The Party of Preservation

In every Western country the political division comes down to the Party of Multiculturalism versus the Party of Preservation. So two things from today. First the Government, our Party of Preservation, has introduced a new multicultural policy. Here is how the report begins:

Australia’s national identity will be redefined along fundamental principles of integration, citizenship and unity in a pointed shift away from welfare entitlement, in the first multicultural statement by a federal government to also recognise the impact of ­terrorism on the nation’s social fabric.

In a landmark departure from the 2011 statement delivered by then-Labor prime minister Julia Gillard, the Turnbull government has ­included for the first time a list of individual freedoms, including freedom of speech, as core Australian values. The statement, ­released to The Australian ahead of its launch today, is a rejection of multiculturalism as a vehicle for grievance and identity politics.

The government has dropped past emphasis on equitable access to welfare and services for new ­migrants, and instead promotes values of opportunity, self-reliance­ and aspiration.

For a better understanding of what’s at stake, there is this article asking Is Denmark On The Brink? which is found at Instapundit. It is an interview with someone watching the disintegration of Swedish society from the Danish side of the border and drawing some conclusions of her own. Read every word but here is the start:

E Tavares: In a sense Sweden is the canary in the coalmine of Europe’s demographic future, since they have been at the forefront of this transformation and openly embrace it. Being a close neighbor we would like to get your views on what is happening there, as well as in Denmark. How do the Danes look at Sweden, with hope or apprehension?

I Tranholm: With absolute horror!

The Swedish media, which is quite pro-government and its leftwing policies, does not always report the full extent of the problems in their society. So it is hard to have a very accurate picture of what is going on. But we in Denmark have a good sense. We are very aware of the murders, rapes, riots, violence and the hand grenades that go on there. This does not often make the news but we know it is going on. And we don’t want to go down the same route.

This is the result of decades of policies promoting multiculturalism in Sweden. And what is left is this hollow house. You know, in the Bible it is said that if a house is left swept, tidied and unoccupied it eventually it will be taken over by evil. And I fear that this is what is happening in Sweden. Far from being a multicultural paradise, the problems can no longer remain hidden.

ET: Indeed, even President Trump made some controversial comments about Sweden at a recent rally in the US, causing an international uproar, with many debates on whether he was right or wrong. Did this cause some discussion in Denmark as well?

IT: It wasn’t much of a discussion because we in Denmark know what is happening in Sweden. Malmo is very close so we only need to go there to see it with our own eyes.

There was a TV ad partially paid by the Swedish government recommending that all Swedes integrate into this new multicultural society they are creating. Think about that. Even old Swedes now need to adjust to this new reality, instead of immigrants adapting to Swedish society. They call it “Det nya landet”, which means the new country. Traditional Sweden is gone.

The title of the post at Instapundit is ‘EUROPE: Danes look at Sweden today “with absolute horror”’which you will understand without much trouble if you read the interview yourself. It is paired with another article, Gramscian damage, which you also need to read to build your fitness for the the ideological wars of the future (as well as being better able to understand the ideological wars of the past).

UPDATE: The Top Comments in order from the top at The Australian.

Roderick
“What ‘multiculturalism’ boils down to is that you can praise any culture in the world except Western culture – and you cannot blame any culture in the world except Western culture.” Thomas Sowell

Serge
Fabulous, although we should stress assimilation not just integration, that’s what made the US’s melting pot so successful. When we arrived in 1951 from China my Russian parents stressed assimilation. We never moved near a Russian community but locked in with the locals. Initial references to us as reffos fell away with the years. Speaking the same language is most important because it leads into the same culture. We’re Australians first and foremost, any institutional mode to divide us should be resisted. That’s why I find it distressing that even in sport today we have indigenous rounds, multicultural rounds, they only serve to separate and are racist by definition. Assimilate, not divide.

