“ In Australia's case, immigration seems to play a key role that it cancels out factors that we don't do so well on (like income inequality and early childhood education). Immigrants, especially if they're chosen for their language skills and employability, tend to be more upwardly mobile than the broader population - so Australia's overall performance reflects our relatively high intake.”

“Seems to” does it? I wish the people who write these articles would be precise, or at least give us a reference where claims such as this can be checked. The last official figures I saw on immigration showed that it had no net effect on anything and now, with climate change our diminishing water and poor infrastructure, immigration must be regarded as threat, not an advantage.

And, if migrants tend to be more upwardly mobile than Australians, how the hell is that helping?

It's helping Leigh, because it means the immigrants are working hard and contributing to Australia.
Your attitude reeks of an attitude that the world owes you - and here I thought conservatives were all for 'aspirational' attitudes.

Great article, which articles my foremost concern for Australia.

We are racing headlong into the American way of life, including in the education sphere.

US school boards hire their own staff.

Victoria ditched centralised hiring of government school teachers in 1992. The principal is responsible for hiring the schools staff. This allows the principal to attract staff who are sympathetic to the schools culture and the principal's vision. This is coupled with a high proportion of teachers on contract. Contract staff do not get holiday pay unless they have work in the following term. Its common for young teachers to collect their final pay on December 21 and be rehired on 27 January and it takes about 10 years to get a permanent position.

In US quality of education depends on local school board.

Ditto in Melbourne, families will rent in the Balwyn, Camberwell and McKinnon school zones.

The US has mass higher education.

Victoria has embraced mass higher education also and as the factories close there are very limited opportunities for girls who don't continue in education. There is always labouring for boys. Even nursing and child care assistants have to have certificates these days.

There is wide variation between quality of education between Ivy-league universities and community colleges. TAFEs are comparable to community colleges.

In Australia there are very few university scholarships and limited interest in positive discrimination in awarding scholarships to able students who would otherwise not have the opportunity to study there.

Americans believe that poor people have done something wrong because they are not rich.

The Australian perception that we live in a land of opportunity, belief in low unemployment and belief that poor people are wallowing in their poverty entrenches and disenfranchises those flipping hamburgers in menial low paid jobs for the whole of their working life.
Australian Council Of Social Services studies consistently show entrenched intergenerational poverty is rampant here.

TurnRightThenLeft,

You really take the prize as the epitome of a left-wing idiot. Yes, I did read your silly post on the Pink Vote - just what I would have expected from you, and the main reason I generally ignore you.

But, in this instance, I just feel like telling you that a gnat makes you look intelligent, and I hope one day you will choke on something -e.g.your head; provide that your head is smaller than your mouth, which I suspect it is.

Nice, Leigh. Very nice.

If that was an attempt to persuade anyone that deep down, you're not an embittered individual who in lieu of competent arguments instead resorts to hate filled rhetoric, then I suggest you go back to the drawing board.

play together nicely, children

Leigh, if you're determined to lose a debate by descending into abuse, at least try to make it clever, incisive abuse.

If everyone is worried so much about the disintegration (or metamorphis, for some) of our education system, why not buck it and HOMESCHOOL?

Yeah I know..you have a big mortgage, you have a root canal bill to pay...can't afford to stay home and educate the kids...blah blah blah

I get really annoyed when people whinge about a system designed to be convenient for the masses...if you are so individual, why not take the less worn, but equally legally entitled to...path. After all, everyone on this forum likes to think they are intellectual, don't they?

Supposedly this is what democracy is? Choosing your own (or your childrens) individual path?

Secretly...I have my doubts as to what "democracy" actually means.

Thanks for reading :)

Bill Gates flipped burgers, once.

It seems he did quite well out of the experience.

The article above seems to me yet another "kick then Yanks" effort which also implys that Australia's present immigration program is good for Australia. Please note that the author of this article studiously avoids any mention of race, probably because she another one who believes in the equality of the human race.

A completely different explanation as to why Australians may be more upwardly mobile that Americans, is because we have considerably less proportions of troublesome ethnic minorities than the yanks.

The growing proportions of negroes and Hispanics in US society are noted for their low educational attainment levels and poor grades, even though US schools have been integrated by "bussing" for decades. I submit that this tends to reinforce the fact that these two miniorities are not as smart as whites and Asians.

