to in the 1960’s. There was a Catholic school on the other side of the railway tracks from our school (but we lived on that side as well so we couldn’t really call it the "wrong side of the tracks"). But our school was very Anglican in its outlook and we were encouraged to refer to the Catholic school kids as "Micks". We engaged in some pretty wild street battles on the way home from school. (It was weird our school was to the south of the Catholic School, but most of its sudents lived to the north of the Catholic School while most of the "Micks" lived to the south of our school – so twice a day our paths would cross and, more often then not, this resulted in pitched street battles. And another weird thing is that I ended up marrying a Catholic).
Much of this was the fault of a bloke called Hughes, who used residual suspicion of Irish Catholics to divide the community in the first half of the 20th Century. He is remembered as the third worst PM in Australia’s history (after Howard and Abbott), mainly for the way in which he divided the nation for short term political gain, using the Irish as scapegoats. Abbott and Howard both beat him simply because their populist attacks on minorities in contemporary Austraian society are causing even more damage to our social fabric than Hughes managed.
26 Nov 2015 8:14:34am
I have trouble with the name. I think these thinking they are native is very naive. In fact I think I would like to call it the ‘ungenous native’ and say it is not a mis-understanding of the world, but rather a deliberate mis-understanding of how history works. Yes, you can say that the history of Australia started the day a white man wrote it. And you can believe that too, but to do so you have to stay away from anything that would put your story into another context. Imagine for a moment that you were a Young Liberal, at Sydney University, in the sixties, seventies, eighties, nineties or even after that. And that it seemed just too taken over by middle-of-the-roaders, a little progressive, but mostly conservative, and that you and your friends thought it would all be better if you took it over. So you did, and so you now had control of your own platform and your own history, you could keep an eye over that too. But there was always a chance that someone on the outside would try to destroy you with some pithy theory about Australia, so you had a list of who was allowed in and who was not. That’s your "nativism", in a nutshell. It’s a list of who should be allowed in.
26 Nov 2015 9:13:33am
Back in form
Now being one of Michaels uneducated and socially isolated yobs I may have (for may read almost certainly) got it wrong
So Sydney University is one little subset of Australia a little hamlet of serenity where the liberal gatekeepers strive to keep it in keeping with "their ideal of Australia", Just as Lakemba is it’s own little subset of Australia, And Ascot and dear say it’s not true even Buderim (my invite must have been lost in the mail) and from inside our little isolated paradises we all see ourselves as (the only) true Australians and see all others as not?
26 Nov 2015 9:13:47am
I think that was meant to be "dis-engeneously nativist".
26 Nov 2015 12:24:13pm
The point, Buderim, is that the movement is built around a list. It’s not random. It is the people who got here first. Some of them get pushed off the list, but it’s unusual to be added to it.
26 Nov 2015 12:41:21pm
But buderim Lakemba is not the same as Buderim. And the richest of Lakemba, Bankstown, Belmore, are probably your Buderim neighbours. You need to see things differently, that’s all. Start with the list and look back at the movement.
26 Nov 2015 3:16:27pm
Spot on, Lakemba, Buderim, Sydney university, are not the same yet maybe when we are inside our little enclaves our little areas of privilege (or disadvantage) we think that WE are the true Australians and anybody else is an interloper, maybe if we broaden our views on what is Australia?
26 Nov 2015 4:12:44pm
If these people, these Nativists say that they are Australia I am not one to argue with that. After all, until they came along there was no Australia (TM) and so one cannot argue with that. The question I want more to hear the answer of is what do they want? They could be wanting to rid Australia of the non-British. Isn’t it likely that that would be in their list? Anyone who didn’t register for being British.
26 Nov 2015 4:27:13pm
What I’m thinking there Buderimboy is this. Did the British or the French or the Spanish really all have the intention to co-colonize the Americas or did they have a plan and taking so long to all agree to implement that plan word of mouth spread and people just started migrating and then there was a scramble by the British, the French, the Spanish to get over there fast and get together asap the parts required for claiming of properties because people, ordinary people, just did what they wanted and ignored the first fleeters there who were waving fists full of documents to say that they were in charge. Was that whole Americas thing just a disaster, really badly managed, and are they therefore wary about all these millions of migrants who are now on the move having sensed doors opening up for the pre-glacial regions and although I am not here referring to The Pied Piper it certainly could possibly a little bit of sense here, doesn’t it?
26 Nov 2015 12:56:55pm
Unless of course what they’re REALLY talking about is Nativity.
26 Nov 2015 4:29:02pm
Anyway if you feel excluded I am sorry to hear that. Myself I am neither.
26 Nov 2015 4:31:45pm
I do think this Nativism has something to do with property laws and claims but what.
26 Nov 2015 8:19:54am
Some good points in this article. However, what is it that needs to be "conquered"? Ignorance of our own humanity?
Ignorance is basically something we are born into and varies according to the circumstances in which one is raised. Some families and social setting are more conducive to becoming the best human one can be than others.
About my only concern with Islam focuses on the right-wingers in their midst, the proponents of Sharia Law who claim to be speaking for all Muslims. If mainstream Muslims come out and reject out of hand the ‘eye for an eye’ mentality of their own backwater cave-dwelling zealots, just as 99.9% of Christians reject the Ku Klux Klan, then I do not see problems moving forward.
If moderate Muslims continue to give the nod to Sharia, it is not worth thinking about what we will become as a society.
26 Nov 2015 10:53:21am
What about the proponents of Christian Fundamentalism who claim to be speaking on behalf of all Christians? These are far more dangerous as they have active supporters in the nations Parliaments.
26 Nov 2015 1:31:24pm
They don’t seem to be targeting civilians for their cause so it is a lower priority in my opinion.
26 Nov 2015 10:57:57am
Which moderate Muslims do you see ‘giving the nod to Sharia’? There are plenty of Christians who choose to live their lives according to additional rules self-imposed according to their religion. Most Christians do not seek to impose these rules on others. Some Christians do (see the anti same-sex marriage group as an example). It is exactly the same with Muslims.
26 Nov 2015 1:10:30pm
" Most Christians do not seek to impose these rules on others. Some Christians do (see the anti same-sex marriage group as an example). It is exactly the same with Muslims."
Correct. A recent example of a religious nutter inflicting his views on other Australians was Tony Abbott as health minister preventing access to RU486.
26 Nov 2015 8:20:05am
You might also consider that the population has a real (and well-founded) fear that the policies of unrtrammelled growth and unsustainable levels of immigration are eroding the structure of our society.
People, unlike the politicians and the press, look at Europe, and do not like what they see.
26 Nov 2015 9:58:32am
Careful damon, or the left will send a bus load of socialist thugs around to violently force you to of obey their ideology, as they do to any group that demonstrates a contrary view to theirs. Shame the media seems to have a blind eye to these thugs.
26 Nov 2015 11:58:22am
Care to tell us when you’ve seen that happen Sam? ‘The left’ as a bogeyman – how ‘reds under the bed’ of you.
26 Nov 2015 12:34:08pm
Just as an experiment, cp, put up an ‘non-PC’ view on The Conversation and see how long you last.
A Former Lefty:
26 Nov 2015 1:02:28pm
Ah yes, the left claim that there is no ‘left’ anymore.
You know things are really heating up and they are on the backfoot when you know they want to deny that their own movement exists and try to disassociate themselves from it.
Very very telling indeed…
26 Nov 2015 1:33:42pm
So CP, care to tell us how a bus organised by known socialists just happened to turn up in a country town last week, many wearing ski masks and attacked a lawful demonstration. Also care to rewrite the words of one of the organisers when interviewed on the ABC. She continually expressed that the demonstrators had no right to be heard because of their stance. One can only assume you support the right of the left to silence anyone that disagrees with them.
26 Nov 2015 2:45:27pm
Sorry but it seems the Right Wing Fascists like Reclaim Australia get all the air time, blanket coverage of their protests.
26 Nov 2015 10:40:51am
damon, when I see the pictures coming out of Europe I see a lot of people desperately fleeing unbearable conditions and looking for salvation for their families. What do you see?
When I look at Australia’s immigration and current multicultural status, I see a country that has benefitted enormously from immigration in many ways. I have absolutely no worries about the immigration of any particular group here as I have seen many waves of different people and cultures coming in, and how well they have fitted in.
I do not support the theory of infinite economic growth as it is impossible in a finite world but we can deal with that without confusing it with the effects of immigration.
26 Nov 2015 12:19:31pm
"benefitted enormously from immigration in many ways"
This is always the claim. Exactly how? The immigrants ate different food, danced different dances, but were they smarter? Probably not. Harder working? Probably not. More entrepreneurial? Evidence?
The enshrining of immigration in a golden glow is completely absurd, and its benefits wildly exaggerated, and countered by most independent (ie, not sponsored by government or business) studies.
26 Nov 2015 2:45:11pm
Billy Hughes, Joseph Cook, Andrew Fisher, George Reid, Chris Watson, Julia Gillard, Tony Abbott, Angus Young, Malcolm Young, Bon Scott, Jimmy Barnes, John Farham, Barry, Robin, and Maurice Gibb, Olivia Newton John, Frank Lowy, Dr Victor Chang, Jian Zhou and Dr Ian Frazer.
These are just of the top of my head but there are thousands and thousands more migrants whom have contributed positively to this nation.
26 Nov 2015 4:04:06pm
Yes, and my great grandparents. They weren’t immigrants.
I did not say immigrants were not contributors, I SAID, they were not so extraordinary that the country would have been poorer without them. I can’t prove this, but neither can you demonstrate the unique contribution of any immigrant. A contribution that could not have been made by a native-born Australian.
26 Nov 2015 3:36:48pm
damon, there is a wealth of sources on the net documenting the success and benefits of immigration and multiculturalism.
I assume you do not know this because of course if you did, your comment would show not just ignorance but something else altogether.
26 Nov 2015 5:11:25pm
" but something else altogethe"
Oh, good. Racism. Better than facts
26 Nov 2015 6:30:27pm
DW, just imagine if your ideal ‘multicultural’ society was realised. If every country in the world was the same. If going to Paris was the same as going to Dubbo? I hope you live to see your dream realised, I don’t want to.
26 Nov 2015 3:43:01pm
I haven’t seen any evidence of that either.
We don’t need to have Russians in Australia in order to see the Russian ballet in Australia. Or french speakers in order to see cirque du soleil. Or Italians, or Chinese, to enjoy Italian and Chinese food, when recipe books and sending chefs abroad to train will suffice. Just about every benefit that is ascribed to multiculturalism, can be achieved by not having multiculturalism. And with the high level of global interconnectivity, this is even truer now. There is no need to watch immigrants cook Moroccan food in Dubbo on some SBS cooking show, when you can watch Moroccans cook Moroccan food in Morocco on youtube.
26 Nov 2015 7:33:03pm
‘I see a country that has benefitted enormously from immigration in many ways.’
Desert Woman. Please cite examples, other than the usual better culinary choice, that Australia has benefited from immigration. Immigration is not always a bad thing, but how has it improved things in Australia? Immigrants benefit far more than the hosts.
26 Nov 2015 10:55:46am
There is a vast difference in advocating for lower immigration levels and advocating for lower immigration levels of certain peoples.
26 Nov 2015 8:22:04am
The author or this article is misguided
Since nativism is really at its core about belonging (it just defines itself by the exclusion of others), it’s no surprise that it tends to attract those whose personal sense of belonging is most fragile: the poor, less educated, unemployed, socially isolated, the alienated and disenfranchised
People like Michael Bradley do not have to live, work or share anything much with new arrivals. The do not lose there jobs, suburbs, shops or anything else to migrants
People like Michael Bradley Sit in their safe houses and call working people poor dumb losers while thinking about hiring a cheap maid and trying out the new Indian restaurant to broaden their worldly experiences without the discomfort of long distance travel
People like Michael Bradley think their views are right and anybody with a different view is ignorant and therefore should be closed down and outright dismissed
If people like Pauline Hanson is right and their is trouble then People like Michael Bradley will be well insulated and more than likely make even more money.
I want a true debate where both side will be taken seriously and go from there. Not have People like Michael Bradley force there ideas down Australia’s throat and tell everybody this is going to be the way it is.
26 Nov 2015 9:21:32am
Unfortunately you sound like exactly like the people Michael has accurately described. So your opinion centres around the fact that you dislike the immigrants because they are getting jobs , buying houses and setting up shops where you live. I thought the conservative wing loved to ramble on about immigrants being dole bludgers and welfare rorters…
In the end it boils down to one point, you think you are more entitled to a job than the immigrants on the virtue you have been in Australia longer. This absurd piece of logic simply ignores the fact that almost all Australians arrived in Australia as ‘immigrants’ within in the last 230 years or so . The Indigenious Australians have been here for 40,000 years but much of Australia’s history everyone has accepted the fact that the removal of these people from their traditional land as simply the way things should be.
The Biscuit Bunyip:
26 Nov 2015 9:25:05am
Sounds like you have a rather large chip on your shoulders Madmax and you are projecting your own insecurities onto the author to help you rationalise his point of view far far away.
26 Nov 2015 4:08:57pm
The phrase having a chip on one’s shoulder refers to holding a grudge or grievance that readily provokes disputation
Maybe I have I live in a free country with free speech and that seems to be denied in this instance which by the way seems to be happening at alarming frequency. That is a valid grievance in anybody’s book
I have no insecurity but so what if I have. You have no right to dismiss them out of hand. That would be arrogant
26 Nov 2015 9:57:40am
"I want a true debate where both side will be taken seriously and go from there. Not have People like Michael Bradley force there ideas down Australia’s throat and tell everybody this is going to be the way it is."
But when I hear the voice of hatred directed against individuals just because of who they or where they come from, I will do everything in my power to shut that voice down, debate or no "debate"…
A Former Lefty:
26 Nov 2015 1:05:36pm
"But when I hear the voice of hatred directed against individuals just because of who they or where they come from, I will do everything in my power to shut that voice down, debate or no "debate"…"
Ah yes, typical leftist bigotry and intolerance, no surprise.
But Im curious Thing, do you also extend this willingness to shut down "hatred" extend to the hateful voice of islamists?
And if so how?
26 Nov 2015 2:59:47pm
Did you not understand what I wrote?
But when I hear the voice of hatred directed against individuals just because of who they or where they come from, I will do everything in my power to shut that voice down, debate or no "debate".
To me, it doesn’t matter where that voice comes from.
You label me a "typical leftist bigot" and "intolerant", but your bias, intolerance, and overt bigotry has resulted in you falling into the trap of thinking that those who look and think you do are "good" and those who don’t are "bad". That is the epitome of bigotry and intolerance!
You should look up "intolerance" and "Bigot" in the dictionary before you start throwing the words around without understanding what you are really saying.
26 Nov 2015 3:12:18pm
Please quote what I said that was hateful
26 Nov 2015 5:18:07pm
"Please quote what I said that was hateful"
I wrote " Fair enough… but…"
Are you being defensive for some reason?
26 Nov 2015 10:33:10am
"People like Michael Bradley Sit in their safe houses and call working people poor dumb losers while thinking about hiring a cheap maid and trying out the new Indian restaurant to broaden their worldly experiences without the discomfort of long distance travel."
That is because he studied at university and got a real job. It is also why the ‘nativists’ should be quiet and should be grateful to the silent majority of gainfully employed Australians who are subsidising their existence. We do not owe you a living and we do not need to listen to your opinions on Muslims. Your ignorance is your problem, not ours. You should stop protesting on the streets that our taxes paid for and stop hassling migrants. If somebody who has just arrived here can out-compete you for a job, then you need to take a good hard look at yourself.
26 Nov 2015 3:19:24pm
Some people use to think "might was right" now it looks to have mutated to academic is right
You seem to be ignorant about refugee designated employment, if I lived like a refugee I could also offer a discount on my labour. Also international companies are give jobs away as long as your a refugee
If somebody who has just arrived here can out-compete you for a job, then you need to take a good hard look at yourself.
You must think the refugee is stupid and unemployable shame on you. Your reply boars me
26 Nov 2015 5:08:57pm
Where to begin? A boar is a type of pig. Accordingly, when you say, "Your reply boars me," I am incredibly confused. I am unaware of any international companies giving jobs solely to refugees and I note that you provide no links either. That said, if such an affirmative action plan existed I would likely admire it. After all, a person who has to flee their homeland is at a significant disadvantage. If your skill set and track record is not enough to leave you better placed in the market than a newly arrived refugee then that is your problem. Suffice to say, it is not the refugee that I think "is stupid and unemployable".
26 Nov 2015 6:43:27pm
I’m so sorry your confused but that is not my problem
If you are unaware of the facts I suggest you educate yourself instead of relying on your opponent to help you out
I’m unable to supply links even if I wanted to as the ABC do not allow it. Do your own home work you lazy boy
26 Nov 2015 5:40:02pm
Madmax, I think you mean "bores".
26 Nov 2015 6:03:30pm
"have mutated to academic is right"
So having a degree and becoming a successful lawyer is now ‘academic’ now? Do you reject all forms of education and achievement as ‘academic’?
"refugee designated employment"
Never heard of it, please explain.
"Also international companies are give jobs away as long as your a refugee"
This makes no sense, the foreigners that international companies want to bring into Australia are not refugees, see Temporary Work (400) visas.
Actual refugees in Australia suffer much higher levels of unemployment than the average. Or are facts ‘academic’ now?
26 Nov 2015 11:01:25am
Why is Michael Bradley the enemy to you Madmax? The middle class leftie type that you so despise are not the ones that are driving immigration into our country. The ones who are really driving it are the neo-cons who want our population to keep growing in order to fuel the economy that makes them richer.
The lefties simply want to try to encourage us to try to get along with the new arrivals rather than allow our fears to become hatred (and Yoda had something to say about that process I believe…).
26 Nov 2015 5:09:20pm
Why is Michael Bradley the enemy to you Madmax
He is not the enemy at worst he is just greedy or a 5th columnist. However his attitude is appalling.
You Curious party may not be so curious if you didn’t go around answering your own questions
27 Nov 2015 9:21:06am
How are his comments on how he thinks others should act any less appalling than your comments on how you think he should act?
26 Nov 2015 8:22:39am
"Nativism" is a natural disposition that most people around the world possess.
China is experiencing newfound nativism, India under the BJP has it as well. The number of social clubs in Australia for different ethnicities, suggests nativism is alive and well in most ethnic communities.
However, it seems that Anglo Celtic Australia is the only ethnic group that is not allowed to experience nativism. The country around us has changed as the inclusion of more and different ethnicities enters Australia, yet we are constantly told that we are racists if we question immigration.
All peoples try and preserve their culture and identity. Yet Australians are told to ditch their history, show no pride in their cultural roots and are forced to accept multiculturalism.
Muslims too employ nativism. This is achieved through disallowing marriage outside of their religion and disallowing apostasy.
It is a strange situation, where, on one hand we embrace and insist upon multiculturalism; yet any reference by the majority culture to preserving that culture is called racism.
26 Nov 2015 9:12:44am
"Anglo Celtic Australia is the only ethnic group that is not allowed to experience nativism"…. What’s the identity of the Anglo-Celtic Australians?…. Do you identify yourself with the Catholic member of Opus Dei?…. What about the young punk?…. Or the members of the Socialist Alliance, how much in common do you have with them?
What’s your identity?
26 Nov 2015 10:59:29am
What’s the identity of Lebanese Australian’s? Is it sophisticated Beirut, the Paris of the East? Is it rural village?
Is it Arabic? Is it Hellenised Levantine? Is it Phonecian?
Is it Arabic speaking? Is it Aramaic speaking? Is it French speaking?
Is it Middle Eastern? Is it Mediterranean?