David
meanwhile there remains two classes of citizens, minorities who bleed welfare and Government funding and us poor mugs who pay the highest tax rates in the world to fund it. Then we are vilified for doing so and denied a real voice on pretty much anything. Yes if your a new or relatively recent immigrant to Australia – it’s utopia, not so for those of us who are forced to smile through clenched teeth at how wonderful it is. Because, quite frankly some cultures are not that easy to live side by side with, which while not being PC is the straight up truth.

sandfly
Multiculturalism is for elitists, academics, dreamers and leaners …assimilation is for Australian lifters who know how to make things work.

Patrick
Multiculturalism usually means a community with no Anglo-Celtics; something like a community that is mostly Lebanese with a few Sudanese, Afghans, Indians, or Samoans. Such will represent a very diverse community but its main source of income is welfare, that’s multiculturalism.

Rick
If the government doesn’t dump 18C, it will make a complete mockery of this move.

Gordon
“Prac­tices and behaviours that undermine our values have no place in Australia.” This should read: “Religions and behaviours that undermine our values have no place in Australia.”

Dannielle
Excellent first step however I think that adding that women are equal to men and men are not allowed to seek to control adult women should also be a clearly annunciated value. I just hope that our Government has the good sense to look at the Hong Kong and Singapore immigration models which allow working visas and an up to 7 years before residency before you can apply for citizenship. The citizenship is vigorous, with the applicant needing to PROVE that they have been employed, paid taxes, formed links to the existing community and have no criminal record AND most importantly no know associations with criminals. They get the best and brightest immigrants who are committed to integration and contributing because they demand it. We, on the other hand are importing expensive elderly people, family reunion ie “I just happened to have family here” but I have nothing in particular to offer and an ever growing welfare list. Our immigration in recent years has been run more like a charity than an expanding sovereign nation and the numbers are overwhelming to the existing population, infrastructure and services.

Judith
Another Gillard bomb that has caused destructive damage requiring remediation action. Fancy defining our country as one based on welfare to all but not cohesion and a common lau gauge and set of values.

John
Without repeal of 18C all the talk in the world is meaningless.

Darren
Don’t care about multi-whatever you call it. I care about free speech and I care about integration. That is acceptance of certain set of standards/values that are non-negotiable. IF you don’t like it go shop for another country. There are plenty around.

wayne
It seems so long ago that a public servant decided that Australia need to change so that those who came as immigrants didn’t have too. The new ‘multicultural ‘ Australia has since that time required the traditional Australian taxpayer to bend over and bare their a**e to be shafted. Apart from telling immigrants that they didn’t have learn English or adapt to the simple Australian life, Governments have flooded State and Federal Legislation with laws that actually attack the average Australian. With the laws came quangos and bodies such as then AHRC, which set out to enshrine the rights of immigrants over Australians. Those bodies, and the laws they persued are still in existence today. They are even oppose free speech! So in return, we are meant to celebrate that the Government is finally seeing the destruction that policies such as multiculturalism is causing. They are saying they see it and its many problems, plus other problems that have festered in Australians for over a decade. One thing hasn’t changed though! It’s the law! It doesn’t matter how much Turnbull talks about this because until he removes the legislation, including 18C, and shuts down, actually closes the various quangos and Commissions such as the AHRC, nothing has or will actually change. I’m won’t hold my breath for Turnbull to actually do something, other than talk of course.

Dave Wane
In Australia, or in fact every country on the planet, people will discriminate every day for any number of reasons, regardless of whether there is a law against the many forms of discrimination. Should not a person be free to discriminate without being fearful of breaking the law? It begs the question: Do we need anti-discrimination laws? We certainly do not need an AHRC. As for citizenship requirements: It is our country and we should set the highest possible standards for gaining citizenship, including a reasonable standard of English and a strong understanding and appreciation of western civilisation.

Bryan
A step in the right direction but meantime we continue importing huge numbers of ” refugees” who will never adopt our way of life and whose progeny make us less and less safe. Every time I go through security at my small country airport, where there used to be no security, I curse this blind adherence to multiculturalism and political correctness.

Merv
Nothing has,or will change, the welfare, and services will still be the priority attracting migrants, and are a given. Until rules are applied to make welfare an earned entity it will be open slather !

Donald T
Multiculturalism is true evil and destroys society and social cohesion. We are beginning to see the effects of this in Europe and it will only get worse. This statement released by the government, is in itself, a response to the failings of multiculturalism.

