How I Lost Faith in Multiculturalism

Greg Sheridan, The Australian (Sydney), April 2, 2011

IN 1993, my family and I moved into Belmore in southwest Sydney. It is the next suburb to Lakemba. When I first moved there I loved it.

We bought a house just behind Belmore Sports Ground, in those days the home of my beloved Bulldogs rugby league team. Transport was great, 20 minutes to the city in the train, 20 minutes to the airport.

On the other side of Belmore, away from Lakemba, there were lots of Chinese, plenty of Koreans, growing numbers of Indians, and on the Lakemba side lots of Lebanese and other Arabs.

That was an attraction, too. I like Middle Eastern food. I like Middle Eastern people. The suburb still had the remnants of its once big Greek community and a commanding Greek Orthodox church.

But in the nearly 15 years we lived there the suburb changed, and much for the worse.

Three dynamics interacted in a noxious fashion: the growth of a macho, misogynist culture among young men that often found expression in extremely violent crime; a pervasive atmosphere of anti-social behaviour in the streets; and the simultaneous growth of Islamist extremism and jihadi culture.

This is my story, our story and the story of a failed policy.

THE three great settler immigrant societies of Australia, the US and Canada have not seen an anti-Muslim backlash on anything like that of Europe’s. Australia, the US and Canada are more successful immigrant societies than those of Europe in the modern era, but the usual self-congratulatory explanation we offer for this is simply that our settlement practices are superior to that of Europe.

In the three countries identity can be credal. Recite the nation’s creed, believe the creed, and you are an insider. It’s a powerful mechanism because it focuses on values, not ethnicity.

You sign up to the US constitution and by golly you’re an American.

You take out Australian citizenship and you’re Australian. Immigrants are more welcome and make a better contribution than is the case in Europe.

There is some truth in all this, and in any event it’s a mostly benign myth, but it doesn’t really stand up to scrutiny as a serious intellectual explanation.

Certainly the presence or absence of multiculturalism as a state policy seems to have no effect. Canada practices multiculturalism. Australia did for a while but then stopped and is now, apparently, half-heartedly starting again, according to a recent speech by Immigration Minister Chris Bowen.

The US, on the other hand, does not practice multiculturalism, yet is the biggest and most successful immigrant society in history–more than 310 million people live there from every corner of the globe. It has a black President, Asian state governors (including two Punjabis) and a vastly more ethnically diverse cabinet and corporate leadership than Australia.

There is a big problem of illegal immigration in the US, but that is overwhelmingly from Latin America. The Hispanic desire to be part of America at a civic level is evident in the huge recruitment rates of Hispanics in the US military. If you’re willing to die for your new country that is surely a convincing sign of commitment.

Here in Australia Bowen, in his February 16 speech, titled “The genius of Australian multiculturalism”, posited the comforting notion that it is the superiority of our own multiculturalism policies that have made so big a difference between us and the tensions of Europe.

I’m afraid Bowen’s speech had the opposite effect on me. It completed my transformation.

Whereas once I wholeheartedly supported multiculturalism, I now think it’s a failure and the word should be abandoned. Australian society and government were mostly doing this until Bowen’s speech.

As a policy, multiculturalism was introduced by immigration minister Al Grassby during the Whitlam government. It was formalised a bit more by Malcolm Fraser and then further refined by Bob Hawke and Paul Keating before being gently left to die of natural causes under the Howard government. In 1988, during the Hawke government, former ambassador to China Stephen FitzGerald wrote a landmark report on immigration and multiculturalism. He concluded that the policies behind Australian immigration were broadly sound but the program needed a much stronger emphasis on skilled migration and the economic contribution migrants could make to Australia.

He also essentially said, though in different words, that the term multiculturalism was useless and confusing, but the policies pursued under its heading, such as teaching migrants English and welcoming their contribution and so on, were good policies.

Hawke and Keating nonetheless stuck with the term. It was hotly contested and highly divisive. It had two big political dividends for Labor: it led to deep divisions within the Liberal Party; and it helped convince migrants that Labor was more naturally sympathetic to them.

It’s very unclear that the term made any positive contribution to the happy settlement of migrants. In the 1990s and beyond, Australia moved away from multiculturalism. A key moment came when then NSW premier Bob Carr abolished the NSW ethnic affairs commission. He felt the constant repetition of ethnic this and ethnic that was not productive and he didn’t think migrants needed a special bureaucracy to watch over them.

Community relations is a more inclusive term than ethnic. It includes everybody, not just migrants.

Similarly the immigration department acquired the word citizenship in its title and lost the word multiculturalism. This was a natural and sensible evolution and one that reflected the maturing, the normalisation, of a welcoming diversity within Australia.

Now Bowen proudly proclaims “I am not afraid to use the word multiculturalism” and has restored Multicultural Affairs to the title of his Immigration parliamentary secretary, though not to that of his department.

Could it be that Bowen hopes once more to inflict division on his political opponents? Is Labor is playing politics with the rhetoric of settlement policies?

For the word has no agreed meaning. Bowen can’t be under the misapprehension that he is communicating something clear by the resurrection of this hotly contested, wildly elastic and downright ugly jargon word, multiculturalism. It seems instead to fulfil George Orwell’s observation that “political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind”.

Multiculturalism has not been used much in Australia in the past decade. Its primary meaning now comes from Europe, and to a lesser extent American university debates. If it means something different in Australia there will need to be a massive effort to convince people of its special, non-standard meaning. What is the purpose of such an effort?

But Bowen’s speech alone has not turned me into an opponent of multiculturalism. While I remain a proponent of a big, non-discriminatory immigration program and celebrate and love Australian diversity, it is the real world that has changed my views.

