I am not going to link again to the odious comments by many about others’ inability to “assimilate” (like we are some sort of Borg collective), but instead try to understand what we are supposed to be assimilating with or to or whatever the appropriate term should be when you are told you must give up your identity and the freedom to choose how you will live your life.
Where better to go than One Nation’s policy on Multiculturalism to find out.
“Multiculturalism has failed everywhere. It is negative and divisive, a weight that is drowning our once safe and cohesive society. One Nation will abolish multiculturalism and the Racial Discrimination Act and promote assimilation, nationalism, loyalty and pride in being an Australian.”
Holy crap, Batman!
How does one “abolish multiculturalism” in a country where 28% of the population was born overseas? Where does it leave Pauline’s first two children whose father was a Polish refugee? Where does it leave the many politicians who were born overseas or have partners who came from other countries? Are we all going to have to join ancestry.com and come up with enough points to qualify to stay?
“As a government policy, multi-racialism encompassed measures to destroy the Australian culture. It played a large part in migrant selection in an attempt to prevent them from assimilating into Australian society. Exactly what was done and admitted to in England.”
I looked up multi-racialism just to be sure I understood.
Multiracialism is a concept or ideology that promotes a society composed of various races, while accepting and respecting different cultural backgrounds. It is a society that consists of a diverse mix of people, whether it be relative to their ethnicity, language, culture, religion, or traditions.
I am searching for what is wrong with that.
And I am not quite understanding the theory of deliberate “migrant selection” that prevents people from “assimilating”. Are they suggesting that we Aussies refuse to associate with people who look different? Are they suggesting that people left their birth country and family to move all the way here so they could be surrounded by their own culture? Is there a conspiracy I am failing to see?
Pressing on…
“One Nation intends to abolish multiculturalism and the Racial Discrimination Act of 1975 based on the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination as it is unconstitutional. We would replace it with a policy of assimilation in which it will be made clear to all those applying to migrate to Australia that coming to Australia is a privilege that gives them an overriding, unifying commitment to Australia, to its past, current interests and future first and foremost.”
The irony of One Nation, who wants a Royal Commission into Islam and surveillance inside all mosques, trying to lecture about the constitution aside, what does an “overriding commitment” to Australia’s past actually mean? Are we finally going to listen to the traditional owners of the land about how to steward it sustainably? Are we going to make the currency barrels of rum again? Am I going to have to put the sheets through the wringer into the blue again?
“They must accept the basic structures and principles of Australian heritage, society and culture, the constitution and the rule of law, tolerance and equality, parliamentary democracy, freedom of speech and religion, and English as the national language. Whilst they may come from other countries and cultures, loyalty to Australia and Australian Nationalism must come first.”
There is a certain primordial simplicity about One Nation who seem to reflect the ancient and perceived evolutionary tendency of humans to organise into distinct groupings based on an affinity of birth. Without wanting to be cruel, that didn’t work out so well for the Royal families of Europe.
And so to the last paragraph of their 5-paragraph policy on multiculturalism…
“Discretion: This means freedom of judgement or choice to choose wisely.”
I am not sure if this was meant to be a cymbal clash moment. It sort of came from nowhere. Would it be churlish of me to point out that another meaning of discretion is the quality of behaving or speaking in such a way as to avoid causing offence. But back to the policy…
“With the current terrorist problems this is essential. It is not intended to stereotype any group. Our policy in this regard has nothing to do with race, it is all about protecting our country from a real threat. One Nation will withdraw from UN Treaties on migration and refugees that conflict with our sovereign rights and laws.”
Ahhhhh… it’s those migrants and refugees (spit) who are messing with our rights!
“One Nation proposes that immigration should become the Department of Customs and Immigration, responsible for protection of our coastline from illegal boat people, invaders, goods (drugs, firearms) and terrorists. Also control and monitoring of entry and leaving of people and goods, issue of passports, visas and other documents.”
The teacher in me is frowning and reaching for a red pen. In fact, the whole thing gives me a headache. What the hell did those last two sentences mean? Are they equating asylum seekers with drugs and arms runners and terrorists?
I am not sure that I am any the wiser about what we are all supposed to be like but if I had a choice between hanging out with refugees or with Hanson and her bunch of angry men, I know who I would rather invite to a barbie.
[textblock style=”7″]
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
[/textblock]
