Wednesday, 24 July 2013

The day Australia closed the door

Australians aren’t just failing at cricket. They’re also failing at acting on that which they supposedly believe.

This week they begin rejecting refugees arriving in Australia by boat, sending them instead to a concentration camp off Papua New Guinea.

This in the name of a country and people who sing, in their national anthem:

For those who've come across the seas. We've boundless plains to share…”

Turns out that’s just empty words and flatulence.

[Hat tip Sandrine L.]

15 comments:

  1. Amid claims of torture and rape on these human beings, one entity called Kev from Penrith wrote on the Sydney Morning Herald website:
    "I don't care what happens to these people, I just a return to total control over our borders and an end to the miserable charlatan who acts as our leader"

    Which sums up the view of most Australians I suspect. The lack of humanity towards those who did not have the good fortune to be born in relatively prosperous country is astounding.

    Julian

    ReplyDelete
  2. I believe Rudd should have said: From here onward there will be no welfare or pension entitlement for immigrants until they have been settled in Australia for five years, with no criminal convictions in that time.

    At the same time, anyone who is not currently a net tax payer should be stripped of their right to vote.

    ReplyDelete
  3. When the Titanic was sinking, the men who were in charge of the lifeboats rowed far enough away from the ship to keep those in the water from swamping the boats and drowning everyone. While many died, all would have died if the crewmen had opened the boats to everyone. A difficult decision, but the same one that most Western governments have to make when faced with the failure of socialist utopias from Mexico to Morocco.

    ReplyDelete
  4. You should all lobby the NZ government to take all the boat people and put them into your homes. Put your money where your mouths are and volunteer to take the boatees into your homes and be personally responsible for them. After all, none of you own Australia, but you do own your own homes.

    Amit

    ReplyDelete
  5. jackndc

    Likely you're correct. What is going to be the case is Mexico, Canada etc will have to start deciding what to do about US refugees (and there are going to be plenty of those).



    AMit

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sorry PC, I'll have to disagree with you on this.

    These "boat people" making their *illegal* entry to Australia are no different to the millions of bludging immigrants who have flooded into the UK, France and the rest of Europe. Why do they go there? In a word - welfare.

    I will staunchly defend Australia's new policy here. Australia is not the dosshouse for every third-world welfare-seeking bludger. They have the *right* to defend their borders against these ILLEGAL immigrants. (Invaders.)

    Guess what? No less an organisation than the *UN* says that "refugees" should be resettled as near as possible to their original country.
    For Somalis, Afghans, Vietnamese etc, that is certainly *not* Australia.

    Do you have no idea of the negative consequences of the mass-immigration policies that the UK and Europe have adopted, PC?

    Do you *really* think that those policies have resulted in utopia in those countries? Far from it.

    Most of these people are Muslims. Are you not aware of "demographic jihad" where Muslims flood into the West "en masse" and then proceed to outbreed the locals? Is that what you want to see?
    That is what is *happening* in the UK and Europe.

    The answer is simple.
    The countries that these people come from should *fix themselves.* If they did that, there would be no need for these people to leave in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Richard, immigrants to the United States way back when used to agree to not receiving any kind of government welfare ever. I have no problem with that (and as a New Zealander residing in Australia for the past few years, I've been out of work for nearly half of the last year and am ineligible for welfare). Remove the pull factor of generous welfare and this flood of illegal immigrants - and the crime that goes along with the islamic culture of the majority of them - would simply evaporate.

    Real refugees don't turn up on boats they've paid more than ten thousand dollars to embark on, then refuse to learn English or follow the local laws or support themselves. They're brought from refugee camps outside Zimbabwe on planes, courtesy of (voluntary) humanitarian organisations.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It's likely that this is just desperate politics from Rudd in an effort to prevent a landslide defeat in the coming election.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thor 42 - The idea that *all* refugees depart their shores for an unknown future, risking their lives for the glittering prize of a welfare cheque at the end is absurd on the face of it. They seek Australia because they live in a hell-hole and want a better life. Sure, a large proportion might end up on welfare on immediate arrival, but long term that trend seems to reverse - as you would expect from people with enough gumption to attempt such a feat. Overall stats show that overseas born in Australia have slightly lower welfare-recipient rates than do Australian-born. How do you explain that one?

    That aside, what irks me the most about positions like yours is your complete lack of confidence and belief in the strength of Western civilisation. At heart your attitude is defeatist. You assume that in any contest of ideas between Islam and the West (brought about by letting more Muslim immigrants in) the West will lose and they forces of darkness will over-run us.