In particular it is four real-world experiences: watching the debate unfold about the illegal immigrants who come to Australia by boat; a month in Europe researching and writing about immigration issues; 30 years reporting on political Islam in Southeast Asia and the Middle East; and, above all, living for nearly 15 years next door to Lakemba in Sydney’s southwest, the most Muslim suburb in Australia.

In his speech Bowen sets up a neat dichotomy between a good Australian multiculturalism and a bad European multiculturalism.

Bowen is right to point out that Australian official policy, whether at any given moment describing itself as multiculturalism or not, has always stressed English as the national language and the need for immigrants to commit to democracy and the rule of law.

But at the declaratory level, European multiculturalism has also stressed the national language and a commitment to democracy.

Bowen accuses Europe of not welcoming immigrants in the way Australia has.

Certainly some European nations have not been generous in making citizenship easily available to immigrants in the way Australia has. Citizenship is the great integrating instrument of government policy in Australia, the US and in most immigrant societies.

But Bowen’s broad accusation is not true for most of Europe. Certainly in Britain migrants can become citizens. Similarly, it would be absurd to suggest, at the official level at least, that Britain has not had an officially welcoming attitude to immigrants. London, with New York, is one of the great, diverse metropolises of the world.

And most important, while all of western Europe seems to be suffering a variety of the same immigration problem, European nations have had radically different settlement policies.

Britain has practised multiculturalism, France has not.

There are two obvious, logical flaws in the way Bowen treats immigration into Europe.

The first is that he puts the entire burden for the success or failure of an immigrant community’s experience down to the attitude of the host society and places absolutely no analytical weight at all on the performance and behaviour of the immigrants themselves.

Second, the problems that Bowen is talking about are problems with Muslim immigrants, not with immigrants generally. Chinese and non-Muslim Indian immigrants have been immensely successful in Britain. Indeed, being Indian in Britain is extremely chic.

These minorities for the most part have done OK in France, too. Certainly immigrants to Britain from the rest of Europe don’t display anything like the alienation of a serious minority of Muslim immigrants.

So this must, logically, lead to one extremely inconvenient, politically incorrect and desperately fraught question. Could it be that the main difference between Europe, with its seething immigration problems, and the US, Canada and Australia, with their success, is not actually a difference based on some footling interpretation of multiculturalism?

There is one other variable that is consistent with the results. The US, Canada and Australia have far smaller Muslim migrant communities as a percentage of their total populations than do most of the troubled nations of Europe. Could this be the explanation?

Several trends in Australian society give pause to wonder whether we, all unintentionally and all fast asleep, may be heading away from the US-Canada-Australia success story and towards a European future. That would be a very bad outcome for Australia.

Discussing these issues is very difficult. It goes without saying that most Muslims in Australia are perfectly fine, law-abiding citizens. The difficulty with discussing Muslim immigration problems is that you don’t want to make people feel uncomfortable because of their religion.

Muslims are not only individuals, wholly different from each other, but national Islamic cultures are very different from each other.

The Saudi culture is different from the Turkish culture, which is different from the Afghan culture. So generalisations are dangerous.

Then there is the ever present risk of being labelled a racist. No matter how calmly the discussion is conducted, that is a big danger.

But the only people who don’t think there is a problem with Islam are those who live on some other planet. The reputation of Islam in the West is not poor because of prejudiced Western Islamophobia, still less because Western governments conduct some kind of anti-Islamic propaganda.

Instead, it is the behaviour of people claiming the justification of Islam for their actions that affects the reputation of Islam.

In January, the governor of the Punjab province in Pakistan, Salman Taseer, was murdered because he opposed the severity of the nation’s blasphemy laws.

One of his last acts was to visit a Christian woman sentenced to death for insulting the prophet. The governor’s murderer won wide public support.

ABC television recently showed a documentary on the killing of Ahmediya sect members in Indonesia, among the most liberal Muslim nations, because their Muslim murderers regarded them as a deviant sect. On YouTube you can watch scenes of a young Afghan woman being publicly flogged because she was seen in the company of a man who wasn’t her husband or brother.

In Saudi Arabia, women are not allowed to drive cars.

In Iran, government thugs beat protesters to death to safeguard the rule of the mullahs.

This list could go on and on. It may very well be that the overwhelming majority of the world’s Muslims reject such actions. But it is fatuous to try to find a similar pattern of Christian, Buddhist or Jewish behaviour. You can find extremists in every religion and from every background, but there is no equivalence in the size and strength of the extremist tendency in other religions.

The Australian Muslim population is still relatively small, perhaps 400,000 or just under 2 per cent of the population.

The US-based Pew Research Centre has recently completed a big study on Muslim demographics and migration trends. It predicts that for Australia the Muslim population will grow by 80 per cent between now and 2030, to about 715,000, growing about four times as fast as the rest of the population, and reaching about 3 per cent of all Australians.

Such forecasts are always rough estimates, but this is based on fertility, migration and mortality trends, and it’s highly plausible.

It may be that by 2030 we will start to have a much more European-style, polarised society as a result.

Coming to these sombre conclusions marks a crisis of faith for me. All my life I have been, intellectually and as a matter of personal experience, strongly supportive of a big and completely racially non-discriminatory immigration program. This grew out of my convictions, my world view, and also my personal experience.

Mark Latham once remarked that the journalists and commentators who most vigorously support big immigration in Sydney live in the eastern suburbs, the inner city or the north shore. They don’t live in the western suburbs where life is much more hard scrabble.

