On Wednesday a frenzy of theatric bipartisanship took over Australian Parliament. A new senator had made a vile, holocaust-referencing provocation in his maiden speech, and much of the day was dedicated to repudiating these remarks.
This gave us some striking, heartfelt moments — Anne Aly’s tearful confession of her exhaustion with this fight, Lucy Gichuhi asking what it would take for her to be considered Australian. The image of Labor’s Ed Husic (of Bosnian Muslim heritage) and Liberal Josh Frydenberg (whose mother was a Hungarian Jew) — descendants of people for whom this kind of rhetoric has a chilling reality — embracing after the former’s speech became the defining image of the day, splashed across the Fairfax front pages. “United against bigotry” ran the headline.
But before we dust our hands and declare the racism business closed, it might be worth reading over some of the rhetoric of those bravely lining up under the “Nazi slogans? NO THANKS” banner.
Malcolm Turnbull
This week… Our Prime Minister called the speech appalling, and returned to that favorite refrain of his: “Australia is the most successful multicultural country in the world”.
Previously… When was the last time we heard Turnbull proudly declare Australia’s success as a multicultural society? In July, when he contributed to the confected and innumerate outrage over “Sudanese gangs” in Victoria:
There is certainly concern about street crime in Melbourne. There is real concern about Sudanese gangs, I’ve heard people, colleagues from Melbourne say there is real anxiety about crime in Melbourne. You’d have to be walking around with your hands over your ears in Melbourne not to hear it.
Alan Tudge
This week… The nostalgia for a return to a White Australia Policy and flirtation with Nazi terminology hit the Minister for Multicultural Affairs where he lives. So Tudge leapt to Twitter to type some words in a row with all the passion and fire of left-out porridge: “Fraser Anning’s comments on immigration do not reflect the views of the government nor the views of fair-minded Australians. We will always maintain a non-discriminatory immigration program”.
But … In July, Tudge told a meeting of the Australia/UK Leadership Forum that “ethnic segregation” brought by migrants threatened “Australian values”.
Diversity can be great, but not when it includes those who want sharia law and will use violence to achieve their ends. Tolerance is generally a good principle, but we should not be tolerant of female genital mutilation or child marriage or women being prohibited from learning English, studying or even driving.
Peter Dutton
This week… Our Home Affairs Minister was fulsome and forthright in his condemnation of racism: “Whether it’s within this place or outside of this place or anywhere around our country. All of us unite together to fight against the scourge of racism.”
Previously… Well, apart from his ongoing preoccupation with 1% of the crimes committed in Victoria, or suggesting that white farmers from South Africa might be shifted to the front of the refugee queue? Dutton really hit the dead centre of the white rights venn diagram when talking to Sky News presenter Paul Murray in 2016 about the Greens proposal to boost the refugee intake to 50,000:
They won’t be numerate or literate in their own language, let alone English. These people would be taking Australian jobs, there’s no question about that. For many of them that would be unemployed, they would languish in unemployment queues and on Medicare and the rest of it so there would be huge cost and there’s no sense in sugar-coating that, that’s the scenario.
Barnaby Joyce
This week… Unable to straight-up condemn Anning’s words, Joyce instead spoke fondly of his Nigerian priest, telling Sky News he didn’t “particularly want to go back to Father Arfu and say ‘look I don’t think you should be here’”. He then followed with sentiments one can only presume he thought would comfort migrant communities: “the Filipinos who work in our abattoirs. They’re good citizens, working in the motels, doing jobs that other people don’t want to do. I don’t particularly want to insult them.”
Last week… Joyce expressed a very particular interest of the trials of white Australia on ABC’s The Weekly to flog his new book — he specified the skin colour of his audience twice:
These are people who are basically at the corner of society — they’re poor, in many instances they’re white, their opportunities are not like yours and we’ve got to come up with policies and something to take them ahead.
Still, none of them specifically suggested a refugee work for the dole program called Arbeit macht frei. So, racism is basically solved.
I’m shocked and totally surprised that Australian politicians are hypocrites.?
Now if crikey and the rest of hypocritical media would like to address any of the other issues raised in that speech it might actually be constructive. Australian parliament should be about issues concerning Australian citizens.
