One Nation Voters – Hope. Fear. Racism.

October 16, 2016
Written by: Trish Corry
93 Replies

This is the second blog in a series to discuss how the One Nation Party leaders promote themselves compared to who they really are. Through this article I will discuss how One Nation uses Hope, Fear and Racism to gain voters’ trust.

For those outside of Australia or if you are someone who has no interest in Australian Politics; the One Nation Party is a right wing Nationalist Party. They recently won four seats in the Federal Senate.

If you voted for the One Nation Party, chances are you see yourself as a Patriot. The first instalment in this series discussed how if you are a patriot, your vote is misplaced by voting One Nation. As One Nation are not Patriots, they are Nationalists.

One of the major comments from One Nation voters is that they are not racist. Some of them very proudly are; but I do not believe the majority are racist.

These voters are simply people who have grasped onto hope, through One Nation’s emotive marketing of fear. That does not make them racist.

One Nation Understands Us

If there is one thing I would like to say to One Nation voting readers; is that One Nation IS a political party. I often hear: One Nation are not like Political Parties – they ‘understand’ us. The fact that the party asked for your vote and won senate seats, means they are a political party full of politicians.

To give them automatic trust based on this falsehood does not mean that they understand you.

One Nation, Emotions and Political Marketing

This Political Party has been very clever in marketing their party to connect with your emotions. They marketed to how you feel about the lack of jobs, the inability to purchase a home, the cost of living and the fears of job insecurity. Also struggling on low wages and the worries, we have every single day for our children.

Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party have taken all of these fears and instead of addressing them with real solutions; they present logic that is flawed.

That is that other people, who have a different skin colour or religion than you, are the real cause of your fears and worries.

This shows that they are even more political and strategic than most other political parties. Think of it like this. All political parties believe that their ideology or values system, will deliver a better Australia for all people. Whether this is Conservatism (Liberal), Laborism (Labor) or Environmentalism (Greens). These parties all truly believe these value systems will benefit ALL Australians. Regardless of what you believe in or what you agree with, this underpins every major party’s vision.

One Nation believes that there can only be a better Australia if we only cater for one section of Australia and make everyone exactly the same. A white Christian Australia.

This is a very politically motivated decision. It is also progressing a political agenda for their own power. They do not understand you. As a political Party they want to gain as much money and power as possible. Be wary of giving automatic trust.

Hope, Identity and Power

It is true that many Australians have lost hope and no longer trust the political system. Over many years, successive Governments have created a system that results in inequity and poverty for many. When we lose hope, we feel we lose our power and our self-identity.

People do not willingly give up power to others. It is not a natural act. That is why entire countries are forcibly taken through war. That is why labour that should be valued is stolen through unfair wages and slavery.

Many people feel that if we lose our self-identity, we give up our power. The power to have rights, make decisions, to move freely and to just be ourselves.

This is where the One Nation Party comes in.

Racism, Xenophobia and Islamophobia disguised as hope and equality

Throughout their history, they have targeted minority groups and have insisted that this minority will become the majority and take away your identity and power. That is a scary thing to think about. However, it simply is not true. Freedom is not gained through fear.

In the 1990’s they targeted Aboriginal Australians and Asians. In 2016, they are targeting Muslims.

If this is a vote for equality, could you stand up and honestly say that you would like to be treated like the people within these groups are treated?

Can you honestly say, that you would like to be abused and spat on, shunned and ridiculed, just because of your skin colour, your features or that you look like followers of a certain religion?

Politicians have a platform, we cannot imagine to have for our voices. Privilege and power are a politician’s automatic right. The words of the One Nation Party are used with all the power they have to target certain groups and set them apart from the rest of us.

By targeting one group as different, it automatically gives people who are not in that group the false impression of power. A real system of privilege and power is created when this is backed by a politician. If it is based on race or Islam it is Racism and/or Islamophobia.

This is nothing but political marketing to get your vote. It is to make you feel powerful. The same problems that make you feel you are losing power and identity are all still there. One Nation has not solved these problems by targeting others.

They have asked you to be angry at other people, instead of Government. Why? Because otherwise, they would need to come up with actual solutions that could be compared to the Government’s solutions. One Nation has had to do nothing to get your vote. They have placed blame on a minority group to distract you away from challenging their (non) policy ideas.

Three levels of prejudice and discrimination

The creation of fear is used because it positions One Nation as ‘protectors’ and ‘authority.’ Very simply, when people are fearful, they naturally want someone to protect them and to take away the fear.

To keep a level of fear that wins votes, it is important for people act on that fear.

There are three levels of prejudice and discrimination:

The first is how we ‘see’ people as different to us and how we make a judgement about them. It is about how we see people compared to what we see as the ideal symbol of what we think people should look like.

The second is how we feel about people. When you think about different races and groups, how do you feel? Happy, angry, excited, fearful? The key for One Nation is to play on the groups that people feel fearful about. This fear is heightened by creating falsehoods about an entire group and using emotive words, such as ‘We are being swamped by Muslims.’

Notice that the action words are negative words, that create fear about becoming the minority and losing our identity and power?

The third is about how we act towards others. This is important for One Nation. It is only logical that people will not be very friendly towards people they are fearful of.

Not being friendly and welcoming creates a divided country. This creates even more fear and uncertainty. One Nation hopes you will look to them, because they are the party who are agreeing with your fears. But they are silent about the problems that are the cause of your fears.

Conclusion

I hope that by explaining it this way, you can see that One Nation are not the ‘Average Australian’ like you. They play to your emotions and fears in a purposeful way.

This is a highly motivated party, with a very well organised strategy to gain votes, more power and more money, based on creating fear about other human beings.

The problems which cause our fears are not solved by targeting other human beings.

The problems that are the root cause of our fears will only go away when we keep challenging the Government or other parties who can gain power to stop inequality, creates jobs and we have real fairness and supportive public services.

Blaming other human beings, because they are different, will not solve this problem. It just makes the same problems even worse for the people in these groups.

I trust this is not the reason you voted for One Nation. I do not believe that most One Nation voters would purposely make life worse for some Australians.

Your vote should never be for a party who blames other people for the country’s problems. That is because the people within these targeted groups, don’t have the power to make the decisions. They are victims of the same system that you are. Only a ruling Government can solve the problems that underpin our fears.

If you did vote for One Nation, because you want to see everyone treated equally with fairness, I hope you challenge and re-think your voting decision. The divisiveness, racism and hatred One Nation champions, is the opposite of who you really are.

Originally published on Polyfeministix

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Post Views: 569

93 comments

Login here

Register here

JaquixOctober 16, 2016 at 8:50 am

Top marks Trish. The prime example of this scapegoating of one section of the population as causing all its woes, is that of the Jews by Hitler. The conditions were similar, the people were afraid, angry and financially disadvantaged. Hitler whipped up hysteria that the Jews were at fault, and the people fell for it, in droves. By the time they woke up it was too late, they had given him unfettered power and he ran with it. The most chilling thing is that he was elected democratically. Pauline & Co now worming their way in, clearly aided and abetted by a weak Liberal government. The old saying applies: The price of democracy is eternal vigilance.

Ricardo29October 16, 2016 at 9:23 am

Good piece Trish, articulate and well argued. Should be printed as a pamphlet and distributed to everyone who voted ON.

ozibodyOctober 16, 2016 at 10:10 am

The Howard Government virtually welcomed One nation because he thought they would take votes away from Labor. They were encouraged to run free, and only when it became obvious Hanson was not fulfilling this prophesy – only then did the N L P put the dampeners on One Nation.

The jail term was meant to totally destroy Hanson’s ambitions! The N L P have now virtually created perfect circumstances to encourage Hansonism and just by the way, her ( now increased ) vote could be quite ‘handy’ for their cause!

Perhaps, when the current Government is shown the ‘Exit’ , One Nation can be packaged with them!

Terry2October 16, 2016 at 10:34 am

On their own, One Nation are not much more than an irritant. But when they are embraced by one of the major parties they become a threat and at the moment the coalition are cuddling up to Pauline to get their union bashing policies through. The coalition’s CFA volunteer firefighters changes to federal legislation has been backed by One Nation in the Senate and there is a high probability that One Nation will assist the coalition in getting the ABCC legislation through.

Had Labor made such an agreement with the Greens, for instance, to get legislation through there would be a howl from the mainstream media but when the coalition embraces One Nation as an ally, not a murmur.

As I’ve said elsewhere, One Nation are not supporting the coalition without conditions attached : deals have been done and the coalition will have to make concessions in return. We should be worried about that.

Seeing Tony Abbott sitting down with Pauline in that very orchestrated meeting of minds was a very uncomfortable moment for me.

brickbobOctober 16, 2016 at 10:53 am

Yes you could show this very well written and logical truthful article to ON supporters, but they would react just like Trump supporters do to criticsism,with hatred and vitriol and threats of violence,and Trump was right when he said he could fire a gun down the main street of NY and kill someone and they would still vote for him,and Hanson could start up another fish and chip shop and lace the product with posion when serving Aboriginals and Muslims and her vote would go up,so i dont know what the answer is apart from a massive education and advetising blitz to hopefully change peoples attitudes.

Education about our first peoples and other minorities should start from day one at primary school,and if you can educate the children early then within one or two generations this awful backward thinking about people who dont look the same as us or have a different skin colour or religion will be eradicated,and as the song says,i may be a dreamer but Im not the only one.

Kaye LeeOctober 16, 2016 at 11:33 am

One Nation will find a minor irritation and pick at it until it becomes a festering sore, never once thinking about the causes of the itch or how to treat it.

If the masses had shared in the uninterrupted growth of the last 25 years, there would be less unrest, but instead, the rich have got richer and it suits them to distract the masses with some other scapegoat so they don’t notice they are being exploited. That is why the unions have to go too…can’t have them demanding a fair share for the people whose labour makes the fat cats fatter.

One Nation may be a symptom of disease but they certainly aren’t a cure.

BeeTee-EssOctober 16, 2016 at 12:31 pm

Well done Trish.

Impressive, straightforward, detailed.

JexpatOctober 16, 2016 at 2:03 pm

Terry2 wrote: “One Nation are not supporting the coalition without conditions attached…

If one of those conditions is: no more corporate racketeer and extortion arrangements masquerading as “trade deals,” that would indeed be a silver lining, since the evidence and rhetoric shows that we can’t trust Labor on these matters.

wamOctober 16, 2016 at 2:34 pm

i was confused and, until there was no paragraph on sexism, I thought you were talking about religion.
brick
Education about Aborigines and minorities does start in primary school and very quickly, if not in class, then in the playground, they are taught their place by the majority.

Steve Laing - makeourvoiceheard.comOctober 16, 2016 at 2:57 pm

One Nation are exactly that Kaye, a symptom. They offer no realistic solutions, and no understanding of the potential effect of their “policies”. The unfolding Brexit disaster is the perfect example of what happens when populism is allowed to over-run sense. The fact that Brexit had its roots in a Crosby-Textor political strategy to get the Tories back into power is of no great surprise. The fact that One Nation have returned in number is the same Crosby-Textor advice to Tony to ramp up the anti-Muslim sentiment in order to gain votes. Once the Pandora’s box of “rational racism” is opened, getting it back under control becomes much more difficult.

Just as we cannot unmake nuclear weapons, we cannot unmake the highly connected world in which we now live. Countries trade with other countries, people move, live and work in other nations. This is the modern world. To believe that building walls (real, and proverbial) is a valid strategy is truly imbecilic. China built a wall to protect itself from external influence, and went from being the most advanced civilisation of its time, to one of the least, over a few hundred years.

However I don’t believe that you will persuade One Nation supporters to change their mind through logic, or by appealing to their values. I know people who support them, and they are rigid in their beliefs. The only way that you might get them to change their mind is to exhibit that a multicultural society is a much more pleasant one, than that of 50s White Australia, and to regularly ask them to come and join the fun.

The question is, how can we do that? The biggest mistake that people (particularly politicians) seem to make, is that a vibrant multicultural society will just happen. It won’t. Despite a significant proportion of people who live in France coming from their African colonies, their has been no real attempt to assimilate them into French society. Instead they are completely marginalised. It is no surprise to me that France has seen the worst of the European ISIS attacks, given how they ghettoise their immigrants. The UK too, only encouraged migration from its colonies because Brits were refusing to do jobs they considered beneath them. This led to the same type of enclaves, whether Brixton, Bradford or Luton, where one migrant culture predominates. This isn’t multiculturalism.

The fact is, with their already established networks, born and bred most Australian’s have no need to welcome newcomers. I totally get that. As a migrant myself, I have no bitterness that natives didn’t welcome me with open arms. And this is a pity, because for multiculturalism to work, it is really those incumbents that need to make the greater effort, not the newcomers. You don’t invite people to your party, and then proceed to ignore them, yet this is essentially what we do. But we seem to expect the incomers to integrate! To pick up “our ways”! And then castigate them when they revert back to the customs of the countries that they came from, and socialise with those of a culture that is familiar. Is there any surprise that this takes place?

So what to do? I personally think the key is simplicity. Next time you go for a walk, or visit the supermarket, make the effort to engage a stranger in conversation. Make a connection. Sure, some people might think you are a bit of a nutter, but so what. Its not like you’ll probably ever see them again. But I used to remember delivering papers on a cold Edinburgh morning in the dark, and it was the “morning” from strangers walking their dogs, or coming home from night shift, that would add just that little bit of warmth to a freezing day.

I’d also like Australia Day, if we are so intent on celebrating it (and personally I think it needs to be change to a day less charged to the indigenous community), then it needs to be a celebration of multiculturalism, because that is what Australia is. A place where we can be proud of where we came from, but also celebrate where we have come to. Being Australian really shouldn’t have to mean denying your heritage, and replacing it with one that actually never really existed in the first place.

Dale MarshallOctober 16, 2016 at 5:10 pm

What would you know? You’re just yet another over-opinionated journalist trying to make a $ by erring on the side of caution,blinding those that still fail to see the truth without showing any care for our future generations safety. Journalism sure does have a lot to answer for in our beloved country,and you ask for a donation??…for what?? Wake up..it has nothing to do with racism..its about retaining our once safe,carefree,happy multi-ethnic nation!!

trishcorryOctober 16, 2016 at 5:28 pm

Thank you for your comment Dale. I am pleased a Hanson supporter has commented.

Could you please shed some light on the need to target and say hateful things about certain groups in society (Aboriginals, Asians and Muslims and those on Welfare) are the way forward to ‘retaining our once safe, carefree, happy, multi-ethnic nation?”

This appears to be the disagreement between those who support Hanson, such as yourself, who see this as the way forward and those who don’t.

Dale MarshallOctober 16, 2016 at 5:46 pm

Welcome Trish,thank you for the opportunity to voice my opinion. Aboriginals? Oh dear..you obviously are confused by the racecard. Since when does Pauline and One Nation have anything against our Indigenous? You are being fooled by those that choose to use the racecard in their defense of who they are and what they’re truly about.
Asians? Yes,Unfortunately I have to give you that one as Pauline was way before her time,imo,on that issue,albeit that foreign ownership is still a huge problem.
So in all,I can assure you,if there was ever anything racist about being a ON supporter,I would never ever support such vile dialect.
Tell me please..What race is Islam? It is the totalitarian ideology that is opposed,not the creed of person so that issue is actually null and void,only serving to destroy our society.

Michael TaylorOctober 16, 2016 at 5:51 pm

I don’t remember Trish saying that Islam is a race. She said “certain groups in society”.

Trish CorryOctober 16, 2016 at 6:10 pm

Dale, I’ll try to keep it as short as possible, but you have posed a few questions.

I am not sure if you were around in the 1990’s; but Pauline Hanson’s original tirade was targeted at Indigenous Australians and Asians. The biggest arguments in society were ‘Do Aboriginals get more than white Australians’ and “Blacks are racist against whites.” Hanson’s arguments were about reverse racism.

It was the conversation of many dinner tables, at bus stops and supermarket checkouts.

The reason she was dis-endorsed from the LNP was because her remarks about Indigenous Australians were so derogatory and offensive; even the conservatives found it offensive.

The evidence of derogatory remarks about Indigenous people are readily available if you google using relevant search terms.

Because our country has evolved since then to one of mostly respect for Indigenous Australians, she has backed away from these attacks, as she knows politically it is not longer ‘trendy’.

