The Australian Government asked The Australian Human Rights Commission to lead the development and delivery of the National Anti-Racism Strategy. One of the first steps was to invite the public to attend consultations nationwide to discuss strategies to overcome racism in Australia.
On the recommendation of the Australian Protectionist Party I attended the consultation held in my local area. My motivation for attending was two fold. I have experienced anti-white racism and have become increasingly concerned special interest groups target these forums to push specific agendas.
During the two hour public consultation four key questions were presented about addressing racism which attendees answered in small groups. We were provided with the following definition of racial discrimination: “any act where a person is treated unfairly or vilified because of their race, colour, descent, national or ethnic origin.”. Just to give readers an idea of the type of questions presented, the second question was: What strategies are most effective in preventing and reducing racism?
I found the consultation predictably disillusioning and undemocratic. The Australian Human Rights Commission had every intent to make this process democratic and enlightening. One of the underlying flaws is that the majority of attendees were all ‘like-minded”:
- left leaning whites who support multiculturalism, mass third world migration and diversity
- representatives of the migrant and refugee community whose main objective is to improve the lot of their own communities
- members of the Muslim community. (I believe there is a need to categorise Muslims separately as I suspect these consultations are being used as a vehicle by Political Islam to curtail Freedom of Speech and implement Sharia Law by stealth and promote the Islamisation of Australia.)
Missing from the equation were individuals from the domestic population who held alternate perspectives. This resulted in a fairly lop-sided approach to addressing racism in Australia being presented by the attendees, one that would actually create more divisions.
To give an example, during the consultation the overriding attitude toward the domestic white population was very negative. It was the white ‘Angle-Saxon / Celtic’ population who were intolerant and responsible for racism. No accountability was given to the behaviour or attitude of migrants.
During this consultation the racist attitude of migrants was not discussed. Surely the first step in conflict resolution is to ask oneself, what am I doing wrong that is creating friction in this situation? So when the strategy rolls out it will no doubt focus only on white on non-white racism; not on anti-white racism or inter-ethnic racism.
The common suggestions to combat racist attitudes from the domestic white population was to:
- educate school children about other cultures by amending the curriculum
- prevent the media from reporting on ethnic crime
- force the media to produce more positive stories about immigrants and their contributions
- have diversity and the challenges faced by refugees written into the scripts of popular soaps
- enforce diversity in the workplace by having more affirmative action
- hold more multi-cultural festivals, have more special diversity days (such as Harmony Day)
- re-examine the definition of racism to include discriminating against someone because of their religion.
During the consultation migrants and their white sycophants neglected to discuss the real issues that concern the domestic population, such as:
- The racist baggage migrant communities held toward other groups and the dominant Anglo community
- The over-riding view was that only white Australians are racists, never the victims of racism only the perpetrators
- The migrant community holds little responsibility in examining their own beliefs, values and attitudes; only the mainstream white community needs to
- If conflict and friction occurs it is the fault of the mainstream white community and the migrant community are the blameless innocents.
- The valid and real concerns held by the mainstream white community about political Islam, ethnic gangs and crime, ethnic enclaves colonising by proxy, the Balkanisation of their country were ignored
- The overriding insistence that multiculturalism was right and that the domestic population needed this reinforced to combat racism
- The deep concern about losing control of our borders and losing control of what is happening within our borders in ethnic enclaves
- migrants failing to learning English, languishing on welfare and refusing to integrate.
I was left feeling that this public consultation opened up a can of worms. Attendees wanted changes to the law, the constitution and various Acts. There was even a recommendation to introduce the Canadian model of multiculturalism. A spokesperson from Immigration Watch Canada advised against the Canadian Model and invited anyone interested in finding out more information about it to visit their web site http://www.immigrationwatchcanada.org/
~ Susan Collins, May 2012.