Maybe I’ll attempt to rephrase al’s comment as I see it. Why do (usual left-leaning) commentors cherish the identity myths of immigrants and dismiss the identity myths of "Anglo-Celts"?
26 Nov 2015 11:34:32am
Some additional explanation of my post seems to be required, Sea Monster: I don’t dismiss any "identity myth", what I am saying is that there are multiple identities, even within our own Anglo-Celtic population. Hence, if we accept such multiplicity of identities we must also accept the added diversity provided by groups of migrants from around the world. If we want to assimilate them, then you must explain to me how are you going to assimilate the punk, the Catholic, the Opus Dei, etc. and to assimilate them into what?
26 Nov 2015 5:59:48pm
I don’t want to assimilate anyone. If someone wants to speak Arabic and and eat falafel its none of my business. Unless they want to send some falafel my way, I’ll have some of those thanks.
Let culture sort itself out.
26 Nov 2015 9:20:52am
You only have to look at the history of the Anglo- Celts to realise that pushing them too hard might not be a very clever idea.
26 Nov 2015 9:41:46am
Wow! You of all people are concerned that others are"told to ditch their history, show no pride in their cultural roots". I never realised your were so empathetic.
FYI, Muslims marry non-Muslims all the time and it’s not "disallowed", although they are rather particular about it. The "rules" are analogous to those in the Catholic Church with their Single, Predominant, Duel and Multi faith services.
Anglicans call interfaith marriage "unavoidable". It was Paul in his letters to the Corinthians who said "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?"
For Sikh’s to perform the Anand Karaj, or marriage ceremony, both have to be committed to follow the teachings of the Gurus. Bah?‟? weddings require both to submit to the will of God. Need we add Jehova’s Witness’s and Seventh Day Adventists. And clearly there are exceptions.
Care to name a couple of religions that officially encourage interfaith marriages?
26 Nov 2015 11:17:54am
Good point there Dove,
Another reason to avoid calling antireligionists racist.
A Former Lefty:
26 Nov 2015 1:14:09pm
"FYI, Muslims marry non-Muslims all the time and it’s not "disallowed", although they are rather particular about it."
Why are you know referring to other moslems as "they" Dove? Anyway, you know as well as any of us that a moslem woman is not allowed to marry a kuffr male. So there goes that nice piece of fluff.
"Care to name a couple of religions that officially encourage interfaith marriages?"
Followers of the Bahai faith are exhorted to intermarry with other religions and races as part of the process of bringing all humanity together. Thats about the only one Im aware of, since usually religion seems to be about a sense of elitism.
26 Nov 2015 3:36:15pm
I’d be only too delighted to engage with you about Islam or any other topic, but what you need to do is isolate the things that you are concerned with in Islam that are unique to it. The aspects that only Muslims do. The specific things, because if others do it too, your criticisms are either misguided or deliberately bigoted and I’m sure it can’t be the latter
26 Nov 2015 5:55:07pm
Apostasy would be a good starting point. Then we could move onto integration.
A Former Lefty:
26 Nov 2015 7:49:39pm
OK Dove, but why are you, as a woman of the islamic faith, comfortable knowing that the choices that you want to make about your life (ie, who you love and marry), limited merely because you are a woman. Why do you assume that your only role in life is as a bearer of moslem children? What would happen if you found yourself wanting to marry a non moslem?
Im seriously and respectfully curious about your thoughts here Dove. BTW you might need to learn the definition of bigoted Dove, its being thrown around a lot these days by people who mistakenly equate it with "racist", and I hope to God you are not going to call this mixed race blackfella racist.
Om Marits Shadow:
26 Nov 2015 5:12:51pm
So many people hiding their racism under a bushel.Eh?
26 Nov 2015 1:44:35pm
Well pointed out Dove.
All religions appears to have some very strange beliefs.
Being able to question these and change them is important if we are all the get on together.
26 Nov 2015 7:36:50pm
Dove. You’ve quoted the other books, now please cite some examples from the Koran concerning interfaith marriage, or even friendship. Your omission is glaring.
26 Nov 2015 10:08:01am
"However, it seems that Anglo Celtic Australia is the only ethnic group that is not allowed to experience nativism. "
May I respectfully suggest that if your "Anglo Celtic" and you want to pursue enforced nativism that you go back to where you were a "native" to begin with?
A Former Lefty:
26 Nov 2015 1:18:08pm
Ah, yes, the ol "go back to where you came from" stuff, only acceptable if youre a leftist, otherwise its racist. Completely ignored the fact that in the native homelands of the Anglo-Celtic people they are facing the same demographic extinction from mass immigration that Aboriginal people suffered? Or is it only cool to talk when dumb black people need lefties to speak on our behalf?
Now being an Australian of Aboriginal Australian descent, should I also "go back to where I came from"?
26 Nov 2015 5:19:33pm
"Now being an Australian of Aboriginal Australian descent, should I also "go back to where I came from"?"
Maybe that was my point? You seem to be having trouble with comprehension when it comes to what I am putting up..
A Former Lefty:
26 Nov 2015 7:59:00pm
Well maybe Thing you are not being clear in what you say, or actually what your point is, because to me you seem to be saying that if you are not an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander you cant call yourself a nativist. I disagree wholehertedly with this concept.
My father was a "white" Australian of Irish/Scottish convict background with a Jewish grandmother. My mother was of Aboriginal, Afghan, German and Portuguese background.
So does my father have any right to consider himself a native of Australia? Damn right IMV and in the view of anyone with sanity. His ancestors had no choice about coming here, but here they were brought and he was very proud of the country that his ancestors built despite the horrors and struggles of convict society.
My mothers non Aboriginal ancestors came here during the height of the supposed white Australia era, obviously despite not being white in the Anglo-Celtic sense. So was her Portuguese born grandfather not entitled to consider himself an Australian? Her Afghan ancestors? How far back do you need to go to consider yourself a native in the eyes of the left?
Your arguments make no sense, maybe thats why people misinterpret what you say?
26 Nov 2015 11:08:15am
He specifically said that it is nativism not racism.
Your comment is yet another attempt to cry ‘persecuted majority’. Noone is saying that you are not allowed to be ‘nativist’ – he was just questioning the benefits of doing so.
I don’t understand this fear of losing our culture to the Muslims/others. Surely if our culture has so much going for it then the process of multiculturalism will give us the vehicle to show new arrivals how great our culture is and we can encourage them to adopt it as their own. It will also allow us to adopt some of the benefits of their culture – be it food, cultural practices, art etc etc and thus IMPROVE ours.
So this is where it confuses me: Is it a fear that other people will prefer to retain their own culture because its better than ours? Or is it a fear that you might have to accept some minor changes within our dominant culture?
26 Nov 2015 11:20:52am
Very true Al.
The cultural apologists and self loathers of the west shelter under the systems and processes of our cultural heritage then proceed to tear it to shreds. To them, the west is a bully who has committed untold sins and must be held to account for it all no matter how far back in time and no matter what the cultural norms of the day where.
Immigrants are encouraged by these people to hang onto their cultures in Australia despite some unsavoury aspects and they say the same to Aboriginals yet ignore how much of their respective cultures contributes to the problems they are experiencing.
These same people ignore the rate of change that has taken place in Anglo Celtic culture over the last 150 years, few would want a return to those times and most are glad we have changed and will continue to do so.
At the end of the day this country must maintain the Anglo Celtic culture that built this country and that has proved to be a magnet for people from just about every other country on earth.
Australians should remain proud of our roots, warts and all as there is simply no viable alternative anywhere in the world.
26 Nov 2015 8:23:24am
I think a lot has to do with where a person lives.
A well off Sydney lawyer lives in an affluent suburb which doesn’t get that many immigrants. The social make-up of the suburb doesn’t change that much. The new arrivals quickly blend in; immigration is not a threat.
A poorer Sydney labourer lives in a low SES suburb in the west. Many immigrants are moving to the suburb because housing is cheap. The social make-up of the suburb is rapidly changing. Soon he feels like a minority; immigration is a threat.
It his human nature to form groups and to strengthen those groups by contrasting them against outsiders. Just because the author’s own groups are not under threat, he should not so quickly dismiss other’s perceptions of threat.
Furthermore, religion and nationality DO correlate with people’s attitudes and beliefs. They are not artificial constructs. The world is not a homogeneous mass. (Has the author not travelled to another country??). Religious beliefs are especially hard to change because they are not based on rational reasoning.
26 Nov 2015 8:24:52am
A useful term, this one. I have often found myself explaining to people that the various 19th century Native Australian associations which have left little plaques, markers and memorials across our cities were colonial self-help groups, not indigenous ones. The irony is that if they had got what they wanted then – better education, jobs, and a level playing field with the better funded, better educated and apparently better spoken new arrivals from "Home" – they might be in far fewer numbers now. Because what we see in these movements and their micro-festivals of hatred is a failure of our economic system to give these people rewarding and interesting careers and a failure of our basic education systems to inculcate basic values and sufficient complexity of understanding to cope with real life in the age of mass society.
26 Nov 2015 8:24:54am
Who is a "typical" Australian?
– Is the young Anglo-Saxon punk a "typical Australian"?
– Is the young Anglo-Saxon member of the Socialist Alliance a "typical Australian"?
– Is the Anglo-Saxon Catholic member of Opus Dei a "typical Australian"?
– Is the Anglo-Saxon footy fanatic a "typical Australian"?
… etc., etc….. The world is a’changin, diversity is increasing in any single place, people move from one place to another more often…. hanging on non-existent stereotypical views of own identity to the exclusion of everything else is mere delusion.
Trying to impose a stiff view of society on a Multicultural country such as Australia that is based on immigration was always destined to fail…. and it’s failing.
Re-direct your focus on what truly matters: Democracy, the Rule of a Common Law, Tolerance.
26 Nov 2015 10:26:49am
Alpo when you get off your strong suit ECO101, we find common ground.
26 Nov 2015 10:46:34am
Predominantly: White, Christian, Anglo-Saxon.
That is not a ‘stereotype’, that is a fact.
"Trying to impose a stiff view of society on a Multicultural country such as Australia that is based on immigration was always destined to fail…. and it’s failing."
It is not a "view" that is failing, it Multiculturalism itself that is failing. The more we bend over, the more cop it.
26 Nov 2015 11:36:21am
Multiculturalism is a fact, Alfie.
26 Nov 2015 12:59:58pm
So is every White Christian Anglo-Saxon the same? Should we then assume that you are all the same as the Catch the Fire Ministries or Exlusive Brethren and treat you as such?
The point is that even though most people are or white anglo-celtic descent that doesn’t mean that they act in any way the same. Just like all Muslim people do not act the same.
26 Nov 2015 1:54:47pm
Nonsense. Australia has been multicultural from about 1815 and doing a very good job of it too.
We will get over this glitch too providing we work together.
Sometimes you just have to point out the unacceptable behaviours.
Australians don’t have a problem doing just that.
26 Nov 2015 11:14:18am
Don’t make me laugh, you don’t possess it. If people do not agree with your moral absolutism, you label them racist etc…
Your tolerance abounds when it comes to multi-ethnic communities, yet you deny traditional Australians the right to assert their identity and to question the wisdom of mass migration from disparate nations. And before anyone yells "indigenous", they do not identify as "Australian", rather they have the right to assert their pre-Australian identity.
You pious hypocrite.
26 Nov 2015 12:01:23pm
You should clarify the Socialist Alliance bit
-the 10000 odd who wave the Socialist Alliance banners
-the 85 who voted for them at the last election
The true measure of ones beliefs is not holding a banner but voting
The true measure of Islam fighting extremist is not saying that it doesn’t represent Islam but actually taking action
26 Nov 2015 8:25:21am
A sobering assessment and so appreciated.
Nonetheless, i do have some affinity for retaining certain boundaries. Exclusion is just as valid as inclusion in the scheme of things. I think it is so unrealistic, so naive, and essentially ignorant, to expect extreme cultural diversity to co-exist in one political or nation state.
The ‘human condition’ is one made of grand and complementary paradoxes.
When the extreme violence and destructive range of men is so redolent and taunting as it has become ‘today’, i think a strong response is not only warranted but mandatory.
Soothing waters of reason and generosity are graces and whilst NOT fragile in themselves, they are not meant or able to co-exist simultaneously with brute force. They are the reward that follows the battle. From their counsel comes the wisdom to pursue or structure a course for dialectic and practice.
26 Nov 2015 8:27:54am
This piece makes sense to me but it is interesting how (this is my observation) that in this case the focus is primarily on the newcomer’s religion.
On a recent ABC TV programme there was an episode regarding the building of a mosque in a regional city. It was about, in part, the protests by groups regarding the building of a place of worship for Muslims. Interestingly, on the outskirts of this regional city there is an enormous building (reportedly the largest of it’s kind in the Southern Hemisphere) with Buddhist connections. Apparently it was built with hardly a whimper by the locals.
Could it be that the distrust of newcomers, in particular, those who ‘look different’ and demonstrate an adherence to an unfamiliar religious belief disturbs a society which for the most part pays little more than a passing loyalty to such passions.
The media must of course take some responsibility for the way they portray the followers of Islam in their reporting but the radical element at present causing disruption around the world and murder and mayhem in the Middle East have focussed their ideology on the Islamic religion. In fact if they had their foundations in, say, Australia and their professed ideology was based on something more akin to our way of life in this country, we would regard them as an aberration and demand the law deal with them, as the criminals they are. Queensland’s criminal motor cycle gang legislation comes to mind.
In any society, looking and behaving differently always raises distrust. This is evident, even in the animal kingdom. The fact that a terrorist movement has hung it’s hat on the religion of these people must actually add fuel to the fire. While those of us demonstrate our objections to the newcomers, loud and long, the criminals are celebrating their achievement of focussing the attention on the innocent people seeking a new peaceful way of life in our midst.
26 Nov 2015 1:23:59pm
Robed Buddhist monks would look different from the average resident of Wollongong if that is your reference. The issue is not xenophobia but one of peoples’ perceptions of Islam.
I don’t know how you would like to see terrorist incidents involving extremist Muslims reported. You may feel the tabloids beat the drum too loudly but would you really want to pretend religion plays no part at all? Outlaw groups such as the extremists will always attract attention. They will feed on it for a while but eventually the attention and their outrages will increase the attention and focus the community on the outlaws causing them to struggle. In particular Muslim families will, for the most part, pay more attention to the children at risk of being led astray by extremist abusers. By all means deplore simpleminded troublemakers looking to isolate Muslims from mainstream society but never pretend there is no problem to be worked through.
26 Nov 2015 4:58:27pm
To the contrary, I do think it is about religion. The point I hoped to make is that making Islam a central to their criminal behaviour the terrorists have made a legitimate religion a scapegoate for their actions. Protest groups and the media have been facilitators for a group’s actions which have little to do with their religion and much to do with their inhumane bloodlust.
Of course there are problems to be worked through and I was not referring to Wollongong. I believe the city was Ballarat in Victoria.
26 Nov 2015 7:32:07pm
I don’t pretend to have any answers but to avoid speaking of Islam would be a mistake here I believe, though not as big a mistake as tying Islam to the Islamists. I don’t think we are that far apart.
I gather Nan Tien Temple outside of Wollongong is the largest in Australia at least. People of all beliefs can stay there as some kind of low tech retreat I gather. I should at least make a visit.
26 Nov 2015 8:29:44am
I wonder how many of these nativists are aware that they have historically been opposed to many ethnic and religious groups that now have settled into the Australian culture with little evidence other than the displeasure of nativists that they were a problem. My personal view is that we could well do without the ethnic sub-group called nativists – is there a specific country they have migrated from? After all it seems that the problems created by ethnic groups are really the problems created by the nativists who find fault with their presence. Remove these short-sighted people who have forgotten their origins and we would remove the "problem".
26 Nov 2015 1:26:50pm
They are likely short-sighted as you say but they are reacting to provocation. I agree we should all be tempering our reactions to provocation but even if we do do you imagine the provocations would stop?
26 Nov 2015 8:29:55am
Picking on certain groups and blaming them for some or all of our problems has been shown to be a tried and true political strategy down through the ages. Rather than explaining the true cause of a problem, it is much easier to say "they did it". It is the central modus operandi for most politicians. When the Liberal government is in power, the country’s problems are all Labor’s fault. When a Labor government is in power, the country’s problems are all the Liberal’s fault.
With Islamic extremism high on the political agenda, the door is wide open for a far right party to pick up where Pauline Hanson left off. All they need is a charismatic leader with political acumen. The strategy would be simple. Build up a fanciful picture of how Australia should be, blame muslims for destroying this vision and accuse anybody who disagrees with you of being unpatriotic and wanting to destroy the country. Choose a symbol that represents what your party stands for (i.e. like the Nazi’s has the swastika) and sell merchandise to people with this symbol on it (e.g. hats, T-shirts, flags etc…). Having ultra-Nationalist policies would be ideal as you could also tap into people’s fears about foreign investment, foreigners taking our jobs and university position etc… With a talent for managing the media, you’d be able to have both major political parties quietly soiling themselves.
26 Nov 2015 8:34:04am
Of course if you can absolutely claim with total integrity that you were on the ship in the first fleet then you’re in so far as the Legal System is concerned and so you have a ship made that is very like the original one and get that name registered and then get on it and sail to Australia and somehow this can be turned into a real claim I’m not sure how it works I don’t have much legal training but I understand it’s called the Pinter Man Ouvre.
26 Nov 2015 12:30:18pm
Basically what it is though is the the idea that, having found it and got to it first before others of their own kind, it is theirs. The theory can be expanded out and tried for oneself. One arrives at the apartment or home of a distant acquaintance sits down and says "here, I own this now". I all of you to test this on the Young Liberals of Sydney University.
26 Nov 2015 12:57:51pm
I’m pretty sure that Nativity is what they’re on about. The first registered birth, stuff like that. Baby Jesus.
26 Nov 2015 3:00:34pm
ever notice how few people reply to your posts Lehan?
26 Nov 2015 4:01:59pm
Rendo I always reply but the moderators put me in the discards box
sometimes our sheepish friend is slightly offbeat (slightly like that paisley shirt I wore to a Bunnies game in 82) sometimes on a track that is going somewhere else in a different direction and in a different part of the time-space continuum thingy, but always get you thinking, now that has to be a good thing
26 Nov 2015 6:35:04pm
buderimboy, nicely stated, it can be tricky explaining what makes Lehan’s style thought provoking, like street signs that remind you of someone you could visit with insight if you care to turn in.
26 Nov 2015 4:04:41pm
and by the way no one not even our sheepish friend replys to my posts
26 Nov 2015 4:51:50pm
It is named a reply but actually it is not replying rendo anyway I am a bad conversationalist.
26 Nov 2015 8:37:54am
"tends to attract those whose personal sense of belonging is most fragile: the poor, less educated, unemployed, socially isolated, the alienated and disenfranchised"
Well then the answer is simple- solve poverty, unemployment, social isolation etc of these people. Oh wait Nativism occurs every decade or so because the dominant society has FAILED these people for the previous decade- and the decade before that and so on. So one expect the degree of their success will depend on how many feel this way.
At one stage Pauline Hanson and One nation got 20% of the vote in Queensland. Perhaps a lot of people feel alienated and just calling them names as the major political parties do might not work.
26 Nov 2015 1:37:10pm
Queensland may be addressing its issues with education now but it has a long history of underinvesting in education and a larger proportion of its population living in regional centres where work opportunities are less available and incomes lower. Governments can only provide opportunities, they cannot indefinitely support whole communities. You may be making Bradley’s case for him (don’t do that!).