Latham has something of a point. It’s easy to be completely relaxed about your society when you look down on it from a metaphorical penthouse. But his point never applied to me. I grew up in Lewisham, a modest little suburb about 7km west of the Sydney central business district. Its more affluent neighbours, Petersham and Stanmore, yearn to be seen as inner city. On the western side, Lewisham is flanked by Summer Hill and Ashfield, both a little more affluent. When I was a kid in Lewisham in the 1950s and 60s it was already racially diverse, surely as racially diverse as any suburb in Australia at the time. It was a bit of a religious ghetto: a big Catholic church with four priests, a Catholic hospital, two Christian Brothers high schools, a convent, a Catholic infants’ school.

But because the church was racially universal, so was the suburb. For a time at school we were placed alphabetically: Saad, Scarfone, Sheridan, Taurian–Lebanese, Italian, Irish, Italian.

In primary school I had one close Aboriginal friend, whom I now suspect may have been part of the Stolen Generations, and very close friends from Singapore, Papua New Guinea, Britain and Ireland. In primary school I didn’t seek out diversity, it was just naturally all around me.

I was a happy kid, I liked my friends and I assumed that a multi-coloured classroom and playground were as natural as the air.

Like many children of that era, I was more than half in love with America and early on imbibed an American-style belief in growth and greatness. I wanted Australia to be big and strong, and that meant lots more people.

The politics of the time were all about the Cold War. I was deeply anti-communist. As a result I strongly supported the South Vietnamese in the Vietnam War, which meant I supported the Australian and American commitments in support of the South Vietnamese.

By the war’s end in 1975 I was at university and this was an unusual position among student activists, but support for the alliance was the majority position among the wider population.

When the South Vietnamese lost the war in 1975 and were invaded by North Vietnam, I knew we had to help our former allies. When the South Vietnamese refugee outflow began, I became committed to refugees.

This also began a lifelong involvement with Asia.

My advocacy on behalf of the South Vietnamese refugees was passionate, almost monomaniacal, and I tried the patience of many editors with endless writing on the subject, even, or especially, when it wasn’t in the news.

One politician I met way back then in the late 70s was Philip Ruddock, later immigration minister. We worked together on a number of Vietnamese refugee cases.

But between the late 70s, and today, the nature of people seeking to come to Australia as refugees has changed fundamentally. Ruddock recognised this before me, but I have caught up eventually.

For Ruddock, who had argued very strongly on behalf of the Vietnamese, there were two moments that told him things had changed.

One came in a coastal Vietnamese city, when he met a manufacturing boss, who was also a senior figure in the local Communist Party. He was looking after his grandchildren because his son and daughter-in-law had left as boatpeople, trying to win the prize of resettlement in the US, Canada or Australia. That certainly did not make them bad people, but neither did it make them genuine refugees. The outflow of real refugees had ended and the refugee system for the Vietnamese had become a channel for immigration.

The second epiphany for Ruddock came when members of the Vietnamese community asked him why the government was admitting so many former Viet Cong to Australia as refugees. Being a former Viet Cong doesn’t make you a bad person, even in the eyes of a South Vietnam partisan like me. But neither does it mean logically that you are a refugee from your own political force.

Because of my passionate commitment to the refugee issue, it took me a long time to wake up to the routine scamming of refugee processes today.

The Vietnamese outflow ended before I faced up to the change, and when the Muslim boatpeople started to arrive in Australia I mistakenly applied my old paradigm to the new situation.

In 2009 I spent a month in Europe–Britain, Germany, France and Belgium–working on Muslim immigration issues.

I interviewed government ministers, immigration officials, non-government organisation advocates, immigrants themselves and almost anyone who would talk to me. What became clear was that uncontrolled Muslim immigration from North Africa (and from Pakistan in Britain’s case) had presented itself as an asylum issue, and thereby disabled Europe’s political response, and had been a disaster on the ground.

Christopher Caldwell’s book, Reflections on the Revolution in Europe, the best book of any kind on public policy I have read, establishes definitively that this has been overwhelmingly a determined illegal immigration, not a refugee question.

The same is happening in northern Australia now, and as the Gillard government loses control of the situation, the number of illegal immigrants, almost all Muslim, will increase, exactly replicating the dynamics of Europe’s disaster, though of course on a much smaller scale.

So while I remain an advocate of a bigger immigration program, and would be happy to have the refugee quota enlarged, I am now a strong critic of lax borders and allowing illegal immigrants to turn up without papers and then settle permanently.

Caldwell’s book, along with the evidence of my own eyes, also convinced me that many North Africans were not going to Europe to embrace European values but to continue their North African life, with its values, at a European living standard and at the expense of the European taxpayer.

Living next to Lakemba for nearly 15 years also gave me a different view of how immigration can go wrong. Our sons went initially to a state primary school that had a brilliant principal and did a fine job.

But as they approached secondary school a senior teacher told us that our boys had academic potential and it would be a tragedy to send them to the local high school. It was riven with violence and misogyny, drugs and gang and ethnic conflict.

If you find yourself unexpectedly in a war zone, your instinct is to evacuate the family, so the boys went to a private Catholic school, which was racially and even religiously diverse, though I don’t believe there were any Muslim kids there. It was excellent.

Lakemba and surrounding areas such as Punchbowl had a large Lebanese Muslim population, many of whom had come when Malcolm Fraser crazily instituted a come-one, come-all admissions policy for those claiming to be refugees from the Lebanon conflicts of the 80s.

Replicating the European experience that the second generation had more trouble than the first, it was the sons of some of these immigrants who figured heavily in anti-social activities.