Lex
I think a great deal was lost when the term “assimilation” became non-PC. If new arrivals are not prepared to make a written commitment to assimilate and integrate into our way of life, they should be invited to leave again. They need to leave their former “culture” behind and become Australians first and foremost. They must learn to speak English and adopt Australian values, practices and dress – the less they look and act different, the more they will be accepted by the mainstream population – that’s just a simple fact of human nature.

This entry was posted in Cultural Issues. Bookmark the permalink.

27 Responses to The Party of Preservation

  1. stackja

    Australia welcomed many in the past who helped the country.
    Why now change Australia?
    Europe’s mistakes should be remembered.

  2. Muddy

    our Party of Preservation

    How ironic. The Putrid Corpse Party has been ‘preserved’ in embalming fluid? So lifelike! Such animation!

  3. Rafe Champion

    From the You Could Not Make it Up department. Jo Nova on the young climate scientist who is tormented by the prospect of parenthood!

  4. King Koala

    In every Western country the political division comes down to the Party of Multiculturalism versus the Party of Preservation

    What bullshit is this? The Liberals support multiculturalism as much as Labor and the only thing they have preserved is marriage, which they are on the verge of cucking on anyway.

  5. Baldrick

    … the Turnbull government has ­included for the first time a list of individual freedoms, including freedom of speech, as core Australian values.

    Stupid.Fucking.Liberals
    Tell that to the AHRC you morons.

  6. Cui bono

    Maybe just ever so slowly our ‘leaders’ are realising that the best way forward is that advocated by the plebs?

  7. Muddy

    Maybe just ever so slowly our ‘leaders’ are realising that the best way forward is that advocated by the plebs?

    OR, this is a first draft for a Mal of Rights?

  8. A Lurker

    The Coalition’s new multiculturalism policy is their way of putting a band-aid on a massive gaping wound that is haemorrhaging voters to parties like One Nation.

    If they really believed in an integrated and unified Australia, then they would immediately abandon multiculturalism in favour of assimilation and integration.

  9. NewChum

    Anyone who believes or trusts Malcolm Turnbull to come up with anything other than turgid left wing sludge is not paying attention.

    Any piece of government action or legislation suggested by Turnbull should be rejected out of hand, without further discussion or reading. His track record is so astoundingly poor it puts even some of the idiots who write for major newspapers to shame.

  10. EvilElvis

    Nice bunch of words. Implement something you idiots! Who’s going to sell this policy anyway?

  11. Cui bono

    Yeah Muddy fair enough. After all he is a lawyer who believes the government and lawyers should be in the middle of everything.

  12. duncanm

    The Dane gets it

    We no longer have a moral compass. Before, Christianity provided this role, keeping us united over centuries. Now we can no longer distinguish between good and evil, and ultimately this is what this struggle comes down to. Without this any preventive measures like this are just quick fixes that will not solve anything over the longer term. What is needed is a positive alternative in a moral sense.

  13. Helen

    Some rewriting of history here. Australia has been built on change not preservation: on immigration, development and progress. Conservative governments have been pro-change and pro-development – the conservative bit has been about conserving power in the right hands under the right philosophy, not about ‘preservation’. Celebrations of milestones – centenaries, sesquicentenaries, bicentenaries (and the semi-centenary of Federation in 1951) were marked not only by celebrations, but by publications extolling the wonderful progress and development that had been made. Progressive was a positive term for development and advancement. Those who wanted to preserve anything – the environment, historic buildings were considered luddites and lefties, and indeed that push for such preservation in the second half of the 20th century came from the left. Progressive now, of course, has been given negative overtones and delegated to the lefties, because it is seen as about social change, not economic. Preservation as used here is seen as about ‘core Australian values’. The irony is that core Australian values are about immigration, change, development and progress, the latter including social progress: democracy, fair pay, women’s rights.