Muslim immigration is a minor concern, it is in Australians interest to accept only immigrants that are willing to accept this countries laws and broad societal norms. If you are unable to accept a woman in a position of authority over you, or feel that bikinis are somehow implied consent… stay home, or be sent home ASAP, not recourse.
Anning raised issues that are important to Australians though political parties don’t wish to discuss.
banking and financial systemic corruption & unaffordable housing & inequitable share of wealth.
Political parties their supportive organisations and the moralistic media grow further and further from the average Australians concerns, and don’t seem to understand that, it is not their job to preach. Who would really be upset about foreigners feeling unwelcome or offended when they are being lied too and extorted by their own political system, government departments and supposed pillars of industry and commerce.
Why should we not criticise Anning for running together issues about material hardship that Australians are suffering with a defence of the white Australia policy and a hint that Nazism might not have been as appallingly evil as we all rightly take it to have been?
The league of Rights in Australia talks in a similar way about the suffering of white christians from all these others coming in and from the banking industry, with just a hint that Jews are behind the wrongs of wealthy banks and that The Nazi “final solution “ was not as bad as some make out.
Australia can do without that sort of comment, whether it is from Anning or The League of Rights
A woman in a position of authority over you? You mean like the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition of Bangladesh? Or former President Megawati of Indonesia, who served in that role before Australia managed to submit to a woman in a position of authority over us? Ms Gillard might say we never did and that’s why she was maligned and deposed. A Muslim mate of mine who was a Comcar driver in Canberra drove for her a number of times and was pretty happy when she became PM. He said she was one of the nicest pollies.
yep that’s what i mean, those who were ok with the election of Benazir Bhutto are fine, those who plotted and celebrated her assassination are not.
Your comcar mates ok… Man Haron Monis is not, its an easy decision, no need to worry about cultural niceties just fuck them off asap.
Gillard might be a nice person she was not a satisfactory PM, probably vice versa for Keating, great PM and leader most likely an arrogant know-it-all pain in the arse otherwise
LOL. Gillard was a damn better PM than any of the dumb losers the Librorts Party have thrown up so far. Not many party leaders could pass so much legislation, in such short a time, as Gillard managed……via 2 hostile Houses of Parliament, might I add. Her legislative record leaves both Abbort, Malcontent & even KRudd in the shade. Oh, but she was a woman whom the Far Right (especially Murdoch) decided to hate…..& so that is clearly your sole reason for thinking her an unsatisfactory PM, Ng.
Oh &, btw, Man Monis was granted a PPV by your mate John Howard…..just ’cause it ticked off Iran.
Golda Meier, Benazir Bhutto, Mrs Gandhi and Mrs Bandaranaike covers most of the sky fairy cults but perhaps PM Gillard being an atheist broke the charm.
(Though unlike two of her predecessors she was assassinated, at least not physically.)
And who can forget Margaret Thatcher, no matter how hard one tries?
Guess what, buddy, I can personally name at least half a dozen white Australians-without even trying-who hold these very views about women. I can name at least half a dozen well known Australian White Males who hold these views about women. If Muslims, or Hindus, were truly having serious issues dealing with our culture, then the MSM would spew it all over the place. Instead I hear more about binge drinking, drug taking, non consensual sex, coward punching & domestic violence……almost 100% by white males.
The Greens & Socialists have made far more of an issue about corporate corruption & greed than Anning ever has……but without the side serve of blatant neo-Nazi racism.
You’re such a twat Ng GJB.
Where on a person’s immigration application does it ask “how do you feel about bikinis/women in authority?”
Have you never heard of psychological assessment, probably not.
Cognitive Component: your thoughts and beliefs about the subject.
Affective Component: how the object, person, issue, or event makes you feel.
Behavioral Component: how the attitude influences your behavior.
Slow down Sigmumd, do you really expect me to believe that peoples beliefs and the environmental factors of their lives affects their behaviours? That is just too far fetched! I would never have considered that!
Well shoot! I guess you’re right! All muslims everywhere have all the same beliefs and all the same environmental factors and therefore all behave entirely identically with no personal agency at all!