On Asians – I’m not sure what you mean that she was ‘way before her time.” Are you saying that it is quite appropriate for Pauline Hanson to separate out one entire group based on their race and misappropriate claims about them? So people fear them? Because large multinational companies are purchasing land and businesses (the fault of the Government rules) that it is fine to target Asian people because of this and vilify them in the community? I’m not sure how you separate the human affect, to the Government allowing foreign multinationals to purchase land and businesses and houses. Should you not be angry at the Government and not the people of the same race? Why would you support a politician who attacks the human and not the Government rules?

Do you see any parallel to what she said in the 90’s (Taking one group, targeting them, and setting them as different to society in a negative way – as a way to ‘multicultural harmony?) as to what she is doing now? Exactly the same thing. Targeting the human to create fear and divisiveness?

The idea that Islamophobia is a racist term, is supported by anthropological theory due to the view of the external and the ‘stereotyping and stigmatising’ based on the view of the external. However, that is an analysis for another day.

When you close your eyes and picture a Muslim, do you see a blond haired, blue eyed, white person? I don’t believe you do. The fact that Hindu’s get attacked on busses is a testament to the fact that this group is attacked based on racial identifiers such as skin colour, appearance and dress.

However, regardless of racism, Hitler targeted people based on their eye colour. His master race was blond haired and blue eyed. Grouping by an identifier, such as clothing, hair, appearance, has the same central offensive stigmatising affects as targeting someone by race. Do you agree? This should not be an excuse for your support of Hanson targeting peaceful people living in our communities.

What evidence is there that the 2% of the population who live as Muslims in Australia are totalitarian by nature and causing harm to our society?

Is this targeting and vilifying a group, based on a falsehood? Agree or disagree?

Does this targeting of a group of people create harmony? Agree or disagree?

Would you happily put your hand up to be treated the same as the groups Pauline Hanson targets? Yes or No?

Dale MarshallOctober 16, 2016 at 6:11 pm

Come,come Michael,to imply that ON has a problem with Aboriginals,Asians and Muslims doesn’t infer to you that Trish is calling ON racist?

Michael TaylorOctober 16, 2016 at 6:19 pm

Here’s a few things Pauline has said about Aborigines:

https://www.buzzfeed.com/allanclarke/pauline-hanson-and-indigenous-australia?utm_term=.txdXG0JbL#.ga618NlX2

(I don’t think she likes them).

Steve Laing - makeourvoiceheard.comOctober 16, 2016 at 6:19 pm

Dale – to claim that Pauline hasn’t said a few less than savoury things about aboriginal people is a fairly large stretch. Try this article for starters.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/allanclarke/pauline-hanson-and-indigenous-australia

Can I also ask. Do you know anyone who is Muslim? What is it about people of this faith that worries you? Are you worried that Australian culture is so weak that a 2.2% minority may be able to take it over?

Dale MarshallOctober 16, 2016 at 6:22 pm

Sorry Trish,you’ve misunderstood me,it was never my intention to either expect you to agree or understand with continuing dialect. I am well adjusted to how left-leaning journalism and supporters think. It is absolutely tragic,in my mind,that you show no care either for Australian culture,nation or wellbeing,condoning such divisive direction for the future.All I can add is,I hope you can hold your head up to the future generations that I dare say,would’ve remained a lot safer being a Christian sovereignty based nation. I will not waste my time or yours any further,as I say I was only here to offer my opinion which is obviously in stark contrast to yours which you don’t suffer well. Take care

Steve Laing - makeourvoiceheard.comOctober 16, 2016 at 6:27 pm

Oh brave Sir Robin! Off you go then. Don’t let the door hit you on your way out.

But there you have it Trish. Neither logic or sentiment will sway them. They have a rose-tinted view of Australia, perfect in every way, other than the darkies, chinkies and rag-heads of course. Build a wall. Keep them out. And if the going gets tough, run away. Aussie Aussie Aussie, oi oi oi!

Trish CorryOctober 16, 2016 at 6:27 pm

Thank you Dale. The fact that you were not able to answer any questions posed to you, in my reply, speaks for itself. It is OK to be racist. Just own it Dale. Say that is WHY you support Hanson. Because you think White Australians are more superior than anyone else who lives here. That they should all act like your symbol of what a white Aussie should be. Rather than live in harmony and accept that we are all different. That is not Patriotism, that is Nationalism. Patriotism is peaceful. Nationalism is not. That is explained in the link of this post.

If you are Patriot and not a Nationalist; your vote is misplaced.

If you are a Nationalist – own it. Don’t hide behind pretending that One Nation is something they are not. Be proud like George Christensen.

I hope you are a business owner and not a worker, because Hanson is also a conservative and hates the worker and hates the Unions. I also hope you are not on Welfare, because she hates those on welfare too.

Remember, she is a rejected Liberal Party member, first and foremost. She shares their views of punishing the worker and the welfare recipient.

Trish CorryOctober 16, 2016 at 6:30 pm

PS. Dale. We are not a Christian Sovereignty. We are a Secular Nation. No one forces anyone in this country to be a Christian. Thank goodness for that because I do not believe in religion!

Dale MarshallOctober 16, 2016 at 6:33 pm

Run away? I have no interest in talking to you…I am so sorry that,that hurts you. I’ve heard all the same crap for years out of you type,while you’re happily accepting terrorism and evidence of how these islamic believers think of the Australian way of life. Enjoy…I’m not here to argue or become abusive with you type as you are showing…Stay safe in your denial..lets all hope and pray that it never affects you or your family in your ignorance huh.

Trish CorryOctober 16, 2016 at 6:35 pm

May your God bless you Dave and forgive you for stigmatising entire groups of people and causing them distress and harm. I hope the punishment isn’t too severe when judgement day comes.
PS. Jesus was a lefty.

Dale MarshallOctober 16, 2016 at 6:37 pm

I’ve just had my dinner Trish,to read your above comments makes me feel like vomiting. It disgusts..Anything for a $ hey…Wow!!

Trish CorryOctober 16, 2016 at 6:41 pm

Lol at the $ comments. I’m not sure where you are getting that idea from! I’m not sure if being called a paid journalist means my writing has improved or it is has gone downhill!

Steve LaingOctober 16, 2016 at 7:04 pm

Well done on getting a paid gig Trish 😉

I thought you’d gone Dale? But apparently you are still here! But not answering the questions, just insulting people and then playing the righteous indignation card! Bravo! The predictability is astonishing. But I’m so sorry I hurt your feelings, and am ignoring your opinions – unfortunately I try to live my life based on facts and logic, not emotion and opinion. And my understanding of religion is somewhat different than yours – I’m guessing you missed Sunday School on the day they told the story of the Good Samaritan?

However if you aren’t running away, then how about answering some of the questions, rather than just pretending that you are so sickly than an opinion you don’t agree with might actually cause you to regurgitate your dinner (meat and two veg, am I right?). Perhaps this Australian culture is so shaky that just thinking about a kebab might kill you!

Kaye LeeOctober 16, 2016 at 7:04 pm

Let’s not forget the Africans…they were the 2006 target

“We’re bringing in people from South Africa at the moment. There’s a huge amount coming into Australia, who have diseases; they’ve got AIDS,” Ms Hanson told AAP.

“They are of no benefit to this country whatsoever; they’ll never be able to work.

“And what my main concern is, is the diseases that they’re bringing in and yet no one is saying or doing anything about it.”

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/hanson-turns-on-diseased-africans/2006/12/06/1165081010724.html

Steve LaingOctober 16, 2016 at 7:07 pm

I sent that comment to a white South African I know who had unsurprisingly shown a degree of sympathy to Pauline and her brigade – PMSL!

Kaye LeeOctober 16, 2016 at 7:09 pm

Or Pauline’s mum who was still scared of the yellow peril 50 years after the war ended.

“I was always taught,” she says, “the yellow race will rule the world. And if we don’t do something now … I’m afraid, yes, the yellow race will rule the world.”

http://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/politics/the-yellow-race-will-rule-the-world-the-woman-who-is-even-more-racist-than-pauline-hanson–her-mum-norah/news-story/3df08e1ed74f43a45d866c1338cb38d0

Michael TaylorOctober 16, 2016 at 7:11 pm

Funnily, Kaye, (though not so funny) it was the diseases brought here by the English that wiped out tens of thousands of Aborigines.

Steve LaingOctober 16, 2016 at 7:15 pm

Even less funny is that they weren’t brought accidentally… They were in some cases purposefully given blankets of people who had smallpox.

Michael TaylorOctober 16, 2016 at 7:21 pm

They did it in America, Steve, no reason to not do it here too.

Steve LaingOctober 16, 2016 at 7:40 pm

Probably saw it as Christian sharing, Michael…

Kaye LeeOctober 16, 2016 at 7:43 pm

Ima guessing Lang Hancock, Gina Rinehart’s dad, and Pauline would have got on well.

In a 1984 television interview, Hancock suggested forcing unemployed indigenous Australians − specifically “the ones that are no good to themselves and who can’t accept things, the half-castes” − to collect their welfare cheques from a central location. “And when they had gravitated there, I would dope the water up so that they were sterile and would breed themselves out in the future, and that would solve the problem.”

I really wish people would understand the difference that culture makes. In Egypt, where perhaps 97 percent of girls suffer genital mutilation, both Christian Copts and Muslims are complicit.

There are also extremists in every religion.

A conference to arrange child marriages for Christian homeschoolers will be held in Kansas this fall. Fundamentalist and conservative evangelical parents will meet in Wichita, Kansas, this November to arrange marriages for their teen daughters.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2016/05/conference-will-arrange-child-marriages-for-christian-homeschoolers/

You cannot seriously tar all Muslims with the same brush any more than you can Christians. The Muslim people I know are no different to any of us. My Muslim electrician just wants to raise his children in a safe, tolerant country. His Muslim son just wants to play cricket with the other kids. His Muslim daughter loves music just like the other kids. Exclusion, vilification and marginalisation will only exacerbate any social problems we have.

Hanson offers nothing but irrational fear.

The AIM NetworkOctober 16, 2016 at 7:54 pm

From one of our authors:

The pueriles of Pauline

guestOctober 16, 2016 at 8:00 pm

Dale, I am rather disappointed that you support Pauline Hanson yet you cannot really explain why. You seem to think that supporting Hanson you will be protected from people you regard as foreign and not really Australian, such as Asians and Muslims. You seem to think that Oz should be inhabited by white Anglo-Saxon Christians.

I was greatly amused when on Q&A Sam Dastyari revealed, as he sat next to Pauline, that he was indeed a Muslim. We could see the disbelief in Pauline’s eyes when she realised that she was sitting next to a Muslim and he had not tried to cut off her head.

Pauline loves to think that violence is what Muslims are all about, and that they are plotting to introduce sharia law. When exactly does she expect 2% of the population to take over the country and impose sharia law?

And what is the problem about halal food? Does she think this is funding ISIS? So I ask you, who is supplying arms to terrorists and insurgents around the world? Who is making the big money out of military weapons?

And who has been interfering in Middle East matters for a long, long time? Remember the Crusades, Lawrence of Arabia, Gordon of Khartoum and dividing of the Middle East after WW2, not to mention the unauthorised attack on Iraq, etc. Think about the actions of those kind and thoughtful Christian chaps. And it is still going on. No wonder the Muslims are a little upset.

I tell you, Dale, I am more afraid of drug-crazed crims in our own society than I am of Muslims.

As for Asians, they have been around in Oz society for centuries. No surprise in that. They are great traders, keen on study and now have big money to invest in Oz. We need investment. And we have trade investments with Asia. You want them to go away?

So what is the real gripe? In the USA, that great capitalist country which we wish to emulate, there are people who think Donald Trump is the answer to their problems of unemployment, stagnant wages, declining industry, so many ethnic groups, etc. What these people cannot see is that this bizarre billionaire, who has been bankrupted several times, who has not paid taxes for 20 years, is not the man who will make America Great Again. He has no coherent plan (although Abbott says Trump is a true ‘conservative’: low taxes and big military power! – what?)

So with Hanson. Beware believing that she will solve all the problems of her supporters. Still banging the same old drum, hoping the Coalition will give her a lift. She does not have what it takes. Time will tell when the bubble bursts.

Trish CorryOctober 16, 2016 at 8:01 pm

I must share a Green/Environmentalist view as a reaction to this piece: It is definitely worth discussion:

@Trish_Corry if One Nation can bring about cuts to immigration thereby protecting fragile eco systems & living standards they get my vote.

@GeminiiAussie It is necessary to target and stigmatise entire groups of people in the name of saving fragile eco systems? Strange concept!

@Trish_Corry our fragile eco systems and our standard of living deserve protection. Casualties in any war are inevitable.

@GeminiiAussie What about stigmatising, Indigenous, Asians and Muslims who already live here? How does that protect fragile eco systems?

@Trish_Corry I’m not saying they should leave. Practice tolerance but cut immigration.

@GeminiiAussie No seriously. If this is a Green view. I am interested. Appalled actually. But Interested. Hanson doesn’t practice Tolerance.

GeminiiAussie describes himself as an Environmentalist from Sydney.

Are those who follow sustainability ok with stigmatising entire groups of people? Another sustainable environmentalist also just tweeted me about we need conversation about the projected 8 million people growth to Melbourne over the next 30 years.

Trish CorryOctober 16, 2016 at 8:11 pm

I will most definitely be researching the views of sustainable environmentalists and their views on immigration and what they are prepared to accept in terms of the affects on other humans by the likes of Hanson and if they champion her cause.

paulwalterOctober 16, 2016 at 9:28 pm

Too late now Trish Corry- that horse bolted two decades ago. Labor did badly on ecology and economy from the early nineties onwards, as it became further infatuated with neoliberalism and ceded its traditional role as defender of the public interest, defined in rational ways.

Trish CorryOctober 16, 2016 at 9:42 pm

Hi Paul. Sorry, I am not following at all what Labor in the 90s has to do with environmentalists today supporting Hanson because they fear immigration will damage eco systems. If you are one of these people, please share your views, because I am keen to understand more about what these people are prepared to accept as to the consequences of Hanson’s harmful policies on others, for the sake of their quest about ‘fragile eco-systems.’

paulwalterOctober 17, 2016 at 12:32 am

“Sorry Paul, I am not following.. what Labor in the 90’s has to do with environmentalists today..”

It is a shame. Go back and rethink what I contributed- maybe leave a copy of my posting under your pillow- and I am sure you will begin to grasp my point (it has to do with Keating minister David Beddall’s rejection of every single one of the hundreds of forest coupes enviro minister Faulkner proposed to be conserved as a rational solution to the logging/ woodchipping/pulping enviro/catchment degradation problem and set the tone for ALP policy ever since, that enviro is some thing we only think about when all else is payed out.

There is a problem with that attitude, to do with a categorical misconception of economics and ecology.

Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 12:36 am

Ok. Still not following why that means an environmentalist supports or should support Hanson’s stance on immigration.

JexpatOctober 17, 2016 at 12:56 am

Trish: you raised a strawman with your “Green/Environmentalist” post. Then, on your own accord proceeded to knock the strawman down, and in the process invited a review of Labor’s own record.

Having done so, can you reasonable be heard to complain? Is an attempt to defect foreseeable criticism via a reference back to Hanson’s a reasonable or effective riposte?

Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 1:08 am

Sorry. I am really not following you either Jexpat.

This guy said to me on Twitter, that he would support Hanson because her immigration policies would “protect fragile ecosystems” I tried to ask him to explain how supporting racism “protects fragile ecosystems” He could not answer. Every time I tried to reasonably ask him – were there other solutions? Why support Hanson? He started raving on with Sharia Law babble; which I have no interest in.

Then another person (sustainable environmentalist) raised that we need to have a serious conversation about the 8 million people who will be living in Melbourne in 30 years. (In support of person 1 – in this convo on Twitter).

So this got me thinking that there is a group that are not ‘racist’ or ‘anti-Islam’ supporting Hanson, but would vote for her and accept everything else she comes with because they don’t want immigration due because of their views on sustainability. I”m merely trying to understand this. Most people believe that Hanson voters are just racist right?

Trying to understand this is not raising a strawman. It is simply trying to understand this particular group and how many of them there are; what their views are and if this will increase Hanson’s votes. I personally would like to understand this group, if they are supporting Hanson for this reason of ‘cutting immigration protects fragile ecosystems’

Is this guy and the other guy just rogue’s or outliers – or are there many ‘sustainable environmentalists’ out there, willing to support her?

