The other day I was having an interesting back and forth email discussion with a leftie about the problems that immigration is causing in Australia. It was interesting because he was acting slightly woke:
To be honest Adam, you have actually shifted my perspective on immigration a bit. Although I do not share your general attitude towards immigration and foreigners, I have become more aware of the fear of raising hard questions around who is immigrating to this country.
As mentioned I work in family services and I see many families from middle eastern nations who arrive here with children who have disabilities, husbands who beat their wives and who all become Centrelink dependent. They are a huge strain on our service system and social workers rarely talk about this. While I would never advocate sending people home or to vilify people in any way I do support more open communication around these issues.
The sad thing is that many of these families appear more depressed in Australia as they struggle to learn English and live in often hostile low socioeconomic suburbs.
Food for thought. (Incidentally, anyone who emails me on my blog address is at risk of being published in a post. I do promise, however to keep your name out of it unless you annoy me unduly).
As humans we want to be around our own kind. People gravitate towards the familiar, and people naturally discriminate in favor of their own. There is nothing wrong with this but multiculturalism attacked this basic truth and replaced it with a warm and fuzzy lie. Now we are seeing the consequences begin to play out.
This is why the terrorists who attacked the Belgium airport last year were 4th generation immigrants. They have been isolated and marginalized from birth, not because of the imagined evils of the nasty white Belgium natives, but due to the biological realities that I have already mentioned.
In Australia we had some good success with integrating immigrants after WWII and that example was used as a precedent to usher in the enormous intakes over the last 40 years. But those original immigrants were European in outlook and culture, and thus they were predisposed to assimilating successfully in far greater numbers than what we have seen since.
It isn’t working but it has become ideological in nature which is why one cannot question it publicly without the broad ad hominem brush of racism being instantly applied. As Churchill said, however beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results.
As to the monetary costs imposed on us it is beyond belief. Charity begins at home. We have no obligation to look after the entire world but we do have an obligation to look after our own. Last year I attended a business breakfast where the speaker was Victorian multicultural commissioner Helen Kapalos. Just why a television journalist would be qualified to lead such an organisation is beyond me, but I suppose she is as good as any other. I sat through her speech in stunned silence. It was a broad and detailed boasting of how Australia is the most generous country in the world for these refugees and how Victoria is the most generous state in Australia. She listed off mind-numbing examples of all of the perks, gifts, money, housing, and other benefits that these refugees receive before they have even stepped off a plane. She was so lacking in any form of self awareness that it never occurred to her that at a business breakfast composed of businesspeople who pay an enormous amount of tax that they might not be so thrilled at the largesse that the government commits with their money and on their behalf.
We’re not just importing hundreds and thousands of these people; we’re beggaring our country while we do it. And all of this while Melbourne’s infrastructure slowly collapses under the strain of 2500 new drivers every week.
In the six years that I was back in Australia 1.5 million immigrants arrived in the country and over 120,000 refugees. How anyone thinks that this is both a good idea and sustainable is beyond me. It is indefensible and it is a betrayal of our children’s future. Their future wealth, their future opportunities, their future living standards. As generation Xers we are beginning to judge the Baby Boomers very harshly. But what generation Z will think of us in 30 years time is going to be an order of magnitude far worse.
His response came in but it was a little disappointing …
Part of the problem, I think, is that the only people who discuss immigration publicly are people like Pauline Hanson, radio shock jocks or hate groups who lack certain subtle communication skills. Their arguments are then pounced upon by opinionated Greens politicians, activists and SJWs who lack the ability to control their emotions. The subsequent discourse then becomes conflictual and everyone gets angry and we get nowhere. I plan on starting some far more constructive conversations on the topic.
I don’t mean to sidestep your point but I sincerely wish our biggest problems in this world were immigration and culture wars, but in my mind, these are dwarfed by the threat of global warming. It is not the planet that needs saving, it is human being’s ability to live on it that I worry about.
‘what generation Z will think of us in 30 years time is going to be an order of magnitude far worse’
I think this comment is far more relevant for those people in 30 years wondering why we destroyed human’s ability to live in this planet when we were given due warning by the bulk of the world’s scientists.
Global warming; destroying discussions everywhere. What can’t it kill?
The crazy thing here is that we have a clear and present danger in the form of our unchecked immigration policy, versus an airy-fairy maybe-some-time-in-the-future-but-nobody-really-knows-when danger of global warming. It’s the convenient catchall that can be used to justify ignoring any clear danger because surviving that is pointless due to the fact that, you know, global warming.
One wonders what Churchill’s speech would have been back in the day …
We would fight them on the beaches, but, you know, global warming is a far bigger danger to mankind than Hitler’s Nazi armies, so we would be better placed to put all of our resources into combating that than these pesky airplanes that keep dropping an inconsequential number of bombs on us. Incidentally, did you know that the average Britain has a greater chance of being killed by a runaway locomotive than by a German bomb dropping on their head. So really, it’s not that much of a threat after all. More of a distraction, really.
But I have good news. Global warming has really and truly jumped the shark this time. I give you, the super chimney!
Heal the planet! Save millions! And earn billions!
The invention suggests employing a super tall chimney to facilitate heat exchange in the atmosphere as a remedy to Global Warming. Calculations show that if we can construct a chimney 5 kilometers (3 mile) tall and 20 meters in diameter out of flexible fabric material. Such Chimney will be sturdy enough to stand upright and withstand side winds. We will need as many 25,000 of such chimneys to stop global warming.
25,000 chimneys will offset Global Warming.
Each chimney will produce electricity
Each chimney will induce rain generation in surrounding areas
Each chimney will transform desert into arable land capable of trapping CO2
In the FAQ it turns out that the Bill Gates Foundation turned him down. I mean, whowoulddathoughit?
The global warming scam is over people. Stop using it as an excuse to avoid the hard and dirty realities that are real issues. Carbon dioxide is plant food. Would you rather have a planet that was getting warmer, (more beach sessions, hoorah!), or was getting colder, (more snowboarding sessions, hoorah!) The weather is not static. My cat hates me beacause I changed his kitty litter, (it wuz globals warmings I tellz you.)