    History however shows us the opposite - that the good/practical ideas ultimately win, and the Islamists have much more to fear from Muslims coming to the West than we do. The combined forces of globalisation and immigration don't weaken us, they weaken the jihad-seekers.

    You can see this even in countries such as Iraq and Egypt - where al-Qaeda have a foothold. After the authoritarian dictators are over-thrown, the Islamists are initially welcomed, as you would expect when the majority are Muslim. But as their barbarity and complete antithesis to everyday life becomes clear, the people start to reject them. Witness the clip of the 12 year old in Egypt posted here a few weeks ago. These people may remain Muslim in name, but they adapt their beliefs to accommodate a secular outlook - just as Christianity did several centuries ago.

    Ultimately the good/practical wins. You seem scared of having the contest, because you think the West will lose. I by contrast think the West is (relatively) strong and the Islamists are weak. All bad ideas ultimately lose. The more Muslims that come to the West, the quicker the Islamists will be defeated. I say bring it on.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Mark

    "Ultimately the good/practical wins."

    How twee.

    Ultimately those who weild power and are prepared to use it win. They win in that it is their ideas that are transmitted and expressed over generations.

    As for Western Civilisation, what you know as Western Civilisation (really nothing more than Western Fascism) is in decline. You ought not to place your faith in such nonsense.

    Amit

    ReplyDelete
  11. @Mark - thanks for your comments, I welcome them!

    I guess that I have a lot less confidence in the resilience of Western civilisation than you do, but that's ok - we can "agree to disagree..." :)

    I see many cities in the UK and Europe having large Muslim "ghettoes" - this makes me (and many others) very uncomfortable as that is the last thing we need here (the Aussies too, for that matter).

    I have seen figures showing that 15% of Swedes, for example, were born overseas, and the vast majority of those will be recently-arrived Muslims. That kind of *massive* and rapid demographic change is just asking for trouble in the future.

    There have been *so many* countries that have been overrun and taken over by Muslims.
    Afghanistan used to have many Buddhists in the past. Iran used to have many Zoroastrians. Lebanon used to be almost completely Christian.

    The problem as I see it, Mark, is that the *leaders* of the West are *completely clueless* about Islam.
    They assume that it must be "just like Christianity" when nothing could be further from the truth. (I am *very* familiar with Islamic doctrine - the Koran and hadith).

    Islam is much more of an ideology/cult than a "religion". How, though, do we convince the Western leaders of this?

    They have been completely captured by "political correctness".

    I can see some *very* nasty times coming in the next decade or two as the "people on the street" in the West struggle against both Islam and their ignorant "PC" leaders.

    Although you may disagree (and that's fine), I think that one HELL of a fight will be needed to overcome Islam in the West.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Thor - Agree we have a fight on our hands. What I don't accept is that erecting a fortress and stopping the free flow of ideas and people helps the fight. Aside from the inhumanity it does the opposite and makes our victory harder.

    Amit - Your argument seems circular and amounts to the 'power belongs to those who wield power'. If you mean that power ultimately rests with those who have the most or biggest guns - then you're mixing up cause and effect. History shows the most successful states that lasted for any length (the US, Britain before them, Romans before them) achieved their dominant position by virtue of the relative freedom they offered - i.e. because the did offer the "good/practical" to everyday citizens compared to the alternatives. As a consequence of the properity and technology this generated they could also afford the military might to defend their position and achieve dominance. Any state or idealogy that wields power for the sake of power and sets itself up as antithetical to everyday life will always lose. It's just a matter of how long that takes. My point is that the forces of globalisation and free flow of immigrants can only hasten the downfall of the bad.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Illegal immigration is a violation of property rights. Read 'The Case for Free Trade and Restricted Immigration' by Hans Hermann-Hoppe.

    ReplyDelete
  14. @Shawn, no, it's not. Folk own only what they own. They don't own all of Australia.

    In fact, to bar immigration is a violation of individual rights.

    I suggest instead of reading cranks like Hoppe, you find out what property rights actually consist of.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I have read many libertarian authors, from Rothbard to Rand, and many more. That's what real intellectual freedom means. It does not mean switching off my mind and blindly accepting your version of libertarian orthodoxy. Open borders is not freedom, it's the political correctness of the Frankfurt School of cultural Marxism.

    And anyone who thinks the West can survive mass Islamic immigration is living in a fantasy world every bit as much as those on the Liberal-Left.

    ReplyDelete

1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.