I was shocked to discover the growth of jihadi culture in Lakemba. We used to go to its main street for shopping and for food.

One day, waiting for a pizza order, I wandered into the Muslim bookshop. I was astounded to see titles such as The International Jew or The Truth about the Pope, amid a welter of anti-Semitic, anti-Christian and pro-extremist literature.

The revenge attacks on white Australians after the Cronulla riots originated out of Punchbowl. A number of media crews were attacked when they went to local mosques. A large number of those charged with terrorism offences in Australia stayed in or had associations with the area.

Due to the brilliant and fearless reporting of this paper’s Richard Kerbaj, who spoke perfect Arabic, we found that at a number of the mosques in the area outright hatred was being preached: anti-Semitic, misogynist, conspiratorial. Most of the time, these sermons didn’t advocate violence. The speakers were what Britain’s David Cameron has called “non-violent extremists”.

The advent of satellite television made it easier for these folks to live a life apart. Hezbollah’s Al-Manar TV station was available on satellite packages. Most Arab homes you went into had Arabic TV playing in the background.

The anti-social behaviour became more acute.

One son was playing cricket with friends when they were challenged by a group of teenagers, whom they presumed to be Lebanese but may have been of other Middle Eastern origin, who objected to white boys playing cricket. A full-scale, if brief, fist fight ensued.

One son was challenged by a boy with a gun. Lakemba police station was shot up. Crime increased on the railway line.

I was in the habit of taking an evening constitutional, walking a long route from the station to home. At some point it became unwise to walk on Canterbury Road. A white guy in a suit was a natural target for abuse or a can of beer or something else hurled from a passing car.

Occasionally at the train station I was recognised and my pro-Israel articles were not popular, though nothing serious ever came of these incidents.

The worst thing I saw myself was two strong young men, of Middle Eastern appearance, waiting outside the train station.

A middle-aged white woman emerged from the station alone. She was rather oddly dressed, with a strange hair-do.

The two young men walked up beside her, began taunting her and then finished their effort by spitting in her face. They laughed riotously and walked away. She wiped the spittle off her face and hurried off home. It was all over in a few seconds.

These events in Lakemba and nearby are not unique. Lots of people from lots of different backgrounds commit violent crime in Australia. There is a good deal of unemployment, combined with a highly advanced informal culture of welfare exploitation, often freely discussed at the local schools, in the area. But Lakemba is different from most of Australia.

A senior policeman from nearby Bankstown once told me that policing in the Bankstown area was unlike working anywhere else in Australia, and he was amazed how much violent crime went unreported by the media.

Does Islam itself have a role in these problems? The answer is complex and nuanced but it must be a qualified, and deeply reluctant, yes.

This is the only explanation consistent with the fact other immigrant communities, which may have experienced difficult circumstances in the first generation, don’t display the same characteristics in the second generation.

But there is a deeper reason as well. As the great scholar of Islam, Bernard Lewis, has written: “The community of Islam was church and state in one, with the two indistinguishably interwoven.”

This isn’t just a theoretical observation. It means that imams at mosques tend to be preaching about politics, and doing so from a cosmology deeply influenced by paranoia and conspiracy.

Many Australian Islamic institutions receive funding from Saudi Arabia, but I know from my work in Southeast Asia and Europe that the Saudis almost always fund an extremist interpretation of Islam.

To have concerns about these matters is not racism or xenophobia. It is reasonable.

It may also be that when young men of Islamic background experience failure and alienation they are much more readily prone to entrepreneurs of identity who offer them purpose through the jihadi ideology, which has a large overlap with what they hear at the mosque and what they see on Arabic TV.

This is simply not true for Buddhists or Confucians or Sikhs or Jews or Christians, and to pretend so, to make all religions seem equal, is to simply deny reality.

Islam is a deep sea with a tradition of much spiritual goodness and genuine insight.

However, the Koran itself contains numerous injunctions to violent jihad and suppression of infidels. It also contains passages against violence and against compulsion in religion.

These things are to a considerable extent matters of interpretation but it is undeniable that at the very least a sizeable minority of Muslims choose an extremist interpretation.

How can Australia sensibly take account of all this while maintaining a non-discriminatory immigration program? Three obvious courses suggest themselves.

In the formal immigration program, there should be a rigid adherence to skills qualifications so that the people who come here are well educated, easily employable and speak good English.

The inflow of illegal immigrants by boat in the north, almost all Muslim, mostly unskilled, should be stopped.

Within the formal refugee and humanitarian allocation of 13,500 places a year, a legitimate stress should be placed on need but also on the ability to integrate into Australian society.

And, finally, we simply should not place immigration officers in the countries with the greatest traditions of radicalism.

A few years ago there was an informal view across government that very few visas should be issued to people from Afghanistan, Pakistan or Iraq, as these were the three likeliest sources of extremism.

These sorts of discussions take place all the time among senior officials, politicians and others. But I have never encountered a policy area in which private and public positions are so different.

It is right to be sensitive and avoid needless offence.

It is wrong to avoid reality altogether in such an important area of national policy.

No one in Europe, 25 years ago, thought they would be in the mess they’re in today.

Australia has been a successful immigration country. But the truth is not all immigrants are the same. And it may be much easier than people think to turn success into failure.

* * *

EUROPE TURNS AGAINST DIVIDED SOCIETY

IN France, recent polls put National Front leader Marine Le Pen ahead of all other contenders for the French presidency. The National Front is a traditionally far-right extreme group, with an inheritance of anti-Semitism.

It has recently ditched the anti-Semitism and now stands primarily against Muslim immigration and Islamic influence in France.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said recently Germany’s attempt to create a multicultural society had failed completely.

Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron recently denounced European-style multiculturalism, saying: “We have encouraged different cultures to live separate lives, apart from each other and apart from the mainstream.

“We’ve failed to provide a vision of society to which they feel they want to belong. We’ve even tolerated these segregated communities behaving in ways that run completely counter to our values.”

France’s President Nicolas Sarkozy has agreed with Cameron and Merkel, that multiculturalism is a complete bust, as has Spain’s former leader, Jose Maria Aznar.

Britain’s former prime minister Gordon Brown said shortly before he lost office that 75 per cent of terror plots in Britain came from Pakistan or had a direct Pakistani connection. There are 800,000 Pakistanis living in Britain.

Across Europe, anti-Muslim parties are gaining electoral strength. They are often described as anti-immigration parties but in truth they have little complaint about immigrants other than Muslim immigrants. Switzerland has banned minarets. Even Sweden has an anti-Islam party.

All this is happening in Europe, the most liberal continent on earth, in the face of furious opposition from the liberal elite, who regard it as racist and, worse, incipient fascism, leftover colonialism and every other kind of -ism you can imagine.

Greg Sheridan

* * *

THERE ARE NO WORRIES

GREG Sheridan in The Australian, November 6, 1996: There is nothing in multiculturalism that could cause any worry to any normal person. Multiculturalism officially promotes an overriding loyalty to Australia, respect for other people’s rights and Australian law, recognition of people’s cultural origins, respect for diversity, the need to make maximum economic use of the skills people bring to Australia and equity in access to government services.

What mostly passes for “debate” about multiculturalism is really the psychology of paranoia as a political style. That is why opinion polls on these issues are often self-contradictory. People will say they think there should be fewer migrants from Asia, but that the policy should be non-discriminatory. Or people might say that everybody should speak English, but then denounce funding for multiculturalism when its chief expenditure is to teach migrants English.

Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Mike H.

    I lost interest around the parts where he described London as a great metropolis and praised America’s insane non-white immigration policies.

    Close, but no cigar.

  • Sheila

    The author is your standard right liberal, who praises multiculturalism and diversity but suddenly finds it uncomfortable when the Muslims start to prevail. He notes increasing societal breakdown and Muslim harassment of Whites, but takes pains to praise their diverse cultures and their pathology of a religion. I have neither sympathy nor respect for Disingenuous White Liberals. Let this man choke on the results of his one worldism and cease preaching to others, who long ago saw the idiocy of his still tightly clung to ideals.

  • john

    You’d have to be living in a parallel universe to think this writer is sane. He’s a nut case. Was born a nut case. And will always be a nut case. In other words he’s a liberal. The Russians know how to deal with idiots like this.

  • olewhitelady

    The whole idea of multiculturalism, regardless of whether it’s in North America, Europe, or Australia, is an invention of loony leftist elites. Most Westerners favor their own groups and are uninterested in seeing their cultures mutated by input from outsiders. The left wants to destroy anything that stands in the way of its agenda, so the power of white Christians has to go–even if Moslems replace us.

  • Tim in Indiana

    There is a big problem of illegal immigration in the US, but that is overwhelmingly from Latin America. The Hispanic desire to be part of America at a civic level is evident in the huge recruitment rates of Hispanics in the US military. If you’re willing to die for your new country that is surely a convincing sign of commitment.

    The writer has a “warm and fuzzy” view of Hispanic immigration that is not borne out by reality. True, there are Hispanics who are willing to join the armed forces, but there are an equal if not larger number who would just as soon see a large part of the US broken off and added to Mexico.

  • Freyr

    European Politicians have their own particular lingo which may not coincide with our’s. Whey they “multiculturalism” has failed – that doesn’t mean they are going to limit immigration. It simply means that they are switching over to a more assimilationist viewpoint, one closer to our’s. And it will fail just as it has here.

  • Schoolteacher

    Clueless. I couldn’t read it all. His positive description of immigration to the U.S. was more than I could take.

  • ehunt

    The US, on the other hand, does not practice multiculturalism, yet is the biggest and most successful immigrant society in history—more than 310 million people live there from every corner of the globe.

    The True Believer leftist ideologue just keeps reappearing.

    Wrong Aussie-Boy. America is imploding. Whole cities have

    been abandoned by whites trying to find somewhere..anywhere to escape. We have out of control crime, Mexican Drug Cartels, Jamaican Drug Lords, Somali Sex Traffickers, Pakistani Car Bombers..by what stretch of the imagination is immigration a

    success? Its a world class disaster. Take a look at a

    a newsreel or simple footage form an American street in the 1950s

    and look at it now. Its worse than Havana before/after Fidel.

    Sorry but this writer is still in an absolute dream world.

  • Anonymous

    The first step is to realize that you are being brainwashed via totalitarian control of media, education, and politics. None of the “issues” as you know them, are real. They are a carefully manufactured reality designed to control your mind. Many are mutually exclusive, “controlled opposition”. Both sides of the debate are carefully controlled with the real outcome, mind control. Once you realize and accept this, it becomes easier and easier to see. So easy, in fact, that the scope is truly disturbing. Then again, you start to see cracks in the system and that there are Achilles heels (for example, what would happen if everyone suddenly decided TV was boring and stopped watching it…..we are starting to find out).

    The second thing to do is to notice who is doing this. This is much more difficult than the first because of the level of taboo programmed into people. You will feel pain, guilt, shame and cognitive dissonance, as the truth becomes unavoidable. You will also feel isolation…..speaking the truth, outside a small but growing group of people who are waking up….is SEVERELY punished. In many countries, you could end up in prison. In some, you could end up dead. God only knows what will happen when that realization can no longer be suppressed anymore. Look at eastern europe to see first western europe then the future of the US.