    Sweden, Denmark and other European countries are not a good analogy for Australia because unlike us, those countries were not built on immigration. We are used to being good at and we have always been dependent on immigration, they are not. Well, at least recently. Of course, Modern Europe is the result of the migrations that ended the Roman Empire and changed Europe and the world. The Scandinavians were part of the invasive/migratory movement, and they had a particular impact on Britain and France. The Normans invaded England from France (Normandy) but the name gives it away – they migrated to France (then Gaul) from the north. And they brought to England many cultural aspects that developed (via new inputs, the Magna Carta, the odd war) into today’s core values of Britain, and subsequently Australia, notably in law and government. Many of the terms we use today, such as the Anglo-Norman parliament, are due to migration and invasion.

    Of course, the obvious response is ‘this time it’s different’, our core values are really in danger (but see above, which core values?). No doubt the Romans, and the English when the Normans arrived, thought the same. But look what happened – we are the result, of both those old migrations into Europe, and the more recent migrations from Europe (and elsewhere) to Australia!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period
    https://qz.com/677380/1700-years-ago-the-mismanagement-of-a-migrant-crisis-cost-rome-its-empire/

  14. Dr Faustus

    The whole deal with Multiculturalism is that it requires everybody, indigenous and new arrivals alike, to accept that all cultural traditions have an equal place in society.

    Big problem when an incoming minority culture is based explicitly on the premise of superiority, separation and the ultimate subjugation of other competing cultures. Very big problem when governments try to bend the existing cultural rules to force fit the political concept of multiculturalism into the resulting cultural conflict.

    It will be interesting to see how the Turnbull Government expects to use policy to manage integration of Islamic Australia. I guess it will lie somewhere on the spectrum between mealy mouthed platitudes and a beacon for the rest of the world.

  15. egg_

    Big problem when an incoming minority culture is based explicitly on the premise of superiority, separation and the ultimate subjugation of other competing cultures

    Curiously, TheirABC appear to embrace Muslim presenters more so than the officially ‘multiculti’ SBS, who seem to be largely the Mediterranean soccer network.

  16. DrBeauGan

    In Gramscian Damage there is an elaboration of what I wrote here years ago. We lost the cold war.

    It was not well received.

  17. .

    No doubt the Romans, and the English when the Normans arrived, thought the same.

    William I fought for 20 of his 21 years as King to consolidate control and he waged a genocidal war in the north to suppress the English.

    Your analogies are total crap.

  18. Helen

    Dot: Of course there were wars and fighting along the way (a characteristic of European culture). The culture we bought to Australia was the end result of the amalgam of the then multicultural Britain (Celts, Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Normans, Danes, Jews, Huguenots, West Indians etc. just to mention a few of those already in Britain when Australia was settled) . My point is valid – that our core values today are the result of past migration.

    Dr Faustus: ‘Big problem when an incoming minority culture is based explicitly on the premise of superiority, separation and the ultimate subjugation of other competing cultures.’ 1788? So you are suggesting that Australians today are in the same position re Muslims as Aborigi9nes were re British in 1788? I think the power balance is very different today , and in fact the broad multicultural basis of Australia now is the best defence against any single small minority ever taking over. The fact that some people are so fearful of it indicates a real lack of confidence in Australia and our core values. Indeed, I have never understood why people seem so bent on talking Australia down.

  19. John Comnenus

    Proof – pudding etc.

    They will need more than words to win back the deplorables hemorrhaging to other conservative parties and the ALP.

    This is the issue to get the cultural conservatives back on the wagon, but I suspect they will be interested in more than just words, they will want to see implementation. It also sets up a nice differentiation with the ALP who will be torn between their urban capital city seats and their regional seats in places like Wollongong, Geelong and Newcastle / Central Coast / Hunter. test issue in the Senate.

