The Labor government’s ban on live cattle exports to Indonesia has brought economic issues over trade to the fore; however, one matter that has hardly been looked at is the cultural aspect of this issue. The Labor Party has had a long-held commitment to the political doctrine of multiculturalism (so too has the Liberal Party, although to a somewhat lesser extent). Surely, under this doctrine, the cultural manner of how the Indonesians treat animals is their own affair? Or are multiculturalists just a massive collection of hypocrites?
The ideology of multiculturalism holds that all cultures are equal and that we should be accepting of other cultures in our country as well as overseas. Cleverly, considering the illogical nature of their ideology, the multiculturalism ideologues like to give themselves a “Get out of jail free” card when it comes to the practical application of their idiocy; they say that multiculturalism accepts all cultures in Australia, so long as those cultures abide by Australian law – even though this “loophole”, or “escape clause”, is contradictory to the idea of cultural pluralism (multiculturalism).
All very “clever”; however, the multiculturalists’ “loophole” does not apply to cultural practices in other countries. As multiculturalism holds that all cultures are equal and that we should therefore accept other cultures (and even embrace them), and that we should not judge other cultures by our own cultural standards, then the multiculturalists should have no problem with how the Indonesians treat animals. Many Asian cultures have different standards to Western cultures on their treatment of animals and their legal systems are often silent on how animals should be treated, simply because it is not an important issue to them.
All the good multiculturalists should be jumping up and down in loud protest against the Labor government’s high-handed treatment of the Indonesians in relation to their handling of cattle. The government’s attitude to Indonesia is “culturally biased”, not “culturally inclusive”, and certainly not “accepting” or “embracing” of Indonesian culture; their attitude might even be regarded by some as – gasp – racist! After all, it’s not like anyone would throw around the “racist” tag for political purposes, is it?
If the multiculturalists are really true believers in their own ideology, then it is time that they all come out in loud support of the right of foreign countries to continue on with their cultural practices, without Western interference and without Western countries being judgmental.
This is a great opportunity for the multiculturalists to defend the right of Third World cultures to go on with their various “interesting” cultural conventions; it is a great opportunity for the multiculturalists to embrace worldwide cultural diversity.
Here’s a short list of foreign cultural practices for the multiculturalists to start defending:
* inhumane treatment and killing of cattle
* inhumane treatment and killing of dogs, cats, and other animals
* female circumcision
* honour killings
* Islamic extremism
* public stonings
* cutting off thieves’ hands as a punishment
* discrimination against women in general
* not allowing women to drive cars, vote, or dress as they wish in public
* arresting improperly-dressed women by special police units
* the widespread marrying of cousins (leading to birth defects)
* marrying off young girls to middle-aged men
What a fantastic opportunity for all multiculturalists to show everyone how much they believe in their ideology!
Or could it be that multiculturalism is actually a load of rubbish?
Could it be that multiculturalism is a contradictory, dangerous, divisive, and expensive mistake?
Could it be that the ideology of multiculturalism is so shaky and that the real-world aspects of this disastrous doctrine (the street-level realities brought on by massive Third World immigration) is such a touchy subject that both Liberal and Labor governments have made it illegal to openly and fully discuss the problems and causes of such realities (a reign of censorship brought in under the disguise of “religious vilification and racial vilification” laws, by both Labor and Liberal regimes)?
Could it be that the underlying psychological driving force of the leading multiculturalist ideologues is a deep-seated hatred for the West and/or a guilt-driven self-loathing of the West, brought on by the overwhelming success of Western countries around the world? Isn’t it just possible that multiculturalism is in fact an anti-Western and anti-White ideology that is not only badly thought-out, but is one that is deadly dangerous to the future of all Western nations, including Australia?
The implications of where the multiculturalists are leading us are horrendous. Such a future for our children, grandchildren, and our coming generations would be a nightmare.
When the inconsistencies and contradictions of the multiculturalists are considered, one important question needs to be asked:
Are multiculturalists a pack of hypocrites?
The answer should be obvious.
The real question is:
What are you going to do about it?