While I’m not naive enough to think, as some people are dim enough to try to counter-argue, that everyone who applies for asylum here should be granted it, to suggest we, by sheer dumb luck, deserve life freedom and security above those unfortunate enough to be fleeing persecution is the kind of staggering prejudice and arrogance that leads nations down very dark paths indeed. Prejudice, whether in the form of racism or economic elitism or religious zealotry is the trait Australians should be looking to avoid, but unfortunately we’ve allowed it to become the enemy from within. You can’t send it offshore in a lifeboat when it’s embedded in your soul like a thorn.
Well said; very well said indeed. But…
SOME of the people who come here in boats are fleeing genuine persecution. But as Marga and others have pointed out, what at least some of these unfortunate people are fleeing from is political and economic stagnation in their countries of origin. And so I ask this simple question: why should the present population of Australia have to pay for that?
Because pay we will. If the borders are thrown wide open (and that is the inescapable political corollary of all the ‘refugee advocacy’ we see here) then we will pay: in overpopulation, in environmental degradation and the rest of it.
As far as bettering the lot of refugees from the Islamic world, Australian dollars would be far better spent on projects that help break the grip of the theocrats in their countries of origin: like aid with family planning. (Do I hear Tony Abbott and his mate Pell having seizures, convulsions and paroxysms stage right? Or should that be stage far right?)
I think of the refugee situation as analogous to the drama that occurred in mid-Atlantic when the Titanic went down near midnight on April 14, 1912.
The analogy of the Titanic is all the refugees and others’ (mainly Islamic) countries of origin. The analogy of the lifeboats is the sought-after destinations like Australia, NZ, the US, Canada and the countries of Western Europe. (No comparative number to that of the people claiming refugee status here, note, are seeking anything but temporary ‘asylum’ in Eastern Europe, the Far East, South America or Africa.)
On the Titanic: the inquiries in the aftermath of the sinking ” …reached broadly similar conclusions: the regulations on the number of lifeboats that ships had to carry were out of date and inadequate; Captain Smith had failed to take proper heed of ice warnings; the lifeboats had not been properly filled or crewed; and the collision was the direct result of steaming into a danger area at too high a speed….”
But the fact is that the (mainly Islamic) countries of origin which are the analogy of the Titanic are not sinking. On the contrary, their Titanic has been taken over by religious fundamentalist pirates. The refugees could all save themselves if they would just convert to the variety of Islam that the majority of the pirates belong to, and accept whatever economic subservience follows from that.
But, most understandably, they do not want to.
Trouble is, the more refugees, and pseudo-refugees of one kind or another, that make it into the lifeboats, the more who want to abandon ship and hope for a place in one of those same lifeboats. Those of us in the lifeboats face the genuine moral dilemma of either pulling all comers out of the water, and going down with the overcrowded lifeboat, or leaving them to drown. But there will always be people like you, Sooz, with us in the lifeboat, and claiming the moral high-and-dry ground. You lot will continue to urge us to admit all comers. That is, until it dawns on even you that this is not sustainable. Not even in the short term.
You call us ‘racists’. I do not believe that you have even the vaguest idea of the meaning of the word.
You, on the other hand, in your moral purity, will protest mightily here on NM as Abbott and Morrison to send boats back to Indonesia. You will protest without having for one instant to face the consequences of the political folly implied by what you demand. Because only a pathetic minority of Australians are in favour of open borders; because only such a pathetic minority are incapable of foreseeing the real consequences of what they advocate.
Cover yourself in righteousness as much as you like, Sooz. You know damn well that the historic experience of Australia is against open borders, and for damn good reasons, and likewise the majority of her people. But you will always be OK and never have to face any sad realities. You can have it both ways: the apparent moral superiority of being in favour of open borders, and the comfort of knowing that the policies you advocate will never be adopted, and that the lifeboat you are in will stay afloat.
Except that I do not think that you pontificate to the rest of us from the moral high ground. You have found the easy way out. You preach at the rest of us from the middle of a moral swamp
I hope that the anonymous author sees this post as it is intended, as a salute to an argument well put about an issue that matters.
I dips me lid Comrade O. Puhleez