If Australia is beginning to follow the US lead where the population is becoming less upwardly mobile, the explanation may be that we are now importing some of the same ethnic groups who have been such a drag on US society. Although there may be smart people among these ethnic groups who do socialise and can be accepted in higher society, the proportions of smart to dumb is much lower than for whites and Asians.

As such, most of them start on the botom rung and stay there, creating ethnic ghettoes noted for their high levels of welfare dependency and serious crime.

The author seems to forget that since the abolition of the White Australia Policy, the same phenomonon is happening in Australia.

You've chosen an apt name, redneck.

Plus, you ignore the fact that the article is about the upwardly mobile - and in terms of numbers, the races you mention, start at the bottom rung of the ladder and have more of a distance to climb.

Plus, with many people holding repugnant perceptions such as yours in private, of course it's harder for them.

I have an appropriate name, have I TLTR? Struth, if I was to label poor black people with a disparaging name like "niggers" and then stereotype them as stupid and ignorant, people like you would run around in red faced apoplexy saying that I am a racist.

But people like yourself, have exactly the same views about poor white people. You label them with a disparaging name like "rednecks" and stereotype them as stupid and ignorant. In other words, TLTR, you are just as racist as I am, but you can not see the contradiction in your own logic.

You know, I once was just as anti racist as you think you are. But unlike you, I was smart enough to see the contradiction. We live in a world where educated and supposedly intelligent young people have ben conditioned to believe that anything that ever went wrong with the black races was all the fault of white people.

Examine the logic of any of the so called anti racist, Howard, Bush, USA and white hating ideologues, and it all boils down to that. Of course, suggesting that white people are to blame for everything is racist, but once again, people like you cannot see the contradiction because of your ideological blinkers.

This is my first exchange with you, and I am heartened that you have already put your foot in your mouth. I rate you as easy meat, and I am glad you are on the supposely "anti racist" side and not on mine.

Intellectual entry standards for those who aspire to be evaluated as "anti racist" do not appear to be very high.

Impressive vitriol there redneck. Golly, I seem to be copping it in this thread, though when I look at where the comments are coming from, in truth, I find it rather heartening. Plus, you chose that nickname, not me.

As far as "This is my first exchange with you, and I am heartened that you have already put your foot in your mouth. I rate you as easy meat, and I am glad you are on the supposely "anti racist" side and not on mine."

I could say the same for you...

Allow me to give you the same advice I gave Leigh. If you're so damn intellectual, perhaps you should consider refuting the points I made instead of resorting to insults. There's a nice fellow.

You mention the White Australia Policy, Redneck.

The abolition of that policy is one of the saddest things that have happened in our history. None of the left-wing cranks will believe this, but I did once see all people as equal. Since Australia has opened the doors to people from anywhere, I have changed my mind. I hope that the immigrants we get here are not representative of the people who are happy to stay where they belong.

I don't dislike people simply because they are not Anglo/Saxon/Celts. In fact, I don't dislike them at all, as long as they stay in their own countries.

And, the people I admire most for their cultural pride and social cohesion are defintiely not Anglo/Saxon/Celts - they are the Japanese. They have stuck to their monocultural structure through thick and thin, and jolly good luck to them. They believe in monoculturalism and they have not been cowered as the white PC cowards in the West have been into changing their principles.

Now, I don't think that makes me a racist. But, if ignorant people use the word - always incorrectly - to describe me thus, so be it. I don't give a fig. I will not change my mind, and I will do whatever I can to encourage other people who are bullied by left-wing thugs like TRTL into thinking they cannot express their opinions here and elswhere.

I chose the name “redneck” as a trap tactic to smoke out white hating racists like you TLTR, and you are just one of many slow thinkers to fall into it. In addition, so many people like you called me a “redneck” that I must be one. Oh, but please don’t call me an “intellectual”, that really hurts.

I note that your dismissal of my argument which analysed your logic's obvious racism towards whites did not include a defence of that logic. That punch must have landed home.

Oh, and please spare me the feigned indignation about my insults to you. Whereas I have never crossed swords with you before, I have noted your posts to others, and they have hardly been free of the same insults that you accuse me of. Besides, a few clever put downs is most entertaining and keeps our readers amused.