I’m not interested in anything Labor has done in the 90s or is doing today about the environment. It has nothing at all to do with the point I raised. I have no idea of Labor’s environmental policies, in the 90’s or even today – only very broadly; so no point thinking I’m defending them – it simply is NOT my area of interest. I simply can’t see the connection of why that matters to the point I’m raising, or why Paul even raised it as a point.

JexpatOctober 17, 2016 at 1:41 am

Fronting up and then knocking back “this guy on twitter” is a 21st Century example of a strawman fallacy.

“The typical “attacking a straw man” argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated a proposition by covertly replacing it with a different proposition (i.e. “stand up a straw man”) and then refuting that argument (“knock down a straw man”) instead of the original proposition.

This technique has been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly in arguments about highly charged emotional issues where a fiery, entertaining “battle” and the defeat of an “enemy” may be more valued than critical thinking or understanding both sides of the issue.

Straw-man tactics were once known in some parts of the UK as an Aunt Sally, after a pub game of the same name where patrons threw sticks or battens at a post to knock off a skittle balanced on top.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

More here: http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/think/strawman.htm

Kaye LeeOctober 17, 2016 at 6:39 am

One Nation’s Immigration policy from 1998

“It is now critical to develop a population policy for Australia in order to decide immigration numbers rationally and in the best interest of Australians. The immigration policies of the major political parties during the 1980s and 1990s have proven disastrous, proceeding as if there was no balance of payments problem, no foreign debt and no geographical or environmental constraints to population growth. If continued, such immigration policy will irreversibly alter the natural and urban environments, economic viability as well and undermining the maintenance and further development of a unique and valuable Australian identity and culture.”

One Nation Immigration, Population And Social Cohesion Policy

One Nation’s Immigration policy from 2016

“It is now critical to develop a population policy for Australia in order to decide immigration numbers rationally and in the best interest of Australians. The immigration policies of the major political parties to this day have proven disastrous, proceeding as if there were no balance of payments problem, no foreign debt and no geographical or environmental constraints to population growth. If continued, such an immigration policy will irreversibly alter the natural and urban environment, economic viability as well as undermining the maintenance and further development of a unique and valuable Australian identity and culture.”

http://www.onenation.com.au/policies/immigration

Nothing ever changes for Pauline except which group she wants to blame.

Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 7:59 am

Jexpat, Thank you for explaining strawman to everyone, when most people will fully understand what it is, considering most readers of this site would actively engage in debate.

I am going to put this very plainly and I am only going to say it once and I am not going to enter into a debate on what anyone thinks my intent was in raising this point.

I raised this because very simply: If there is an entire other group out there voting for Hanson, because they believe her policies will somehow help the environment, it is very important to understand this group.

The reason: Because anyone interested in environmentalism – particularly politicians; should be having conversations with these people and explaining why voting for Hanson is not the way to go. Voting for Hanson is not the way to protect fragile eco systems. There has to be other solutions that environmentally concerned people, already advocate for, other than cutting immigration.

This adds an entirely different element to Hanson appealing to people who are xenophobic or racist or Islamophobic. These people are not in these groups.

If you don’t think it is a valid point of discussion. Fine. Don’t engage in it.

If you think it is interesting that there may be an entire group out there pushing the Hanson agenda, other than the ‘go back where you came from Aussie, Aussie, Aussie, oi oi oi” crowd, then please discuss.

I don’t move in environmental circles. I raised this purely because I am interested to find out if people have heard about Hanson’s appeal to this group of ‘sustainability advocates’ and if this is something anyone who doesn’t want Hanson in power should be concerned about.

Kaye LeeOctober 17, 2016 at 8:36 am

I find it hard to understand how any environmentalist could support a party who doesn’t believe in climate change. And for those who are interested in sustainability, why would they support a party whose irrational opposition to Agenda 21, which is about pathways to sustainable development, borders on hysterical.

Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 8:53 am

This party is the party he said he normally votes for: http://www.votesustainable.org.au/ but he would give Hanson his vote if it meant cutting immigration.

He also told me that water would be scarce by 2050 and food security was an issue.

He said “As distasteful as some of (ON) policies are. They are the only hope. Both major parties want a big Australia.”

This means he is prepared to accept everything that comes with ON – to curb immigration. That is my concern.

It has knocked me for a six. I hope the two who responded to me, are an isolated case and not the norm.

Arthur TarryOctober 17, 2016 at 9:29 am

I haven’t read the comments on this essay so maybe my thougfhts have already been mentioned. I find it strange that Trish’s essay barely mentioned Pauline Hanson, and what she stands for. ON would not exist, at least in its present form, without her leadership. I live in Qld and am surrounded by ON supporters. Overwhelmingly they admire her for her ability to ‘cut through the crap’, dismiss so-called political correctness, and expose the truth of what it really going on. Whether it’s indigenous issues, immigration of Asians and Moslems, union malevolence, climate change, ‘greenies’ or many of the other bizarre ‘policies’ (eg: Halal certification). And you don’t have to wait long for the incipient racism to emerge from these people, and it is definitely racism. Nor do you have to wait long before you hear about conspiracy theories and how, in due course, we will undoubtedly be living under Sharia law, etc. You can be rapidly abused as a ‘softy’ or’ lefty’, or worse, if you try to make contary point. ON attracts folk who seem to be authoritarian, reactionary, intolerant, fixed in views, those that respond to dog whistling about ethnic and race issues, and who rely on perception rather than a real understanding. Pauline Hanson is the nucleus around which these folk cluster – it is her leadership that gives voice to their prejudices, anger and aggravation. She expresses and personifies the physce of a significant number of Austraians.

HarquebusOctober 17, 2016 at 9:35 am

I am very interested in what politicians do with our environment. It is what keeps us alive.
There is no such thing as sustainable development.
We are overpopulated already and that will become apparent as resources continue to deplete. Zero immigration and population reduction is what is required.

Trish.
No politics on a dead planet. Your work, although pretty good in its own right, is still a waste of yours and everyone elses time. The utopian future that you long for is not going to happen. Physics trumps political and economic ideology every time.

“It’s coming home to roost over the next 50 years or so. It’s not just climate change; it’s sheer space, places to grow food for this enormous horde. Either we limit our population growth or the natural world will do it for us, and the natural world is doing it for us right now.” — David Attenborough

“Using his burgeoning intelligence, this most successful of all mammals has exploited the environment to produce food for an ever increasing population. Instead of controlling the environment for the benefit of the population, perhaps it’s time we controlled the population to allow the survival of the environment.” — David Attenborough

“Democracy Cannot Survive Overpopulation.” — Prof. Albert Bartlett.

“If we don’t halt population growth with justice and compassion, it will be done for us by nature, brutally and without pity – and will leave a ravaged world.” — Dr. Henry W. Kendall

“There is no need to decide whether to stop the population increase or not. There is no need to decide whether the population will be lowered or not. It will, it will! The only thing mankind has to decide is whether to let population decline be done in the old inhumane method that nature has always used, or to invent a new humane method of our own.” — Isaac Asimov, 1974.

“Famine seems to be the last, the most dreadful resource of nature. The power of population is so superior to the power in the Earth to produce subsistence for man, that premature death must in some shape or other visit the human race. The vices of mankind are active and able ministers of depopulation. They are the precursors in the great army of destruction; and often finish the dreadful work themselves. But should they fail in this war of extermination, sickly seasons, epidemics, pestilence, and plague, advance in terrific array, and sweep off their thousands and ten thousands. Should success be still incomplete, gigantic inevitable famine stalks in the rear, and with one mighty blow levels the population with the food of the world.” — Malthus T.R. 1798. An Essay on the Principle of Population.

“an increase in the water temperature of the world’s oceans of around six degrees Celsius—which some scientists predict could occur as soon as 2100—could stop oxygen production by phytoplankton by disrupting the process of photosynthesis.”
http://phys.org/news/2015-12-global-disaster-suffocate-life-planet.html

“oxygen-deprived oceans may have “significant impacts on marine ecosystems” and leave some areas of ocean all but uninhabitable for certain species.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/climate-change-oxygen-loss-oceans_us_57226e80e4b0f309baf0499e?section=australia

“Warming seas absorb less oxygen at the surface.”
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/emerging-threat-from-climate-change-ocean-oxygen-levels-are-starting-to-drop-20160427-gogqd3.html

“Industrial civilization will destroy the ability of the planet to harbor life. Whether we look at climate change, topsoil loss, biodiversity loss, mass extinction, oceanic acidification and oxygen depletion, toxification of landbases, etc. we see an accelerating trend by which human industrial civilization is rendering the planet inhospitable to life”
“we need to remake the world in a way that doesn’t base itself on ecocide”
https://prayforcalamity.com/2016/05/02/checkmate/

“Within the past several years scientists have found that oxygen (O2) in the atmosphere has been dropping”

Plankton Will Stop Making Oxygen By End Of Century

“Ocean deoxygenation is the 3rd but less-reported member of an evil climate change trinity, along with global warming and ocean acidification.”
https://lokisrevengeblog.wordpress.com/2016/09/09/earth-oxygen-emergency-conference/

An economist was on ABC News24 this morning saying that China’s GDP has doubled in last 10 years and he thought that this was a good thing. This is the mindset that is killing us.

Have a nice day.

FreethinkerOctober 17, 2016 at 10:15 am

Trish said, quote: “This is a highly motivated party, with a very well organised strategy to gain votes, more power and more money, based on creating fear about other human beings.”

I will disagree on that they are not based in creating fear, they are exploiting the selfishness of the people, the “look after number one” the greed and the “bugger you Jack I am Ok”
They bring policies that they know that it what people like to hear and the result it is in the last polls
Pauline Hanson’s One Nation triples support since election: Newspoll

That it is the reality, the other is a dream that we the minority are think that it is the reality.

trishcorryOctober 17, 2016 at 10:31 am

HI Arthur. Thank you for your comment. This is a series of articles. I will be approaching them from a broad perspective of ON and my opinion of how I see voters engage with ON and their appeal to voters. Hanson’s leadership in that from the perspective of this series is implicit, rather than writing from that as Hanson as the explicit particular driver.

My series is not an analysis of Pauline Hanson’s leadership; although I agree her leadership is a huge factor. Many others are already writing issues discussing Hanson, her leadership, who she is etc., At this time, it isn’t an area that interests me, as the topic is simply too saturated.

Through my writing, I am hoping to bring another element to the table.

Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 10:39 am

H – thank you for all that information.

As someone who appears to see sustainability and zero immigration and population reduction as key areas of interest – Does Pauline Hanson appeal to you and people such as yourself?

What I am trying to understand, does voting for controlling population growth trump everything else, regardless of what other harmful policies or rhetoric ON brings?

Please answer honestly. I think it is very important to understand this, without prejudice or judgement.

guestOctober 17, 2016 at 11:11 am

Population has dropped out of conversations in recent times. Once upon a time we talked about Malthus, but his predictions did not eventuate. Nor did Paul Ehrlich’s in “The Population Bomb” (1968).

Today it is talked about in different ways. In Germany Angela Merkel spoke about taking in one million refugees because Germany has an ageing problem and the economy needs a boost in population. Japan has an ageing problem. Oz has an ageing problem. We wonder how we can sustain our consumer society if the number of workers is in decline.

I do not see how Hanson hopes to save the forests in order to reduce populations. Large populations can exist in small spaces. The economics of population is not what Hanson is on about. Nor is food security.

Hanson is on about stopping other people from having what I/we do not have. It is about blaming someone else for my/our failures. About keeping safe what has been traditionally mine/ours. No change, thank you. I/we are conservatives. Orstralians. No room for outsiders.

A program on SBS which spoke to Hanson supporters revealed that their reasons for supporting her were all about their own personal needs or fears. Need a job. Fear of Islamist violence. Fear of the other. Fear of the unknown.

Not much about a wider national interest. Or have I missed the point? We are heading for 9bn.

FreethinkerOctober 17, 2016 at 11:12 am

Trish several questions asked in The Essential Report polls show what are important topics and views of the participants and this reflect in the popularity of some politicians with extreme right views.
It is not about Pauline leadership of party for that matter that concern me it is the view of the electorate.

JaquixOctober 17, 2016 at 11:31 am

I came to Australia in 1965, when the White Australia policy was still in force. It was the dying days of hearing about “The Yellow Peril” and the “Domino Effect”. At that time the anti-immigration debate was directed at the most recent arrivals (of course) who were Italians and Greeks. Anyone remember the book and film “They’re a Weird Mob” ? Later it was Lebanese. So I have seen many waves of immigration, including from Vietnam. (Everyone moaning because PM Fraser (I think) gave them $7,000 to get themselves on their feet. And heard all the same rhetoric about them. The population in 1965 was only about 10 million, we could not conceive how Australia could have 24 million to house and feed, and yet we have. (there was bleating then about “sustainability” though they didnt use the word) (Housing is skewed by several factors including neg gearing and non-residents buying under cover of residents). Hanson & Co. forget (or more precisely wilfully ignore) the fact that Australia was a far more boring country back then. When out with friends, I often note how one third of them are usually born in Australia, and two thirds are not. So if all of us “went back to where we came from”, the restaurants, schools, shops, businesses and facilities would only have one third the customers, and quickly close down. Australia would be thrown into a Great Recession and life would not be as we know it now. I also support Australia Day becoming in effect Multicultural Australia Day, so we can celebrate the variety the immigrants bring with them

HarquebusOctober 17, 2016 at 11:32 am

Trish.
I disagree with most of One Nations policies but, if they advocated population reduction then, yes. I would vote for them. Population reduction is the only viable solution and trumps everything else.
If the Labor Party wants my vote then, you know what they have to do.
Cheers.

helvityniOctober 17, 2016 at 11:32 am

“A program on SBS which spoke to Hanson supporters revealed that their reasons for supporting her were all about their own personal needs or fears. Need a job. Fear of Islamist violence. Fear of the other. Fear of the unknown.”

guest, deep down they know that Hanson can’t do anything for them, but maybe it’s their cry to be listened to, they want someone, anyone, to hear them and help them, because our present government certainly will not…there will be even more jobless and homeless in the future.

The jobs and growth have not eventuated, the time and effort goes into battles about who will be the leader, Tones or Mal.

Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 11:46 am

Jaquix. I visited Sydney for the first time a few weeks ago. It blew me away. Such a fast paced and vibrant city with so many choices for dining in just the few days I was there. It gave me an entire different perspective, similar to what you said, as to what we would lose. I’ve always thought this, but seeing it for myself really had an impact.

The service in Sydney was absolutely impeccable. Faultless. The quality of the food – beyond anything I know in my own town, even just for a cafe.

The only thing I didn’t like was so much traffic and the speeds at which they travelled!

I thought it would just be like a bigger version of Brisbane. Far from it.

I would 100% support bringing such diversity to regional Australia.

Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 11:47 am

Thanks H. That has given me the motivation to research this much deeper.

JaquixOctober 17, 2016 at 11:58 am

Trish “Sydney Today” completely disproves all of the Hanson claims about immigration swamping us. Going back even further – I believe that in 1945, at the end of World War II, there were only 29 restaurants! I can believe that. Because in 1965 they were just getting into the swing of things with 20 years’ worth of post-war prosperity. And immigration! The Gold Coast is another place built on immigration, though much of it from within Australia. And the restaurants and facilities are improving and increasing all the time, to the betterment of the place. With regard to the “Insight” program on SBS, where the audience were those who voted for One Nation, I was struck by the fact that the majority had been Liberal voters. And clearly they did feel fear. I think the conservative mind-set is based on fear really, fear of this and that. I do think the jobs issue – lack thereof – is driving a lot of this fear. One Nation is not going to improve the job situation, but its enjoying a wave of fear-driven popularity among too many (in my humble opinion!)

HarquebusOctober 17, 2016 at 12:10 pm

Trish

For you.

http://www.votesustainable.org.au/

Home

Cheers.

HarquebusOctober 17, 2016 at 12:44 pm

Trish
You might find some more material in DTM’s links that I have posted here.

https://theaimn.com/day-day-politics-speaking-words-matter/#comment-497830

helvityniOctober 17, 2016 at 1:02 pm

Jaquix , those ex-Liberal voters, now Hansonites, maybe also wanted tell The Big Daddy Liberal that we’ll leave you, if you don’t look after us and create more jobs as you promised, some of them joined Xenophon, some ON.

Now of course Big Daddy is busy courting them back…

HarquebusOctober 17, 2016 at 1:45 pm

Trish
Look what just popped up in my reading list.