    Lastly, and most importantly (and most difficult) is to ponder why. What is it they are attempting to force you to do and not to do? Resist.

    Alot can be written on that. But here are some suggestions. Learn to worship God. God is real and Christianity is the source of all that is good, holy, decent, powerful and effective in the world. What whites built, we did so because we were Christians. They are trying to take that away from us. Connect with a bible centered church of true believers. Gently point out what you can to them but don’t push too much. The brainwashing includes lots of landmines designed to destroy love, intimacy and trust. Set aside your bitterness that they would hate you forever, if they suspected what you think on these issues. Forgive them. Love them. HELP THEM.

    Live in the whitest community you can find that does not tolerate liberalism. Own lots and lots of guns and know people who own lots of guns. Live where the law allows you to legally execute criminals (think Joe Horn). Form attachments with people of a survivalist mentality. And practice short to medium term disaster survival (how many of the Japanese wish today that they did that yesterday).

    Throw out your TV and all popular culture and encourage others to do the same.

  • GetBackJack

    By the third paragraph, I was so turned off by his praises of other cultures and races that I no longer wished to hear any of his opinions or newfound beliefs. Too late buddy. You’ve screwed yourself, your country, your ancestors and the inheritance they gave you, your children, and your fellow Australians of whom some had the wisdom and foresight to see the potential disaster you so willingly embraced. Game over.

  • Carl

    This is the best you can get away with in Australia right now. Australia doesn’t have a right to free speech, and never claimed to. You have to add a lot of waffle to get away with lines like “But the only people who don’t think there is a problem with Islam are those who live on some other planet.”

  • Anonymous

    Was I the only one who trudged through to the end of this? I became disheartened within the first few paragraphs but soldiered on. There was small recompense for the effort.

    Yes, Islam is bad and, newsflash my Aussie friend, reconquista isn’t any better. I thought there’d be some kind of epiphany where he generalizes the negative outcomes of too much immigration to all foreigners, but he’s still living in another world.

    This tidbit made me retch:

    “Islam is a deep sea with a tradition of much spiritual goodness and genuine insight.”

  • white guy

    which is why us europeans gotta stick togther, the blessing and riches of diversity and the multicult affect us all no matter where we live, canada, US, etc.

  • Fall of the Tyrants

    Wow… Can someone who managed to muddle their way through this sum up the author’s point in a few sentences for us?

  • Browser

    “The Hispanic desire to be part of America at a civic level is evident in the huge recruitment rates of Hispanics in the US military. If you’re willing to die for your new country that is surely a convincing sign of commitment.”

    ———————

    Rubbish! They’re not willing to die for America. It represents a job, security, free meals and med, training, and a chance to see the world.

    What a bunch of hogwash this was. I didn’t have the patience to follow this inane nonsense through to the end.

  • Roy

    The Left often cite ‘evidence’ that multiculturalism works. This is the BIG LIE. What they’re really saying is that, on rare occasions, people can tolerate each other DESPITE the barriers put there by multiculturalism. Not BECAUSE of multiculturalism.

    Homogeneous nations take it for granted that they won’t have these problems in the first place – why would they? It’s like telling a non-smoker saying that smoking cigarettes is ‘successful’ because you haven’t got lung cancer after chain-smoking for 40 years.

    Liberals report feel-good stories of how two communities finally made peace after fighting for years, or how a couple got married despite their different cultural backgrounds. They give the credit to multiculturalism when really they should be blaming it for all the problems up to that point.

    The liberal left have got it all backwards. When they talk of a ‘successful’ multicultural society they mean it has fewer problems than a less successful one.

    Sometimes they hijack the occasional success of an ethnic person and say it’s a multicultural success story, without showing how his success was actually due to his ‘culture’ or race.

    Next time someone mentions a ‘successful’ multicultural community ask them how the different cultures caused them to be cohesive, and how an all, say, Chinese community couldn’t have pulled it off. When they mumble something about overcoming their cultural differences act all confused and say “you mean they overcame the problems put there by multiculturalism in the first place”?!

    Next time the Left give credit for something to multiculturalism ask them to provide CAUSATIVE evidence for it, not weak correlative anecdotes. Ask them what a FAILED multicultural society would look like.

  • Anders

    12 — Anonymous wrote at 10:52 PM on April 4:

    Was I the only one who trudged through to the end of this?

    You may well have been Anon! Like the rest of the posters above, I ended up skimming through; what a whole lot of nothing!

    He’s lost his ‘faith’ in multiculturalism (note the word. ‘faith’) but he’s too scared to tell everyone why, whilst pointing out how great the aliens are at the same time.

    A simpering fool.

  • Tim Mc Hugh

    “They are a manufactured reality designed to control your mind.”

    I just had a HUGE argument with my girl. She was watching Law and Order SVU and I went beserk on her. I screamed I couldn`t stand the scripted reality and then turned on her and asked, “Why are you being entertained by the rape of an 11 year old by her own father?!?’

    So she split for a weekend in Scottsdale. And I happened across an article on “Deconstructing Law and Order”. Outstanding! It made me realize I wasn`t the crazy one, that others (like here) saw the exact same thing. Two of the “laws” I remember from the show were these, 1.) Whether guilty or innocent, the handsome White guy will always have an unlikeable abrasive personality. And 2.) IF the woman is guilty of a crime instead of a man she will ALWAYS be either a chain smoker and /or have been driven to it by an abusive husband or male father figure…” After reading the article I repledged to not only no longer place myself where trouble and deceit are but to quit bringing it into my living room…

  • Honey

    Greg Sheridan has an Indian wife, so his loyalties have always been mixed over multiculturalism. I think as an influential white man he see a totally different side to multiculturalism as a powerless white woman.