Hi Leigh, long time no see.

You appear to have a problem being labelled a “racist”. But it is no problem to me. There are many definitions of racist, but anyone who thinks that the different races have unequal physical and mental characteristics is a racist. Since the idea that the races do indeed possess unequal physical and mental abilities looks self evident to me, then calling me a ‘racist” does not worry me in the slightest. I even tell people I am a racist. That really upsets some people and I get to figure out their prejudices and underlying motivations very quickly.

To me, the term “racist” as used by the political PC people means exactly the same as “heretic” did with religious PC people in a bygone age.

Thank you for pointing out that Asians are very racist. The funny thing about TLTR and his comrades is that they will never tire of attacking white western society which is the most tolerant, most gender equal, and most enamoured of “human rights”, on the grounds that it is not perfect. Yet they will ignore every other failed culture where such concepts are rudimentary or vestigial. That looks like racism to me.

Redneck,

I’m not so much concerned about being thought of as a racist as I am by the practice of self-hating renegades like TLTR using the word against their own kind in their complete ignorance of the nasty side of alien cultures they seem to prefer to their own.

These self-haters, with their anything-but-WASPS bleating, should be pitied. They must be horribly choked up with their own failures to have such a down on their own culture. I can’t quite come at pity, though, and merely find them obnoxious little twerps who should be very glad that they live in a culture they can rubbish with impunity.

TLTR et al would have been very please this morning if they heard the news that, thanks to the arrogance of the AMA and its ‘quotas’, and the dummies in Canberra, we will have to continue relying on overseas-trained doctors like Dr. Death and the shifty little Dr. Haneef.

Perhaps the plan is to wipe us through lack of medical care. The politicians can always fly to Geneva for their health care, at our expense

I'm rather honoured the two of you are coming together in such a friendly fashion to criticise me. Considering one is a self proclaimed racist while the other just loves to attack immigrants at any opporunity, I consider it quite the honour.

I never said I was without disparaging remarks, though I always keep them focused on the stupidity of particular posts.
There's plenty of material in yours to go by.

All your response has been just more insulting rhetoric. I'm still waiting to see evidence of your vaunted intellectual capability, but if all you can do is respond by making slurs on the intellect of your opponent, you really don't have much substance.

You said I didn't address your arguments. I put forward two contrary considerations. Those are refutations as well as arguments, yet you still haven't rebutted.
Maybe one day you'll get there. Until you do, I'll have to conclude you're "easy meat" as it were, unless I see posts that can address the actual arguments.

I dunno what race you are. I haven't commented on any particular race.
No doubt you'll accuse this of simply being politically correct apologism, that seems to be the MO when white supremacists are cornered.

As far as disparaging points of view... well duh.

Get over it - this is called 'online opinion' we're here to evaluate opinions by looking at posts. Criticising an opinion isn't the same as blanket condemnation of a race.

Have you ever actually stopped to consider the direction of where your views lead? If I wanted to go for the shallow argument I could quite easily accuse you of being like Hitler or the like, but lets take it back a notch and simply go with the most reasonable course of action.

You said yourself, that "there may be smart people among these ethnic groups who do socialise and can be accepted in higher society".

Is it okay to refuse a job offer on the basis of race? What about these people? I'm quite genuinely interested in your view.

You are asking me if racial discrimination can be justified? Of course it can.

In Australia, tribal aboriginal people have different property rights to other races. Aboriginal parents are paid to send their children to school. Aboriginal people do not need to buy fishing licenses in NSW, while every other race must do so. Aboriginal people need not keep records relating to their job seeking applications in order to gain the dole. Aboriginal people may hunt dugong, every other races may not. Aboriginal people get special low interest loans from the government for anything they want. Aboriginal people are given priority and special scholarships for higher education.

If you oppose racial discrimination, then there are several instances of racial injustice for you to sink your teeth into. But if you agree with all of these examples, then you just crossed the Rubicon and you can never again claim that racial discrimination is wrong.

Discrimination is a fact of life and to consider it wrong as a moral absolute is silly. Here in this country, all young drivers are made to pay higher car insurance premiums because collectively, young drivers have more accidents. People who live in rich areas pay less insurance because collectively, wealthy people are more responsible drivers and they have less accidents.