“The development in question is the end of global economic growth, which will lead inexorably to the end of centralization (including globalization). It will also mean the end of the existence of most, and especially the most powerful, international institutions.
“In the same way it will be the end of -almost- all traditional political parties, which have ruled their countries for decades and are already today at or near record low support levels (if you’re not clear on what’s going on, look there, look at Europe!)
From Bill Clinton and Tony Blair onwards, the center-left embraced the project of a global free market with an enthusiasm as ardent as any on the right. If globalisation was at odds with social cohesion, society had to be re-engineered to become an adjunct of the market. The result was that large sections of the population were left to moulder in stagnation or poverty, some without any prospect of finding a productive place in society.”

‘End of Growth’ Sparks Wide Discontent

trishcorryOctober 17, 2016 at 1:51 pm

Labor really needs to go on a massive attack on jobs. However, sometimes even if they do go on an attack, people just don’t notice. A comment in a Facebook thread just said:

“I don’t believe Labor are being an effective opposition. Never were and still aren’t. Look at the disintergration of Medicare, happening before our eyes. It’s almost like they’re happy with the status quo.”

Labor hasn’t defended Medicare? I cannot for the life of me, see how this person has come to that conclusion.

It is this type of perception why people are flocking to the minor parties because they are ‘something different’ and the television gives them the spotlight. Like Sunrise has for Hanson.

Labor needs to think of better ways to really get their message across, as they are doing a lot. They are doing a lot to stand against the Liberals; but because they prevent things, no one feels the impacts of what should have been.

I’d say the same for the Greens opposing harmful measures.

and Jacqui Lambie to an extent.

They get no where near the coverage of Hanson – a minor party.

People are just going to see what they want to see. I’ve come to the conclusion that people really need to feel the pain, like Newman brought QLD to really ‘get it’ but then they quickly forget as well.

It is a huge problem.

Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 2:01 pm

H – I’m not so much interested in the intricacies of sustainability practices, or the opinions that these people have on the free market and globalisation.

I am more interested in what this group is prepared to accept as to supporting harmful policies outside of this space and give support to Hanson, because she supports curbing immigration. What price does the country and it’s citizens pay for this ‘democratic choice?’

I find it difficult to believe that there are no other solutions, other than cutting immigration and reducing population.

I understand the racists and the bigots. I understand the people who get reeled in to her generalisations, that are not inherently racist or bigoted. However, environmentalists, I am not understanding.

HarquebusOctober 17, 2016 at 2:20 pm

Trish
There is nothing wrong with “curbing immigration”. It is not racism but, is instead doing what is required.
How much more energy guzzling infrastructure do we need? There are just too many people for our environment to survive and how goes the environment, goes the human race.

“On August 8, 2016, we began to use more from nature than our planet can renew in the whole year.”
http://www.overshootday.org/

Have you seen this? I may have posted it for you before. I highly recommend it. It will explain the absurdity of pursuing growth. It goes for an hour but, the first half is the most important.

Dr Albert Bartlett R.I.P.: Arithmetic, Population and Energy

In my opinion, this presentation should be required viewing for all politicians and journalists.

Cheers.

Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 2:25 pm

Thx H – However, I will remain with this question.

I find it difficult to believe that there are no other solutions, other than cutting immigration and reducing population.

For example, the electorate I live in Capricornia is far from anywhere near being over populated.

I have very grave concerns that Hanson appeals to environmentalists and they would vote for this party.

HarquebusOctober 17, 2016 at 2:54 pm

Trish
No other solutions is difficult to come to terms with when our whole lives have been conditioned for infinite growth. Mathematically and physically impossible.
If you watch the presentation, your opinion about Capricornia’s population will change.

Here is the magic formula that Bartlett explains.

Doubling time = 70 / growth rate.

When you understand the effect doubling has on resources and the environment, your priorities will change.

Doubling of our population, at current growth rate, will mean 50 million people by around 2070 competing for scarce resources and if it doubles again, it will 100 million sometime early next century. This won’t happen. We don’t have the resources to sustain our current population for more than a decade or two at most.

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/3101.0

If we do nothing and continue growth at all costs, nature will reduce our numbers for us in her usual brutal and unforgiving way.

Cheers.

robOctober 17, 2016 at 3:17 pm

Lets open our doors for everyone… black, white yellow etc. Trish. But who exactly is going to support all these “New Australians” if they cannot find jobs, cannot afford housing, will you put your hand up to provide shelter and food at your own expense, I believe some refugees are now being housed in aged care centres, but I guess that appeals to you and to hell with anyone else that does not share your view. Lets sell all our farms, public assets etc.to other countries, lets allow multinational companies to come into our country and pay ZERO tax and if we don’t like that happening we are slapped with the racist card again. I don’t support One Nation but it infuriates me to see the media take things out of context, the Australians that voted for this party have concerns about certain issues, they should be respected not ridiculed, perhaps you might enlighten us to what party you affiliate yourself with. There is no easy solution to any of these problems but please ON is at least questioning whether we should continue on the same slippery slope as we are going… which is a little more than the major parties are doing. For those of you that have never bothered to look at One Nations policies, take a look below, not quite the same as the Nazi agenda that Trish would have you believe…..

1.To bring about the necessary changes for fair and equal treatment of all Australians, within a system of government recognising and acting upon a need for Australia to be truly one nation.

2.To protect our sovereignty and democracy.

3.To acknowledge and respect the Aboriginal and Torris Strait Islanders as the first peoples of this land. In the preamble to the Australian Constitution, One Nation opposes acknowledging Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders as One Nation believes that all Australians are owners and custodians of this land and should work toward unification, not segregation, under the one law for all.

4.One Nation supports Citizens Initiated Referenda, giving the people of Australia, a voice to oppose or call for laws to be implemented.

5.Our children are the future leaders of our nation. They must be given every opportunity to a decent affordable education. Our children must have priority to fill school and university enrolments before those of international students.

6.To actively pursue and promote treaties, investment and development as deemed appropriate and in the national interest and repeal those that are not in our best interests.

7.To honour and respect the men and women who have suffered and lost their lives in defence and protection of our country, and ensure that those who have given so much for their country and people, are cared for appropriately in time of need.

8.To ensure those convicted of crimes endure appropriate penalties. To seek treaties with other countries, for those who are non Australian citizens who have committed a criminal offence carrying a 2 years or longer prison sentence, be deported to their country, to do their jail term there.

9.To ensure law abiding Australians, with legitimate purpose, will always have access to firearms to undertake various activities including the defence of themselves and their families in their own homes.

10.To ensure our society remains benevolent and caring in its approach to our fellow citizens in genuine need.

11.To treat all Australians equally and justly and with government assistance based on need, not race.

12.To support and advocate traditional family values and uphold the institution of the family in its fight against the many who aim to breakdown this important unit of any decent society.

13.To re-vitalise and support our defence forces and personnel and ensure Australia builds and maintains and appropriate level of national security and defence.

14.To restrict immigration at times when necessary due to high unemployment, overloading on our infrastructure such as roads, water, sewerage, hospitals, schools and housing, except that related to investment, and is in Australia’s best interest.

15.To stop foreign ownership of Australia’s agriculture land and established housing. Oppose the sale of public assets without the consent of Australians and repeal United Nations treaties that are detrimental or of no benefit to Australia.

16.To restore tariff protection where appropriate, revitalise and encourage Australian industry and manufacturing and initiate financial support for small business and the rural sector, in particular in the interest of creating national wealth and employment.

17.To take positive action on matters such as taxation reform, education, health, unemployment, crime, the environment and the discrimination created by political correctness.

18.To re-establish a publicly-owned people’s bank like the Commonwealth Bank used to be, prior to it being privatised to create true competition, value and benefit Australians.

19.To abolish divisive and discriminatory policies, such as those related to Aboriginal and Multicultural Affairs.

20.To protect the environment from industry that will destroy prime agriculture land and water sources. We will oppose CSG mining until a full government impact study is done, as to the ramifications it has on our environment, land and water.

21.To stop the teaching and infiltration of Islam and its totalitarian ideology, that opposes our democracy, way of life and laws. To ban the Burqa in public places, government buildings and schools. To make genital mutilation of young girls a criminal offence, carrying heavy sentences. To stop islamists and their families from receiving welfare benefits; we are a Christian country, only one marriage is recognised. Ban the building of any more Mosques.

22.To oppose Sharia Law ever being allowed in Australia. We are a Christian country with one law for all.

23.To implement an Australian Identity Card to be used by Australians accessing taxpayer funded services such as health, education, welfare, pensions and services. For too long Australian taxpayers have been footing the bill for people who are not entitled or submit multiple claims under aliases. Also foreigners have been known to abuse our system, by using their Australian families details, when visiting the country.

24.To implement a food labelling system that is conducive as to the origin of the product, Australian made or foreign. Halal certification has no place in Australia when unsuspecting Australians are forced to fund Islamic Mosques and schools. One Nation would stop the practice of Halal Certification on all products, service, and machinery in Australia, other than for export.

25.One Nation will continue to stop illegal immigration by way of boat and air and support temporary protection visas. One Nation supports the refugee programme, but we must have a say in who comes in. We must be mindful of taking people that are Christian, and genuine refugees.

26.One Nation opposes increasing the Aged Pension age to 70 and the family home included in the assets test. As it is opposed to people on the land only being able to encompass the family home and 5 acres of land before the assets test is applied. Independent retirees who are not eligible for the aged pension must be rewarded by providing health care assistance.

27.One Nation opposes the privatisation of essential services such as water, gas, electricity, telecommunications and defence. This must and should remain in the hands of our governments and not foreign ownership and control. We oppose Agenda 21 and its push for ‘sustainable development’.

28.One Nation is committed to protecting the farming sector in time of drought, flood and foreign takeover. If we cannot feed ourselves we will starve. We cannot allow other countries to use our land to feed their own when we should be growing the food and exporting it.

29.One Nation will repeal or review the 1953 Double Taxation Agreement Act that provides for foreign investors not to pay tax in Australia. Foreign investors take out more in unpaid taxes than Australian companies operating in other countries, bring in.

30.Marriage between two people of the same sex is a social issue, and One Nation believes all Australians should have the right to vote in a referendum, rather than a vote on the floor of Parliament. If it is to be determined by Parliament then One Nation members of Parliament will be allowed a conscience vote. We also acknowledge that same sex couples living in defacto relationships should be afforded the same property rights as heterosexuals couples.

31.To secure the election to public office of members committed to the objectives of the party.

PS. Unfortunately for me Facebook has led me onto this link, enjoy your self righteous journalistic insipidities, I am joining the minority group who choose not to assimilate with your coterie, good day to you all.

Kaye LeeOctober 17, 2016 at 3:53 pm

reb,

” will you put your hand up to provide shelter and food at your own expense” What a simplistic and overused excuse for bigotry.

Every day we pay for the rich to get richer. We pay Gina Rinehart to explore for more of our minerals for her to extract and make profit from. We hand over our land to Twiggy Forrest and provide him with a cheap workforce. Every day we allow investors to not pay tax as they accumulate properties, forcing up prices and increasing their wealth at the expense of others. There are white Christian politicians who own over 40 properties. Malcolm Turnbull invests his money in offshore vulture/venture funds. Why you would blame refugees or immigrants for this is beyond me. Unemployment benefits represent 7% of welfare payments. It has been shown that immigrants outperform Australians in entrepreneurial skills. All they want is a safe home. They have added greatly to our wealth.

Anyone who is scared that Sharia law is going to take over this country has seriously lost the plot. I am much more concerned about the insidious and real influence of Christianity on our politics.

Kaye LeeOctober 17, 2016 at 4:10 pm

And could I add, I have read One Nation’s policies and they are the most ignorant, xenophobic bunch of rubbish I have ever read in my life. This for example…..

“Australians have the right to a cohesive society and deny immigration to anyone who does not abide by our law, culture, democracy, flag or Christian way of life. We don’t want or need migrants bringing their problems, laws, culture and opposing religious beliefs on us.

Many Australians feel that politicians have not listened to their concerns regarding Islamic extremism and the teachings of Islam and this has given rise to parties such as One Nation and also to groups such as Reclaim Australia and Party for Freedom who do speak up.

One Nation does not condone violence of any kind, political-Islam must be attended to via legislation. However if these concerns are not addressed, we believe that there may come a time where there is civil unrest on our streets.”

How dare they insist that I follow their religion and honour some stupid piece of cloth. Make no mistake, Hanson and her followers represent a far greater danger to our society than any migrant. Hanson herself got pregnant to a refugee at age 16 and married him, having two children before she got divorced at age 20. What a hypocrite she is.

Michael TaylorOctober 17, 2016 at 6:45 pm

I read somewhere that One Nation lifted a whole heap of their policies off Wikipedia.

JaquixOctober 17, 2016 at 6:49 pm

I think a lot of it was lifted from the John Birch Society website.

Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 6:52 pm

I’ve been reading them to research for this series Michael; and they are xenophobic, Nationalistic, anti-Islamic, contradictory and very poorly informed. Policy analysis is on the agenda for the series.

Matters NotOctober 17, 2016 at 8:20 pm

If you voted for the One Nation Party, chances are you see yourself as a Patriot.

That I very much doubt. Most One Nation supporters seem to describe themselves as real ‘Austrayans’ not ‘patriots’. While it’s perfectly valid (and very useful) to use the ‘patriot’ concept to describe the ‘beliefs’ of a large majority of One Nation supporters, I am yet to read of significant numbers who claim to be ‘patriots’. Perhaps I wrong and you have a link?

Certainly, there would be vast numbers of American citizens who would readily embrace that descriptor – and I’ve met the odd one or two – Australians are more ‘down market’ when it comes to such proclamations. This article highlights some.

Australia has always preferred a quiet sensibility about demonstrating our love of the country, mostly by just living here and not making a big deal about it. .. People in the US tend to be a bit showier, plastering every corner of their egregiously large Ford F-350s with American flag stickers and singing the national anthem any time more than 10 people gather in a public place.

Patriotism is implicit here, we know we love the country because we all live here and it’s self-evidently bloody great (obviously not without its huge problems, but f*ck mate, have you seen our beaches?). And if you don’t like it? Awesome: dissent, work to change it. We’re getting better every day because it’s okay to say you’re unsatisfied with our shithouse politicians and the minority of racists working to ruin this place.

Do your patriotic duty: call the prime minister a dickhead.

http://www.sbs.com.au/comedy/article/2016/08/31/key-differences-between-american-and-australian-patriotism

Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 8:42 pm

Do you even Facebook Matters Not? Hanson worshipping Patriots, Patriots everywhere……

Matters NotOctober 17, 2016 at 8:54 pm

No Trish I don’t have Facebook, perhaps you could give me a quote or two?

Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 8:57 pm

Just put it this way Matters Not. There are not just quotes, but whole entire groups and movements stating they are Patriots and they worship Hanson. There is one political group called United Patriots Front etc., In general terms when people discuss Hanson related topics, they state they are Patriots – True Blue Aussies. etc., However, I have an idea for a blog to do a qual analysis of facebook comments in this series, so maybe you will see then, what you don’t see on Facebook, in everyday discussions.

Matters NotOctober 17, 2016 at 9:01 pm

So Hanson has gone to a foreign nation for her conceptual framework?

How unAustralian!

While the US had The Patriot Act and in Australia we replicated the ‘essence’ of same, I don’t recall the use of ‘patriot’ in the legislation.

Hanson is a real radical.

Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 9:16 pm

Well, not necessarily. She just isnt’ correcting people. In fact her policies clearly state that ‘One Nation will abolish multiculturalism and the Racial Discrimination Act and promote assimilation, nationalism, loyalty and pride in being an Australian. ”

So the very meaning of Nationalism that Australia is the more superior race/culture and everyone needs to conform to what is defined as the ‘ideal’ is Nationalism.

She just doesn’t correct her followers. She allows them to believe they are patriots.

JexpatOctober 17, 2016 at 9:32 pm

Trish wrote: ” I have an idea for a blog to do a qual analysis of facebook comments…”

A good place to start such an endeavour would be a lit survey/review of the relevent academic journals (there are many), paying particular attention to differences that have likely been identified between facebook users and non-facebook users. And among categories of facebook users.

I think what you’ll find at the outset is high degree of siloing and group think among certain categories of facebook users, along with an outsized repition of the more vocal -and also over representation of views held by those who become “opinion leaders” simply by being vocal and vehement, -or “liked” for whatever reason.