  20. Cynic of Ayr

    Turnbull is still as stupid as ever on 18C, and he has a lot of stupid mates.
    Consider:
    At present, Triggs makes a “judgment” on whether it will be lucrative for a client she has solicited, to pursue another party for “offense or humiliation.” This gets to court where a Judge makes a “judgment” whether the action is really offense or humiliation, worthy of a conviction, so money can change hands from the accused (now a criminal) to Triggs’ client.
    Changing the act to something like “harrassment” or the stupid “pub test” now makes it this way:
    Triggs makes a “judgment” on whether it will be lucrative for a client she has solicited, to pursue another party for “harassment.” This gets to court where a Judge makes a “judgment” whether the action is really harassment, worthy of a conviction, so money can change hands from the accused (now a criminal) to Triggs’ client.
    However – get this – the Judge is supposed to make this judgement based on what he thinks a mob in a pub would think. Note the Judge doesn’t actually ask the mob in the pub, he just guesses what they think.
    See the difference? No? That’s because there is no bloody difference!
    It still comes back to Triggs’ “judgment” based on money, and a Judge’s “judgement”, based on what he thinks a mob of people in a pub think. People he has never associated with, and never will!
    Of course, ideally, Triggs prefers to extort the cash directly, with the threat of court. This stinking sideline won’t be affected by any change to the wording of the act either.
    I don’t know why people don’t understand this.

  21. Jannie

    Many of the terms we use today, such as the Anglo-Norman parliament, are due to migration and invasion.

    It took the English nigh on 400 years to break the yoke of French Norman tyranny. And for 800 years the French was the great Enemy, the many wars fought made the canvass of the English heroic myth, military and cultural. The Norman assimilated into the English, they changed the formal English language, but the English fought them until they forgot why they were fighting.

    The next war against the invaders may not take 800 years, but it will be long enough.

  22. Peta Credlin recently remarked that overseas observers thought Australia was the one hope for reversing the trend towards the overthrow of national sovereignty by the multi-culti globalist ideologues.

    This was chilling. I am coming increasingly to the belief that the remark was no exaggeration.

    And, apparently, so do many others. Mark Steyn was always so very, very right.

  23. Eddystone

    Dan Hannan says the Norman invasion was a disaster for England, from which it took an age to recover the lost liberties, and echoes of the conflict still persist in the class divide in English society.

  24. Andrew

    So:

    – Gillard defined Oz values as “Yay, free socialist money!!”
    – it’s taken 4 years of Lib govt to reword that

    FMD

  25. iampeter

    +1 Helen. I think that was a great post on the issue, but I would just argue that you are being too nice to “Conservatives”.

    I think it’s a false dichotomy to set the scene as one of Multiculturalism vs Preservation. Western Civilization has never been about preserving anything, in fact it is about reason, dynamism, testing and rejecting ideas that prove to be bad and a constant drive to change and improve our individual lives and by extension the standard of living within Western Civilization.

    What has happened is Western civilization has become overrun by collectivists of every stripe and color from the secular variety of the Labor and Green movements to the old-school, religious, traditionalist collectivists of Conservatism. All of these lefties have helped grow the welfare and regulatory state in Western countries.

    THIS in turn has resulted in driving away the right kind of immigrants and encouraged the wrong ones to come here instead. THIS is what’s happening in the European countries swamped with un-assimilated and dangerous migrants.

    The solution is to fight big government NOT “immigration”.

  26. Yohan

    Helen do you really believe all that stuff you are posting? The great multicultural nation of Australia you speak of was one of white European peoples. That where our ‘values’ came from. It was the same for the US.

    Then starting in the 60’s western nations were happy to accept people of any color, race or culture from anywhere in the world. But this diversity was limited, the numbers manageable and the migrants integrated.

    But since the 90’s the leftists have ramped this up to an insane level. They are intent on making white European descended people a minority in their own country. That’s what this is all about, lets not beat around the bush. Is saying you only want 20% diversity instead of 60% diversity racist? The leftists say you are a Nazi to only want 20%.

  27. Nerblnob

    Those who wanted to preserve anything – the environment, historic buildings were considered luddites and lefties, and indeed that push for such preservation in the second half of the 20th century came from the left

    You are quite wrong there Helen. In the 50s and 60s lefties wanted to tear down “ugly” Victorian buildings and replace them with clean modern designs. EVERYTHING was the fault of stuffy and repressive Victorian values. Liberation would follow if we tore it all down.

    Now those lefties are in charge they make the “stuffy” Victorians look like the hedonistic party animals of all time.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *