As global challenges escalate, the sooner we snap out of this cultural confusion the better it will be for almost everything. A good start would be identifying those who’ve taken part in the recent anti-Semitic protests, prosecuting those who are Australian citizens and deporting those who are not. …
Not long after the Cronulla riots in 2005, the Howard government introduced a citizenship test to try to ensure everyone settling in this country understood what was expected of them.
Question 18 of the current official practice version of the test asks: “Can you encourage violence against a person or group of people if you have been insulted?” The correct answer, of three alternatives, is: “No, it is against Australian values and the law.”
Question 19 asks: “Should people tolerate one another where they find that they disagree?” The correct answer is: “Yes, peaceful disagreement reflects Australian values in relation to mutual respect.”
To pass the test and be eligible for citizenship, newcomers are supposed to answer correctly all five of the Australian values questions, of which these two are in the practice version. Clearly, sentiments such as “gas the Jews” and “f–k the Jews”, as thousands of people chanted in the forecourt of the Sydney Opera House shortly after the Hamas atrocity in Israel, don’t conform to the values that are supposed to characterise this country.
Some of those proclaiming such race hate would have been Australian born; while others would have been mere residents and, therefore, never exposed to a values test. But many would have been recent citizens, Australians of convenience perhaps, who assented to something they didn’t believe in order to gain a privilege. …
The fact tens of thousands of Australians now feel strongly enough to join protests, chanting “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free”, effectively calling for the destruction of Israel in a new holocaust, is hardly consistent with the mutual respect and tolerance that many of them have supposedly signed up to, let alone the decency and respect that previously characterised Australian society. …
Multiculturalism has failed (except that it succeeded brilliantly in importing lots of left voters):
What have we done to our country in accepting migrants so at odds with mainstream Australian thinking?
In a powerful and prescient speech delivered a few weeks prior to October 7, British Home Secretary Suella Braverman, herself the child of Mauritian and Kenyan immigrants of Indian background, attacked multiculturalism as it’s practised in most Western countries. “Uncontrolled immigration, inadequate integration, and a misguided dogma of multiculturalism” she said, “have proven a toxic combination for Europe over the last few decades.”
“Multiculturalism,” she said, “makes no demands of the incomer to integrate.”
“It has failed,” she said, “because it allowed people to come to our society and live parallel lives in it. They could be in the society but not of the society. And in extreme cases, they could pursue lives aimed at undermining the stability and threatening the security of our society.” …
Nearly all of those found guilty of terrorist offences in Australian courts have been recent immigrants from the Middle East. …
Many of the angry protesters now flooding Western cities have been from recent immigrant communities that plainly don’t think their Australian or British citizenship means respect for a fellow democracy where the rights of women, gays and other minorities are taken seriously. …
One way to limit the impact of unintegrated minorities would be to reduce immigration across the board. This would also have the advantage of alleviating the downward pressure on wages, the upward pressure on housing costs, and the massive pressure on infrastructure produced by current immigration at record levels.
But what’s really needed is a much stronger expectation of people that, whatever their background, to use Tony Abbott’s term, they’ll join “Team Australia”. That doesn’t imply migrants should forget their homelands or abandon old values. It clearly does mean, though, a readiness to adhere to Australian law.
Another problem we must tackle head on is mosques and Islamic centres that spew violence and hate under the guise of religious preaching. In Britain and France, the failure of successive governments to take this threat seriously has enabled some Islamic institutions to become de facto radicalisation centres and we cannot allow that to become further entrenched here. Entities of concern should all be audited, sermons translated and assessed for hate speech and any government support or charitable status urgently reviewed.
See the case against, here.