The next question would in term of qualitative analsis would be: do the terms used on the shallow facebook level, really have the same referents in the larger population of facebook users- or, more importantly in the general populaton of supporters and potential supporters?

Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 9:45 pm

Thank you Jexpat. I’m very pleased you have suggested I take an academic approach.

I shall keep this as one of my favourite comments of all time.

JexpatOctober 17, 2016 at 10:17 pm

All in day’s work, Trish. 🙂

While we’re on the topic, may I also suggest a 2009 book by Tim Soutphommasane. Reclaiming Patriotism: Nation-Building for Australian Progressives.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reclaiming_Patriotism

paulwalterOctober 18, 2016 at 12:10 am

Trish Corry is not interested in what happened in the nineties, thus denies the notion of context as to what drives voters away from the big parties.

Later she invokes the need for Labor to pull its finger out as to job creation, but this seems at odds with this:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/oct/17/unions-at-odds-with-labor-over-trans-pacific-partnerships-negligible-benefits#comments

Trish CorryOctober 18, 2016 at 12:59 am

Paul. History has shown, I do not have the tact or diplomacy of John Lord, when dealing with irritant pests.

It is not my fault that you have some type of deep seated trouble coming to terms with the fact that there are environmentalists who support Hanson. This does not mean you, if you do not Paul. I will give you a hashtag to make you feel better #NotAllEnvironmentalists.

You don’t need to counteract that point I raised about sustainable environmentalists, with incessant goings on about Labor, when Labor has nothing to do with this post, nor anything to do with anything raised in the commentary. Neither of the two are related.

If your point is to rile me, go get your jollies elsewhere.

Nor do I have the tact and diplomacy to respond to your personal opinions of the assumptions of me as the writer, situated as false attribution and completely out of context

……so I won’t say what I was going to say.

paulwalterOctober 18, 2016 at 1:41 am

I explained very, very clearly where Labor fits in and cited specific examples, re forestry and now FTA’s.

I have explained why some people have departed to either the Right or the Green Left out of frustration with bad faith, pro-developer Labor politicians and polices, let alone severe IPA neoliberalism of the Coalition sort on display on QA, when Labor is supposed to defend the ordinary people and our common wealth.

What begins to rile me is your incapacity to grasp simple, linking, propositions.

I observe you offered nothing in response to the Guardian article, so you are again deflecting via adhominem insinuations.

Trish CorryOctober 18, 2016 at 1:47 am

Yes, goodnight Paul. This article is about One Nation. Go get your Labor hating jollies elsewhere. I’m not playing your game.

paulwalterOctober 18, 2016 at 2:29 am

Ahhh now I see. You have unfriended me elsewhere.

How petty.

Trish CorryOctober 18, 2016 at 2:30 am

No sensible. Goodnight again

Return to home page

Login here Register here

JaquixOctober 16, 2016 at 8:50 am

Top marks Trish. The prime example of this scapegoating of one section of the population as causing all its woes, is that of the Jews by Hitler. The conditions were similar, the people were afraid, angry and financially disadvantaged. Hitler whipped up hysteria that the Jews were at fault, and the people fell for it, in droves. By the time they woke up it was too late, they had given him unfettered power and he ran with it. The most chilling thing is that he was elected democratically. Pauline & Co now worming their way in, clearly aided and abetted by a weak Liberal government. The old saying applies: The price of democracy is eternal vigilance.
Ricardo29October 16, 2016 at 9:23 am

Good piece Trish, articulate and well argued. Should be printed as a pamphlet and distributed to everyone who voted ON.
ozibodyOctober 16, 2016 at 10:10 am

The Howard Government virtually welcomed One nation because he thought they would take votes away from Labor. They were encouraged to run free, and only when it became obvious Hanson was not fulfilling this prophesy – only then did the N L P put the dampeners on One Nation.

The jail term was meant to totally destroy Hanson’s ambitions! The N L P have now virtually created perfect circumstances to encourage Hansonism and just by the way, her ( now increased ) vote could be quite ‘handy’ for their cause!

Perhaps, when the current Government is shown the ‘Exit’ , One Nation can be packaged with them!
Terry2October 16, 2016 at 10:34 am

On their own, One Nation are not much more than an irritant. But when they are embraced by one of the major parties they become a threat and at the moment the coalition are cuddling up to Pauline to get their union bashing policies through. The coalition’s CFA volunteer firefighters changes to federal legislation has been backed by One Nation in the Senate and there is a high probability that One Nation will assist the coalition in getting the ABCC legislation through.

Had Labor made such an agreement with the Greens, for instance, to get legislation through there would be a howl from the mainstream media but when the coalition embraces One Nation as an ally, not a murmur.

As I’ve said elsewhere, One Nation are not supporting the coalition without conditions attached : deals have been done and the coalition will have to make concessions in return. We should be worried about that.

Seeing Tony Abbott sitting down with Pauline in that very orchestrated meeting of minds was a very uncomfortable moment for me.
brickbobOctober 16, 2016 at 10:53 am

Yes you could show this very well written and logical truthful article to ON supporters, but they would react just like Trump supporters do to criticsism,with hatred and vitriol and threats of violence,and Trump was right when he said he could fire a gun down the main street of NY and kill someone and they would still vote for him,and Hanson could start up another fish and chip shop and lace the product with posion when serving Aboriginals and Muslims and her vote would go up,so i dont know what the answer is apart from a massive education and advetising blitz to hopefully change peoples attitudes.

Education about our first peoples and other minorities should start from day one at primary school,and if you can educate the children early then within one or two generations this awful backward thinking about people who dont look the same as us or have a different skin colour or religion will be eradicated,and as the song says,i may be a dreamer but Im not the only one.
Kaye LeeOctober 16, 2016 at 11:33 am

One Nation will find a minor irritation and pick at it until it becomes a festering sore, never once thinking about the causes of the itch or how to treat it.

If the masses had shared in the uninterrupted growth of the last 25 years, there would be less unrest, but instead, the rich have got richer and it suits them to distract the masses with some other scapegoat so they don’t notice they are being exploited. That is why the unions have to go too…can’t have them demanding a fair share for the people whose labour makes the fat cats fatter.

One Nation may be a symptom of disease but they certainly aren’t a cure.
BeeTee-EssOctober 16, 2016 at 12:31 pm

Well done Trish.

Impressive, straightforward, detailed.
JexpatOctober 16, 2016 at 2:03 pm

Terry2 wrote: “One Nation are not supporting the coalition without conditions attached…

If one of those conditions is: no more corporate racketeer and extortion arrangements masquerading as “trade deals,” that would indeed be a silver lining, since the evidence and rhetoric shows that we can’t trust Labor on these matters.
wamOctober 16, 2016 at 2:34 pm

i was confused and, until there was no paragraph on sexism, I thought you were talking about religion.
brick
Education about Aborigines and minorities does start in primary school and very quickly, if not in class, then in the playground, they are taught their place by the majority.
Steve Laing - makeourvoiceheard.comOctober 16, 2016 at 2:57 pm

One Nation are exactly that Kaye, a symptom. They offer no realistic solutions, and no understanding of the potential effect of their “policies”. The unfolding Brexit disaster is the perfect example of what happens when populism is allowed to over-run sense. The fact that Brexit had its roots in a Crosby-Textor political strategy to get the Tories back into power is of no great surprise. The fact that One Nation have returned in number is the same Crosby-Textor advice to Tony to ramp up the anti-Muslim sentiment in order to gain votes. Once the Pandora’s box of “rational racism” is opened, getting it back under control becomes much more difficult.

Just as we cannot unmake nuclear weapons, we cannot unmake the highly connected world in which we now live. Countries trade with other countries, people move, live and work in other nations. This is the modern world. To believe that building walls (real, and proverbial) is a valid strategy is truly imbecilic. China built a wall to protect itself from external influence, and went from being the most advanced civilisation of its time, to one of the least, over a few hundred years.

However I don’t believe that you will persuade One Nation supporters to change their mind through logic, or by appealing to their values. I know people who support them, and they are rigid in their beliefs. The only way that you might get them to change their mind is to exhibit that a multicultural society is a much more pleasant one, than that of 50s White Australia, and to regularly ask them to come and join the fun.

The question is, how can we do that? The biggest mistake that people (particularly politicians) seem to make, is that a vibrant multicultural society will just happen. It won’t. Despite a significant proportion of people who live in France coming from their African colonies, their has been no real attempt to assimilate them into French society. Instead they are completely marginalised. It is no surprise to me that France has seen the worst of the European ISIS attacks, given how they ghettoise their immigrants. The UK too, only encouraged migration from its colonies because Brits were refusing to do jobs they considered beneath them. This led to the same type of enclaves, whether Brixton, Bradford or Luton, where one migrant culture predominates. This isn’t multiculturalism.

The fact is, with their already established networks, born and bred most Australian’s have no need to welcome newcomers. I totally get that. As a migrant myself, I have no bitterness that natives didn’t welcome me with open arms. And this is a pity, because for multiculturalism to work, it is really those incumbents that need to make the greater effort, not the newcomers. You don’t invite people to your party, and then proceed to ignore them, yet this is essentially what we do. But we seem to expect the incomers to integrate! To pick up “our ways”! And then castigate them when they revert back to the customs of the countries that they came from, and socialise with those of a culture that is familiar. Is there any surprise that this takes place?

So what to do? I personally think the key is simplicity. Next time you go for a walk, or visit the supermarket, make the effort to engage a stranger in conversation. Make a connection. Sure, some people might think you are a bit of a nutter, but so what. Its not like you’ll probably ever see them again. But I used to remember delivering papers on a cold Edinburgh morning in the dark, and it was the “morning” from strangers walking their dogs, or coming home from night shift, that would add just that little bit of warmth to a freezing day.

I’d also like Australia Day, if we are so intent on celebrating it (and personally I think it needs to be change to a day less charged to the indigenous community), then it needs to be a celebration of multiculturalism, because that is what Australia is. A place where we can be proud of where we came from, but also celebrate where we have come to. Being Australian really shouldn’t have to mean denying your heritage, and replacing it with one that actually never really existed in the first place.
Dale MarshallOctober 16, 2016 at 5:10 pm

What would you know? You’re just yet another over-opinionated journalist trying to make a $ by erring on the side of caution,blinding those that still fail to see the truth without showing any care for our future generations safety. Journalism sure does have a lot to answer for in our beloved country,and you ask for a donation??…for what?? Wake up..it has nothing to do with racism..its about retaining our once safe,carefree,happy multi-ethnic nation!!
trishcorryOctober 16, 2016 at 5:28 pm

Thank you for your comment Dale. I am pleased a Hanson supporter has commented.

Could you please shed some light on the need to target and say hateful things about certain groups in society (Aboriginals, Asians and Muslims and those on Welfare) are the way forward to ‘retaining our once safe, carefree, happy, multi-ethnic nation?”

This appears to be the disagreement between those who support Hanson, such as yourself, who see this as the way forward and those who don’t.
Dale MarshallOctober 16, 2016 at 5:46 pm

Welcome Trish,thank you for the opportunity to voice my opinion. Aboriginals? Oh dear..you obviously are confused by the racecard. Since when does Pauline and One Nation have anything against our Indigenous? You are being fooled by those that choose to use the racecard in their defense of who they are and what they’re truly about.
Asians? Yes,Unfortunately I have to give you that one as Pauline was way before her time,imo,on that issue,albeit that foreign ownership is still a huge problem.
So in all,I can assure you,if there was ever anything racist about being a ON supporter,I would never ever support such vile dialect.
Tell me please..What race is Islam? It is the totalitarian ideology that is opposed,not the creed of person so that issue is actually null and void,only serving to destroy our society.
Michael TaylorOctober 16, 2016 at 5:51 pm

I don’t remember Trish saying that Islam is a race. She said “certain groups in society”.
Trish CorryOctober 16, 2016 at 6:10 pm

Dale, I’ll try to keep it as short as possible, but you have posed a few questions.

I am not sure if you were around in the 1990’s; but Pauline Hanson’s original tirade was targeted at Indigenous Australians and Asians. The biggest arguments in society were ‘Do Aboriginals get more than white Australians’ and “Blacks are racist against whites.” Hanson’s arguments were about reverse racism.

It was the conversation of many dinner tables, at bus stops and supermarket checkouts.

The reason she was dis-endorsed from the LNP was because her remarks about Indigenous Australians were so derogatory and offensive; even the conservatives found it offensive.

The evidence of derogatory remarks about Indigenous people are readily available if you google using relevant search terms.

Because our country has evolved since then to one of mostly respect for Indigenous Australians, she has backed away from these attacks, as she knows politically it is not longer ‘trendy’.

On Asians – I’m not sure what you mean that she was ‘way before her time.” Are you saying that it is quite appropriate for Pauline Hanson to separate out one entire group based on their race and misappropriate claims about them? So people fear them? Because large multinational companies are purchasing land and businesses (the fault of the Government rules) that it is fine to target Asian people because of this and vilify them in the community? I’m not sure how you separate the human affect, to the Government allowing foreign multinationals to purchase land and businesses and houses. Should you not be angry at the Government and not the people of the same race? Why would you support a politician who attacks the human and not the Government rules?

Do you see any parallel to what she said in the 90’s (Taking one group, targeting them, and setting them as different to society in a negative way – as a way to ‘multicultural harmony?) as to what she is doing now? Exactly the same thing. Targeting the human to create fear and divisiveness?

The idea that Islamophobia is a racist term, is supported by anthropological theory due to the view of the external and the ‘stereotyping and stigmatising’ based on the view of the external. However, that is an analysis for another day.

When you close your eyes and picture a Muslim, do you see a blond haired, blue eyed, white person? I don’t believe you do. The fact that Hindu’s get attacked on busses is a testament to the fact that this group is attacked based on racial identifiers such as skin colour, appearance and dress.

However, regardless of racism, Hitler targeted people based on their eye colour. His master race was blond haired and blue eyed. Grouping by an identifier, such as clothing, hair, appearance, has the same central offensive stigmatising affects as targeting someone by race. Do you agree? This should not be an excuse for your support of Hanson targeting peaceful people living in our communities.

What evidence is there that the 2% of the population who live as Muslims in Australia are totalitarian by nature and causing harm to our society?

Is this targeting and vilifying a group, based on a falsehood? Agree or disagree?

Does this targeting of a group of people create harmony? Agree or disagree?

Would you happily put your hand up to be treated the same as the groups Pauline Hanson targets? Yes or No?
Dale MarshallOctober 16, 2016 at 6:11 pm

Come,come Michael,to imply that ON has a problem with Aboriginals,Asians and Muslims doesn’t infer to you that Trish is calling ON racist?
Michael TaylorOctober 16, 2016 at 6:19 pm

Here’s a few things Pauline has said about Aborigines:

https://www.buzzfeed.com/allanclarke/pauline-hanson-and-indigenous-australia?utm_term=.txdXG0JbL#.ga618NlX2

(I don’t think she likes them).
Steve Laing - makeourvoiceheard.comOctober 16, 2016 at 6:19 pm

Dale – to claim that Pauline hasn’t said a few less than savoury things about aboriginal people is a fairly large stretch. Try this article for starters.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/allanclarke/pauline-hanson-and-indigenous-australia

Can I also ask. Do you know anyone who is Muslim? What is it about people of this faith that worries you? Are you worried that Australian culture is so weak that a 2.2% minority may be able to take it over?
Dale MarshallOctober 16, 2016 at 6:22 pm

Sorry Trish,you’ve misunderstood me,it was never my intention to either expect you to agree or understand with continuing dialect. I am well adjusted to how left-leaning journalism and supporters think. It is absolutely tragic,in my mind,that you show no care either for Australian culture,nation or wellbeing,condoning such divisive direction for the future.All I can add is,I hope you can hold your head up to the future generations that I dare say,would’ve remained a lot safer being a Christian sovereignty based nation. I will not waste my time or yours any further,as I say I was only here to offer my opinion which is obviously in stark contrast to yours which you don’t suffer well. Take care
Steve Laing - makeourvoiceheard.comOctober 16, 2016 at 6:27 pm

Oh brave Sir Robin! Off you go then. Don’t let the door hit you on your way out.