    Ten years ago I started to refer to Sydney as a multicultrual hell and fled back to my native state. Even then I was saying I’d prefer to go back to my bland meat and three veg meals than put up with the utter hostility and alienation I felt in Sydney from mass immigration and multiculturalism. I felt utterly displaced and as a white Australian women, totally reviled.

    I’m amazed at the silence that exists over the hostility toward white women. I thought it was me, and then a white collegue who married an Asian man told me that many Asian women from his community told her before her wedding that if they got divorced it would be her fault because white women made terrible wives and mothers. Exactly the same thing I heard Asians tell me.

  • Blues Magoo

    There was a documentary series on TV called ‘gangs of Oz’ about Australias various crime gangs.There were episodes about the Aussie-Italian Mafia,Anglo biker gangs etc.The episode that stood out for me was about the Assyrian Kings,an Arab Christian street gang based in Sydney.They were formed by a group of refugees who fled from the Iraqi army.They established their credentials by stabbing an off duty policeman to death(the fatal wound pierced his heart and came out of his back).Like the Muslim gangs the Assyrian Kings are major players in drug distribution and car rebirthing.If they had wound up in any other Western nation the outcome would be the same.They seem to regard liberal democracies as weak and ripe for exploitation.If immigration policies don’t toughen up dramatically we will only be importing more trouble.

  • Anonymous

    Ludicrous self-righteous hypocrite!

  • Anonymous

    Poster #9 says…..The second thing to do is to notice who is doing this. This is much more difficult than the first because of the level of taboo programmed into people. You will feel pain, guilt, shame and cognitive dissonance, as the truth becomes unavoidable. You will also feel isolation…..speaking the truth, outside a small but growing group of people who are waking up….is SEVERELY punished. In many countries, you could end up in prison. In some, you could end up dead. God only knows what will happen when that realization can no longer be suppressed anymore. Look at eastern europe to see first western europe then the future of the US.

    —————————————————————-

    I must concur. But, most White Americans will never wake up to the truth, let alone proclaim it.

    The brainwashing is complete and I must say, especially in the Christian churches of today. They don’t speak the truth of the Bible, they only preach what is PC acceptable and what makes them “popular” and what brings in the money and media fame.

    Have you noticed how wimpish most Christian “men” are today? Same with the women. I could never envision them being Christ’s warriors or physically fighting for the loved ones. They have become total cowards and God’s truth evades them completely.

  • sbuffalonative

    “Greg Sheridan has an Indian wife”

    I find that easy to believe.

    Mr. Sheridan didn’t really lose faith in mulitCULTuralism. He appears to believe it could work if everyone worked to make it work. In this regard, he is merely frustrated with Asians, Muslims, and other minorities for not meeting white Australians half-way.

    “Islam is a deep sea with a tradition of much spiritual goodness and genuine insight.”

    Typically, Mr. Sheridan praises Islam for their ‘spiritual goodness and genuine insight’. He wants mulitCULTuralism to work and believes it can if WE simply try harder.

    I’m reminded of the mantra, ‘Can’t we all just get along?’

    The answer is no. Although Mr. Sheridan likely believes in a common humanity and shared values such as love for our children, our definition and means to achieve our goals can we wildly different. For example, who is responsible for making sure children are successful in school? Is it the role of the parents or the state? Who should pay, and how much, to ensure that children are successful in life? Who is to blame when they fail?

    This is less a statement of being disillusioned by multiCULTuralism and more a plea to ‘find solutions’ to make it work.

  • John Engelman

    Immigrant groups are not of equal value. Orientals and Indians usually perform and behave somewhat better than whites. Other groups perform and and behave much worse.

    Everything secular liberals hate in the religious right and the Bible Belt is far more true of Muslims and Islamic culture. Secular liberals are having a difficult time learning this. I am glad that the learning process is beginning.

  • Anonymous

    This ‘journalist’ has finally come to realise that enforced multiculturalism and mass immigration has totally devastated Western societies. But this liberal with his head in the sand, can’t or won’t, completely shrug off the brainwashing and admit that for thirty years he got it totally wrong, and instead keeps the readers going round in circles by attempting to point out the non-existent saving graces of certain types of multiculturalism. Like others I couldn’t even finish his article which I found to be pure unadulterated waffle.

    If anyone needed further proof that the Marxist/globalist political cabal and their controlled media brainwashers inhabit a different planet from the rest of us, then they need look no further than the author of this article and the present-day brainwashed political place-men now ruling all Western nations. In Europe, under the yoke of the Marxist/globalist EUSSR Superstate, these Central Banker puppet politicians such as Cameron, Sarkozy and the rest of the pro-EU placemen, continue to flood our countries with mass immigration from the Third World, not for the benefit of their people, but to further the One-world government totalitarian agenda of the Central Banker Marxist/globalist cabal.

  • drdeeselixir

    This ‘journalist’ has finally come to realise that enforced multiculturalism and mass immigration has totally devastated Western societies. But this liberal with his head in the sand, can’t or won’t, completely shrug off the brainwashing and admit that for thirty years he got it totally wrong, and instead keeps the readers going round in circles by attempting to point out the non-existent saving graces of certain types of multiculturalism. Like others I couldn’t even finish his article which I found to be pure unadulterated waffle.

    If anyone needed further proof that the Marxist/globalist political cabal and their controlled media brainwashers inhabit a different planet from the rest of us, then they need look no further than the author of this article and the present-day brainwashed political place-men now ruling all Western nations. In Europe, under the yoke of the Marxist/globalist EUSSR Superstate, these Central Banker puppet politicians such as Cameron, Sarkozy and the rest of the pro-EU placemen, continue to flood our countries with mass immigration from the Third World, not for the benefit of their people, but to further the One-world government totalitarian agenda of the Central Banker Marxist/globalist cabal.

  • Anonymous

    The author gets it wrong by blaming Islam. Lebanese Christians are just as bad as Muslims. Their behavior comes from their DNA.

    It is race, not creed, which is the problem with immigration. Flooding the country with even the most docile non-whites will eventually erode away the good things about Australia.

  • Anonymous

    Contemporary mass immigration in the Western world is simply a banker’s plot to exponentially increase the global money supply.

    Is it any coincidence why Australia, Canada, the U.S. and Europe all have nearly identical immigration policies, which force a net gain on all their populations? Conservative or liberal, it’s the same policy year after year.

    When people endlessly debate the pro’s and con’s of multiculturalism, they’re missing the forest for the trees. It’s about money. Democracy is a sham; we’re being controlled by unelected dictators.

  • Wayne

    Jean Raspail, in The Camp of the Saints, wrote about the dual virus infecting Western culture. The one part is white guilt, whereby the Western nations are brow beat into accepting responsibility for the failure of the 3rd world peoples and made to feel that they do no deserve the inheritance of thier ancestors. When the natural self-defense mechanism kicks in against this, then the 2nd virus comes forth–racism. Krytonite for white people.

    White guilt backed up by cries of racism, with multi-culti immigration policies are the horsemen of the West’s apocalpyse.

    How do we combat white guilt, without which the other two will be ineffective?

  • Greg

    To 14 Fall of the Tyrants:

    I find these types of write-ups very telling. An intelligent, racially liberal conservative close to the truth hems and haws his way around it, although he does trip upon a few good things. Yes, diversity has turned out to be bad he realizes, but also is quick to point out “discrimination” is bad too, so avoiding needed cultural and racial generalizations becomes his raison d’etre.

    Yes, I agree “most” (+50%) minorities are generally tolerable, law-abiding residents that cause little to no trouble. Unfortunately, the ones that do cause trouble more than destroy whatever benefits the good (and all too often, silent) minorities bring. One must ask this question. Would the West be better as 95% or more white than it is now? If so, multiculturalism is a bad thing, and immigration from non-white nations should be stopped.

  • Anonymous

    “being Indian in Britain is very chic” (and that’s not racist)

    I weep for the memory of a once proud nation. Almost all the good White people must have joined the army and died at war. I weep.

    I read the whole article, he is struggling with losing his religion.

  • Bon, From the Land of Babble

    Tim Mc Hugh #18

    Tim can you post a link to that article?

    Bon

  • Tim Mc Hugh

    “Tim Mc Hugh, Can you post a link to that article”

    I couldn`t find the exact one but there seem to be plenty of people taking potshots at Law And Order. I tried to find it by entering Deconstructing Law and Order and then Does Law and Order protray reality? I DID find a site called “Everything there is to Know about all the shows of the Law and Order Brand.” Though I didn`t have time to peruse it, a quick glance seems to make me think that this might be as good or better than the one I found. Talks about the charcvaters having the chance to ‘display moronic facial expressions” etc. hope this helps. By the way, I still don`t know how to repost a link as I was born in the year 8 BC. Before Cap`n Crunch! Hope this helps

  • Dagworthy

    No one in Europe, 25 years ago, thought they would be in the mess they’re in today.

    Actually, Enoch Powell, Member of Parliament, foresaw this in his

    “Rivers of Blood” speech in April 1968.

    Mr. Powell quoted one constituent:

    “In this country in 15 or 20 years’ time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man.”

    He stated

    Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad. We must be mad, literally mad, as a nation to be permitting the annual inflow of some 50,000 dependants, who are for the most part the material of the future growth of the immigrant-descended population. It is like watching a nation busily engaged in heaping up its own funeral pyre. So insane are we that we actually permit unmarried persons to immigrate for the purpose of founding a family with spouses and fiancés whom they have never seen.

    In the speech, he correctly forecast the effects of permitting immigrants to bring their extended families.

    These trends we face now were set in motion decades ago. We facing the consequences of these decisions made long ago.

  • Browser

    “These trends we face now were set in motion decades ago. We facing the consequences of these decisions made long ago.” These trends we face now were set in motion decades ago. We facing the consequences of these decisions made long ago.

    You are exactly right. These events, that are by now so glaringly obvious, did not just “happen” to come about within the last few years. Nor are they an accident. They are the results of a comprehensive, long-term PLAN that was set in motion decades ago. (E.g. the 1965 Emmanuel Cellar immigration act, for instance, which he worked on for 40 years before finally getting it passed.) His dream (our nightmare) is now coming true.

    The fact that this is happening everywhere now, in ALL white countries (and ONLY white countries) is proof positive that it is not any mere coincidence. That would be impossible.

  • The g Factor

    Sheridan seems more anti-Muslim than anti-multiculturalism. There are problems with some Muslims in Australia, but the most over-represented migrant groups in Australia’s prisons are good Christian boys from Samoa and Tonga, and the next most over-represented group is Sudanese. Migrants from Turkey (95% Muslim)are less likely to be in jail than the Australian-born. Sheridan has focussed on cultural problems not racial ones – and latter will be the most insidious in the long run.