26 Nov 2015 8:38:08am
Reclaim Australia should be an indigenous Australian movement.
It was only a couple of hundred years ago that England sent its dregs to Australia with a group unfortunate troopers to keep the crime in check.
Jump forward to today and every year more than 200,000 immigrants arrive and 1 in 3 Australians were born overseas.
Some folks feel they have the right to decide who can come here and when, those folks need to take a look at their own family history before getting too carried away about their "rights" to decide who can live in a country that was stolen at gun point from the original inhabitants.
A Former Lefty:
26 Nov 2015 1:27:44pm
I assume by ‘indigenous Australian" you mean Aboriginal Australian?
Well I dont understand why you assume that all Aboriginal people are leftist sympathisers out to punish Australian society along with the socialist alliance trash, because its not true. Aboriginal people arent a singularity, we have differing political and social views.
There are many Aboriginal people who support at Reclaim and are opposed to islam and mass immigration. Besides myself, ther are Aboriginal people attending their rallies and joining in with the speakers, in fact a rather articulate Aboriginal man addressed the Adelaide rally on the weekend and spoke passionately about his concerns for islam and made the salient point that the first Australians to suffer at the hands of islam were the Aboriginal women who were taken as booty by moslem Makkassers in the Top End. A fact that the left conveniently ignore.
Finally , dont assume you can speak for me or any other Aboriginal people, because we dont need patronising racists like you to make our voices heard.
26 Nov 2015 1:39:56pm
Paul if you must ladle out the white guilt ladle it on yourself, I’m not interested. Figure out what you want for Australia and your family and come back to us after that.
26 Nov 2015 8:44:48am
It used to be the Italians and Greeks that were blamed for woes and wiles by ‘true Aussies’. The smell of garlic was enough for angry outbursts to the ‘dagoes’ of the fifties and sixties. They were knife pullers and had strange sexual habits.
This was overcome but the next lot to receive abuse were the Balts and Lebanese. The usual abuse and accusations of taking virtuous women, climb over fences and corrupt the Australian culture with kebabs and even more garlic.
The introduction of soccer was met with riotous behaviour, bottle throwing and burning down of strange flags.
Hot on the heels were people from Vietnam with rice dishes and totally ignorant of cricket and Phar Lap.
We are giving the same to Muslims that are coming from all sorts of countries that by and large we have bombed without much effect.
When will they ever learn, by Marlene Dietrich springs to mind or should that be ‘when will WE ever learn?
26 Nov 2015 10:48:59am
Re soccer. It was immigrants doing the rioting and flag burning. Top grade soccer in Sydney was rife with ethnic rivalries. APIA. Sydney Olympic. Marconi. Avala/White Eagles. One of Lowy’s FFA reforms was to suppress these rivalries. They were holding back soccer’s broader appeal.
I kid you not. I went to watch a friend play for Sydney Croatia in the early nineties and saw chaps there in replica Ustase uniforms.
26 Nov 2015 10:50:32am
Long live the garlic.
26 Nov 2015 10:53:19am
That’s a bit rich coming from someone who’s written reams rationalising his discomfort about how Australians don’t leave our curtains open like people used to do in the country he came from as a child 60 years ago.
26 Nov 2015 8:46:16am
A good article.
I have been living in Southern Tasmania for 7 years and I have seen the slow collapse of several blue collar industries. As I see people who had working class jobs lose those jobs it has become apparent to me where the roots of nativism lie.
The problem for many working class people with low skilled jobs (I’m not talking about the plumbers or the carpenters here – but more the fruit pickers, tree loggers, process workers, etc) is that slowly over time these jobs are going. Technology, international market forces and a range of other reasons are ensuring that jobs that existed before are gone already or slated to go in the future.
For the people in those jobs, it means that they move from having a stable income to then having to go out and try to survive on intermittent work doing other unskilled labor such as mowing lawns or pulling weeds up. Many of these types of people have large mortgages with shiny new cars and modern brick homes to pay off. Life is very stressful for them because a more permanent income which existed before is has now been eroded.
The problem for these people is that they long for the past whereby they don’t require much skill and can still have a stable, steady income. You could say they want to ‘reclaim’ that life. But a return to an Australia where you can still have a middle class lifestyle with poor education is only a dream now. The reality is much harsher. Unlike previous generations of under-skilled Australians in the past, you can not live in a reasonable (not wealthy – just reasonable) home, having a nice car, a large outdoor bbq set, expensive TV and sound system and expect to simply work 8 hours in an unskilled labor job in order to pay for it. That is the problem. Those who sat in the lower middle class bracket are being pushed in to the lower class bracket. It is often a perception that middle class people want to work and lower class people don’t. Unfortunately for the marginalised this situation is changing. Now there is a new class of people – those who are keen to work, but do not have any skills. It is this group who are being squeezed out of the middle class bracket as their income options are reduced in the modern world. The gap between the haves and have-nots is increasing.
Unfortunately the have-nots that are being squeezed don’t know who to blame. In Tasmania – it’s the ‘Greens’ rather than the collapse in the price of timber. Minorities become a target for the have-nots. Their lack of education (and therefore lack of critical thinking skills) means they do not have an understanding of how global market forces, technology, etc, are actually the real killer of their jobs. Instead to someone who does not have very good critical thinking skills, increased sightings of people with different skin colour or a different religion become an obvious target as potential reasons for their own increased struggle in life.
The way I s
26 Nov 2015 11:14:04am
I’m not sure that education in critical thinking skills really helps the people and the problems you have – absolutely correctly – identified. What we need is a political and economic climate that encourages investment and development. A rising tide floats all boats.
The Greens are not against this in theory – all in favour of new clean green shiny industries. Where they fall down is the belief that the way to achieve this nirvana is to nobble what we currently have. Those with critical thinking skills might like to apply them to non-zero-sum concepts for a change. It is every bit as true of migrants vs "natives" as it is for sunrise vs traditional industries: that the success of one does not demand the loss of the other.
26 Nov 2015 8:48:00am
your article is good, however i would say that there are a number of constants, if you would pillars that underpin all societies, 1) culture 2) class 3) identity
with class it has to do with money. under either a capitalist or socialist system depending on the establishment regardess of race/identity or culture, you can think of class as what we do in our daily waking effort in establishing ourselves in the world. Early in school we compete to get the best grades, we compete to see who is the most social and politically gifted, we compete to see who is the most capable, who are the leaders who are the followers. This then becomes our adult waking life, our jobs, which groups we associate with, how much money we earn, and ultimately where we lives and who are children associate with.. and so on through generations. So even within ethnic groups you have within it the common theme of class, the successful, the average and the failures. In white culture you have the upper crust, the majority middle class, the working class and the underclass. This is why capitalism tends to separate people even within the same ethnic group quickly dividing the bogan and the yuppie class, and the coastal dwellers and the outer working class scum.
the other one is culture, culture comes from family, friends and community, it is part of identify and when a foreign culture comes in, immediately there is a conflict to the core of ones person. So when lefty groups ignore the white australian culture for multiculturalism , they need to in many ways prostitute their own personal identity and integrity to accept all new cultures and people like a prostitute for whoever walks in the door, but it is the innate human characteristic to love what you are and your culture to the smallest nuance and detail. It forms the basis of a persons identity and security and love of the community they live in. Leftys tend to say, nup, throw all that out, and embrace all cultures and all people, so what you end up with is – nothing. Thats why many left wing people live in a neurotic world of self denial.
finally with identity, this has more to do with a human instinct to feel more comfortable with people who look like themselves, like in a persons race, it can be as broad as simply being european or asian or indian etc. But this is mere veneer and there are few who cant get past this and that is considered degernative, however culture is often fused with physical appearance. some people tend to like to deal with people who look like them, until they feel replused by the sameness of it all.. this is what is called middleclass suburbia or working class slums and centrelink, after a while humans have a need to look for something different.
26 Nov 2015 8:51:19am
I have often asked here and there and everywhere: what are Australian values, Australian culture…
If and when I know what those values are, I’ll examine them, and if any of them are better than mine, I’ll consider taking some on, perhaps….
26 Nov 2015 10:45:09am
Agreed. As a seventh generation Anglo-Celtic Australian, I find myself asking those same, exact questions.
26 Nov 2015 11:02:50am
I have passed the point of asking.I am even ashamed to be a human most days when I see who else wears the tag, and what they are capable of.
What was fought for in the last world war has been eviscerated in the stampede of greed and ignorance.Everyone monopolising the soapbox,is a self interested hate machine, or on the road to becoming one.
26 Nov 2015 10:50:43am
What I believe Australians Value:
Obeying the (Australian) Law
Respecting the rights of others.
My understanding of Australian culture since immigrating here:
Australians are extremely accepting people.
They do not care where you are from or what religion you are. If you pull your weight at work and do not have a chip on your shoulder, you will be accepted as one of them.
You will always meet people who do not like you because of your background. However, this is true of any country in the world.
If you are bullied at school (as I was) and then decide that the whole of Australia is racist, you will never be happy in any country.
Australia is NOT a racist country (despite what some people try to claim about Australian culture).
Australian culture is about accepting people and giving them a chance of a better life and freedom.
I also think Australians are intolerant (and rightly so…) of people who bring the problems of their homeland here. They don’t like to put up with people who, for some reason think the country owes them and have a chip on their shoulder.
I think that people who are unable to recognise Australia, it’s people and it’s culture for the paradise that it is (regardless of whether they are born here) should get out and go somewhere that makes them happy.
Hope this helps.
26 Nov 2015 11:59:28am
"Working" is Australian value??
So a labourer working in Argentina has this "Australian value" ?
-Obeying the Law
-Respecting the rights of others.
These are your civic duties.
– Responsibilities of all citizens whether you are living in Australia or in another country –
26 Nov 2015 1:01:32pm
So a labourer working in Argentina has this "Australian value" ?
Of course! Why can’t somebody from another country have a shared value with an Australian?
(I think I mentioned I was from another country didn’t I?)
That is my point!
Do our civic duties not reflect our values?
Why is it that the so called ‘racists’ complain the loudest about immigrants 1) Not working and receiving on the dole. 2)Breaking the law (violence/terrorism ect..) 3) Trying to enforce sharia law.
Wouldn’t these complaints demonstrate what they value?
26 Nov 2015 3:24:52pm
" Of course! "
So even before Australia existed as a country,
who discovered – who owned – this Australian value "working" ?
26 Nov 2015 4:12:26pm
" Do our civic duties not reflect our values? :
Civic duties reflect our responsibilities as citizens.
You MUST fulfil your civic duties. If you don’t, the State will pull you aside and have a word with you.
So called "values" are different.
You can reject or accept a certain value depending on your moral choices. Values are almost always about moral choices.
26 Nov 2015 5:30:30pm
Once again these are just my opinions. I am sure that most Australians take pride in their contribution to their country whether they are forced to or not.
Maybe I am wrong?
Would love to hear what you think Australia values.
26 Nov 2015 4:15:12pm
"Why is it that the so called ‘racists’ complain the loudest about immigrants? 1) Not working and receiving on the dole. 2)Breaking the law (violence/terrorism ect..) 3) Trying to enforce sharia law."
rumours are carried by haters, spread by fools, and accepted by idiots.
If idiots could fly, the sky would be like an airport.
26 Nov 2015 5:42:12pm
It is highly likely that these people are haters/fools/idiots.
But pointing that out to them and (incorrectly) calling them racist without addressing their fears, irrational as they may be, doesn’t seem to help.
26 Nov 2015 5:05:03pm
You obviously have the right to post inane, meaningless posts on a government site so what are you on about?
26 Nov 2015 5:23:55pm
Unsure of who discovered it.
Even less sure of who ‘owned’ it.
Pretty sure most Australians value it though.
(This is only my opinion of what our values are, I would love to hear yours)
26 Nov 2015 5:26:37pm
Possibly you’re reading something into what yeahright said that just isn’t there? You seem to be under the misapprehension that he/she thinks that Australian values were invented by Australians or unique to Australians. How else can you have so much trouble conceptualising that a labourer in Argentina nearly 200 years ago might share a current Australian value?
Of course civic duties reflect our values, as do all our laws.
26 Nov 2015 6:49:00pm
Which Australian value ?
26 Nov 2015 3:45:15pm
"Why is it that the so called ‘racists’ complain the loudest about immigrants"?- because they’re racists
And you too shall get a shiny penny when you can name any implementation of sharia law in Australia. Any
26 Nov 2015 5:38:45pm
You really need to read people posts more carefully.
Please keep your gold stars/ shiny coins.
26 Nov 2015 6:00:37pm
Sharia Law regulates every aspect of a devout Muslim’s life. Why wouldn’t it occur in Australia? Your ignorance of a major minority religion in this country is astounding.
26 Nov 2015 7:43:39pm
‘And you too shall get a shiny penny when you can name any implementation of sharia law in Australia. Any’.
Would examples of calls for implementation of Sharia Law in Australia count?
Mitor the Bold:
26 Nov 2015 8:54:13am
As far as I recall the Vietnamese, Greeks, Lebanese, Africans, Italians and Croatians didn’t declare a holy war against us, shoot our police workers, threaten to randomly behead non believers, declare a caliphate that we all must join or die, and demand with menaces laws that fit their holy book of nonsense.
This is not a group of nationals from one place but a group of ideologues from many places. At least, that’s what people are afraid of. Islam is an ideology, not a race. Islam is an ideology based upon ancient mysticism that is utterly humourless, inflexible and intolerant. Islam is an idea that has clung on like a cancerous tumour in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
Australia can barely accommodate inflexible Christianity, largely neutered though it is. Islam refuses to be critiqued, let alone neutered. We have every right to feel threatened by an ideology that openly makes threats against us. These threats are not imagined, they are enacted. Here, in Paris, in London, in Manhattan, in Iraq, in Syria, in turkey, in Beirut, in Madrid, in Nigeria….
26 Nov 2015 11:08:31am
The Vietnamese gang known as 5T murdered NSW Parliamentarian, John Newman. In a two year period in Cabramatta more than 1,300 people were arrested for drug related crimes. I’m tipping you think all Asians are heroin dealers, right?
It’s usually a sign a lack of knowledge when contributors here have to resort to vague, wafty phrases and clich?s. The one, single person who had a sign calling for the beheading of the maker of the film, The Innocence of Islam has a name, Hamza Cheikho. If you followed the story or pretended to be informed you could have Googled it in ten seconds.
And your gold stamp will be earned today by telling us all who has declared a "caliphate" in Australia? Muslims know how absurd the idea is, but the uninformed seem to lap this stuff up and think it’s true. Oh yeah, samey samey for who’s declared a holy war against us. I’ll wait for you. You lose your stamp if you call my correction of your ignorance an apology 🙂
26 Nov 2015 12:47:39pm
I think Mitor was referring to the ‘caliphate’ in the Middle East.
I don?t think he/she meant (or even claimed) it was in Australia.
Also, If I remember correctly (which I may not…) I think the sign held up at the protest read ‘behead those who insult the prophet’.
If that is correct, it would have suggested violence to more people than just the film maker. (Calling for anyone?s beheading is unacceptable in my opinion, but each to their own).
The Vietnamese gang were criminals whose motives included wealth and power, much like any other criminal of any other race. They did not commit these crimes in the name of their religion, race, nationality, political beliefs or otherwise.
Therefore, thinking that ALL Asians were heroin dealers would not have been logical.
For this reason, comparing non-terrorism crimes with actual terrorism (politically or religiously motivated) is not usually helpful.
26 Nov 2015 1:04:55pm
Dove, when the Muslim community come out and say that the culture of their adoptive home, exceeds those of the ones they have left, I will start to reconsider their attitudes. Instead, I see congregation in ghettos, I see young males heavily involved in crime, I see religious leaders preaching antipathy towards Australian customs, and I see no attempt to assimilate.
26 Nov 2015 6:51:39pm
Clue: there isn’t a singular Muslim community. Australian Turks and Australian Malays are no closer than Australian Catholic Brasilians and Australian Orthodox Russians. I really hope you get that because it will save both of us a lot of time
26 Nov 2015 7:49:01pm
Speaking of Vietnamese, they have suffered just as cruelly at the hands of the West as Arabs, and continue to do so in the form of agent orange related birth defects. Yet, there has not been ONE act of vengeful terrorism against the West by Vietnamese. Compare that to the number of Islamic terrorist attacks/plots, and it’s not hard to work out what the missing ingredient is.
26 Nov 2015 11:12:59am
Don’t worry, Mitor,
Even if something happened and Australia became muslim-free overnight, it wouldn’t take you too long to find someone else to hate and fear.
Already I see a hint of your back-up plan; ‘inflexible Christianity’! Then, when you get rid of that, you can start on ‘flexible Christianity’ (which is, after all, just a Trojan Horse for the ‘inflexible’ kind!).
Paranoids will always see threats, no matter what! That’s part of their core identity, and no-one will ever take that away from them!
26 Nov 2015 11:24:12am
Well Mitor let’s go through your claims one by one.
Yes I believe that you are correct in the first para about other migrant groups and the absence of declaration of ‘holy war’. The thing is you will find this is also true of almost all of the Muslim migrants too. By the way you do know there were Muslim migrants from the very start of colonial Australia – in 1796 there were Muslim setters on Norfolk Island who soon after moved to Tasmania and there were ‘Mohammedans’ listed in the Australian census from 1802 on. And of course there were the ‘Afghans’ during the mid 19th century. The only example I can think of when a new migrant group has declared that the existing inhabitants must ‘join or die’ is the British colonialists and their genocidal attitudes to indigenous Australians.
Next we have your views on Islam’s ‘holy book of nonsense’, ‘ancient mysticism’ and it being a ‘cancerous tumour in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary’. Again I must agree with you – except that these comments are just as true about every religion there is. No evidence, books of nonsense and mysticism abounds without fail in them all.
In your third para you do touch on a real truth. However Christianity has a barbaric and murderous past that certainly rivals anything happening under the name of Islam now – the only difference is when it happened. It seems to take these Abrahamic religions in particular a couple of thousand years to shake out most of the really murderous ideas and zealots (although Christianity still has its dangerous cross bearers) and Islam still has a few hundred years to go – the trouble is I don’t think we can afford to wait another four or five hundred years for Islam to grow up. The religion itself has to change, it has to get out of politics, power and law and only be a ‘spiritual’ faith, preferably as influential as the Church of England is – i.e. not very.
26 Nov 2015 2:54:42pm
When did the Grand Mufti declare a holy war on Australia? Should we kick out all the Caucasians because of police dying at Hoddle Street or Martin Bryant at Port Arthur or Ivan Milat?
26 Nov 2015 8:54:54am
One of the nation’s self appointed moral superiors has spoken.
Anybody who disagrees with him is angry, irrational and misdirected, should be understood, rejected and cured. Those moral inferiors should not be called any of the old names, but should now be referred to as suffering from nativism.
Where do we sign up for the re-education camps Aunty? Room 101?
26 Nov 2015 2:55:32pm
As usual no discussion of the subject just character assassination.
26 Nov 2015 3:51:46pm
Indeed Lazarus but I would expect nothing more from the Labor Fan Club.
Do you disagree with my summary of the article? Do you disagree that the author wants those who disagree with him to be re-educated?
Go on, say something!
26 Nov 2015 8:56:37am
The arguments presented here against ‘naturism’, defined here as fearful rejection of migration from any culturally/ethnically/racially group, based on the group behaviors deemed undesirable to the current population. It is also presented as misguided, irrational and something to be opposed by the more enlightened members of society. It is undoubtedly true that many groups in the past were unfairly subject to such attitudes. However, to say that there will never be the case that a particular group does indeed have customs, attitudes and behaviours which discourage assimilation, increase conflict, perhaps commit more crimes and even form dangerous exteremist groups, is to ignore history and the diversity of human culture.