But there you have it Trish. Neither logic or sentiment will sway them. They have a rose-tinted view of Australia, perfect in every way, other than the darkies, chinkies and rag-heads of course. Build a wall. Keep them out. And if the going gets tough, run away. Aussie Aussie Aussie, oi oi oi!
Trish CorryOctober 16, 2016 at 6:27 pm

Thank you Dale. The fact that you were not able to answer any questions posed to you, in my reply, speaks for itself. It is OK to be racist. Just own it Dale. Say that is WHY you support Hanson. Because you think White Australians are more superior than anyone else who lives here. That they should all act like your symbol of what a white Aussie should be. Rather than live in harmony and accept that we are all different. That is not Patriotism, that is Nationalism. Patriotism is peaceful. Nationalism is not. That is explained in the link of this post.

If you are Patriot and not a Nationalist; your vote is misplaced.

If you are a Nationalist – own it. Don’t hide behind pretending that One Nation is something they are not. Be proud like George Christensen.

I hope you are a business owner and not a worker, because Hanson is also a conservative and hates the worker and hates the Unions. I also hope you are not on Welfare, because she hates those on welfare too.

Remember, she is a rejected Liberal Party member, first and foremost. She shares their views of punishing the worker and the welfare recipient.
Trish CorryOctober 16, 2016 at 6:30 pm

PS. Dale. We are not a Christian Sovereignty. We are a Secular Nation. No one forces anyone in this country to be a Christian. Thank goodness for that because I do not believe in religion!
Dale MarshallOctober 16, 2016 at 6:33 pm

Run away? I have no interest in talking to you…I am so sorry that,that hurts you. I’ve heard all the same crap for years out of you type,while you’re happily accepting terrorism and evidence of how these islamic believers think of the Australian way of life. Enjoy…I’m not here to argue or become abusive with you type as you are showing…Stay safe in your denial..lets all hope and pray that it never affects you or your family in your ignorance huh.
Trish CorryOctober 16, 2016 at 6:35 pm

May your God bless you Dave and forgive you for stigmatising entire groups of people and causing them distress and harm. I hope the punishment isn’t too severe when judgement day comes.
PS. Jesus was a lefty.
Dale MarshallOctober 16, 2016 at 6:37 pm

I’ve just had my dinner Trish,to read your above comments makes me feel like vomiting. It disgusts..Anything for a $ hey…Wow!!
Trish CorryOctober 16, 2016 at 6:41 pm

Lol at the $ comments. I’m not sure where you are getting that idea from! I’m not sure if being called a paid journalist means my writing has improved or it is has gone downhill!
Steve LaingOctober 16, 2016 at 7:04 pm

Well done on getting a paid gig Trish 😉

I thought you’d gone Dale? But apparently you are still here! But not answering the questions, just insulting people and then playing the righteous indignation card! Bravo! The predictability is astonishing. But I’m so sorry I hurt your feelings, and am ignoring your opinions – unfortunately I try to live my life based on facts and logic, not emotion and opinion. And my understanding of religion is somewhat different than yours – I’m guessing you missed Sunday School on the day they told the story of the Good Samaritan?

However if you aren’t running away, then how about answering some of the questions, rather than just pretending that you are so sickly than an opinion you don’t agree with might actually cause you to regurgitate your dinner (meat and two veg, am I right?). Perhaps this Australian culture is so shaky that just thinking about a kebab might kill you!
Kaye LeeOctober 16, 2016 at 7:04 pm

Let’s not forget the Africans…they were the 2006 target

“We’re bringing in people from South Africa at the moment. There’s a huge amount coming into Australia, who have diseases; they’ve got AIDS,” Ms Hanson told AAP.

“They are of no benefit to this country whatsoever; they’ll never be able to work.

“And what my main concern is, is the diseases that they’re bringing in and yet no one is saying or doing anything about it.”

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/hanson-turns-on-diseased-africans/2006/12/06/1165081010724.html
Steve LaingOctober 16, 2016 at 7:07 pm

I sent that comment to a white South African I know who had unsurprisingly shown a degree of sympathy to Pauline and her brigade – PMSL!
Kaye LeeOctober 16, 2016 at 7:09 pm

Or Pauline’s mum who was still scared of the yellow peril 50 years after the war ended.

“I was always taught,” she says, “the yellow race will rule the world. And if we don’t do something now … I’m afraid, yes, the yellow race will rule the world.”

http://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/politics/the-yellow-race-will-rule-the-world-the-woman-who-is-even-more-racist-than-pauline-hanson–her-mum-norah/news-story/3df08e1ed74f43a45d866c1338cb38d0
Michael TaylorOctober 16, 2016 at 7:11 pm

Funnily, Kaye, (though not so funny) it was the diseases brought here by the English that wiped out tens of thousands of Aborigines.
Steve LaingOctober 16, 2016 at 7:15 pm

Even less funny is that they weren’t brought accidentally… They were in some cases purposefully given blankets of people who had smallpox.
Michael TaylorOctober 16, 2016 at 7:21 pm

They did it in America, Steve, no reason to not do it here too.
Steve LaingOctober 16, 2016 at 7:40 pm

Probably saw it as Christian sharing, Michael…
Kaye LeeOctober 16, 2016 at 7:43 pm

Ima guessing Lang Hancock, Gina Rinehart’s dad, and Pauline would have got on well.

In a 1984 television interview, Hancock suggested forcing unemployed indigenous Australians − specifically “the ones that are no good to themselves and who can’t accept things, the half-castes” − to collect their welfare cheques from a central location. “And when they had gravitated there, I would dope the water up so that they were sterile and would breed themselves out in the future, and that would solve the problem.”

I really wish people would understand the difference that culture makes. In Egypt, where perhaps 97 percent of girls suffer genital mutilation, both Christian Copts and Muslims are complicit.

There are also extremists in every religion.

A conference to arrange child marriages for Christian homeschoolers will be held in Kansas this fall. Fundamentalist and conservative evangelical parents will meet in Wichita, Kansas, this November to arrange marriages for their teen daughters.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2016/05/conference-will-arrange-child-marriages-for-christian-homeschoolers/

You cannot seriously tar all Muslims with the same brush any more than you can Christians. The Muslim people I know are no different to any of us. My Muslim electrician just wants to raise his children in a safe, tolerant country. His Muslim son just wants to play cricket with the other kids. His Muslim daughter loves music just like the other kids. Exclusion, vilification and marginalisation will only exacerbate any social problems we have.

Hanson offers nothing but irrational fear.
The AIM NetworkOctober 16, 2016 at 7:54 pm

From one of our authors:

The pueriles of Pauline
guestOctober 16, 2016 at 8:00 pm

Dale, I am rather disappointed that you support Pauline Hanson yet you cannot really explain why. You seem to think that supporting Hanson you will be protected from people you regard as foreign and not really Australian, such as Asians and Muslims. You seem to think that Oz should be inhabited by white Anglo-Saxon Christians.

I was greatly amused when on Q&A Sam Dastyari revealed, as he sat next to Pauline, that he was indeed a Muslim. We could see the disbelief in Pauline’s eyes when she realised that she was sitting next to a Muslim and he had not tried to cut off her head.

Pauline loves to think that violence is what Muslims are all about, and that they are plotting to introduce sharia law. When exactly does she expect 2% of the population to take over the country and impose sharia law?

And what is the problem about halal food? Does she think this is funding ISIS? So I ask you, who is supplying arms to terrorists and insurgents around the world? Who is making the big money out of military weapons?

And who has been interfering in Middle East matters for a long, long time? Remember the Crusades, Lawrence of Arabia, Gordon of Khartoum and dividing of the Middle East after WW2, not to mention the unauthorised attack on Iraq, etc. Think about the actions of those kind and thoughtful Christian chaps. And it is still going on. No wonder the Muslims are a little upset.

I tell you, Dale, I am more afraid of drug-crazed crims in our own society than I am of Muslims.

As for Asians, they have been around in Oz society for centuries. No surprise in that. They are great traders, keen on study and now have big money to invest in Oz. We need investment. And we have trade investments with Asia. You want them to go away?

So what is the real gripe? In the USA, that great capitalist country which we wish to emulate, there are people who think Donald Trump is the answer to their problems of unemployment, stagnant wages, declining industry, so many ethnic groups, etc. What these people cannot see is that this bizarre billionaire, who has been bankrupted several times, who has not paid taxes for 20 years, is not the man who will make America Great Again. He has no coherent plan (although Abbott says Trump is a true ‘conservative’: low taxes and big military power! – what?)

So with Hanson. Beware believing that she will solve all the problems of her supporters. Still banging the same old drum, hoping the Coalition will give her a lift. She does not have what it takes. Time will tell when the bubble bursts.
Trish CorryOctober 16, 2016 at 8:01 pm

I must share a Green/Environmentalist view as a reaction to this piece: It is definitely worth discussion:

@Trish_Corry if One Nation can bring about cuts to immigration thereby protecting fragile eco systems & living standards they get my vote.

@GeminiiAussie It is necessary to target and stigmatise entire groups of people in the name of saving fragile eco systems? Strange concept!

@Trish_Corry our fragile eco systems and our standard of living deserve protection. Casualties in any war are inevitable.

@GeminiiAussie What about stigmatising, Indigenous, Asians and Muslims who already live here? How does that protect fragile eco systems?

@Trish_Corry I’m not saying they should leave. Practice tolerance but cut immigration.

@GeminiiAussie No seriously. If this is a Green view. I am interested. Appalled actually. But Interested. Hanson doesn’t practice Tolerance.

GeminiiAussie describes himself as an Environmentalist from Sydney.

Are those who follow sustainability ok with stigmatising entire groups of people? Another sustainable environmentalist also just tweeted me about we need conversation about the projected 8 million people growth to Melbourne over the next 30 years.
Trish CorryOctober 16, 2016 at 8:11 pm

I will most definitely be researching the views of sustainable environmentalists and their views on immigration and what they are prepared to accept in terms of the affects on other humans by the likes of Hanson and if they champion her cause.
paulwalterOctober 16, 2016 at 9:28 pm

Too late now Trish Corry- that horse bolted two decades ago. Labor did badly on ecology and economy from the early nineties onwards, as it became further infatuated with neoliberalism and ceded its traditional role as defender of the public interest, defined in rational ways.
Trish CorryOctober 16, 2016 at 9:42 pm

Hi Paul. Sorry, I am not following at all what Labor in the 90s has to do with environmentalists today supporting Hanson because they fear immigration will damage eco systems. If you are one of these people, please share your views, because I am keen to understand more about what these people are prepared to accept as to the consequences of Hanson’s harmful policies on others, for the sake of their quest about ‘fragile eco-systems.’
paulwalterOctober 17, 2016 at 12:32 am

“Sorry Paul, I am not following.. what Labor in the 90’s has to do with environmentalists today..”

It is a shame. Go back and rethink what I contributed- maybe leave a copy of my posting under your pillow- and I am sure you will begin to grasp my point (it has to do with Keating minister David Beddall’s rejection of every single one of the hundreds of forest coupes enviro minister Faulkner proposed to be conserved as a rational solution to the logging/ woodchipping/pulping enviro/catchment degradation problem and set the tone for ALP policy ever since, that enviro is some thing we only think about when all else is payed out.

There is a problem with that attitude, to do with a categorical misconception of economics and ecology.
Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 12:36 am

Ok. Still not following why that means an environmentalist supports or should support Hanson’s stance on immigration.
JexpatOctober 17, 2016 at 12:56 am

Trish: you raised a strawman with your “Green/Environmentalist” post. Then, on your own accord proceeded to knock the strawman down, and in the process invited a review of Labor’s own record.

Having done so, can you reasonable be heard to complain? Is an attempt to defect foreseeable criticism via a reference back to Hanson’s a reasonable or effective riposte?
Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 1:08 am

Sorry. I am really not following you either Jexpat.

This guy said to me on Twitter, that he would support Hanson because her immigration policies would “protect fragile ecosystems” I tried to ask him to explain how supporting racism “protects fragile ecosystems” He could not answer. Every time I tried to reasonably ask him – were there other solutions? Why support Hanson? He started raving on with Sharia Law babble; which I have no interest in.

Then another person (sustainable environmentalist) raised that we need to have a serious conversation about the 8 million people who will be living in Melbourne in 30 years. (In support of person 1 – in this convo on Twitter).

So this got me thinking that there is a group that are not ‘racist’ or ‘anti-Islam’ supporting Hanson, but would vote for her and accept everything else she comes with because they don’t want immigration due because of their views on sustainability. I”m merely trying to understand this. Most people believe that Hanson voters are just racist right?

Trying to understand this is not raising a strawman. It is simply trying to understand this particular group and how many of them there are; what their views are and if this will increase Hanson’s votes. I personally would like to understand this group, if they are supporting Hanson for this reason of ‘cutting immigration protects fragile ecosystems’

Is this guy and the other guy just rogue’s or outliers – or are there many ‘sustainable environmentalists’ out there, willing to support her?

I’m not interested in anything Labor has done in the 90s or is doing today about the environment. It has nothing at all to do with the point I raised. I have no idea of Labor’s environmental policies, in the 90’s or even today – only very broadly; so no point thinking I’m defending them – it simply is NOT my area of interest. I simply can’t see the connection of why that matters to the point I’m raising, or why Paul even raised it as a point.
JexpatOctober 17, 2016 at 1:41 am

Fronting up and then knocking back “this guy on twitter” is a 21st Century example of a strawman fallacy.

“The typical “attacking a straw man” argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated a proposition by covertly replacing it with a different proposition (i.e. “stand up a straw man”) and then refuting that argument (“knock down a straw man”) instead of the original proposition.

This technique has been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly in arguments about highly charged emotional issues where a fiery, entertaining “battle” and the defeat of an “enemy” may be more valued than critical thinking or understanding both sides of the issue.

Straw-man tactics were once known in some parts of the UK as an Aunt Sally, after a pub game of the same name where patrons threw sticks or battens at a post to knock off a skittle balanced on top.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

More here: http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/think/strawman.htm
Kaye LeeOctober 17, 2016 at 6:39 am

One Nation’s Immigration policy from 1998

“It is now critical to develop a population policy for Australia in order to decide immigration numbers rationally and in the best interest of Australians. The immigration policies of the major political parties during the 1980s and 1990s have proven disastrous, proceeding as if there was no balance of payments problem, no foreign debt and no geographical or environmental constraints to population growth. If continued, such immigration policy will irreversibly alter the natural and urban environments, economic viability as well and undermining the maintenance and further development of a unique and valuable Australian identity and culture.”

One Nation Immigration, Population And Social Cohesion Policy

One Nation’s Immigration policy from 2016

“It is now critical to develop a population policy for Australia in order to decide immigration numbers rationally and in the best interest of Australians. The immigration policies of the major political parties to this day have proven disastrous, proceeding as if there were no balance of payments problem, no foreign debt and no geographical or environmental constraints to population growth. If continued, such an immigration policy will irreversibly alter the natural and urban environment, economic viability as well as undermining the maintenance and further development of a unique and valuable Australian identity and culture.”

http://www.onenation.com.au/policies/immigration

Nothing ever changes for Pauline except which group she wants to blame.
Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 7:59 am

Jexpat, Thank you for explaining strawman to everyone, when most people will fully understand what it is, considering most readers of this site would actively engage in debate.

I am going to put this very plainly and I am only going to say it once and I am not going to enter into a debate on what anyone thinks my intent was in raising this point.

I raised this because very simply: If there is an entire other group out there voting for Hanson, because they believe her policies will somehow help the environment, it is very important to understand this group.

The reason: Because anyone interested in environmentalism – particularly politicians; should be having conversations with these people and explaining why voting for Hanson is not the way to go. Voting for Hanson is not the way to protect fragile eco systems. There has to be other solutions that environmentally concerned people, already advocate for, other than cutting immigration.

This adds an entirely different element to Hanson appealing to people who are xenophobic or racist or Islamophobic. These people are not in these groups.

If you don’t think it is a valid point of discussion. Fine. Don’t engage in it.

If you think it is interesting that there may be an entire group out there pushing the Hanson agenda, other than the ‘go back where you came from Aussie, Aussie, Aussie, oi oi oi” crowd, then please discuss.

I don’t move in environmental circles. I raised this purely because I am interested to find out if people have heard about Hanson’s appeal to this group of ‘sustainability advocates’ and if this is something anyone who doesn’t want Hanson in power should be concerned about.
Kaye LeeOctober 17, 2016 at 8:36 am

I find it hard to understand how any environmentalist could support a party who doesn’t believe in climate change. And for those who are interested in sustainability, why would they support a party whose irrational opposition to Agenda 21, which is about pathways to sustainable development, borders on hysterical.
Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 8:53 am

This party is the party he said he normally votes for: http://www.votesustainable.org.au/ but he would give Hanson his vote if it meant cutting immigration.