Perhaps dear Freud, you should inspect your own cognitive and affective components on the topic of muslims, then circle back and have a look at this here behavioural component.
The idea that all Muslims everywhere have identical beliefs is absurd, we can ensure a bikini-clad future for Australians without needing to grab the pitchforks.
As an aside, where did this idea come that Muslim countries all ban bikinis? Like… do people not just google “beaches in Turkey” before going full stupid?
Next Ng will be telling us that Muslim Nations all ban Christmas too…..even though there is enormous evidence to the contrary.
Also, last I checked, wasn’t it predominantly white males who were-on one side of the Tasman-saying a woman couldn’t be PM if she was “deliberately barren”, whilst on the other side of the Tasman were saying a woman couldn’t be PM if she was having a baby. Just sounds like people who hate the idea of being ruled by a woman.
My point that no one seems to grasp is that Immigration should not be an issue; if it is becoming something of a rallying call then reduce it.
Like it or not Australian governments of any persuasion should be more accountable and responsive to all the citizen of Australia, not prospective citizens and refugees.
Stability and harmony are to important to risk for the benefit of others.
Yes Turkey, what a progressive enlightened country…?
Turkey’s regression has accelerated at a rate few could have predicted even ten years ago.
After Ataturk almost a century of secularism, military coups and general corruption – that’s the trouble with this democracy caper.
Not to mention a population explosion in Anatolia hinterlands.
I ain’t saying Turkey is progressive or enlightened… I’m saying that you can go grab you bikini and pay ’em a visit and you’ll be happy as an Austrian pyschologist with a pound of cocaine with the amount of bikini wearing you’ll get to do. Get wild, you!
Beating up on muslims is not an effective way to identify problem immigrants, its just a toxic narrative; especially now that it’s clear you don’t really know the difference between refugee and immigrant.
It should be smacked down because as long as the liberals are winning the racist vote they can leverage that to push through real socially harmful policies.
… not for the first time is an assessment of others germane to your self (on this matter)
> Slow down Sigmumd,
The rejoiner is NOT the lest Freudian.
“do you really expect me to believe that peoples[sic] beliefs and the environmental factors .. [snip]”
Classic Marx(ism) in fact. Add a desire for “actalisation” as Maslow put it and its close enought to Jung. So YES!.
As to what you take issue :
“All muslims everywhere have all the same beliefs and all the same environmental factors” Consider the matter from this perspective. Is this assertion true of ALL Christians or ALL Jews or ALL Hindus? Are the environmental factors in the Gulf States identical to those in Iran or Morocco? Similarly for the various creeds of Islam. Read an authorative text on Islam mate and THEN smack a keyboard.
“As an aside, where did this idea come that Muslim countries all ban bikinis?
A few people in this country (Oz) really do need to get out more. Bikinis are common in Morocco and surrounds. Similarly for Alexandra but NOT all of Egypt. Latakya (Syria) and Beirut and pockets of the Gulf States. We don’t need to appeal to Turkey. Then there are to Muslim countries to the east of Turkey. Bikinis
there are not uncommon (desipite the contrventon to sura five.
FletcherBeverley – care to make a bet about how much long “bikinis” (even for tourists) survive in Turkey.
Unless the Cuzzins have a chat to the(ir) generals and coup Erdogan, 2020 would be optimistic.
Bikinis are dumb imo, specially for whiteys. I’d prefer a burkini at the beach, sun protection and no unsightly wobbles.
“After Ataturk almost a century of secularism, military coups and general corruption – that’s the trouble with this democracy caper.”
Meanwhile, a century on from the Bolshevik Revolution and numerous attempts to straightjacket people into a Marxist-Leninist paradigm, this is what the rump of what’s left of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics has become:
https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2018/07/keep-an-eye-on-the-magnitsky-act/
It is only a “Rallying cry” to racists, many of whom hate to admit the fact that they nor their ancestors never once considered assimilating with any of the cultures they encountered in the lands they ultimately settled.
Seriously, though, when your only claim to greatness is a belief you’ve won the genetic & geographic lottery (as is true of most One Neuron & KAP supporters) then you must be a pretty pathetic specimen.