The original inhabitants of this land, quickly found that the new arrivals would confiscate land, engage is mass murder, and attempt to enslave their people. No amount of negotiation or resistance would affect the outcome. On the other hand, postwar migration of Europeans, despite their differences, they shared a common history, were broadly Christian, and accepted the Enlightenment concepts and political structures. There was also sufficient diversity to ensure that a single cultural group did not threaten the dominant Anglo-Saxon culture. Later asian immigration provoked fears in the community, but there were few problems due to the willingness of the asian cultures to blend without exhibiting cultural behaviours which would alarm the dominant European culture. So while immigration in the past has gone smoothly (except for the first peoples), its does not mean that any group in the future will do the same. It also ignores active selection of groups in the past thought more likely to succeed due to selective choices. The only way to decide whether any new group will enhance not undermine social cohesion, is to look at the hard evidence from around the world, and look at statistical data, such as crime rates, employment, social unrest, rather than just follow irrational anti-‘nativism’.
26 Nov 2015 8:56:45am
The protestant catholic divide goes back hundreds of years the
UK did not come by democracy or unity without wars and the spilling
of great deals of blood and even now there are divides in both religion
and nationalist sentiment. The fact is more muslims are being killed
by other muslims than non-muslims. Hatred run deep in the ME along
tribal and religious lines. All a lot of australians are asking is that if
you want to come to this country you leave your old dogmas and
hatreds at the doorstep and embrace and respect our freedoms.
Demanding the decapitation of non believers is not the best way to go about this
frank of malvern:
26 Nov 2015 8:58:42am
The author has done a narrative on the anti muslim movement n Australia but whats his explanation for bigger and much more organised anti muslim immigration movements in Europe for example that are currently growing rather than contracting.
Then there is the matter of Anti Islam campaigner Geert Wilders party in The Netherlands’ currently is polling at plus 20% nearly twice what the Greens are polling in Australia while several years ago the Swiss voted to stop the building of further Minarets at that countries mosque. Currently the Swedish Government fearing electoral backlash are doing a urgent re think of its long time liberal immigration policies which has seen large numbers of muslims migrate to that country
The anti muslim immigration sentiment far from being just an Australian thing, its a growing phenomena throughout the Western world
26 Nov 2015 8:59:02am
Quite frankly there are many out there who beleive that the Cronulla "riots" are still unfinished business and that another event like that is just around the corner and I tend to agree. The uneasy truce that exists is as fake as a Bali Rolex . There will be turmoil , there will be violence and no amount of pandering to the feelgood brigade on either side will stop that . What we have is a massive divide that is growing wider on the one hand the undereducated bogans , on the other the undereducated of Midlle Eastern origin. They do not mix well , they have oppsing views on most things and they are young and full of bravado , this is a mixture that is volotile and just waiting for a spark, it will happen because it must happen , good old human nature as it is
26 Nov 2015 1:07:53pm
Although it never would have happened if the gangs of young Muslim men going to Cronulla, had shown respect for bikini clad teen girls and lifesavers, and not this machismo that seems innate to their culture.
26 Nov 2015 8:59:13am
This is a great article!
It’s the first one I have read on this website that doesn’t attack white ‘rednecks’ or accuse them of ‘extremism’.
Most of the articles here are guilty of the same racism and stereotyping that they accuse the white protesters of, yet the authors seem to be incapable of recognising it in themselves!
In fact, this article admits that they are NOT racist!! What a breakthrough!
I agree with most of what has been written. I can accept that in the past people were reluctant to live among ‘foreigners’, and over time have accepted the change without problems.
Most people from other countries have immigrated to Australia and adopted the Australian lifestyle. This involves finding work, paying tax, obeying the (Australian) law and usually learning the English language. They are then generally accepted by the Australian people as ‘Aussies’ themselves.
However, this time I think people are genuinely concerned for the future of their country and their children?s future. As this time round, the Australian people seem expected to conform to the foreigners (The building of Mosques, Halal certification, Introduction of Sharia law to some areas, threat of death to ‘non-believers’, being labelled as racist for questioning Islam ect…).
They are concerned that their children may have to live with fewer freedoms than they grew up with.
They are concerned that the introduction of a larger Muslim population may lead to an increase of violent attacks on unarmed, innocent civilians (including women and children).
They are concerned that one day, their daughters will be expected to cover their heads when they leave their homes.
I am not saying that their fears are justified (I am not saying they aren’t either).
What I am saying is screaming ‘racist’ at them is extremely unintelligent and unhelpful as their fears are clearly not based on race and need to be addressed properly.
Finally, an intelligent article!
26 Nov 2015 10:35:09am
No this apologist is simply saying that anyone who objects to muslim immigration is a misguided fool who will soon realise the error of their though processes.
26 Nov 2015 11:07:31am
You are correct.
I did realise that, but by him admitting they are not ‘racist’ is a good start.
It’s almost as if he is the one who is slowly (baby steps…) learning.
I felt the need to give him encouragement.
26 Nov 2015 11:12:50am
But Peter, I suspect you would prefer these apologists to show some intelligence and look to Europe to see the result consequence of their ideology raver than damage this country to confirm the inevitable consequence of their ideology.
26 Nov 2015 11:39:27am
You’ve been "expected to conform to the foreigners"? That must be terrible for you. Let’s have a closer look:
Mosques. Have you been in one? Were you compelled or expect to go into one? Exactly how have you conformed?
Halal certification. The special word here is "certification". It’s on the tin. You can chose to buy it, or not. You can buy koscher Vegemite, or not. You can eat Weet-Bix, or not. Certification doesn’t expect you to conform. It gives you choices to help you buy. Or not.
"Introduction of Sharia Law to some places". Name one. I dare you. I double dare you.
Threat of death? Really? By whom? Where and when? Why didn’t you report it to the police?
Being labelled a racist. Guess you’re on your own with that one
26 Nov 2015 1:11:33pm
Please read my post again and have another try at a response.
I am not a protester, I was simply pointing out the concerns of the people who are protesting have nothing to do with race.
Simple as that.
I think this is the second post that you have misread.
Please be more careful.
26 Nov 2015 3:35:08pm
yeahright – these are your own words:
"As this time round, the Australian people seem expected to conform to the foreigners (The building of Mosques, Halal certification, Introduction of Sharia law to some areas, threat of death to ‘non-believers’, being labelled as racist for questioning Islam ect…)."
You’ve made the assertions, Dove challenged them. Please demonstrate which areas of Australia Sharia law has been introduced in. I triple dare you.
26 Nov 2015 6:14:40pm
You are correct, that is what I wrote.
I think that I could have worded that better, please accept my apology.
However my intention was to detail the concerns of the people protesting (who are obviously concerned about sharia law) and point out their concerns have nothing to do with race.
I am unable to name anywhere is Australia that has sharia law.
In fact, at the end of my original post I even stated I wasn’t saying their concerns were justified.
I thought the intention of my original post was clear, obviously it wasn’t.
I hope this helped
26 Nov 2015 7:02:09pm
Sharia law is not officially recognised or enforced in any area of Australia by our government.
However, I am unable to say whether it is or isn’t being unofficially enforced by some members of the community on certain individuals (family members ect..)
I imagine that proving one way or the other would be very difficult.
26 Nov 2015 1:15:06pm
Another disingenuous defence of all things Muslim. There is nothing wrong with eating halal food, but I do not see why I should have to pay a hidden religious tax everytime I eat my Wheeties….if Muslims demand that Wheeties should be halal, then the Muslim community should pay for it. If the manufacturer identifies foreign markets for Wheeties, that require halal certification, then they should bear the cost. Not me.
For all your posturing, I have never read a single word from you that praises the Australian nation as you have found it. As with most proponents of multiculturalism, there is this innuendo that somehow Australia is an unfinished project….ie, it will not be finished until Anglo/Celtic cultural dominance is eroded to the status of just another ethnic group.
26 Nov 2015 4:25:59pm
"I have never read a single word from you that praises the Australian nation"? The feeling is definitely mutual. I’ve got every right to praise and criticise as I see fit. Your views are a projection of your own limitations.
As for the peanut gallery below, there is no sharia law in Australia. Not one bit. Mind you, you have absolutely no idea what "sharia" even means, but keep trying
26 Nov 2015 2:50:21pm
Dove, deny that sharia law is already in place in muslim dominated areas like parts of western Sydney.
Go on. I dare you. I triple dare you.
26 Nov 2015 3:48:44pm
There is no sharia law in a single square inch of Australia, in any Muslim dominated part of western Sydney or in any jurisdiction.
If you are looking for religious courts in NSW, look up the Beth Din religious courts which have been operating for years
26 Nov 2015 7:55:25pm
Dove. The Muslim riots in Sydney in 2102 have done irreparable damage to this multi-culture. 300 Muslims, carried Islamist flags and signs saying, "Behead all those who insult the prophet", "Our dead are in paradise, your dead are in hell", "Shariah will dominate the world", and "Obama Obama, we love Osama" and threw bottles and objects retrieved from construction sites at police officers. Six police officers were injured.
The recent RA protest pales, and at least it was vehemently opposed by other Anglo Australians. Where was the Muslim opposition to the 2012 riot? Something’s missing.
26 Nov 2015 9:00:44am
I am old enough to recall the deep suspicion which the Australian/Anglo community held towards us Roman Catholics of Irish extraction. Being of that faith and descent via my ancestors, us Papists kids who attended Catholic Schools and attended Mass where Latin was spoken were viewed as not compatible with the then Aussie values. Fortunately for me WW2 broke out and as the Irish/Aussie descendants like my father and brothers marched proudly off to war all was forgiven. The Huns became the enemy and then when the war was over we turned our now united vitriol on the "swarm" of European migrants who chose to call Australia home. After the "wog" invasion came the Asians closely pursued by the Muslims. Pauline Hanson could well have been the ghost of things long past. When will we ever learn?
26 Nov 2015 9:01:08am
Now Pauline Hanson is what we would call a diversion. It’s like the way politicians never actually want higher taxes or less humanity, that is of course the votable-eligible electorate that wants that. Pauline Hanson is the person who can take us back to the 90’s when that kind of thing was popular, she is like Abba, the kids laugh and feel happy to remember her from the 90’s on the television.
26 Nov 2015 12:37:30pm
I think myself that Pauline Hanson was an invention of the Howard team, in the way that Palmer appears to have been an invention of the Abbott team. Both existed to make noise in excess of the main team and scare everyone back to the centre. This is what happens if anything changes so you’d all better sit still.
26 Nov 2015 3:22:34pm
maybe not an invention but when she arrived they were most likely happy. if you have the volume at 50 and want to turn it up to 70 you will be told off, if someone comes along playing their melodies at 85 you can turn up your beats to 70 and no one even noticed the change
26 Nov 2015 4:25:11pm
Pauline was thrown out by Howard for her extreme views.
which is slightly different to palmer, who wanted preferred treatment for all the money he donated to the liberal party. They, quite rightly, said ‘no’, so he left and formed his own party.
which then self destructed
26 Nov 2015 1:00:50pm
Anyway you can see what happens if you don’t bother to spend a bit of time with words, looking at them and listening to the sound of them. Poll, Polling, Pauline, Hanson, Hansard, Wasps nest on Parliament table bogong moths. You can see easily where that’s going.
26 Nov 2015 3:24:12pm
The poet lives
and if we listen to the same record time and time again do we even notice when the singers not the same?
26 Nov 2015 3:30:27pm
Her waterloo came with false imprisonment but by Fernando she came back like the dancing queen (not Bindi she won you know, big news overnight also some plane in Turkey did something but anyway Bindi won) when she said I do I do the boys with the money money money got quite scared
Is it a diversion or is it Democracy? when people say what many feel and that many feel they aren’t being listened to?
26 Nov 2015 9:01:49am
"Australians" you know the ones, they have Aussie flag thongs, drink VB, drive a Holden with a modified exhaust, are not the first people as properly put by our legal eagle for 10000’s of years it was Aborigines that called Australia home. However the current Australia with its Legal System, Democracy with it’s fine infrastructure of Roads, Rail, Schools and Hospitals is a product of our Anglo-Saxon/Celtic background, what is better a Pristine paradise where 700,000 people lived in harmony of the land or Todays modern smog filled megacities supporting 25 Million rats in a maze of stress? without a time machine this is a Rhetorical question, the fact is we live in Todays Australia where Taxes are collected then redistributed, Where everyone gets an Education, where there is equality (in law at least) for all genders and minoritys, where certain norms are expected where certain traditions are followed, is this "Australia" something than can or should be protected? and is there a threat to this "Australia", on 25Th April each year we pay homage to the young men who on distant fields gave away everything for us (well mainly to protect the "Mother land") to protect OUR Australia, is it not right now to want to protect OUR Australia now?
Off Course the big thing is we (or as Michael so lovingly put it the Uneducated, unemployed nerds) must Know what we are fighting to protect (lets not protect a lie or a manufactured Utopian pie in the sky vision) Why we are doing it and against whom we are doing it. One thinks Big Corporations spell more danger than many other groups.
26 Nov 2015 9:05:42am
What you choose to call nativism has its negatives, but also its positives. I’ve always kind of liked it that when you go to France they speak and act French, same with Germany, and a few other parts of the world. As the world continues to become more homogenous we will definitely have lost a great deal.
The other consideration is social interaction. The rules, manners, whatever, of social interaction vary between cultures and I believe that’s a major cause of discomfort and bad feeling through inadvertent offence. It’s tricky enough negotiating one’s own native culture and subcultures.
26 Nov 2015 11:39:09am
What basic skill did most of the French population lack in 1860? The ability to speak French.
It was a centralized government decision to suppress regional languages. To this day the central French Academy is still telling people how to be French. Don’t say "bulldozer" or "chewing gum". "L’ Binge" will henceforth be called "Beauvarie Express".
What you see as "acting French" looks to me to be slightly concerning Nationalism and Cultural Purism. One gets a similar feeling in Germany but they’re a little bit more reticent in expressing it, probably because of their troubled history of Nationalism and Cultural Purism.
I think this is what the French Ambassador was seeing when he recently suggested Australia is the model for integration of migrants.
26 Nov 2015 1:15:43pm
Nah, SM, that’s just a skewed view of the French Academy that’s filtered into Anglophone consciousness. Everyday French language and its usage evolves naturally all the time and in many different subcultures within France and outside it.
Arguably imposing the French language at the time was a powerful nation building tool. Over in Bretagne the Celts are reviving their historic language just as in Wales. Other regional languages are also undergoing a revival.
When I say "acting French" I have in mind more things like their customary directness, commencing any human interaction with a hello, prizing fresh bread, when they do and do not wear makeup …
That’s not too say there isn’t some unpleasant French nationalism sitting alongside the more positive French nationalism. All countries have some of that.
26 Nov 2015 6:11:27pm
Where does Nation Building stop and Nationalism start? I recall a few years ago Rupert Murdoch celebrating the demise of Chinese languages and the growing dominance of Mandarin… sorry… Modern Standard Chinese. Standardisation is good for big business.
I realize most French happily ignore the central French Academy. But that doesn’t say anything about the motives of the Academy.
Waterloo Sunset DD 2016:
26 Nov 2015 12:10:36pm
Hi Vor, good to see you back.
Are you suggesting that Germans speak and act French 🙂
26 Nov 2015 1:32:19pm
Hi, same to you.
To answer your question: No, I’m writing colloquially.
26 Nov 2015 7:42:11pm
In part, the French look united in their French-ness to us because we cannot spot the nice differences between various groups within France.
I doubt that the Basque French see themselves as mainstream French. As another person mentioned, the Bretons are reviving the Breton language, Provence & Languedoc were always linguistically distinct. Alsace-Lorraine has been tugged back and forth between France & Germany for centuries.
26 Nov 2015 9:06:38am
Currently, in the USA, Donald Trump is advocating building a wall. His philosophy which I believe is accurately described is " If we dont have borders, we dont have a country. "
From drugs coming through borders and into a country to anchor babys ( pregnant woman who walk across the border to have there kid in the US so it gets welfare for the next 80 years ).
I would argue that since the price of Living has gone up three fold ( houses are now unaffordable ), we’re starting to devalue human life. Life has become about money and everyone is faceless whether your australian, moslom or chinese. Meeting another Aussie on the street isnt important anymore because all that matters is money.
Other then having no borders, our policys on family are simply to continue paying woman exhorbiant welfare benefits in the hope to push our fertility rates higher. Clearly we’ve created a social divide, isolating men with a country of domestic violence. Our solution is to blame men. Is Australian family working? Are people happy? Clearly not. We’re so desperate for workers, we have to migrate them in from overseas. We simply dont want to pay to educate people in this country anymore or pay to actually have happy familys. Its all about the cheap dollar. Its cheaper to just migrate a skilled worker into the country despite the terrorism risks we may face.
Devaluing Human Life will continue. While we put mosloms and those who havent earned there place within the Australian society on a pedestal, we are pushing Australians and our core belief into the corner. We’re basically devaluing ourselves.
I remember someone once said, " We no longer belong to a family anymore, we belong to a company. Your work mates are your family. ".
I think the only reason why this hasnt become a major issue in Australia is because of welfare. Certain people in Australia are too lazy to care one way or the other. As long as the right people are receiving money hand over fist, it shuts them up and nobody will ever complain.
Yes, we devalue human life and Yes we devalue family… and Yes, Australians should be honoured. For all these idiots who say we owe free money to the world, go out and earn that money yourself. Your welcome to donate your pay check anytime. Its easy for an unemployed person to say ‘someone else’ should give ‘someone elses money’.
The problem isnt racism… the problem is we have too many people and no value to human life anymore. In my eyes, Australia is already dead. There was a time to do something about it and that time has passed. Im not surprised we have a drug epidemic in Australia. We have all become faceless.
Get ready for a wave of male suicides in the next 10 to 15 years. It wont be woman standing in line taking there own lives, it’ll be men. Woman will complain like they always do.
Its really a matter of whether you prioritise money o
26 Nov 2015 10:53:23am
You summed it up with
" the problem is we have too many people".
26 Nov 2015 9:07:12am
So what should the reaction of non nativists be? Quiet acceptance? No way
I prefer the reaction implied by Abe Lincoln in 1855.
"I am not a Know-Nothing. That is certain. How could I be? How can any one who abhors the oppression of negroes, be in favor or degrading classes of white people? Our progress in degeneracy appears to me to be pretty rapid. As a nation, we began by declaring that "all men are created equal." We now practically read it "all men are created equal, except negroes" When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read "all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics." When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty — to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocracy [sic]. "
He understood the consequences of quiet acceptance.
The Know Nothings were a nativist party of the 1850s
26 Nov 2015 9:09:28am
"In Australia, this occurs about once a decade; the last great explosion was in the Cronulla riots of 2005. Before that, the rise of Pauline Hanson and One Nation in 1997."
Howard showed the way to deal with people like Hanson who had vague and non-specific grievances to air; let her air her views but apart from that ignore her. Eventually her movement fizzled out and died.
The Cronulla riots occurred when a legitimate demonstration against the anti-social and misogynistic behaviour of middle eastern gangs was hijacked by some white supremacists. I understand that the people of Cronulla believe that the riots were successful in that they succeeded in stopping the unacceptable behaviour.
There was a great deal of soul searching after the riot involving all parties including the govt, media, Cronulla and middle eastern communities and the police who had been previously reluctant to act for fear of accusations of racism.
The current outbreak of "nativism" has obvious causes which the author doesn’t address. There will need to be similar soul searching across the board this time. The Muslim community has a history of playing the victim card while ignoring the problems originating within. This does not go down well with mainstream Australia.
26 Nov 2015 3:01:10pm
No a section of white society sees itself as a "victim" and seeks to blame others for the problem just like yourself.
26 Nov 2015 9:11:25am
Those thinking this is a new phenomenon might like to search out the original words to Advance Australia Fair, before they were politely reworded.
26 Nov 2015 7:34:06pm
From memory, the second and third verses are still pretty dodgy.
26 Nov 2015 9:11:50am
When I first heard the name "Reclaim Australia" used in the context of a grass roots political movement, I naturally assumed it was an activist group of indigenous Australians.
26 Nov 2015 9:12:28am
On the sense of belonging thing. I think mistakes were made early on in the multicultural policy. I think the message that these people who who’s sense of belonging was fragile; were deliberately aggravating. Often they were delivered by left-leaning advocates of multiculturalism. Proud nationalist displays by immigrants were fascinating and to be encouraged. Proud nationalist displays by "natives" were repulsive and discouraged.
I don’t think that was fair. I think it caused resentment. This was a major blunder by the left. They breached their own inclusive principles by excluding marginalised "natives".
I think the attitude lingers to a degree. Bad behavior in immigrant communities is explained by their marginal statuses. Bad behavior in marginal "native" communities is explained by their inherent nastiness and cultural deficiency. I’m afraid left-leaning compassion and understanding fails when it comes to marginalized "Anglo-Celts". They are constantly met with sneering, condescension. don’t imagine that they can’t the hypocrisy.
I fear Bradley has strayed into this trap in his interpretation of Cronulla. He omits the search for identity (we’re avoiding provocative terms like racism) that drove the "Lebanese" side. He omits the grievance and provocations felt by the "natives". Otherwise its an excellent article.
I would draw attention to his repeated use of "rationalisation" too. Prejudice feels rational if you’re doing it. Just a tip for life. Examine your own prejudices I say. Confront it in others by all means; but anti-prejudice starts at home, in my opinion.
26 Nov 2015 9:25:29am
All over the world, when people are asked about the population numbers of muslims in their country, people always get the number wrong.
In Australia, the average person thinks that 18% of the population are Muslim.
Well, the actual number from the last census is 2%. How can such a small number bring on the fears that they will bring on Sharia Law? Most Muslims in Australia are peace-loving citizens who love Australia.
In my view, there is no difference between fundamentalist christians and muslims. Except, fundamentalist christians are worse because at least they had the chance to have a good education.
26 Nov 2015 11:19:33am
I’m sure there are plenty of fundamentalist Christians who didn’t have the chance of a good education.
I’m sure there are fundamentalist Muslims who HAVE had a good education. Israr Ahmed, for example, has a bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery and a Masters degree in Philosophy.
I very much doubt that the average Australian thinks that 18% of the population are Muslim.
26 Nov 2015 9:27:01am
Well Yes and I am christian and i live in Australia but owe my allengince to Jesus Christ not to Australian culture which is very materalistic money culture. Pauline Hanson, the right and left wing cultural elties trade Union heavies some politicians sports people do not want to share their materalistic Australian culture with anyone. A christian will share his or her money country etc with all thoughts of different people. Just as jesus christ shared his love and life with so many different people.
26 Nov 2015 6:51:52pm
Stuart Lawrence : I have problems reconciling Hillsong’s take on materialism, and from a very different perspective agree with your take,my allegiance is to the beauty of decency in people and nature itself.
26 Nov 2015 9:29:01am
This is an interesting thesis, but the only problem with applying it more broadly is you could use this argument to improperly discount the reaction of indigenous Australians to British settlement as an example of nativism, which would give racists a get-out-of-jail-free card.
I think the author has touched on a simple truth – that human beings as a result of their evolution over a long period of time are inclined to have developed some very deep-seated "behaviours" inclining them to view the "outsider" as a threat to their tribe/village/settlement until they could see benefits in accepting the outsider through trade or other positive interactions.
Maybe that is the origin of what we call racism today. This behaviour no doubt worked well in 2000BC but today it is an anachronism.
Anyway, an interesting and thought provoking article.
26 Nov 2015 9:29:49am
As is so often the case with Mr Bradley’s musings, he starts with a theory and then seeks facts to support it.
He does have a new angle: a claimed intention to "avoid loaded terminology". To do so he lists all the terms he considers synonymous with his "nativism". He describes this group as "the poor, less educated, unemployed, socially isolated, the alienated and disenfranchised" indicates how he views them. And he ends by explaining their "inchoate fear of change" leading to a :final howl of impotent rage".
Well, you can’t get more objective than that.
He seems unaware that the ancient Greeks had strict laws concerning metics, foreigners who lived in their cities. That the Egyptians insisted that Jews in Alexandria lived in one specific area. (Sounds like luxury now: only about 12 Jews survive in the whole of Egypt). The Japanese still do not really accept Koreans and other non-Japanese, and the Chinese have a history of disliking foreigners.
Mr Bradley’s concentration on some small examples of current "nativism" in a tolerant and welcoming Western democracy seems odd, particularly considering the cultures from which the new immigrants came from.
Perhaps this explains his use of Cronulla as a prime example. As he would find from a little research, the tension arose not because of some latent "nativism" but because constant and long term harassment of locals and beach goers by ethnic gangs was ignored by authorities scared of being labelled racist. (Or more likely by politicians scared of losing bloc votes from ethnic communities).
And I do find it odd that he overlooks a fact that destroys his argument that the latest arrivals are always picked upon. Large numbers of Lebanese migrated to Australia in 1976, and many of these were Muslim. So it is now 40 years since Muslims arrived in large numbers.
In the same year large numbers of Vietnamese arrived. These have assimilated with few problems, after some initial bad feeling. Since then large numbers of Indians have moved to Australia, as well as Chinese and Filipinos. Not to mention Spanish speaking South Americans.
The newest arrivals are from East Africa: Somalis and others.
Virtually all have been accepted with little outcry, and, possibly due to their desire to fit in rather than complain, have integrated successfully into our community.
Yet after more than a generation one group still has issues.
Could it possibly be not "our" fault, but theirs?
26 Nov 2015 9:31:59am
This is the biggest pile of tripe I have ever read. Never mind archaic religions and cultural imperialism, what about the environment? How much longer will we allow the population to increase, for our most productive land to be turned into never ending suburbs, our limited water supplies to be drained to grow cotton and rice, our seas to be polluted with oil, cleaning products, and so on.
PS – Islam is not a race
PPS – The environment is not infinite
26 Nov 2015 2:07:18pm
Don’t worry Tory Boy, it will only take a couple more years and we will have clubbed that pesky damn environment thing to death.
And then, we will never have to be bothered by those lazy greenies again. Cos they will all emigrate to the Amazon. I think I heard somewhere that every time a koala dies, we all get a dollar. Or something. I wasn’t really paying attention, because someone said the word "Muslim", and I got distracted…
The environment? Don’t need to worry about it.Even if global warning is real, the extra CO2 is like steroids for trees and plants and stuff. Water? Why would we need water, when we can drink beer? Anyway, isn’t the planet covered in water?
I better stop writing now, I think I can hear someone saying "Muslim" again.
26 Nov 2015 9:33:41am
We are in the 21st century and we still have some dinosaurs clinging to the village mentality. The world is a global village and for some who cannot see beyond their own hamlet their myopia see others as threat. In the world of commerce we attempt to dismantle barriers but with people our village paranoia is all encompassing. The underlying trend is the continuing mishmash of people and goods and the artificial separation that the reactionaries want to maintain would be in vain. With education and travel our world view would be increasingly cosmopolitan and the village idiot who thinks he/she is the centre of the Universe will be just that – an idiot.
26 Nov 2015 9:36:44am
I get what the author is saying. He has a point but it is not a revelation. However, I am new to the word ‘nativisim’ and I have a problem with its use by this author.
Being an ‘ism’ suggests it is a form of prejudice. As used in the article and on looking it up it appears no more than a desire to be with likeminded people or maintain a group of likeminded people; except the author concludes as if such a desire is inherently prejudicial. There is nothing wrong with it in principle. It is only wrong in practice when it unreasonably impinges on other groups, including the other groups nativist tendencies. It is an important distinction the author seems to fail to realize.
26 Nov 2015 9:43:35am
I was born in 1950’s. The era is significant because it coincided with the mass immigration of displaced persons following WW11. Natvism, new term for a historical line of hate and exclusion, once and for some areas tribal wherever human life domiciled.
Nothing new folks in Australia 2015. The ethnic, cultural and religious rivalries, even violence has been going on since the 1950’s and before that.
Hanson’s targets in the 1990’s were Asians and Aboriginals. Now Muslims. She is still struggling for relevance, the spotlight, a career on the taxpayer funded payroll?
I’ve seen the "Paul and Pauline Hanson’s" and the "Australia is doomed, doomed I tell you" soothsayers all my life.
Nativism? What a clinical term. Just like ethnic cleansing, collateral damage, lifters and leaners.
National pride and unity should be an extension of community pride and unity which is an extension of family pride, unity, love, nurturing and support for each other.
Whether Hanson; the swastika wearing, tattooed skin heads; well dressed, urbane members and others of Reclaim and other anti groups – many of whom are descendants of "johnny come lately" (last 60 years) Australians –
realise this or not… they have actually separated themselves from Australia and the ideals that they profess to have, the love and commitment to this nation and humanity itself. These people support the mandatory detention on islands, yet have themselves committed to living on the island of lost and dead souls. There is no Christian/religious overtone to that statement.
I wonder if Hanson and those like her have thought what they would actually do with their lives if their targets miraculously disappeared and Australia once more seemed to only be full of people that looked like them? With their objectives realised, turn on each other because suddenly they see differences in each other? I think so.
Racism, exclusiveness, smearing, targeting, labelling, stereotyping, supremacy, dominance and even advocating violence to repel the undesirable is not the domain of any group of people in Australia or a religion. INDIVIDUALS who are human beings seek out the like minded and form these groups and alliances to oppose, marginalise and vilify others. They group and label to separate their target from the human being as they threaten with abuse or weapons, dispassionate about the hurt, fear and degradation they expose their target to. I call it the "sniper mindset", remembering that snipers do not harm or murder a human being; they remove the threat or target the objective with cold and dispassionate calculation. The same cold approach has been programmed into target drones.
26 Nov 2015 9:44:46am
"Today’s victims of nativism in Australia are Muslims. There may be some violence, perhaps quite bad, before this current surge inevitably subsides"
What universe do you come from. Obviously you did not see the "religion of peace" march in opposition to some cartoons published in a European country. There was a kid in this march holding a sign death to infidels. If these "victims" continue with such behaviour there will be more opposition to brining people who follow the "religion of peace" to Australia.
You are well known for your support of letting any number of such people come to Australia without any documentation. All the Italians, Greeks etc were actually invited to migrate to Australia and generally did not bring with them a hatred of the free western way of life enjoyed by Australians
26 Nov 2015 9:51:28am
Unlike most contributors here I agree with most aspects of the article. For me the fundamental problem is the challenge of dealing with an unpredictable situation. I dare say no-one in Australia would object to one genuine immigrant per year, irrespective of where they came from. However, all of us would object if this was 1 million. So what is the right number per year? The immigration demand varies with population size, war and economics, but internal acceptance of immigration numbers is determined by local factors. I conclude that there is no solution to the problem. The immigration numbers get determined by finding the least objectionable, to the locals, number. Where those immigrants are from, as well as their behaviour when they are here, will always affect that number.
26 Nov 2015 12:37:35pm
"The immigration numbers get determined by finding the least objectionable, to the locals, number"
Think it’s more to do with propping up GDP growth, and keeping enough work for property developers in the pipeline.
Is anyone ever asked how much immigration they’d like to see? It certainly seems to have escaped scrutiny through the bipartisan consensus of the Big Australia Laborals.
26 Nov 2015 9:53:09am
This is just another of recent ABC articles to try to associate anybody that is concerned about Muslim immigration with Reclaim Australia. Sounds to me that the Australian Liberty Alliance ALA is the main political party where people will express their frustration with current LNP, Labor Green MPs.
Its a shame the ABC don’t report how multiculturalism is going in countries where Muslim immigration and multiculturalism is further advanced in terms of higher percentages in population.
We who care to look have been seeing what is happening in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Britain, Germany, Belgium and now France. The naivety comes from lefties who think Australia will be different.
All the evidence overseas and in Australia is suggesting that this will turn out badly for Australia.
Why take this crazy risk!
26 Nov 2015 11:43:12am
Couldn’t agree more ! And the ABC would never do that !
From Dr Peter Hammond’s book "Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat." ( Hammond is a missionary from the US )
Islamisation begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges.
When politically correct tolerant and culturally diverse societies ( like ours ) agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components ( legal, political, economic, social and military ) tend to creep in as well.
As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will be for the most part regarded as a peace-loving minority and not a threat to other citizens.
eg, USA, Australia, Canada and others
At 2-5% they begin to proselytise from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and street gangs. ( sound familiar ? )
eg, Denmark, Germany, UK and others
From 5% they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population, For example, they will push for the introduction of halal food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on
supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves ( already happening here )
eg. France, Sweden, Switzerland and others
When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam and results in uprising and threats.
( Refer to recent events in France and Belgium, and from here on it just gets progressively worse – suggest you look it up. )
Today’s 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world’s population Their birth rates dwarf those of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists Jews and all other believers. Muslims will exceed 50% of the world’s population by the end of this century.
Sure don’t want my descendants to grow up in a Muslim world.
26 Nov 2015 1:09:44pm
Don’t worry. The world will sort out overpopulation all by itself.
26 Nov 2015 2:03:03pm
Peter Hammond has a doctorate in Missiology, whatever that means, from a Baptists Theological College in South Africa.
He is the prestigious author of such high brow titles as: Finding Freedom From The Pornography Plague, Porndemic ? How the Pornography Plague Affects You and What You Can Do About It, The Pink Agenda – Sexual Revolution and the Ruin of the Family
Basically, he’s a quack and his so-called analysis of demographics was discredited by school children the day it was published
26 Nov 2015 9:54:12am
Nativism in itself is, and has been a misdirected term from my empirical experiences.
Isolation by, or from, some societal groups and institutions can, and has been a tool of core centric valued individuals in the workplace, in volunteer workplaces, in structured Public Service institutions and probably any other personnel organised group.
The individual exposed to nativism can be ostracised for any reason including the unwillingness to accept conformity to dishonesty, venality, institutionalised dysfunctionalism, or any other reason; the term is not only race related, but conscience and concencus related. Obviously closing ranks, to use a term, is practiced within many organisations where opposing constructed and cemented views are comfortably looked upon as the accepted status quo. An article I read some time back wrote of a Judge who used the term; "a conga line of corrupt cowards", when referring to the practices of a group of active policing persons who refused to give evidence against one of their own in a child molestation case.
Nativism and some societal structures generally, from my experiences, are regressive and retard all types of progress. Historically, from the initial organisations of stonemasons to closed shop practices of sections of the disintergrating union movement, nativism is still practiced in all sections of our society. From golf clubs to now outlawed motorcycle clubs, to be accepted or dismissed is as native a practice as is the ability of an eagle to fly.
26 Nov 2015 10:02:12am
Some of us well remember the families split by Catholic/Protestant "mixed marriages" of the fifties and sixties and lived through the successive waves of unwanted immigrants and their enclaves. The arguments and resentment today is much the same as before and based on progressive tribalism. Once each new arrival joins in the attacks on the latest target group, they become members of the tribe.
What most forget is that the culture we have today is the result of those groups progressively assimilating and contributing to society.
You would be hard-pressed to find many contemporary Australians who are not the result of immigration of only a few generations ago.
The difference today is the degree of public resentment and the volume of media noise that takes extreme examples and generalises all of one certain group as being typical of them all.
Add that to our unique "tall poppy syndrome" (actually about seeing some people get something they don’t get themselves) and it’s not surprising.
Swap the word "Muslim" for the word "Jew" in everything you see and hear and things look strangely familiar.
26 Nov 2015 10:57:13am
Lot of truth in what you say. if Australia could rid itself of this "how come they are getting that" mentality, we’d be far better off.
26 Nov 2015 10:05:10am
Well I wasn’t going to comment, but having read the first 12 comments in response I feel that I have to, to try and let the author know that I believe this is a great article, one that goes right to the heart of the matter. The author drills-down to the core of the issue, ‘a sense of belonging’, and that is at the core of this and many other issues. So don’t despair – those of us who are able/willing to scratch the surface of issues and keep scratching until we reach the core issue are often laughed at and vehemently disagreed with by those who aren’t yet able, or willing to look any deeper than what they see before them. Keep up the good work Michael.
26 Nov 2015 11:01:45am
Nikola, I too like the way Michael writes. Too much un-deserved ugliness is dished out on the author; ABC should not allow it.
26 Nov 2015 12:51:37pm
I too enjoy Michael’s articles.
I think that one needs to have pretty thick skin to put a piece up here, judging from the bile in some comments.
26 Nov 2015 11:32:20am
Sadly the Author has failed to scratch the surface as evidenced by his statement "…poor, less educated, unemployed, socially isolated…." in describing a group who apart from an ABC screenshot he has not seen or met.
What is needed is rational debate Reclaim Australia is unlikely to provide that but neither is the author
26 Nov 2015 12:29:17pm
Indeed he has driven to the core of the issue in suggesting that the people that you and he describe are the ones likely to support extreme right-wing groups like this because their poverty, their lack of education, their unemployment status and their social isolation, among many other obvious traits, leaves them feeling as if they themselves are on the fringe of mainstream society and struggling to ‘fit in’, in other words, they are very insecure about their own standing in society, that they assume that by joining-in with such groups, it will prove to those that they are trying to impress, i.e. those they wish to belong with, that they are indeed a part of the group.
This is a common concept in many aspects of life and the yearning to belong. People yearning to belong to a group often ‘over-do’ the traits of the group they are trying to belong to in order to impress to the group that they are indeed ‘one of them’ .
I disagree with you Buderim Boy.
26 Nov 2015 10:10:24am
This is a very good and well thought out report, and obviously it hit the right notes. Its obvious that we have a problem and the comments on this report proves the point that the report was a good one as you have the usual denialism rampant in the comments and the justifications which just proves what the author of the report was highlighting
26 Nov 2015 10:12:06am
This is just waffle, and completely ignores the very real reason why people are worried about Muslim immigration:
The shocking and barbaric slaughter being carried out around the world by Islamic Terrorists, and their stated aim of setting up a caliphate.
The Koran clearly states that all non believers should be killed, that any Muslims who immigrate to a foreign country have a duty to convert that country to the Muslim faith, and NOT to integrate.
The overwhelming evidence in countries like France and England, who have a large Muslim population, that 2nd and 3rd generations are now becoming more and more radicalised.
The Islamic leadership in our own country continually apeing the Lefties by claiming that terrorism is caused by our islamaphobia, racism, and tough anti terrorist laws, thereby refusing to take any responsibility for the problem.
It is not racist or islamaphobic to express a view that you do not want your country to turn into another France or England. And the lessons of history clearly show that Muslims do not integrate well, no matter how long they live in safety in a foreign country. A good example of this, the Grand Mufti, a scholar, who has lived in Australia for 18 years, and can`t speak English, so much for committment to the country which has provided him a safe home. Islamic immigration should be stopped, there are already 500,000 in Australia, that is enough in the circumstances, which will not be solved by appeasement and denial of the facts. It is up to Muslims to reform their medieval faith and stop the slaughter.
26 Nov 2015 11:22:14am
‘The Koran clearly states that all non believers should be killed’
So does the old Testament. In fact the Koran and the Bible are so full of barbarity you could be excused for thinking they were written by the same authors.
Was the Inquisition or the many religious wars between Christians and others any less barbaric than ISIS?
Is the extreme religious Zionist and Christian right any different from fundamental Islam?
Yes- we are in more danger from extreme ISIS than Zionists in Australia but I guess Palestinians feel the opposite.
Extremism in all of its forms is evil.
26 Nov 2015 5:26:46pm
Difference is Christianity at least got a sequel.. the New Testament in which god gave up smitings and ‘kill in my name’ in favour of a sacrificial son, the promise of resurrection and a life in heaven.
Trouble has always been the use of such texts to justify the pursuit of power and control over others.
I often think humans could turn a telephone book into a instrument of oppression if that was the only authority text left!
26 Nov 2015 6:50:13pm
If it is a Chinese Buddhist or Communist or an African pagan who points out problems with Islam, are you still going to make pointless comparisons with the Old Testament (the Old Testament would not likely be relevant to those people)? Or would you try to point out problems with their beliefs?
Stick with the issue at hand; specific Islam problems.
The Inquisition by the way was according to its RationalWiki entry (hardly a pro-religious site) was actually more humane compared to other courts systems of the day.
26 Nov 2015 7:05:30pm
And the Jewish Talmud says that non-Jews are "human cattle" destined to be ruled over and whose killing in not considered a mortal sin.
The Bible also says some distasteful things about rape, incest and he genocidal treatment of non-believers – and women in particular.
That’s what "holy books" are for – to reinforce separation of the believer from the undeserving heretic.
Just because some radicals of a religion make some statements, they don’t speak for them all.
I don’t consider the KKK or any of the other 10,000 versions of Christianity as being typical of all Christians.
26 Nov 2015 10:18:19am
If only we could end the ‘nativism’ of religion. As we have seen the ‘nativism’ of religion has already caused violence and deaths in Australia and division. When will the violence end? Will there be more deaths? Understanding it will help us end it, but ignoring it like many want to, criticising and attacking anyone who does, won’t. Denying a religions beliefs, practises and teachings won’t help nether will accepting its beliefs, practises and teachings as being acceptable.
26 Nov 2015 10:18:29am
"These people’s anger, irrational and misdirected as it is, is real. We can understand it, reject it and try to cure it, without the name-calling"
I could easily use this statement to describe the socialist, marxist far-left wing elements that we all had to tolerate while I was at university in Melbourne. These people pathologically protest on heavily used roads and intersections in Australian CBDs with their anger often stemming from a deep seated hatred for the culture and society which provides for them. The similarities between them and Reclaim are closer than they would like to admit.
26 Nov 2015 10:24:34am
What Michael is calling "nativism" is merely another derogatory term for the universal phenomenon of ethnocentricity. All nations are ethnocentric, that’s why immigrants from one may find it difficult to assimilate into another with major religious or cultural differences. Criticising one while pretending it is the only such offending player in the game is disingenuous, as is asserting that only a certain distasteful minority are ethnocentric, a claim with no validity whatsoever. All groups, from school playground bullies to social media "trends" to international military alliances define themselves by and derive their identity from shared commonalities. All will react against perceived threats.
26 Nov 2015 10:35:15am
Spot on Bev and Freddie frog
26 Nov 2015 10:47:31am
Five times a year there is a cricket bbq at mine. This year is a Pink theme to celebrate and/or lament the new ball in Adelaide.
There will be people of different countries of origin, plenty of other Muslims, mostly atheists, and maybe a Jewish couple and a Hindu couple if they can make it. But that doesn’t matter because theology isn’t nearly as important as the six-and-out rule.
The uniting thing for everyone isn’t cricket (half probably hate it), it’s that everyone, regardless of their religion, politics or race is an Australian or would like to be.
As usual, anyone’s welcome, there’s plenty of food and drink, except pork and booze. And because I don’t want to hose down a burning cross on my lawn I have a strict no-racists, no-bigots door policy
26 Nov 2015 10:49:12am
Patriot orgs are as great a threat as any terrorist group,because they are the drivers of the hate.
The govt will be tracking them.And will pick them off one by one.At last a reason for eavesdropping and data retention.
Now all we need is politicians to have the guts to seek to bring the dialogue back to the centre.Starting with condemnations and intellectual assassination of the Hansonites .
26 Nov 2015 10:51:08am
Some will nitpick about some details, but this article presents a fundamentally sound thesis.
It also dovetails well into other examples of ‘group hatred’ in recent history. for example, the majority of KKK supporters in the USA were ‘white trash’, probably because they would do anything to ensure that there was at least one rung lower on the ladder than theirs. The Civil Rights Movement threatened (and only to a debatable degree, succeeded) in this.
The Nazi hatred of Jews was also propagated on the theme of ‘Jewish Capitalists’ and their alleged control; A degree of control that the working German did not have over his own life during the Great Depression.
So whether it is to keep an underclass in ‘their proper place’ or to overthrow the oppression of a perceived ‘overclass’, the root motivation is to protect what little control and status one still has.
26 Nov 2015 10:58:56am
With head-in-sand "analysis" like this, Australia will follow Europe into polarisation and political paralysis. What is "irrational" about wanting to stop the twin retrograde forces of our time (a) Islamisation of the West and (b) the Rise of China. Both of these forces are undermining Australia’s cohesion and national security, and it’s completely sane to want to curb these forces which threaten to destroy Australia as we know it? But if we can’t speak about these matters, and instead are labelled "racist" or "nativist" at every turn, you can be sure that Australia will follow Europe and become politically polarised and paralysed.
26 Nov 2015 12:27:16pm
Michael R.: This is the most eloquent summary of current events I have read. Thank you.
26 Nov 2015 11:00:58am
Michael Bradley loves immigration, however over the last decade I have asked this question here many times.
What is a sustainable population for Australia?
On the odd occasion the moderator has actually posted my query I have never solicited one single reply.
26 Nov 2015 11:29:56am
100 million. Happy now?
26 Nov 2015 4:34:05pm
!00 million Budgies. OK
26 Nov 2015 11:58:20am
"What is a sustainable population for Australia?"…. gbe, it’s very difficult to put a precise figure to that question. If we improve our land management we can increase our population, if we get sources of water into arid areas, we can increase our population, if we buffer broad sections of the country from climate change, we can increase our population, etc….
Currently, I am confident that we could double our population without doing much at all, provided that we don’t do so by further populating Melbourne and Sydney.
…. But there is a limit, of course, there is always a limit….
26 Nov 2015 1:22:02pm
"there is always a limit"
Of course Alpo, but you people stubbornly refuse to put a figure on it. If you’re so convinced of your rectitude, why?
Academics, demographers, politicians, conservationists, are all prepared to deal in numbers. Only you and your ilk remain vague. Why?
Could it , just possibly, be that if there were numbers, the refugee lobby would have to face unpleasant decisions? That the sacred cow of immigration might be questioned?
You’re very vocal, Alpo, but sedulously avoid discussing any pragmatic issues that might compromise your ‘ideals’.
26 Nov 2015 2:30:53pm
And just exactly where are those sources of water going to come from?
26 Nov 2015 5:59:39pm
Look at how Singapore supplies its population with water. You will learn something.
26 Nov 2015 3:33:09pm
Yes Alpo, it is all about improvement of land management.
26 Nov 2015 6:58:45pm
I assume by your comments that a one minute shower once a week will be your contribution to this increase in population.
And of course, should you want a longer shower, you might sell your property to allow that dam to be produced to have that two minute shower
I note that you have not really thought it through have you – you have just listened to the rhetoric
26 Nov 2015 12:01:47pm
Given we have administrations and governments ie,; LGCs, State Governments, and Federal Governments of such magnitude, I have read that their, the governing administration numbers, now would adequately administer a population of 60 million, let’s try to aim for that figure as a minimum.
26 Nov 2015 1:39:48pm
Don’t any of you people have any idea of the environmental consequences of increasing the population to 60mil as suggested. Don’t any you have any idea of what is happening NOW to our environment.. you people are insane!
26 Nov 2015 3:29:59pm
The mismanagement of large, huge tracts of our land has been generally within the hands of a select few "nevvv" for over a century now. The mismanagement of our land has led to erosion, loss of native species along with the decline in numbers of our national symbols, extended periods of drought due to deforestation, increases in salt plains areas, severe drops in water tables, increased flooding due to laser levelling of massive acreages: the list could go on and on. Responsible land management can unreservedly add to population increases.
Though in no way being an advocate for what has happened in Palestine, Aaron Aaronsohn did achieve a remarkable result through land management and rural research at Athlit. If it was a practical and successful procedure a century ago in Palestine, I can see no reason why, when in the hands of professional operators with vision and a break from todays standards of mismanagement, a similar result cannot be achieved in Australia. All the best.
26 Nov 2015 4:09:17pm
Unfortunately, our environment is still struggling to survive -but if we all just do our bit, we can finish it off once and for all.
Every time you see a piece of plastic, throw it out the window, with a bit of luck it will float out to see and kill a dolphin. Damn dolphins are eating all the fish anyway.
If you are unlucky enough to see a tree, ringbark it. Trees are our mortal enemy. They used to have them in the Amazon, once. They’re gone now and the Amazon is making billions of dollars on the internets evey day. Australia is bigger than the Amazon, so we will all be rich.If you find a river, build a damn so all the water can evaporate without helping a single plant to grow.And don’t get me started on that stupid reef thats stopping us shipping all our coal to India. What did that damn reef ever do for us? Maybe, if we killed all the trees on all the rivers in Qld, then planted a chemical dependant monoculture where the trees used to be, we could rid our selves of that coral monostrosity in five, maybe ten years tops.
But I really like your suggestion to import 60 million people here. With all the trees and rivers and stuff gone, we could be the biggest city on the planet. And we could all survive eating genetically modified, imported food while we did important stuff. Like posting pictures of our lunches on Facetube and stuff.
26 Nov 2015 11:13:33am
Australia was peopled from Europe from 1788 as an experiment in getting people who would not work to do work. Thieves and no hopers, now classified as "losers" have continued to come here, redefining a sense of exclusivism and passiveness that belies origins and sense. This is a land of the dispossessed, and native Australians do not like their part in that. We have a political class that sells us out in order to profit from percentages and methods of the "take." We have little to offer, mostly, except the very ground we stole and occupied, having incrementally identified value in it as mineral wealth. Of course the urban well-off see a threat in other cultures, having none of value anyway. It’s beer, pies, footy and fornication, all of which other cultures just do not treasure. And we are right. Perhaps, far right…
26 Nov 2015 1:10:28pm
The self-hate is strong in this one…
By the way, beer is a German word, everywhere has pies – by whatever name – and sport, and fornication (from Latin) is what got us here.
More Australians visit art galleries than go to the football anyway so I’m struggling to understand what your problem is. Maybe if you ran for office instead of whinging about the "the political class" you might achieve something.
26 Nov 2015 11:20:15am
Maybe it just all boils down to money. "They" are getting more than "us". "They" arrive here and are given accommodation, pension, schooling, help, "we" have to struggle on our own.
I have seen this with Italian, Greek, Vietnamese, Indian, all previous immigration groups since WW11.
Reclaim Australia, how far back do you want to go. Before Aboriginal people, before Lucy? It is never spoken by Reclaim Australia and the like just what "they" have contributed to the country. It will, like all the other "isms", take generations to die out and the only way to help that is education.
26 Nov 2015 11:20:27am
There’s an old Kingston Trio song, the Merry Minuet, that sums it up
"They’re rioting in Africa. They’re starving in Spain. There’s hurricanes in Florida and Texas needs rain.
The whole world is festering with unhappy souls. The French hate the Germans. The Germans hate the Poles.
Italians hate Yugoslavs. South Africans hate the Dutch and I don’t like anybody very much"
26 Nov 2015 12:33:47pm
jeez, jean, a song will always be just a song. A blast from the past. Unhelpful at best. How merry can you get?
26 Nov 2015 11:22:53am
What do we (and who is that we) want Australia to be like?
And should that above mentioned "we" get a say in it?
Our Beloved leaders tell us that "we" want
-50 Million people
-Cheap imported (slave/student) Labour serving our weekend coffees sans overtime loading
-A wave of our young people fighting the good fight with the coalition of the willing (willing leaders)
Maybe "They" (The leaders) need to stop telling the "we" what Australia wants and start asking instead
26 Nov 2015 11:24:38am
Understanding the varying opposition to ponzi population pump the GDP Australia, does miss the lobbyists gaze by default these days.
Too lazy to train our own. Too lazy to value add anything. Too lazy to rebuild anything lest it’s to be barn sale material down the road, literally. Too lazy to clean up the mess profit does leave in it’s wake but no worries, the free of accountability market will fix.
Of peak lazy rUs excellence? WTG Canberra.
26 Nov 2015 11:26:23am
We are an incredibly primitive species.
With a bit of luck Homo Sapiens will be extinct within the next 100,000 years or so —– then these types of issues won’t exist. And the planet will be better off.
26 Nov 2015 11:26:27am
The entire anti immigration and islamophobia was whipped up and manipulated by the LNP Abbott and Stop the boats campaign to gain election in 2013 and amplified by the shock jocks.
The people do exist but there are now 5 ANTI Islam political parties which I do not understand when we have an ANTI Discrimination Act.
We can thank Abbott for that.
26 Nov 2015 11:30:36am
Your article is a standard PC brigade tactic to shut down debate by name calling.
Just because a person is concerned that excessive(in their eyes) immigration will adversely affect the country does not make them raciest.
History shows that when a country loses control of its immigration policy it will be changed in a manner the locals don’t want. – Ask the Palestinians, or the Australian aborigines.
This is because immigrants can bring cultural and social norms that vary from the host population.
The Reclaim Australia group are simply saying that the perceive that the social an cultural norms of middle eastern Muslims is not the norms they want to become prevalent in society. and the level of immigration of people with those social and cultural norms is such that "ghettoes" are forming where there is little interaction between the wider Australian society and the immigrants, such that those social an cultural norms that are unacceptable in Australian society will be perpetuated. (for example oppression and mistreatment of women and girls, and the separation of the sexes in public life)
The language used by "Reclaim Australia" is often not particularly slick and there are people attracted to the group who are genuine racists. The fact that the language is not very slick and some racists are involved are not facts that invalidate their concerns, (in the same way that the existence of criminals in the union movement, or in the business community does not render the political of gaols of those groups invalid)
Rather than lambasting a group as "nativist" and creating another "ism" with which the PC brigade can use to shut down debate, better to try to understand the concerns, discuss and address them if they turn out to be valid.
26 Nov 2015 11:37:11am
The next lot of migrants will solve Australia’s problems, Ladies and Gentlemen please welcome the US marines.
26 Nov 2015 11:40:36am
‘Nativism’ suggests a blanket objection to ‘the other’. As such it can easily be dismissed as paranoia. However the Reclaim movement is targeted at a group that have given us good reason to harbour apprehensions. In fact the group about whom there is most concern, Middle Eastern Muslims, are less ethnically ‘other’ than those who cause no concern at all. I state the obvious when I say that Koreans are more ethnically exotic than Lebanese, who after all were allowed in under the White Australia policy. Yet which looms larger in the public mood?
History may well conclude that the Reclaim bunch exaggerated the threat posed by this demographic, but then it may not. What it will definitely conclude, though, is that a threat did indeed exist.
26 Nov 2015 11:42:15am
The worst kind of "nativists" are the ones who see no hypocrisy in opposing immigration whist also discriminating against our indigenous peoples..
Andrew Bolt / Ray Hadley, are you listening?
26 Nov 2015 11:43:10am
To be candid, I don’t think the author completely understands the nuances involved. Apparently people are either black or white – you either dislike Islamic adherents or you embrace them. The real position is far more complex than that simplistic assertion.
We have learned a lot over the last 50 years of immigration to Australia. The Irish working class didn’t like the arrival of cheaper labour from Italy. The Greek original arrivals wouldn’t condone Turkish immigration and made their position abundantly clear. The Serbs didn’t like Croats. And on and on. But in time we got over those hurdles.
Most observers today do not, in principle, rail against anyone. It’s true that fringe groups do, but fringe groups are fringe groups and have always been thus. What concerns many normal citizens of Australia, regardless of their politics, is that 27% of muslims in Northern Europe support the actions of ISIS and 10% are "undecided". If you haven’t been looking at some of the alarming videos out of Europe then you are not understanding the root causes of that concern. Rightly or wrongly, there is a feeling abroad that integration into our society is going to be a much tougher job. Moreover, 15 year old kids murdering innocent bystanders for a principle is quite a new approach regardless of whether they are a very small minority.
I never fail to be bemused by these sorts of ramblings which, in my view, completely miss the point.
26 Nov 2015 12:53:05pm
Jack, I’m not sure where your figures "27% of muslims in Northern Europe support the actions of ISIS" comes from, but let’s imagine the figure is correct.
What "actions of ISIS" do these Muslims support?
Let’s try adding some context.
When Saddam was removed from power in Iraq in 2003, a power vacuum was created in a region with an underlying sectarian conflict. Sunni Muslims, having once subjugated Shiite Muslims now found themselves under existential threat from Shiite militias. (Old scores from the incredibly bloody Iraq-Iran war were also being settled.)
With government forces no longer able to protect them from this existential threat, Sunni tribes sought protection from US troops, from Al-Qaeda, and then ISIS.
So, my question is: If your poll figure is correct, does the 27% figure represent Sunni Muslims out of all Muslims polled? And could the ISIS "actions" they allegedly support be actions such as the protection of Sunni populations against the Shiite threat?
I mean, the same poll results, with the added context of the ongoing sectarian war within Islam, could be: "Majority of Sunnis support actions to thwart own demise."
I think we sometimes interpret things on the understanding that we are the centre of the world. But we need to realise that we’re not. ISIS isn’t all about us.
26 Nov 2015 6:35:57pm
A fair enough question Mark.
My sources were actually threefold. One is a PEW report issued before the Charlie Hebdo event, the second is a Washington Institute report reproduced in the Huffington Post, and a third one which directly polled muslims only in Britain, France and Sweden. And no – it did not poll only Shia or Sunni – it polled muslims. I assume from that, that every branch of Islam was enough to get a guernsey.
I understand Iraq very well also Mark – I lived in Najaf for quite a while over the last three years and had the opportunity to discuss events at length with both Sunni and Shia. Many people on these pages do not understand the absolute brutality which Saddam visited on the Shias, and once deposed it was obvious that the Shia would exact revenge. If a "solution" to Iraq was taken in the same Saddam vein, the Americans would have just stood back and let the Shia eliminate them. To their credit they did not, and even large slabs of the Shia population admired their even handed approach. Believe me, if you had been used as target practice on your home streets by Saddam’s Sunni troops you might have a certain reluctance to embrace them given your new found freedom.
26 Nov 2015 1:27:27pm
And how about non muslim teenagers killing or maiming people including members of their own families for money for drugs….or is that excuseable because they aren’t muslim.
What about the non muslim guys who are slaughtering their families.
What about the drug traffickers who a slaughtering millions in their quest for money.
All are terrorists extremists and terrorists. However right wing extremism is OK in western countries according to most of the slant of what is printed and reported in the media.
26 Nov 2015 7:21:02pm
Sorry to say Wise One that you seem to get most of your exercise from leaping to conclusions.
Where exactly in my post did you see that I condone murder or drug use ? Couldn’t find it myself.
But by all means go on believing that murder for a principle is OK.
26 Nov 2015 11:59:24am
The other aspect is the increasingly competitive nature of Australian society. Where jobs are increasingly scarce, and average living standards are going down (and not equitably).