Judging people by their group associations is an everyday affair. Are you going to invite the Hells Angels over to your next party? If not, why not?

To be more specific with your original question, you are asking me if it is morally right to discriminate against the immigration of trouble prone immigrant groups knowing that some of them are intelligent enough to be productive and to be accepted? Of course it is.

The moral priority for me is not racial discrimination; it is what is good for the Australian people.

Regardless of whether some people within trouble prone immigrant groups can be considered decent people, the fact remains that importing these troublesome ethnic groups is not in the interests of my people. In addition, the interests of non citizens should not have priority over citizens.

Redneck,

Once again you have shown demonstrated commendable patience with poor old TRTL by responding to his last embarrassing post. You have given him the explanations he so craved, but it’s unlikely that he will cotton on.

Boys! The article was not about racism, nor was it much about immigration. Its about the stoppages to progession within a society. Much of this (IMHO) relates to intrenched beliefs at varying levels of that society. Where intergenerational poverty is rare, those living in poverty will always be able to see a path to the top (or at least further up). You will find few attitudes of hopelessness and despair. Where intergenerational poverty becomes entrenched, then the problem we face is that any children being raised in these families will tend to inherit the sense of despair and hopelessness, which are self-defeating. Think about it, if you cant see a way out of your situation, why bother at all. Lots easier to sink into crime and drug abuse. We are not yet at this point in Australia, but probably are not far from it. For the benefit of Australia as a whole, we need to do our best to stop this slide. Think of social policies that are designed to address inequalities not as robbing you of your hard-earned dollars, but investing in your childrens futures (or in the future of our society).

For the record, I've always enjoyed debating with you TRTL, whilst not always agreeing with your opinions.

Country Gal, very well said.

R0bert

Yes, I agree - very well said indeed CG.

TRTL, you've got a tag team of intransigent bigotry there, old son. I don't waste effort on boofheads who only ever post hateful ideas in order to get noticed by the rest of us - it just encourages them.

Redneck

You write 'The funny thing about TLTR and his comrades is that they will never tire of attacking white western society which is the most tolerant, most gender equal, and most enamoured of “human rights”, on the grounds that it is not perfect. Yet they will ignore every other failed culture where such concepts are rudimentary or vestigial. That looks like racism to me.' You sum things up extremely well.

However it is not just the success of the western white society that these people detest but the biblical principles that made us so successful. The dogmas that they promote in the guise of intellectuals have proven to be a miserable failure.

So many comments, such tight limits.

CJ: I'd like to let it pass, but I know too many people of the races these people are damning. I'd hate to think they'd look at these threads and see this sort of crap going unchallenged.

Leigh: I disagree with redneck, but at least now he's belatedly making a proper argument. As ususal, all you do is insult or barrack for a side.
Oh, and jumping in before I have the chance to respond by hypothesising on my behalf is a pretty poor debate tactic. So is constructing some weird crap about me wanting people to have a bad health system.
If we're just going to make up arguments about what people think then where do we stop? Shall I just say you think the ku-klux-klan should be a political party then demolish the position I attributed to you?

Largely agree with countrygirl - it's about background, and there are a larger proportion of people from these other races coming from harsher backgrounds.

redneck:

I find it interesting that you have to construct some white hating view for me, when all I'm doing, is calling for those precise values of respect for human rights and tolerance, that has made our civilisation the best of the lot. Dunno how that's 'hating' the west.

You've acknowledged that some members of these other races are just as capable as white people, but said we should ignore that. Our society is built on the idea that anyone who works hard and honestly can get ahead.
You're the one rejecting the basis of civil rights.

I never said I was flat out opposed to screening processes for migrants.
I reject that we just do it via a blanket condemnation of certain races because as you acknowledge, some people from these groups do just as well as the rest of us, that is at least a partial acceptance that all people are capable of being equal even if there are demographic shifts.
What, exactly, is wrong with deciding each individual case on merit, and treating people as individuals?

Yes, the posting limits are rather annoying, which is why I usually stick to the General pages!

One of the points I am a bit surprised that no-one has made is that there is a lovely example in hand of how these problems apply in "white" countries as well (and before anyone gets the wrong idea, I am not a white apologist - many have called me redneck and racist before!). Take the example of the UK. Even now, according to the article, it ranks right up there as one of the most class divisive societies. But look back to its past and you can see the full effect of what it was like to be born into a society where your place (job and income etc) were determined by your birth, and merit had little to do with advancement. The US is rapidly progressing down this path, although the tools there have been the division between education opportunities and the like, rather than enforcement of the class structure. Nevertheless, the effect will be much the same.

I read somewhere that Australia has been a "little experiment in socialism since its inception", which I feel is largely true. That has formed the basis of our "fairgo" society, and I'd hate to see that disappear. Yes, its probably slightly more costly from a tax perspective, but consider this - rarely is the cheapest option the best one. My prior comment about investing in the future of our society is based on this premise. If 1 child in a poor family gets the message along the line that we provide welfare because we care about their survival, then that's one child given the self-esteem to potentially pull themselves out of the same hole. And the self-esteem restored to that one can have a multiplier effect. That's the sort of society that I want my children and grandchildren to live in. One with compassion for others - not a dog-eat-dog world.

I call you a white and West hating bigot TLTR because I have been crossing swords with people who possess your incredible mindset for over ten years now, and I have a fair idea of their group motivations. They can’t just come right out an say “I hate white people, and I hate western capitalist society” because that is racism, and people like you need to pretend that you hold the moral high ground. So the trick is to always find fault in white Western capitalist society and always find some way to blame it for the gross mismanagement, violence, corruption and tyranny of other cultures.

Regardless of whether they are a race, a religion, a club, a clan, a class, a family, a political party, or a society, human beings are judged according to their group associations. It just isn’t possible to know everybody as individuals, so we look at their group associations to determine whether we consider individuals from that group to have values so similar to our own that we can accept them.. Almost every group makes no secret of what core values it expects its members to adhere to, so judging people by their group associations is usually very easy. I gather that you are not so tolerant that you would accept a Nazi as your friend?

Certain races, religions, and ethnicities create intractable social problems wherever they are allowed to settle. Your ideology insists that we must ignore that fact because we might be unjustly condemning decent people in those groups. To you, that noble principle trumps everything. And if it means importing race hate rapists, terrorists, violent criminals, and professional welfare recipients, then that’s just too bad. But to me, the welfare of the Australian people is my moral priority, and if that means I will have to unfairly condemn decent people who are not even Australian citizens anyway, then that is just too bad.

Redneck,

I think you'd make more progress if you use the term "cultural compatibility" rather than the broad-sweeping and politically- charged words "races, religions, and ethnicities" when assessing whether a certain group of individuals is OK to settle in Australia. Then, you can make a case according to the degree of ease with which migrant groups settle here.

Once you start doing that, the bad or incompatible cultures amongst them can be isolated and treated on their merits while the good cultures can fit in without bothering anyone and actually do well for themselves and the country. In essence, you simply want to filter out the bad ones and keep the good ones, but do it in a way where the reasoning is clear, based on merit and impartial. The ultimate test for inclusion or exclusion of a particular migrant group would be whether or not they genuinely threaten the existing fabric of society in Australia.

TRTL

I have no interest at all in 'debate'. I have sometimes reacted to you (and a few others) simply because you can't just express your own opinion and leave others to do the same without trying to re-educate them to your way of thinking.

I feel no obligation to present you with arguments, nor do I feel any need to explain myself to you. There are several people who believe the same things you believe, and say so, without feeling the need to criticise opposing views. You seem to want everyone to be the same as you are. It's not going to happen.

You stick to your opinions and I'll stick to mine. I'm really quite disgusted with myself that I took any notice of you in the first place: it has been a demeaning process, and it won't happen again.

So you're not actually arguing with me at all.

In response to each paragraph:

1) You've decided what mindset I have, then you've proceeded to formulate an entire argument based on your perceptions.
To you, it doesn't matter what argument I make. You've already decided I'm a white hating bigot, even though I just said I view western society as the best, most successful in the world.
What you neglect is that it's been built on critical analysis and the fact that people have fought at every stage for things like the right to vote and free speech. If people had simply sat back and refused to criticise, western society wouldn't exist.

2) The key difference between a Nazi and someone of a particular race is choice, redneck. We don't get to choose whether we're born to a particular race, gender or location.
All we can do is make the best from what we have. According to you, ultimately it won't matter what the individual does. You judge entirely by the collective.
You say that your judgment in this argument is shaped by "crossing swords with people who possess your incredible mindset for over ten years now, and I have a fair idea of their group motivations."

You've already lost this argument, you're just spouting your hatred of people who've disagreed with you in the past.

And I don't pretend to hold the moral high ground. I'll just say flat out, that in this case I hold it.

3) You're starting to make a semblance of a decent argument, but everything you state hinges on the notion that this is inevitable if you import certain ethnic groups.

What is it you think built the United States?
Whatever happened to the old 'bring us your poor, your huddled masses?'

I tend to think that in the past, the US had an excellent way of making migrants feel American first, with their original nation second. They had an excellent system of integration, precisely because they were so accepting.
They used that to build the most successful nation in world history.

It was you who decided what attitudes rednecks have, yet you now object to me doing the same with leftist Shiities like yourself.

Successful white societies were also built upon racial and religious discrimination. In Britain, Catholics were once considered to be such a threat to the existence of Protestantism, that Catholics were prevented from holding government office, and Catholic squires were prevented from voting until 1831. Here in Australia, the White Australia Policy protected white Protestant European culture from submergence in Asian culture. If I were to ask you whether aboriginal, Japanese, black African, Vietnamese, or Muslims should protect and celebrate their own culture, I have no doubt that you would gushingly agree to that idea. The only culture that people of your perfidious ilk wish to destroy is the successful culture of the white Prots.

Regardless of whether a person chooses the culture they identify with, or not, the fact remains that the key to understanding any person’s behaviour is to understand their culture. The most reliable indicators of any person’s cultural values, is their physical ethnic identifying characteristics and their skin colour.

In the “great melting pot” of the USA, people still call themselves “African Americans”, “Italian Americans”, “Lebanese Americans” and “Native Americans”. For almost all of humanity, a person’s ethnic or racial origin is very important to their sense of identity, and all of these groups openly display their need to separate themselves from others, and from white “Americans”. What has resulted is the creation of numerous ethnic ghettoes, some of whom are demanding that their own languages be the lingua franca in their own particular areas. It has also resulted in “white flight”, where productive white people flee the consequences of multiculturalism, which includes urban decay and very high crime rates.

The dangers to national unity of the USA was brought home when the former Mexican President began bragging about “La Reconquistinada” (the Reconquest”) of the USA through immigration. With Hispanic population proportions so high in Southern US states, it may only be a matter of time before these states vote to rejoin Mexico.

Leigh, effectively what your post says, is that you just come to the onlineopinion site to express an opinion, while refusing to take on board the opinions of others.
You also say you have no interest in debate, which loosely translated means you just don't want to have to back up your opinions. You can claim you're being bullied all you want, but all that's happening is people are presenting contrary opinions.
Funnily enough, that happens in a place called 'online opinion'. Of course you don't have to take on board opinions, but whingeing about them is hardly a good look.

redneck - 'leftist shiites'. Very creative. A little extreme perhaps, though I'd argue that categorically damning other races as inferior to whites and asians places you squarely in a fringe category, well outside the mainstream.
Perhaps this is why you say you're reacting to 'people like me' who are perhaps, a little closer to opinions accepted by the mainstream. It must be quite cathartic to be able to use me as an opportunity vent against the many people who condemn your attitude. I hope you're enjoying yourself.

In relation to your argument - you've chosen a snapshot of history which you say supports your argument. I'd say it represents a very narrow view. From the broader sense, how about acknowledging that while western society was mired in the dark ages, non white or asian races in the middle east were well ahead of the ball, and created the foundation for our understanding of medicine and astronomy. At that time in history, Islam was far less authoritarian than Christianity.

The resistance to the melting pot exists now and I concur that it's a problem. Sorry if that doesn't fit your preconceptions.
I'd argue that if you talk to the older immigrants who were living in a different time, those that came off the ships in the aftermath of WW2 became American first and their heritage took a back seat in the rush to carve out a decent life, which was what America offered them instead of the ruins of Europe.