Also, consider the argument historically. Your claim that we should reduce immigration because its become a “rallying cry” for racist blowhards is kind of like the Reich-stag saying, in the early 1930’s “well, the number of Jews living in Germany has become a rallying cry for certain Germans, so lets just make them put a yellow star on their clothes so we can easily identify them”. We should be opposing racists, not appeasing them.
The guy (Ng) has a point otherwise there would not be an citizen questionnaire. As an aside, if you have ever visited another non English-speaking country it is unlikely that you would need to ask the question? Information about any country (culture & lifestyle) is easily available and is provided by Oz. Dep. Foreign Affairs.
As to the question by Ng – unless the person has undertaken a teacher-training course in the last 30 years or a senior management course then it is unlikely.
I’m no fan of any of these people but when the media choose to claim that believing that immigration levels are too high is identical with racism, as many commenters on Anning or, for instance, Abbot and Credlin in The Saturday Paper last week imply, they’re simply asserting the conflation of racism with legitimate concerns about the environment, overcrowding and the emotional costs of the loss of a sense of community. A better way of alienating the public from those addicted to conspicuous virtue signalling could not be imagined.
Except none of these vile s**ts think immigration is too high. They have made it clear, over & over, that there issue is more about *where* the immigrants come from, not their numbers. If Australia invested in infrastructure & had a more fair distribution of wealth, we could take 35+ million quite comfortably.
Turnbull’s comment on Sudanese street gangs was an appalling racist dog whistle but Tudge’s comment was fine. It is fine to say that tolerance and acceptance of different cultures is limited to those who do not involve injustice. Of course, we cannot tolerate a version of any religion that incites its members to kill others just because they do not believe what they believe, or a version that seeks to impose their religious rules governing marriage with violence. Nor can we tolerate laws being broken against bodily harm and child marriage or equality between the sexes. So, it is fine for Tudge to say that to any audience. The only question that one could ask is whether these are properly said to be just “ethnic segregation “, when plainly there might be other forms of “segregation” that are not unacceptably unjust, if they are voluntary.
We need to be able to separate acceptable comment on diversity from all the other racist or xenophobic dog whistling from Turnbull through Dutton to all the other usual suspects.
My thoughts exactly. Anybody offended by Tudge’s comments is just looking to be upset. I have absolutely no problem with pointing out the archaic facts and realities of any culture or religion. Nobody and no idea should be exempt from criticism.
“I have absolutely no problem with pointing out the archaic facts and realities of any culture or religion.”
Are you referring to Christianity, or Judaism, or was that only a reference to Islam?
Tudge’s comments weren’t upsetting, just wholly anodyne. I thought that was the point that Charlie and Gabrielle were making. But I could be wrong.
Islam in this instance, but I think all religions have thier own issues to deal with
Oh, & now we have the Churches telling us that they’ll flat out disobey laws relating to reporting child sex offenders who admit their crime during confessionals. If they cannot accept our laws, maybe we should round up the entire Catholic Hierarchy & pack them off to Vatican City.
Funny. Everytime I look at the news, the only religious/cultural group who are trying to dictate the way we Australians live are white Christians…..especially the Catholics. Whether it be money for chaplains in schools, funding for religious education degrees in universities, gay rights, euthanasia, women’s rights, funding for Christian Schools……its always the rich, white, Catholic Minority who are trying to force us to adopt their “values”. Don’t recall the last time a Muslim in Australia ever asked me to-directly or indirectly-to change over to Sharia law.
The comments regarding Rundle’s “This grinning racism ..” seem to have gone unheeded. To that extent some number of the subscribers are wasting their time.
Rather than pick bits and pieces (eclectically) commence with an authoritive definition of racism or, failing that, racial discrimination and ascertain the extent to which the “offenders” contravened various UN declarations to which Oz is a signatory.
With those two points a story of some significance might result. As it is you scribbling to the “other side of the coin”; viz., emulating the “offenders” but in a around-about matter.
“Don’t Borgart that dog-whistle Ozzie, pass it round. Whose turn is it? …..”
Very good klewso. 🙂
Pass the dog whistle to the left hand side, pass the dog whistle to the left hand side ……