Amenity and housing affordability likewise going down.
A Liberal MP at the least Federal election was blaming boat-people for traffic congestion on the M4 in Sydney.
While there remains bipartisan commitment to 100,000s of (legal) immigrants a year, the disaffection may continue to grow. And that’s most easily vented on people who look different.
Although some of that anger might more usefully be directed at the political class and its dedication to Big Australia.
26 Nov 2015 12:03:53pm
Most lawyers are against closing our borders.
Most health professionals are against Voluntary Euthanasia.
Most churches are against contraception.
Could it be so because they are intense self-interest groups?
It’ll be interesting to see if this comment gets through. Voyons.
26 Nov 2015 2:26:19pm
Provide some references please, ACH, as most of your statements strike me as being untrue.
26 Nov 2015 12:17:43pm
The first Europeans were born on Australian soil in 1778. In less than two decades those children had invented the Australian accent from the slurry of regional English dialects and celtic influences. They became the sun baked blue eyed pioneers who cleared the forests to grow food and explored the vast empty continent that was our new home. They developed a uniquely Australian culture of mateship and resilient independence in the hardships of early colonial life.
Since then, against the better judgement and best efforts of the otherwise helpful, friendly and generous Australians, waves of immigrants have been allowed to arrive because of misguided government policies. The problem is that instead of assimilating and becoming carefree, fun loving, sports enthusiasts, which would be the polite thing to do if you were invited into someone’s country, the new arrivals imposed their incompatible behaviours and beliefs onto our mainstream Australian culture.
The results speak for themselves. Our bronzed Anzacs didn’t complain once during the Gallipoli campaign, but only made laconic jokes. Then the 10 pound migrants started arriving, incessantly whinging and turning red like pomegranates in the heat. You can’t go outside now without being someone complaining about this or that or how we are being overrun by foreigners. And where is that self reliance and confidence now, any little fright starts such panic that we demand protection from some harmless minority
What will become of us if this is allowed to continue?
26 Nov 2015 2:59:36pm
I love the utopian view of Australia in the two decades between 1788 and 1808 you paint. No convicts, frontier wars or Aborigines. Just blued pioneers exploring and growing food.
What exactly happened in 1808 to ruin all this?
26 Nov 2015 12:23:20pm
While it is true that the irrational, xenophobic, flag-draping crowds rear their ugly heads every 10 or so years, it would be folly to lump each wave as more of the same.
The grievance(s) this time around is a response to the real and tangible threat of terrorism. (The halal conspiracy theorists are just a comical sideshow spin-off).
So far there is no link between new muslim immigrants/asylum seekers to international jihad fomenting in this country. All the evidence to now suggests would-be terrorists are home-grown.
However to immune Islamic teachings, or any teachings from scrutiny and criticism would only serve to conceal dis-trust and mis-trust.
26 Nov 2015 12:38:08pm
Well drafted and argued. Good to see – as compared to other dross the Drum sometimes publishes.
26 Nov 2015 12:41:16pm
There is a couple of things missing here. You are talking about a small group, which is more like they refer to Southeners in the U.S., as rednecks. This is the redneck brigade, getting together, and stirring people up, is nothing new. Mainstream Australian society, has too many other distractions, with mortgages, life in general and family and jobs, to get involved. A lot of different cultures exist in this country, and the majority have adapted to Australia. The issue of Islamic people’s is tied up with tradition where they see themselves as under siege all the time, sometimes they look for conflict to justify their view of the world, to maintain the rage. So, we may have reached a point where we have let in a group of people who want to live a dual culture life.
The other group we fail to understand is the original occupiers of this land, the Aboriginal people. This is a group, that lives a dual culture lifestyle and are still on the margins of society in a lot of instances. I don’t put too much thought into a bunch of rednecks letting off a bit of steam, the only time they will become a problem, is if we were to get repeated terrorist attacks in this country, and they would start to openly challenge the groups they don’t like in the streets in open conflict.
We always look to have a go at someone in this country who is not politically correct, as though it is the new religion, and that makes freedom of speech not actually free. The government has laws to try and make this happen, but it still happens. You are not going to get a world of absolutes, that is the game of lawyers – politicians – and expectations of the community at large. Not all humans are alike, and how they talk and relate to others, is as varied as people in our society. And people forget to just ignore them, but instead, they run a counter rally which gives them what they want, conflict and free publicity. You walk off and take no notice, they have no audience. You stand in their face, and they get a free media show courtesy of you. People with good intentions fail to see they are putting petrol on the fire, in their pursuit of a cotton wool society.
People have become fixated, on small issues, on what this person says, or that group says, and this has become the politics of this country. We always approach a problem, from our point of view. We don’t go and ask Aboriginal people, how do they need to be treated, and the same when we get immigrants who are not adapting to change. Australia is very much like America, a former British Colony, with mostly an immigration population. Government is not addressing the issue by engaging with community leaders, to see where they can help, rather they just leave people to become angry, and lost in society. It is easy to blame someone who is angry, then to work with the marginalised in our society, that tells you the real personal values of people, and our politicians. Tha
26 Nov 2015 12:45:49pm
Nativism. A new term to mean the same thing. Its still a loaded term especially when it applies to "all anti-immigration groups"
The concern for many is the character of individuals and how they assimilate.
Character is simply related to jail time and nothing else.
Assimilation is not required at all. One can simply be a drain through permanently required translation services and/or stick to their own insular community.
Before citizenship there should be a requirement for an individual to demonstrate assimilation. This is required to bring communities together.
What I think:
26 Nov 2015 3:03:42pm
‘Nativism’ strikes me as a rather stupid term for this phenomenon. Surely the only real NATIVES in this country are the Aboriginal people. To hear that some white people in America called themselves ‘Native Americans’ is also absurd and a complete insult to the TRUE Native Americans, whom these white people so callously attempted to wipe out. Why are they so incapable of seeing what they have done to the original ‘natives’ of these countries?
What this phenomena is about is to protect what a person sees as their little piece of this Earth and stop anyone else from taking it away. It is akin to tribalism and has probably always existed in human behaviour. To some extent, it is understandable, however, in the world today, humans are really only one tribe, and it is time they tried to understand each other a bit better, and smooth out some of the rough edges. Almost everyone has rough edges and we are all ‘working on’ each other, to some extent.
26 Nov 2015 12:46:25pm
After reading Steven Pinker’s "The Better Angels of Our Nature", I have formed the opinion that this behaviour goes back a very long time, probably pre-dates homo sapiens. A tribe adopting what you have called "Nativism" is capable of exterminating a neighbouring tribe, thereby increasing the reproductive success of the conquering tribe – very evolutionary. Notably in first testament, historic, and pre-historic accounts, the conquering group kill all the defeated group, except females of reproductive age, and or virgins. It is very patriarchal of course because of the dominance of chiefs and high-ranking tribal males, in mating with women – a phenomenon that is also still with us. ISIS fits this model, and Bikies.
26 Nov 2015 4:13:41pm
I think you are right. Also I think tribalism is a better word than nativism.
Even in primitive tribes there were those who are more inclined to take up their spears and defend the tribe.
26 Nov 2015 1:11:07pm
"Jews/Muslims/Catholics/Asians/gays behave in certain ways which are inconsistent with the cultural/national values which the nativists hold dear"
Hmm, as a gay person I’m aware that many Jews/Muslims/Catholics are very homophobic, in accordance with their anti-gay religions and cultural traditions. Bradley’s lumping together of mutually hostile minority groups doesn’t really do much for the "let’s all live in happy clappy harmony" case.
There’s a lot to be said for acknowledging that some degree of social conflict is inevitable and even desirable, if society is to continue to progress.
26 Nov 2015 1:14:07pm
I don’t think it’s name-calling to describe ‘nativism’ as racist and xenophobic. To do otherwise is to lend it an air of false-legitimacy.
26 Nov 2015 1:18:10pm
Shame on these Reclaimers……..what precisely are they trying to reclaim? The country isn’t theirs alone. Some of them might have been born in Australia but they should check their family histories. Who do they think they are other than extremist and agitators. They behave like the mobs of anglo australians who protested and killed the chinese in the goldfields and like the anglo australians who killed euro australians (calling them dagos) and burned down their homes in Kalgoorlie. And the White Australia policy was born and has lived over 50 years. Shame.
There is much for us to learn from multiculturalism…..there’s a lot more to life than beer, and cigarettes and steak on the Bar B Q.
Extremists are a scourge regardless of their race or religion.
We should show a better example of behaviour to refugees instead of engendering hatred and bigotry, otherwise that’s all they will learn from Australia. A shameful example of people who like to brawl and claim ownership of something that we don’t own, but we happen to have the right to live here.
26 Nov 2015 1:21:36pm
And it is true, Nativism, Nativity, very interesting.
26 Nov 2015 1:23:54pm
It often takes a few generations of relative affluence or at least not feeling too vulnerable for people in our Country to develop a love for their local environment, unless of course they happen to be developers. People from high population tropical cultures can’t easily understand environmental pressures or our ecosystems, but then neither did[or do] we.
This is the only true nativism for my money and it takes patience and education. My phobia is fear of people of any or all cultural persuasions trashing the place, it may be because I feel I can afford to care, a safe country , good government but how magnified that feeling must be for our aboriginal people would surely eat away at their very core. I only watched as a smallish area was irrecoverably trashed as I grew up, most of the damage was already done and my family was safe. Even environmental damage can be reversed at least in part.
26 Nov 2015 1:24:38pm
Being convinced locals (born At home) Nativism is defending the fact that we have enough of our own Treasons,of Bigoted Law Systems within our own backyards so who needs to attend to uninvited religious political people practicing rubbish that has nothing to do with Wombats Koalas and Kookaburras ha ha ha
26 Nov 2015 7:10:14pm
nohasel: Yeah I like diversity in culture too, I grew up with religion and see very little difference in the rationale, after all they worship the same god and have Jesus in common, some religious people are the most decent one could ever have the privilege to meet. Australia is far more intelligent[broader perspective] than it was 40 years ago due to multiculturalism.
26 Nov 2015 1:30:09pm
This is more than a very old (100 years) issue; if this isn’t a 100,000 year old issue or arguably even a 3,000,000,000 year old issue I would be rather surprised.
Our mission? Turn 100,000 years of human social evolution on it’s head in a few decades. No problem; what will we do after lunch?
26 Nov 2015 1:33:01pm
I agree that Islam is an ideology and nothing else. But since there are thousands who use it to terrorise other people, it is most feared of. And we cannot ignore it. So we should fight it with all our strength. In the 21 century there is no place for such nonsense. But we have the right to fear it, reject it, criticise it, demonstrate against it and not tolerate it in Australia. As for the "naturism", it is so natural in Australia, multicultural society, that each different migrant group cultivates their customs, language, religion etc. At the same time, they try to integrate with the majority of Australians who already went true the similar period and now call themselves Real Australians. It is shame that these Real Australians forgot so quickly their roots, grand-grandparents customs, language and sometimes their religion and became the society which thinks they have all rights to criticize all other fresh immigrants, and often very religious people. I am not talking fanatics, but moderate religious people, and please don?t repeat yourselves that the religion is to blame for all bad what is happening in the world. It is just opposite; too little faith in the world is to blame
Les P Delescalier:
26 Nov 2015 1:33:39pm
An excellently written and argued piece. Probably the best I’ve read here on The Drum this year. Well done.
I’ve read much (though not all) of the counter-commentary posted in reply and, either intentionally or otherwise, the authors have rebutted arguments you haven’t made. Others have done well to expose that and well done to you too.
26 Nov 2015 1:35:04pm
I can understand the concerns of the Australian people based on:
(a) Recent events in Europe -Paris and the wave upon wave on immigrants
(b) That all 20 recent terrorist acts or planned attacks in Australia were from one religious group-Muslims -not Christians, Not people from America, New Zealand etc –
They are concerns about the safety of the country, their family and friends and themselves
Surely people have right to express their concerns without being called various names
26 Nov 2015 1:43:07pm
As an environmentalist who sees the long term carrying capacity of Australia at around 10 million, I’ve been voting for the smallest Australia option for decades. And with a lack of mainstream alternatives offering small Australia policies, this necessitates voting for some far right group. Their opposition to immigration and multiculturalism is what secures them my vote. Their xenophobia and racial/religious bigotry I view as toxic, but this invariably comes as part of the package.
Which is a rather convoluted way of saying that not all who support groups like Reclaim Australia are Nativists. Some supporters not only want no more ‘others’, they also want fewer ‘us’.
Now to the policy of multiculturalism. A perfectly valid choice for a country with a stable population. And a choice which amounts to cultural martyrdom when combined with high levels of immigration. Because when assimilation is optional, foreigners are entitled to retain their cultures, whilst locals have no such entitlement to retain the existing cultural landscape. Locals, or ‘Nativists’ have every right to be angry about this.
Either immigration or multiculturalism has to go. I’d prefer immigration to be abandoned, but given that politics in Australia is dominated by ‘big Australia’ parties, I’d settle for multiculturalism going instead. And so I’ll vote for some far right group at the next election, and I suspect that the likes of Michael will have no understanding for my reasons for doing so.
26 Nov 2015 5:03:22pm
Are all the parties opposed to massive immigration programs far right?
I had thought that there were also a couple on the left. Greenie types looking to preserve biodiversity and that sort of thing. Who don’t really care about GDP growth. Or only care about it per-capita.
26 Nov 2015 6:21:37pm
graazt, none on the left that I have come across. For example the Greens have a population policy that ticks lots of boxes, and then their support for uncapped numbers of asylum seekers completely invalidates it.
The stable population party (or whatever it is called now) sounded good too, until I examined it more closely. Over population is the root cause of refugee flows. Resettling refugees solves nothing. And the SPP supports Australia having a generous refugee resettlement program. Tick, tick, fail.
26 Nov 2015 6:57:22pm
In several years following these posts, I have seen almost no support for ‘BIG Australia’. This is not xenophobia,it is a desire to retain a lifestyle we cherish, and wish to pass on to our children.
26 Nov 2015 1:45:40pm
Most modern sociological change is influenced by technology, the number of first migrants were limited by their mode of travel and the justice of the day, with travel now made relatively easy by air and distances made less inconvenient by building suburbs near arterial road systems and shopping centres it has begun the evolution of the inclusive society and cultural integration. When as seen in Britain and parts of Europe society segregates itself into racial enclaves distrust and distrust prevails, but Australia has not yet reached that tipping point except in isolated cases in overpopulated city suburbs, where the mistakes of accepting high population density only leads to higher criminality. Australia is now obliged to follow other Western Countries to develop more diversity in how it’s population grows, the irony of bigotry among a verbose minority is that we live near the fastest growing populations in the World as a wealthy productive country Australia has much leadership to offer.
26 Nov 2015 1:48:39pm
As someone who despises and detests Islam I resent being labelled a ‘nativist’. That contemnation on my part comes from 25 years living in SEAsia. It is well-founded on observing the reality of Islam in action – its hatreds, its bigotry, its misogyny, its brutality and its murderousness. I guess you see me as part of the ‘problem’, Michael and all the dhimmis here assembled. Unfortunately I have seen the truth and reality.
26 Nov 2015 1:54:46pm
I like Saffron discussion on this with an ex-Muslim comedian, who had to leave Pakistan because of the death threats he received about criticizing Islam on the mike. He described having a discussion where someone from left might say that Muslims hit out at the West because of poverty while someone from the right might says there are some very violent message in the Koran. He felt both were right. He felt you couldn’t say anything negative about Islam without being labeled a Islam-aphob. To explore the nuaffences we need to have a discussion. We were always able to discuss the differences and positives and negatives between Catholics, Protestant and Jewish freely and people where allowed to have different opinions. The political correct seem to feel that there is only one right opinion that, unlike Chirstianity, Islam can not be critisied. Unfortunately this creates a pressure cooker where opinions of the community are suppressed until they explode. Very likely considering a small percentage of Muslims undertake acts of violet for religious reasons.
26 Nov 2015 1:57:08pm
Here’s a though.
As a secular society, why don’t we tell the religious to keep their religious beliefs to themselves.
Inside their church, or their homes, they can dress up in their religious clothes, and chat about their beliefs for as long as they want.
Outside, they dress as members of a secular society – that is they don’t wear religious clothes or show religious icons.
And they keep their religious beliefs to themselves.
That way we can all live in peace.
26 Nov 2015 6:53:57pm
I can see why you’d like to ban religious clothing but I wouldn’t like to try to enforce such a ban.
Visible religious icons in the form of jewellery – that’s possible.
Religious clothing – how do you define it? As an example, some Hindus see the sari as a garment that Hindu women "should" wear. On the other hand, generations of Moslem, Christian & Bhuddist women in India (and Pakistan and Bangladesh & Sri Lanka) have worn saris. So the garment is not exclusively Hindu. Even defining a sari is more challenging than you might expect.
Would you consider religious underwear to be against your proposed law? Where would that leave some more conservative Mormons? How would you enforce it?
While some Moslem women wear a very distinct hijab [or even a burqa or a niqab] others go for a head covering that could be considered fashion rather than religious. So again, how do you enforce the law – would you have the police arresting & charging women who are wearing a scarf because they’ve had chemo or women who are wearing what they think is an attractive hat?
Finally, we come to the tattoo. Now, strictly speaking Jews & Moslems should not get tattoos – let alone tattoos of religious symbols. Hindus can and do find tattoos of their deities offensive. Some Christians believe the old Testament prohibition on marking the skin include tattoos & so don’t get them but there are others who don’t accept such a ban. So, what are you going to do when people get a cross or perhaps a chi-rho symbol tattooed on themselves? Forced removal?
26 Nov 2015 2:00:27pm
Michael, this is a fine article. The only problem with it is that not all people are as educated as you are and most will not understand and accept that nativity, religion, nationality etc are not real but constructs. Consequently they will not be able to understand that similarities between all of us are far greater than the differences.
I recall one tutorial at uni, where we discussed the most important factors of our identity. Most would regard their gender, race, looks, age etc as the most important factors of their identity. However a Muslim lady insisted that the first and the most important factor of her identity is Islam, her religion. People who have been brought up with such narrow view of the world, are very difficult to accept anything or anyone different from the ‘most important ingredient in her life’ .
Therefore, your article, no matter how good and logical it is, talks only about and to the educated members of the Western society. Articles like this cannot reach the ones who have been subjected, right from their early age, to the ongoing, systematic brainwashing. We are talking about people who strongly believe that even considering or trying to understand anything different from their religion as a mortal sin.
To sum it up; Good article, however, once again, the preaching is to the ‘already converted’. Someone should start ‘preaching’ to the ones who need to open their eyes and see the world outside and beyond their narrow religious teaching.
I don’t think people are actually against any religion, including Islam. People rather fear other people who reject them as inferiors on the basis of their religion and are willing even to them harm just because we don’t all follow their teachings of their religion. Therefore, the aggression comes from the minority towards the majority, not the other way around. That is very important to keep in mind.
I have nothing against Muslims and am happy to leave them alone – as long as they leave me alone. To Westerners such message would be very logical and acceptable, however most Muslims have been taught that it is their sacred duty to ensure that their god is worshiped by everyone on earth. That is where the aggression and interference in the life of others comes from.
I hope you can understand my position.
26 Nov 2015 2:40:51pm
Today’s victims are Muslims – vomit!
26 Nov 2015 2:43:03pm
You can clearly see how these faux elite faux intellectuals are so easy to manipulate.
You simply say that the people who hold such and such position are poor and uneducated and the faux elite will adopt the opposite position to distance themselves from the bogans.