He also told me that water would be scarce by 2050 and food security was an issue.

He said “As distasteful as some of (ON) policies are. They are the only hope. Both major parties want a big Australia.”

This means he is prepared to accept everything that comes with ON – to curb immigration. That is my concern.

It has knocked me for a six. I hope the two who responded to me, are an isolated case and not the norm.
Arthur TarryOctober 17, 2016 at 9:29 am

I haven’t read the comments on this essay so maybe my thougfhts have already been mentioned. I find it strange that Trish’s essay barely mentioned Pauline Hanson, and what she stands for. ON would not exist, at least in its present form, without her leadership. I live in Qld and am surrounded by ON supporters. Overwhelmingly they admire her for her ability to ‘cut through the crap’, dismiss so-called political correctness, and expose the truth of what it really going on. Whether it’s indigenous issues, immigration of Asians and Moslems, union malevolence, climate change, ‘greenies’ or many of the other bizarre ‘policies’ (eg: Halal certification). And you don’t have to wait long for the incipient racism to emerge from these people, and it is definitely racism. Nor do you have to wait long before you hear about conspiracy theories and how, in due course, we will undoubtedly be living under Sharia law, etc. You can be rapidly abused as a ‘softy’ or’ lefty’, or worse, if you try to make contary point. ON attracts folk who seem to be authoritarian, reactionary, intolerant, fixed in views, those that respond to dog whistling about ethnic and race issues, and who rely on perception rather than a real understanding. Pauline Hanson is the nucleus around which these folk cluster – it is her leadership that gives voice to their prejudices, anger and aggravation. She expresses and personifies the physce of a significant number of Austraians.
HarquebusOctober 17, 2016 at 9:35 am

I am very interested in what politicians do with our environment. It is what keeps us alive.
There is no such thing as sustainable development.
We are overpopulated already and that will become apparent as resources continue to deplete. Zero immigration and population reduction is what is required.

Trish.
No politics on a dead planet. Your work, although pretty good in its own right, is still a waste of yours and everyone elses time. The utopian future that you long for is not going to happen. Physics trumps political and economic ideology every time.

“It’s coming home to roost over the next 50 years or so. It’s not just climate change; it’s sheer space, places to grow food for this enormous horde. Either we limit our population growth or the natural world will do it for us, and the natural world is doing it for us right now.” — David Attenborough

“Using his burgeoning intelligence, this most successful of all mammals has exploited the environment to produce food for an ever increasing population. Instead of controlling the environment for the benefit of the population, perhaps it’s time we controlled the population to allow the survival of the environment.” — David Attenborough

“Democracy Cannot Survive Overpopulation.” — Prof. Albert Bartlett.

“If we don’t halt population growth with justice and compassion, it will be done for us by nature, brutally and without pity – and will leave a ravaged world.” — Dr. Henry W. Kendall

“There is no need to decide whether to stop the population increase or not. There is no need to decide whether the population will be lowered or not. It will, it will! The only thing mankind has to decide is whether to let population decline be done in the old inhumane method that nature has always used, or to invent a new humane method of our own.” — Isaac Asimov, 1974.

“Famine seems to be the last, the most dreadful resource of nature. The power of population is so superior to the power in the Earth to produce subsistence for man, that premature death must in some shape or other visit the human race. The vices of mankind are active and able ministers of depopulation. They are the precursors in the great army of destruction; and often finish the dreadful work themselves. But should they fail in this war of extermination, sickly seasons, epidemics, pestilence, and plague, advance in terrific array, and sweep off their thousands and ten thousands. Should success be still incomplete, gigantic inevitable famine stalks in the rear, and with one mighty blow levels the population with the food of the world.” — Malthus T.R. 1798. An Essay on the Principle of Population.

“an increase in the water temperature of the world’s oceans of around six degrees Celsius—which some scientists predict could occur as soon as 2100—could stop oxygen production by phytoplankton by disrupting the process of photosynthesis.”
http://phys.org/news/2015-12-global-disaster-suffocate-life-planet.html

“oxygen-deprived oceans may have “significant impacts on marine ecosystems” and leave some areas of ocean all but uninhabitable for certain species.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/climate-change-oxygen-loss-oceans_us_57226e80e4b0f309baf0499e?section=australia

“Warming seas absorb less oxygen at the surface.”
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/emerging-threat-from-climate-change-ocean-oxygen-levels-are-starting-to-drop-20160427-gogqd3.html

“Industrial civilization will destroy the ability of the planet to harbor life. Whether we look at climate change, topsoil loss, biodiversity loss, mass extinction, oceanic acidification and oxygen depletion, toxification of landbases, etc. we see an accelerating trend by which human industrial civilization is rendering the planet inhospitable to life”
“we need to remake the world in a way that doesn’t base itself on ecocide”
https://prayforcalamity.com/2016/05/02/checkmate/

“Within the past several years scientists have found that oxygen (O2) in the atmosphere has been dropping”

Plankton Will Stop Making Oxygen By End Of Century

“Ocean deoxygenation is the 3rd but less-reported member of an evil climate change trinity, along with global warming and ocean acidification.”
https://lokisrevengeblog.wordpress.com/2016/09/09/earth-oxygen-emergency-conference/

An economist was on ABC News24 this morning saying that China’s GDP has doubled in last 10 years and he thought that this was a good thing. This is the mindset that is killing us.

Have a nice day.
FreethinkerOctober 17, 2016 at 10:15 am

Trish said, quote: “This is a highly motivated party, with a very well organised strategy to gain votes, more power and more money, based on creating fear about other human beings.”

I will disagree on that they are not based in creating fear, they are exploiting the selfishness of the people, the “look after number one” the greed and the “bugger you Jack I am Ok”
They bring policies that they know that it what people like to hear and the result it is in the last polls
Pauline Hanson’s One Nation triples support since election: Newspoll

That it is the reality, the other is a dream that we the minority are think that it is the reality.
trishcorryOctober 17, 2016 at 10:31 am

HI Arthur. Thank you for your comment. This is a series of articles. I will be approaching them from a broad perspective of ON and my opinion of how I see voters engage with ON and their appeal to voters. Hanson’s leadership in that from the perspective of this series is implicit, rather than writing from that as Hanson as the explicit particular driver.

My series is not an analysis of Pauline Hanson’s leadership; although I agree her leadership is a huge factor. Many others are already writing issues discussing Hanson, her leadership, who she is etc., At this time, it isn’t an area that interests me, as the topic is simply too saturated.

Through my writing, I am hoping to bring another element to the table.
Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 10:39 am

H – thank you for all that information.

As someone who appears to see sustainability and zero immigration and population reduction as key areas of interest – Does Pauline Hanson appeal to you and people such as yourself?

What I am trying to understand, does voting for controlling population growth trump everything else, regardless of what other harmful policies or rhetoric ON brings?

Please answer honestly. I think it is very important to understand this, without prejudice or judgement.
guestOctober 17, 2016 at 11:11 am

Population has dropped out of conversations in recent times. Once upon a time we talked about Malthus, but his predictions did not eventuate. Nor did Paul Ehrlich’s in “The Population Bomb” (1968).

Today it is talked about in different ways. In Germany Angela Merkel spoke about taking in one million refugees because Germany has an ageing problem and the economy needs a boost in population. Japan has an ageing problem. Oz has an ageing problem. We wonder how we can sustain our consumer society if the number of workers is in decline.

I do not see how Hanson hopes to save the forests in order to reduce populations. Large populations can exist in small spaces. The economics of population is not what Hanson is on about. Nor is food security.

Hanson is on about stopping other people from having what I/we do not have. It is about blaming someone else for my/our failures. About keeping safe what has been traditionally mine/ours. No change, thank you. I/we are conservatives. Orstralians. No room for outsiders.

A program on SBS which spoke to Hanson supporters revealed that their reasons for supporting her were all about their own personal needs or fears. Need a job. Fear of Islamist violence. Fear of the other. Fear of the unknown.

Not much about a wider national interest. Or have I missed the point? We are heading for 9bn.
FreethinkerOctober 17, 2016 at 11:12 am

Trish several questions asked in The Essential Report polls show what are important topics and views of the participants and this reflect in the popularity of some politicians with extreme right views.
It is not about Pauline leadership of party for that matter that concern me it is the view of the electorate.
JaquixOctober 17, 2016 at 11:31 am

I came to Australia in 1965, when the White Australia policy was still in force. It was the dying days of hearing about “The Yellow Peril” and the “Domino Effect”. At that time the anti-immigration debate was directed at the most recent arrivals (of course) who were Italians and Greeks. Anyone remember the book and film “They’re a Weird Mob” ? Later it was Lebanese. So I have seen many waves of immigration, including from Vietnam. (Everyone moaning because PM Fraser (I think) gave them $7,000 to get themselves on their feet. And heard all the same rhetoric about them. The population in 1965 was only about 10 million, we could not conceive how Australia could have 24 million to house and feed, and yet we have. (there was bleating then about “sustainability” though they didnt use the word) (Housing is skewed by several factors including neg gearing and non-residents buying under cover of residents). Hanson & Co. forget (or more precisely wilfully ignore) the fact that Australia was a far more boring country back then. When out with friends, I often note how one third of them are usually born in Australia, and two thirds are not. So if all of us “went back to where we came from”, the restaurants, schools, shops, businesses and facilities would only have one third the customers, and quickly close down. Australia would be thrown into a Great Recession and life would not be as we know it now. I also support Australia Day becoming in effect Multicultural Australia Day, so we can celebrate the variety the immigrants bring with them
HarquebusOctober 17, 2016 at 11:32 am

Trish.
I disagree with most of One Nations policies but, if they advocated population reduction then, yes. I would vote for them. Population reduction is the only viable solution and trumps everything else.
If the Labor Party wants my vote then, you know what they have to do.
Cheers.
helvityniOctober 17, 2016 at 11:32 am

“A program on SBS which spoke to Hanson supporters revealed that their reasons for supporting her were all about their own personal needs or fears. Need a job. Fear of Islamist violence. Fear of the other. Fear of the unknown.”

guest, deep down they know that Hanson can’t do anything for them, but maybe it’s their cry to be listened to, they want someone, anyone, to hear them and help them, because our present government certainly will not…there will be even more jobless and homeless in the future.

The jobs and growth have not eventuated, the time and effort goes into battles about who will be the leader, Tones or Mal.
Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 11:46 am

Jaquix. I visited Sydney for the first time a few weeks ago. It blew me away. Such a fast paced and vibrant city with so many choices for dining in just the few days I was there. It gave me an entire different perspective, similar to what you said, as to what we would lose. I’ve always thought this, but seeing it for myself really had an impact.

The service in Sydney was absolutely impeccable. Faultless. The quality of the food – beyond anything I know in my own town, even just for a cafe.

The only thing I didn’t like was so much traffic and the speeds at which they travelled!

I thought it would just be like a bigger version of Brisbane. Far from it.

I would 100% support bringing such diversity to regional Australia.
Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 11:47 am

Thanks H. That has given me the motivation to research this much deeper.
JaquixOctober 17, 2016 at 11:58 am

Trish “Sydney Today” completely disproves all of the Hanson claims about immigration swamping us. Going back even further – I believe that in 1945, at the end of World War II, there were only 29 restaurants! I can believe that. Because in 1965 they were just getting into the swing of things with 20 years’ worth of post-war prosperity. And immigration! The Gold Coast is another place built on immigration, though much of it from within Australia. And the restaurants and facilities are improving and increasing all the time, to the betterment of the place. With regard to the “Insight” program on SBS, where the audience were those who voted for One Nation, I was struck by the fact that the majority had been Liberal voters. And clearly they did feel fear. I think the conservative mind-set is based on fear really, fear of this and that. I do think the jobs issue – lack thereof – is driving a lot of this fear. One Nation is not going to improve the job situation, but its enjoying a wave of fear-driven popularity among too many (in my humble opinion!)
HarquebusOctober 17, 2016 at 12:10 pm

Trish

For you.

http://www.votesustainable.org.au/

Home

Cheers.
HarquebusOctober 17, 2016 at 12:44 pm

Trish
You might find some more material in DTM’s links that I have posted here.

https://theaimn.com/day-day-politics-speaking-words-matter/#comment-497830
helvityniOctober 17, 2016 at 1:02 pm

Jaquix , those ex-Liberal voters, now Hansonites, maybe also wanted tell The Big Daddy Liberal that we’ll leave you, if you don’t look after us and create more jobs as you promised, some of them joined Xenophon, some ON.

Now of course Big Daddy is busy courting them back…
HarquebusOctober 17, 2016 at 1:45 pm

Trish
Look what just popped up in my reading list.

“The development in question is the end of global economic growth, which will lead inexorably to the end of centralization (including globalization). It will also mean the end of the existence of most, and especially the most powerful, international institutions.
“In the same way it will be the end of -almost- all traditional political parties, which have ruled their countries for decades and are already today at or near record low support levels (if you’re not clear on what’s going on, look there, look at Europe!)
From Bill Clinton and Tony Blair onwards, the center-left embraced the project of a global free market with an enthusiasm as ardent as any on the right. If globalisation was at odds with social cohesion, society had to be re-engineered to become an adjunct of the market. The result was that large sections of the population were left to moulder in stagnation or poverty, some without any prospect of finding a productive place in society.”

‘End of Growth’ Sparks Wide Discontent
trishcorryOctober 17, 2016 at 1:51 pm

Labor really needs to go on a massive attack on jobs. However, sometimes even if they do go on an attack, people just don’t notice. A comment in a Facebook thread just said:

“I don’t believe Labor are being an effective opposition. Never were and still aren’t. Look at the disintergration of Medicare, happening before our eyes. It’s almost like they’re happy with the status quo.”

Labor hasn’t defended Medicare? I cannot for the life of me, see how this person has come to that conclusion.

It is this type of perception why people are flocking to the minor parties because they are ‘something different’ and the television gives them the spotlight. Like Sunrise has for Hanson.

Labor needs to think of better ways to really get their message across, as they are doing a lot. They are doing a lot to stand against the Liberals; but because they prevent things, no one feels the impacts of what should have been.

I’d say the same for the Greens opposing harmful measures.

and Jacqui Lambie to an extent.

They get no where near the coverage of Hanson – a minor party.

People are just going to see what they want to see. I’ve come to the conclusion that people really need to feel the pain, like Newman brought QLD to really ‘get it’ but then they quickly forget as well.

It is a huge problem.
Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 2:01 pm

H – I’m not so much interested in the intricacies of sustainability practices, or the opinions that these people have on the free market and globalisation.

I am more interested in what this group is prepared to accept as to supporting harmful policies outside of this space and give support to Hanson, because she supports curbing immigration. What price does the country and it’s citizens pay for this ‘democratic choice?’

I find it difficult to believe that there are no other solutions, other than cutting immigration and reducing population.

I understand the racists and the bigots. I understand the people who get reeled in to her generalisations, that are not inherently racist or bigoted. However, environmentalists, I am not understanding.
HarquebusOctober 17, 2016 at 2:20 pm

Trish
There is nothing wrong with “curbing immigration”. It is not racism but, is instead doing what is required.
How much more energy guzzling infrastructure do we need? There are just too many people for our environment to survive and how goes the environment, goes the human race.

“On August 8, 2016, we began to use more from nature than our planet can renew in the whole year.”
http://www.overshootday.org/

Have you seen this? I may have posted it for you before. I highly recommend it. It will explain the absurdity of pursuing growth. It goes for an hour but, the first half is the most important.

Dr Albert Bartlett R.I.P.: Arithmetic, Population and Energy

In my opinion, this presentation should be required viewing for all politicians and journalists.

Cheers.
Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 2:25 pm

Thx H – However, I will remain with this question.

I find it difficult to believe that there are no other solutions, other than cutting immigration and reducing population.

For example, the electorate I live in Capricornia is far from anywhere near being over populated.

I have very grave concerns that Hanson appeals to environmentalists and they would vote for this party.
HarquebusOctober 17, 2016 at 2:54 pm

Trish
No other solutions is difficult to come to terms with when our whole lives have been conditioned for infinite growth. Mathematically and physically impossible.
If you watch the presentation, your opinion about Capricornia’s population will change.

Here is the magic formula that Bartlett explains.

Doubling time = 70 / growth rate.

When you understand the effect doubling has on resources and the environment, your priorities will change.