26 Nov 2015 4:08:41pm
If you read k Philip Zimbardo’s ‘The Lucifer Effect-why good people do evil things" and study his work you will realise how easily both the faux elite and the bogans are easily manipulated.
Which one are you a bogan or a faux elite?
26 Nov 2015 5:18:00pm
I am in the 80% that is neither. However I am also in the very small subset of that 80% that understand the mindset of the faux intellectual elite.
26 Nov 2015 6:37:56pm
Your own words condemn you- you think you are in a very small subset; therefore you are in the faux intellectual elite!!
or maybe a reverse bogan snob!!
26 Nov 2015 3:01:44pm
I refuse to ‘sell’ my house/land to a Capitalist buyer, because I don’t believe they are compatible with my way of life, my culture. And I know there will be problems with them in this country down the track.
I would never assume that another persons culture/way of life as being the same as mine, or whatever Hanson’s ‘ours’ refers to per quote.
26 Nov 2015 3:25:54pm
There’s no need to explain the blood-thirsty tribalism of uneducated, poorly-raised, pig-ignorant filth. It is what it is and they are what they are.
26 Nov 2015 6:29:07pm
Are you referring to both the UPF and Da’esh?
26 Nov 2015 3:39:26pm
To all those in the comments who attribute Islam as the main cause of social stagnation and conflict in the middle east, let me note the theory of the ‘backwards country.’
This theory states that societal maturation and technology are generally linked. For example, for a gun to be developed from scratch one needs numerous specialists, a society that allows for a scientific sector and respects their findings, and enough social progressiveness not to deny the findings of one based solely on class, religion, etc. However, in many cases, this has not occurred.
Instead, we have had advanced countries like England and the US come into an area (often to colonize/annex) and distribute their more advanced technology either deliberately, through trade, or through simple technological osmosis. What occurs as a result is a country with advanced technology whose societal progression has been stunted if not outright reversed with the increased power of previously created ruling classes (such as the house of Saud).
Thus, what we have created is an area where societal development was stunted for much of the 21st century (a few bright spots of progression aside), and has now reversed as a result of increased technology, outside interference, and resource scarcity.
And this doesn’t even address the damage done by the borders drawn by the west. However, I have neither the time nor patience to attempt to explain that, so instead, I will simply say this:
The problem is caused by the region, and the ways the British Empire interacted with it, and not the religion.
26 Nov 2015 6:20:58pm
Even 40 years ago you could have printed any cartoon about allah
anywhere in the world And nothing would have happened.
It is technology meeting a medieval religion that is the problem.
Of course it is the religion. It is not altering to help its adherents
cope with a wider and more sophisticated world. They fear and hate
what they do not understand and are willing to kill and die to try
and turn the clock back a few hundred years so the world again
makes sense and aligns with their idea of god.
And that is never going to happen.
26 Nov 2015 3:53:14pm
"I’m going to avoid the usual loaded terminology: racism, xenophobia, Islamophobia."
Except when I use them!
26 Nov 2015 4:17:48pm
I like the way the author says he will not use loaded terminology in the opening of the article but closes with an observation that the nativists need to be "cured"
26 Nov 2015 5:29:34pm
and calling them unemployed, uneducated, socially isolated is hardly firing on empty either
Jayne and Rachel:
26 Nov 2015 4:31:21pm
Michael you write some fantastic articles, you are by far our favourite drum author!! Amazing stuff…!
26 Nov 2015 4:35:36pm
Perhaps Nativism is one of many aspects of Civil Unrest. Civil Unrest must have inequality and hierarchy in order to occur. One can imagine that Nativism would be rampant amongst the ruling classes and would be effectively mimicked if that society had different rules and rankings within stardards, or laws, of nationality and citizenship.
26 Nov 2015 4:36:19pm
I find it ironic that those who are so bitterly opposed to Muslims coming to this country because they are a threat to our way of life, have so little faith in the appeal of the Australian way of life.
Yes, we do have a wonderful life here. Our climate is wonderful, our food abundant and healthy, our infrastructure world class (including our schools and hospitals), and our electoral system cited as one of the most democratic in the world. We are for the most part a peaceful, prosperous, and happy place. Trying to protect it by excluding one particular group is misguided at best.
It is this very lifestyle that is our greatest asset for the integration of people from different backgrounds. The experience of the post war European migrants, and the intake of Vietnamese refugees in the late 70’s shows us that over time our way of life is too strong to resist. All of these groups initially grouped together yet today they, and especially their children, embrace the Australian lifestyle as strongly as anyone who is "Australian" by the geographic location of their birth.
Do the "nativists" really have so little faith in the lifestyle they profess to defend, that they feel it could be demolished by the 2% of the population that describe themselves as Muslim? Given the choice between the lifestyle they are fleeing and ours, history has shown that our lifestyle is the one that is chosen. Go to any large park on Australia Day and you will see people of all nationalities and races standing around a barbecue, or enjoying a picnic.
The only area that bothers me, whether they be Catholic, Baptist, Islamic, or Jewish is the segregation of our children into schools dedicated to a particular religion. Putting our children into these enclaves of intolerance (you’re not Catholic, Baptist, Islamic, Jewish, or whatever, so you can’t come here) is a wrong step in our pursuit of an egalitarian society.
And does anybody else see the irony in the criticism of Germany for reaching out and showing compassion to a group of people the rest of the world seems intent on persecuting?
26 Nov 2015 4:38:08pm
I know that in the institution in which I first had a chance to study such a phenomenon, there was a tradition of ‘pulling up the ropeladdder and bolting the window" upon acceptance into the organization.
Vinnie Barbar Rhino:
26 Nov 2015 4:53:53pm
Over 450 posts/counter-posts already.Turnbull now has a country full of xenophobes to deal with.A divided community.
But I think he may have missed the boat,already.Abbott stirs up the hate and hides in the trench.Typical.Hanson should sue Abbott for stealing unintellectual property.
26 Nov 2015 6:07:52pm
If you just stopped typing random words and pressing ‘post’ some of us may be able to comment in between random meltdowns.
26 Nov 2015 4:57:31pm
Micheal Bradley continually vents his hatreds against Australians and demonizes us Aussies weekly with name calling and negative labels. His strongest hatreds was against Abbott for stopping the boats. Bradley was part of the cheer squad for the left wing drowning policies of Rudd/Gillard/Greens. Bradley makes a living out of the product of people smuggling. I see him as deliberately demonizing millions of Australians purely for personal gain. Bradley my label for you is race divider for personal gain.
26 Nov 2015 4:57:46pm
Mass immigration as practised in Australia provides only cultural and environmental pollution. We have 10 million too many as it and with the added burden of the government sponsored policy of multiculturalism maintaining cultural/ethnic divisions. Reclaim Australia and the UPF have tbe right to bring these matters to the fore particularly as they seem immune from the shouts of racism that has drowned all attempts to raise these issues previously. Muslims in Australia appear to place tbeir ideology before all else. Until we see Muslims demonstrate their commitment to a non-Muslim Australia the UPF and the UPF have a role to play.
26 Nov 2015 6:22:09pm
Cultural pollution? Please explain.
26 Nov 2015 4:57:57pm
This is an Interesting read, however I fundamentally disagree on a few points.
Bradley’s core assertion is that ‘nativism’ is a better framework to understand RA/UPF’s actions, in that they target an ‘other’ identified not out of hate, but rather as a threat to a shared values embodied in ?place? (in this case Australia).
see: " Again, the rationalised basis for these actions has always been, not hatred of Jews, but the belief that they represented a danger to the societies in which they lived but were not accepted?
"is the accusation that they threaten our national values. Not because they’re inherently bad people, but because there’s something inherent in their background, whether ethnic, national or religious, which just doesn’t fit.?
I disagree on both these points, I would argue that while ?nativism? may stand as justification (and an explanation) for certain participants in the movement, they do not represent the political core which drives it.
In my opinion, the political core of these movements (and especially the UPF) is fascism (this is contrary to some other ‘nativist’ movements Australia has experienced). Fascism, or national socialism more particularly promotes a system of control which is based on race, race being a social construct not a biological one, this can include a number of indicators. The in group are identified by factors such as whiteness, or christian values or ?Australian-ness? (as defined by whiteness) etc?
As such, these moments are more about defining what the in group is, not what the ?other? represents. This is why the UPF do not just target muslims, and despite some of their posturing, they are fundamentally opposed to ?lefties?, homosexuals, and Jewish people. (there are others too)
This stands quite to the contrary of Bradley?s assertion.
?Nativist movements have always ultimately collapsed under the weight of their own contradictions?.. It, like all its forebears, is the final howl of impotent rage from a subset of society whose inchoate fear of change is only a reflection of how unattached to society it really feels.?
What Bradley touches on here is the dangerous notion that these groups will inevitably disappear as society becomes more educated. While he is right in the implication that many of the people involved are un-educated and from low socio-economic backgrounds, he again ignores the political underpinnings that drive the movement, i.e. fascism. Fascism is not an incoherent political ideology, it has structure, it has purpose and it has an extremely dangerous precedent that cannot and should not be ignored.
However this point does raise a very important topic, it highlights just how far removed from its roots and impotent the ?left? in Australia has become, it highlights the fact that on the whole, lower socio-economic status people have been abandoned by politics in this country and are therefore easy picking
26 Nov 2015 4:58:54pm
I am missing some words from my posts at present. Some have been taken by the moderators but mostly it is my omission sorry if you couldn’t follow today but it was a pretty fascinating track. I think these Nativists if they don’t get their way soon will try a different angle like copyrighting or patenting us or something.
26 Nov 2015 4:59:33pm
Todays victims are Muslims?
When I see Muslim Children in Australia holding banners that say Behead all infidels, i’m not seeing the victimhood,
When I see Gay people being thrown off Buildings I’m not seeing any victimhood
When I see terrorists killing innocent people in Paris, while shouting Alan Snackbar , I’m not seeing any victimhood.
When I see a Turkish crowd booing during a minutes Silence for the Paris Victims at a football match, I’m still not seeing any victimhood.
I don’t see victimhood when Muslims shoot and kill an unarmed pilot descending in a parachute, then dance around his body also screaming Alan Snackbar!
People have a right to be shocked at the Behaviour and total brutality of the acts of Muslim’s, and they rightly are!
26 Nov 2015 6:29:43pm
"When I see a Turkish crowd booing during a minutes Silence for the Paris Victims at a football match, I’m still not seeing any victimhood."
You’re an ignorant person and you don’t know what you’re talking about.
26 Nov 2015 7:09:30pm
If I am ignorant to the reason the Turkish crowd Booed during a Minutes Silence for the Paris Victims during a football match.
I am quite happy for you to explain the reason they were Booing.
Until such time as you can give a reasonable explanation, I still cannot see how Muslims are Victims.
26 Nov 2015 7:21:25pm
Yes, that did not happen.
Ignore these types, please.
26 Nov 2015 7:27:08pm
Turkish supporters attending a friendly soccer game against Greece on November 17 refused to participate in a minute of silence following the recent terror attacks in Paris, choosing instead to boo the commemoration.
A section of the crowd at Fatih Terim Stadium in Istanbul?s Basaksehir district had first whistled during the playing of the Greek national anthem, prompting Turkish star Arda Turan to argue with the crowd. Arda?s intervention, however, failed to stop the booing.
During the subsequent moment of silence, supporters also whistled their disapproval while a section of the crowed also reportedly shouted ?Allah-u Akbar? and ?Martyrs don?t die, the homeland will not be divided,? a common nationalist slogan.
?We?re staging a moment of silence for people that have died. Can?t we be patient for one minute? When we go abroad, we?re not able to explain this,? Turkish national team coach Fatih Terim said after the match. ?It doesn?t reflect well on us at all.?
The match ended in a 0-0 draw.
26 Nov 2015 7:45:36pm
The gay person thrown from the building was a Muslim
Muslims were killed in the Paris attack and the policeman shot outside Charlie Hebdo was a Muslim
26 Nov 2015 5:30:07pm
Michael, the politics of so-called ‘nativism’ go back centuries whereby the political elite would place a ban on others from ie speaking their own tongue. If one looks at the 17th century English ban placed on speaking the Irish language I would say it was racist.
26 Nov 2015 5:47:15pm
Muslims are here to stay, and I’m happy for that.
But yesterday, Benjamin Netanyahu referred to Palestinians in general as ‘barbarians’ and his own countrymen by contrast as ‘civilization’.
This fellow should never be welcome in this country again because he will cause unrest and I expect that his ticket to ride will be revoked by the Minister For Immigration.
(By the way, when N. said it, John Kerry was right beside him … and did you ever see a man who’d lost a ring, and maybe it was in the pudding ?)
26 Nov 2015 6:57:27pm
When you are convinced you are one of ‘the chosen people" everyone else must seems like a "barbarian’.
The irony is that was also an Aryan conviction.
26 Nov 2015 7:09:05pm
He also expressed his support for members of ISIS because they were the enemy of Assad. He was photographed and interviewed in an Israeli surgical tent where a wounded ISIS member was receiving medical attention and represents a significant part of the problem.
26 Nov 2015 7:50:07pm
When was the last time a Christian, Jew, Sikh, Hindu or Bhuddist committed a terrorist attack in Australia, Europe or the US? Never! When was the last time an atheist committed a terrorist attack in the name of atheism?
Have you ever heard one of the above groups make the threat "when we take over…"? Never. How many people other than Muslims are on the Australian terrorist watch? Close to zero, how many Muslims ? 1,000? 2,000? more?
Why is the Middle East in such turmoil ? It is because Islam in an unreformed ideology which can not find a place in the modern world.
Those simple questions completely undermine Bradely’s argument. The reason why Islam is not wanted in Australia is not because of Islam but because of the risk it poses to everyone else
27 Nov 2015 8:32:01am
"Today’s victims of nativism in Australia are Muslims. There may be some violence, perhaps quite bad, before this current surge inevitably subsides. It, like all its forebears, is the final howl of impotent rage from a subset of society whose inchoate fear of change is only a reflection of how unattached to society it really feels.
These people’s anger, irrational and misdirected as it is, is real. We can understand it, reject it and try to cure it, without the name-calling."
I know many citizens who are wealthy, well educated and – ethnocentric. They have a substantial stake in society and wish to maintain it.
The quote above needs little tinkering to make it relevant to the viewpoint any unattached subset of society, which surely including some muslims.
‘Nativism’ is a term which could quickly become name-calling, even pejorative, if it is given enough media coverage. We already have enough similar categories to squabble about.
Comments for this story are closed.
- Is this Australias worst criminal youve never heard of?
Melbourne Cup: 2018 field, form guide and sweep
- Worst one yet: Man dies from shark attack in harbour where other tourists were bitten
- Im black … Im seen as a threat: Crime and panic on the streets of Melbourne
- NBC, Fox News and Facebook pull racist Trump midterms advertisement
- Massive victory for Trump or road to impeachment? Heres how the midterms could go
- Spoilsport or Party Pony? Which Melbourne Cup stereotype are you?
- Iran will break US sanctions and continue selling oil, says defiant Rouhani
- New Sydney Fish Market plans unveiled
- Fisherman saves 18mo from drowning at New Zealand beach
- Nearly 80 children kidnapped from school in Cameroon
- Is the Top End coast at risk of a tsunami?
- Cherry growers expect largest crop in history, but prices may not fall much
- Grave enthusiasts unearth the forgotten history of Indonesia for Instagram community
- Runaway BHP train full of iron ore travels 92km without a driver before being deliberately derailed
- Massive hole: 163 children left out in search for Keli Lanes baby
- Pastiche, stereotyping or falsity: How cultural appropriation hurts young readers
- Traumatised best friend charged with murdering Angry Andersons son
- Saudi Arabian investigators sent to cover up evidence in Khashoggi murder
- Birders flock to Kimberley to see elusive Asian duck
- Dragon boat hearse shows trend towards uplifting and creative funerals
Chainsaw artist carves tribute to Winx
Connect with ABC News
Got a news tip?
If you have inside knowledge of a topic in the news, contact the ABC .
News in your inbox
Top headlines, analysis, breaking alerts
ABC teams share the story behind the story and insights into the making of digital, TV and radio content.
Read about our editorial guiding principles and the enforceable standard our journalists follow.
Your 2018 US midterms guide
By Jack Kilbride and Greg Howard
What the US midterms are, how they work, and why they matter.
An Aboriginal womans guide on how to avoid dating a racist
When I’m dating a white guy, I dread certain conversations because our whole relationship depends on how they pan out, Molly Hunt writes.
Chinas diplomatic thaw
This week, Beijing appears to have become satisfied Australia’s Government is no longer publicly naming and blaming China, writes Bill Birtles.
The lessons I learnt in my Christian education dont stack up
The values I learnt at my Sydney Anglican school are very different to those on display in the “right to discriminate” letter from school principals.
- Is this Australias worst criminal youve never heard of?
- Melbourne Cup: 2018 field, form guide and sweep
- Worst one yet: Man dies from shark attack in harbour where other tourists were bitten
- Im black … Im seen as a threat: Crime and panic on the streets of Melbourne
- NBC, Fox News and Facebook pull racist Trump midterms advertisement
- Massive victory for Trump or road to impeachment? Heres how the midterms could go
- Spoilsport or Party Pony? Which Melbourne Cup stereotype are you?
- Iran will break US sanctions and continue selling oil, says defiant Rouhani
- New Sydney Fish Market plans unveiled
- Fisherman saves 18mo from drowning at New Zealand beach
- Fisherman saves 18mo from drowning at New Zealand beach
- Demand for Katherines alcohol support service jumps 500 per cent as liquor patrols decline
- Maladministration finding against Port Pirie Mayor for meeting Filipino girlfriend on trade missions
- Master of stupidity gives Hobart a sci-fi makeover
- Senior drivers charged $280 for free medical assessment
- He needed the money: Former real estate manager on trial for fraud in serious financial trouble
- Is the Top End coast at risk of a tsunami?
- Dow lifts 191 points ahead of US midterms, ASX to open flat
- Nearly 80 children kidnapped from school in Cameroon
- NTs Flying Fox station sells for $8.9m, cotton development a possibility
- Traumatised best friend charged with murdering Angry Andersons son
- Yellowstone geyser spews up decades-old trash in rare eruption
- Is Taylor Swift the biggest problem for Donald Trump ahead of the midterms?
- Melbourne Cup: 2018 field, form guide and sweep
- Three Girl Scouts and volunteer mum killed in roadside hit-and-run while picking up litter
- Island in the middle of nowhere gets go-ahead for $1.2b development
- The lessons I learnt in my Christian education dont stack up
- Virgin Australia to rethink tokenistic US-style priority boarding for veterans
- Adventurer endures trench foot, salt mouth and losing chunks of tongue on 157-day record swim
- Four-year-old girl gang-raped in Indian hospital while being treated for a snake bite
Analysis & Opinion
- Whats really behind the thaw in Chinas relations with Australia?
- The lessons I learnt in my Christian education dont stack up
- China is changing our cities — but its not as simple as an invasion or a takeover
- Bitcoin turns 10, and we havent seen the last of it
- Why Trump cant mimic Australia when it comes to citizenship
- Melbourne Cup lacking fairytale to capture nations heart
- Australias housing downturn could spark interest rate cut
- House price slump is now weighing on the economy, but is it getting worse or bottoming out?
- Opinion: Trump has an ace up his sleeve that could seize an election win
- Lets check Trumps report card in the eyes of his supporters
Analysis & Opinion
Corrections & Clarifications
This service may include material from Agence France-Presse (AFP), APTN, Reuters, AAP, CNN and the BBC World Service which is copyright and cannot be reproduced.
AEDT = Australian Eastern Daylight Savings Time which is 11 hours ahead of GMT (Greenwich Mean Time)