Doubling of our population, at current growth rate, will mean 50 million people by around 2070 competing for scarce resources and if it doubles again, it will 100 million sometime early next century. This won’t happen. We don’t have the resources to sustain our current population for more than a decade or two at most.

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/3101.0

If we do nothing and continue growth at all costs, nature will reduce our numbers for us in her usual brutal and unforgiving way.

Cheers.
robOctober 17, 2016 at 3:17 pm

Lets open our doors for everyone… black, white yellow etc. Trish. But who exactly is going to support all these “New Australians” if they cannot find jobs, cannot afford housing, will you put your hand up to provide shelter and food at your own expense, I believe some refugees are now being housed in aged care centres, but I guess that appeals to you and to hell with anyone else that does not share your view. Lets sell all our farms, public assets etc.to other countries, lets allow multinational companies to come into our country and pay ZERO tax and if we don’t like that happening we are slapped with the racist card again. I don’t support One Nation but it infuriates me to see the media take things out of context, the Australians that voted for this party have concerns about certain issues, they should be respected not ridiculed, perhaps you might enlighten us to what party you affiliate yourself with. There is no easy solution to any of these problems but please ON is at least questioning whether we should continue on the same slippery slope as we are going… which is a little more than the major parties are doing. For those of you that have never bothered to look at One Nations policies, take a look below, not quite the same as the Nazi agenda that Trish would have you believe…..

1.To bring about the necessary changes for fair and equal treatment of all Australians, within a system of government recognising and acting upon a need for Australia to be truly one nation.

2.To protect our sovereignty and democracy.

3.To acknowledge and respect the Aboriginal and Torris Strait Islanders as the first peoples of this land. In the preamble to the Australian Constitution, One Nation opposes acknowledging Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders as One Nation believes that all Australians are owners and custodians of this land and should work toward unification, not segregation, under the one law for all.

4.One Nation supports Citizens Initiated Referenda, giving the people of Australia, a voice to oppose or call for laws to be implemented.

5.Our children are the future leaders of our nation. They must be given every opportunity to a decent affordable education. Our children must have priority to fill school and university enrolments before those of international students.

6.To actively pursue and promote treaties, investment and development as deemed appropriate and in the national interest and repeal those that are not in our best interests.

7.To honour and respect the men and women who have suffered and lost their lives in defence and protection of our country, and ensure that those who have given so much for their country and people, are cared for appropriately in time of need.

8.To ensure those convicted of crimes endure appropriate penalties. To seek treaties with other countries, for those who are non Australian citizens who have committed a criminal offence carrying a 2 years or longer prison sentence, be deported to their country, to do their jail term there.

9.To ensure law abiding Australians, with legitimate purpose, will always have access to firearms to undertake various activities including the defence of themselves and their families in their own homes.

10.To ensure our society remains benevolent and caring in its approach to our fellow citizens in genuine need.

11.To treat all Australians equally and justly and with government assistance based on need, not race.

12.To support and advocate traditional family values and uphold the institution of the family in its fight against the many who aim to breakdown this important unit of any decent society.

13.To re-vitalise and support our defence forces and personnel and ensure Australia builds and maintains and appropriate level of national security and defence.

14.To restrict immigration at times when necessary due to high unemployment, overloading on our infrastructure such as roads, water, sewerage, hospitals, schools and housing, except that related to investment, and is in Australia’s best interest.

15.To stop foreign ownership of Australia’s agriculture land and established housing. Oppose the sale of public assets without the consent of Australians and repeal United Nations treaties that are detrimental or of no benefit to Australia.

16.To restore tariff protection where appropriate, revitalise and encourage Australian industry and manufacturing and initiate financial support for small business and the rural sector, in particular in the interest of creating national wealth and employment.

17.To take positive action on matters such as taxation reform, education, health, unemployment, crime, the environment and the discrimination created by political correctness.

18.To re-establish a publicly-owned people’s bank like the Commonwealth Bank used to be, prior to it being privatised to create true competition, value and benefit Australians.

19.To abolish divisive and discriminatory policies, such as those related to Aboriginal and Multicultural Affairs.

20.To protect the environment from industry that will destroy prime agriculture land and water sources. We will oppose CSG mining until a full government impact study is done, as to the ramifications it has on our environment, land and water.

21.To stop the teaching and infiltration of Islam and its totalitarian ideology, that opposes our democracy, way of life and laws. To ban the Burqa in public places, government buildings and schools. To make genital mutilation of young girls a criminal offence, carrying heavy sentences. To stop islamists and their families from receiving welfare benefits; we are a Christian country, only one marriage is recognised. Ban the building of any more Mosques.

22.To oppose Sharia Law ever being allowed in Australia. We are a Christian country with one law for all.

23.To implement an Australian Identity Card to be used by Australians accessing taxpayer funded services such as health, education, welfare, pensions and services. For too long Australian taxpayers have been footing the bill for people who are not entitled or submit multiple claims under aliases. Also foreigners have been known to abuse our system, by using their Australian families details, when visiting the country.

24.To implement a food labelling system that is conducive as to the origin of the product, Australian made or foreign. Halal certification has no place in Australia when unsuspecting Australians are forced to fund Islamic Mosques and schools. One Nation would stop the practice of Halal Certification on all products, service, and machinery in Australia, other than for export.

25.One Nation will continue to stop illegal immigration by way of boat and air and support temporary protection visas. One Nation supports the refugee programme, but we must have a say in who comes in. We must be mindful of taking people that are Christian, and genuine refugees.

26.One Nation opposes increasing the Aged Pension age to 70 and the family home included in the assets test. As it is opposed to people on the land only being able to encompass the family home and 5 acres of land before the assets test is applied. Independent retirees who are not eligible for the aged pension must be rewarded by providing health care assistance.

27.One Nation opposes the privatisation of essential services such as water, gas, electricity, telecommunications and defence. This must and should remain in the hands of our governments and not foreign ownership and control. We oppose Agenda 21 and its push for ‘sustainable development’.

28.One Nation is committed to protecting the farming sector in time of drought, flood and foreign takeover. If we cannot feed ourselves we will starve. We cannot allow other countries to use our land to feed their own when we should be growing the food and exporting it.

29.One Nation will repeal or review the 1953 Double Taxation Agreement Act that provides for foreign investors not to pay tax in Australia. Foreign investors take out more in unpaid taxes than Australian companies operating in other countries, bring in.

30.Marriage between two people of the same sex is a social issue, and One Nation believes all Australians should have the right to vote in a referendum, rather than a vote on the floor of Parliament. If it is to be determined by Parliament then One Nation members of Parliament will be allowed a conscience vote. We also acknowledge that same sex couples living in defacto relationships should be afforded the same property rights as heterosexuals couples.

31.To secure the election to public office of members committed to the objectives of the party.

PS. Unfortunately for me Facebook has led me onto this link, enjoy your self righteous journalistic insipidities, I am joining the minority group who choose not to assimilate with your coterie, good day to you all.
Kaye LeeOctober 17, 2016 at 3:53 pm

reb,

” will you put your hand up to provide shelter and food at your own expense” What a simplistic and overused excuse for bigotry.

Every day we pay for the rich to get richer. We pay Gina Rinehart to explore for more of our minerals for her to extract and make profit from. We hand over our land to Twiggy Forrest and provide him with a cheap workforce. Every day we allow investors to not pay tax as they accumulate properties, forcing up prices and increasing their wealth at the expense of others. There are white Christian politicians who own over 40 properties. Malcolm Turnbull invests his money in offshore vulture/venture funds. Why you would blame refugees or immigrants for this is beyond me. Unemployment benefits represent 7% of welfare payments. It has been shown that immigrants outperform Australians in entrepreneurial skills. All they want is a safe home. They have added greatly to our wealth.

Anyone who is scared that Sharia law is going to take over this country has seriously lost the plot. I am much more concerned about the insidious and real influence of Christianity on our politics.
Kaye LeeOctober 17, 2016 at 4:10 pm

And could I add, I have read One Nation’s policies and they are the most ignorant, xenophobic bunch of rubbish I have ever read in my life. This for example…..

“Australians have the right to a cohesive society and deny immigration to anyone who does not abide by our law, culture, democracy, flag or Christian way of life. We don’t want or need migrants bringing their problems, laws, culture and opposing religious beliefs on us.

Many Australians feel that politicians have not listened to their concerns regarding Islamic extremism and the teachings of Islam and this has given rise to parties such as One Nation and also to groups such as Reclaim Australia and Party for Freedom who do speak up.

One Nation does not condone violence of any kind, political-Islam must be attended to via legislation. However if these concerns are not addressed, we believe that there may come a time where there is civil unrest on our streets.”

How dare they insist that I follow their religion and honour some stupid piece of cloth. Make no mistake, Hanson and her followers represent a far greater danger to our society than any migrant. Hanson herself got pregnant to a refugee at age 16 and married him, having two children before she got divorced at age 20. What a hypocrite she is.
Michael TaylorOctober 17, 2016 at 6:45 pm

I read somewhere that One Nation lifted a whole heap of their policies off Wikipedia.
JaquixOctober 17, 2016 at 6:49 pm

I think a lot of it was lifted from the John Birch Society website.
Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 6:52 pm

I’ve been reading them to research for this series Michael; and they are xenophobic, Nationalistic, anti-Islamic, contradictory and very poorly informed. Policy analysis is on the agenda for the series.
Matters NotOctober 17, 2016 at 8:20 pm

If you voted for the One Nation Party, chances are you see yourself as a Patriot.

That I very much doubt. Most One Nation supporters seem to describe themselves as real ‘Austrayans’ not ‘patriots’. While it’s perfectly valid (and very useful) to use the ‘patriot’ concept to describe the ‘beliefs’ of a large majority of One Nation supporters, I am yet to read of significant numbers who claim to be ‘patriots’. Perhaps I wrong and you have a link?

Certainly, there would be vast numbers of American citizens who would readily embrace that descriptor – and I’ve met the odd one or two – Australians are more ‘down market’ when it comes to such proclamations. This article highlights some.

Australia has always preferred a quiet sensibility about demonstrating our love of the country, mostly by just living here and not making a big deal about it. .. People in the US tend to be a bit showier, plastering every corner of their egregiously large Ford F-350s with American flag stickers and singing the national anthem any time more than 10 people gather in a public place.

Patriotism is implicit here, we know we love the country because we all live here and it’s self-evidently bloody great (obviously not without its huge problems, but f*ck mate, have you seen our beaches?). And if you don’t like it? Awesome: dissent, work to change it. We’re getting better every day because it’s okay to say you’re unsatisfied with our shithouse politicians and the minority of racists working to ruin this place.

Do your patriotic duty: call the prime minister a dickhead.

http://www.sbs.com.au/comedy/article/2016/08/31/key-differences-between-american-and-australian-patriotism
Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 8:42 pm

Do you even Facebook Matters Not? Hanson worshipping Patriots, Patriots everywhere……
Matters NotOctober 17, 2016 at 8:54 pm

No Trish I don’t have Facebook, perhaps you could give me a quote or two?
Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 8:57 pm

Just put it this way Matters Not. There are not just quotes, but whole entire groups and movements stating they are Patriots and they worship Hanson. There is one political group called United Patriots Front etc., In general terms when people discuss Hanson related topics, they state they are Patriots – True Blue Aussies. etc., However, I have an idea for a blog to do a qual analysis of facebook comments in this series, so maybe you will see then, what you don’t see on Facebook, in everyday discussions.
Matters NotOctober 17, 2016 at 9:01 pm

So Hanson has gone to a foreign nation for her conceptual framework?

How unAustralian!

While the US had The Patriot Act and in Australia we replicated the ‘essence’ of same, I don’t recall the use of ‘patriot’ in the legislation.

Hanson is a real radical.
Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 9:16 pm

Well, not necessarily. She just isnt’ correcting people. In fact her policies clearly state that ‘One Nation will abolish multiculturalism and the Racial Discrimination Act and promote assimilation, nationalism, loyalty and pride in being an Australian. ”

So the very meaning of Nationalism that Australia is the more superior race/culture and everyone needs to conform to what is defined as the ‘ideal’ is Nationalism.

She just doesn’t correct her followers. She allows them to believe they are patriots.
JexpatOctober 17, 2016 at 9:32 pm

Trish wrote: ” I have an idea for a blog to do a qual analysis of facebook comments…”

A good place to start such an endeavour would be a lit survey/review of the relevent academic journals (there are many), paying particular attention to differences that have likely been identified between facebook users and non-facebook users. And among categories of facebook users.

I think what you’ll find at the outset is high degree of siloing and group think among certain categories of facebook users, along with an outsized repition of the more vocal -and also over representation of views held by those who become “opinion leaders” simply by being vocal and vehement, -or “liked” for whatever reason.

The next question would in term of qualitative analsis would be: do the terms used on the shallow facebook level, really have the same referents in the larger population of facebook users- or, more importantly in the general populaton of supporters and potential supporters?
Trish CorryOctober 17, 2016 at 9:45 pm

Thank you Jexpat. I’m very pleased you have suggested I take an academic approach.

I shall keep this as one of my favourite comments of all time.
JexpatOctober 17, 2016 at 10:17 pm

All in day’s work, Trish. 🙂

While we’re on the topic, may I also suggest a 2009 book by Tim Soutphommasane. Reclaiming Patriotism: Nation-Building for Australian Progressives.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reclaiming_Patriotism
paulwalterOctober 18, 2016 at 12:10 am

Trish Corry is not interested in what happened in the nineties, thus denies the notion of context as to what drives voters away from the big parties.

Later she invokes the need for Labor to pull its finger out as to job creation, but this seems at odds with this:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/oct/17/unions-at-odds-with-labor-over-trans-pacific-partnerships-negligible-benefits#comments
Trish CorryOctober 18, 2016 at 12:59 am

Paul. History has shown, I do not have the tact or diplomacy of John Lord, when dealing with irritant pests.

It is not my fault that you have some type of deep seated trouble coming to terms with the fact that there are environmentalists who support Hanson. This does not mean you, if you do not Paul. I will give you a hashtag to make you feel better #NotAllEnvironmentalists.

You don’t need to counteract that point I raised about sustainable environmentalists, with incessant goings on about Labor, when Labor has nothing to do with this post, nor anything to do with anything raised in the commentary. Neither of the two are related.

If your point is to rile me, go get your jollies elsewhere.

Nor do I have the tact and diplomacy to respond to your personal opinions of the assumptions of me as the writer, situated as false attribution and completely out of context

……so I won’t say what I was going to say.
paulwalterOctober 18, 2016 at 1:41 am

I explained very, very clearly where Labor fits in and cited specific examples, re forestry and now FTA’s.

I have explained why some people have departed to either the Right or the Green Left out of frustration with bad faith, pro-developer Labor politicians and polices, let alone severe IPA neoliberalism of the Coalition sort on display on QA, when Labor is supposed to defend the ordinary people and our common wealth.

What begins to rile me is your incapacity to grasp simple, linking, propositions.

I observe you offered nothing in response to the Guardian article, so you are again deflecting via adhominem insinuations.
Trish CorryOctober 18, 2016 at 1:47 am

Yes, goodnight Paul. This article is about One Nation. Go get your Labor hating jollies elsewhere. I’m not playing your game.
paulwalterOctober 18, 2016 at 2:29 am

Ahhh now I see. You have unfriended me elsewhere.

How petty.
Trish CorryOctober 18, 2016 at 2:30 am

No sensible. Goodnight again

Bondi and mental health under attack?

Suspending the Rule of Tolerable Violence: Israel’s Attack…

Commentary on the Migration Amendment Bill 2024

Fossil Fuel's war on protest

Despite Lehrmann’s rave parties, his silence is deafening…

World Health Summit Regional Meeting in Australia opens…

One year of conflict has cast Sudan into…

What kind of an American are you?

One Nation Voters – Hope. Fear. Racism.

One Nation Understands Us

One Nation, Emotions and Political Marketing

Hope, Identity and Power

Racism, Xenophobia and Islamophobia disguised as hope and equality

Three levels of prejudice and discrimination

Conclusion

Like this:

Related Articles

93 comments

Leave a Reply

The Harman Undertaking

New Zealand is under siege by the Atlas Network

One Nation Understands Us

One Nation, Emotions and Political Marketing

Hope, Identity and Power

Racism, Xenophobia and Islamophobia disguised as hope and equality

Three levels of prejudice and discrimination

Conclusion

Share this:

Like this:

Related Articles

93 comments

Leave a Reply