I don’t altogether agree or disagree with the essay in question, he makes a point of view and other essay writers have made contrary ones. If we live in a democracy and believe in it then we should WELCOME reasoned and mature debate around important national issues - such as how to cope with growing refugee numbers.

Having strong political views should not be a problem. In a pluralist society we should expect that and appreciate diversity of opinion and be prepared to weigh in to debate with INTELLIGENCE.

After all, Wester civilisation developed through a history of dialectic debate - a challenging discourse between strong opposites.

Okay… most of the essay writers, both those leaning toward the left and the right, present reasoned arguments. I disagree with various bits of them. But a much more serious issues is the flurry of intemperate, carping, often abusive commentaries that follow in the wake of many well-spoken essays.

Hate-filled intolerance is not the hallmark of a mature democracy, and, sadly, it is not in keeping with Australia’s tradition of giving all a fair go – in fact, it’s very un-Australian.

Hard core racist sentiment has arisen in recent times, perhaps predictably in the light of international events, but much more worrying is the general lurch towards anti-democratic sentiments and meanness of spirit.

Those who want the Australian traditional lifestyle to be preserved should, above all, be defending democratic values, pluralist opinion, the right to be heard and intelligent debate – not engaging in the opposite

The notion of a 'fair go' is well and truly used and abused by the anti-racist industry. It is kind of a loaded word along with 'tolerance' and 'compassion' to pursue the failed idea of a world without borders.

Gecko who exactly are you talking to? Where is the 'hate filled' intolerance you mentioned in your response in this thread?

You value intelligence, of what nature exactly? Because some people (Guy PERHAPS) are intelligent acedemically, but clueless in every other aspect of life!

I speak from common sense: refugees should always be placed into a culture similar to their own. Our multicultural 'tolerance' is finite, and its misuse will lead to social instabilty. Cronulla?

gecko

You raise some interesting points, especially the notion of tolerance.

There are members of my family who do not deserve my tolerance - even so, I appear (to others) to tolerate them. I do this for family harmony (if it can ever happen in our family).

I guess I apply the same principle in the broader community. I am not proud of that.

Before I became Internet friendly in Forums such as this, I always said what I really thought. I still do to some extent, but I am more careful now because the regular abusive posters on OLO (all threads) on whatever issue would have my guts for garters. I am not here to be abused. I am here to learn. And by golly, learn I do.

Cheers
Kay

Dear Bronwyn.

your points.

1/ "Everyone should be free from torture and persecution".

Totally agree ! and hence we sent a coalition of the willing to liberate a country in the grip of a master torturer and mass murderer. You have probably noted the 'cost' in human damage of such an exercise. So, am I right in assuming that setting people free means liberating them or... just letting those who perpetrate such things continue on their merry way as Sadaam was ?
Of course the 'other' solution is to open our borders to every persecuted person in the world. Is that what u want ?
No.. you want 'a few thousand refugees able to come here'.

2/ Refugee Acceptance
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/03/23/1079939629400.html
Please check this link, we previously took 4000/yr, now it will be SIX thousand/yr and we both know that will not put the slightest dent in the overall problem, (neither would 50,000), which can only be fixed by ripping out by the roots, those regimes causing the problem i.e. MILITARY action. Please support your soldiers in Iraq, and oppose the racist Al Qaeda and Baathists who want to restore oppression of the Shia or militant Islamic Sharia (or both)

My problem is with people coming here illegally, flouting our laws. As long as 'we' determine "who and how many" and in 'our' interests rather than theirs, I wont winge. History is littered with carcas after carcas of states overun by refugees or simply by migrants.
Read the history of Angkor Wat (Thais took over) or just read the news about the history of Ivory coast.

The "Christian" approach is to believe Romans 13 about an Emporer (secular of otherwise) who carries the sword (or the Nukes) to deter the 'evildoer'.

Jesus was neither "left" nor "right" He spoke about the culpability of the unjust, but injustice stems from alienation from God.

He drove out the 'opportunistic merchants' from the Temple, and he healed the broken hearted. You cannot have one without the other. Accepting refugees without dealing with the injustice which produced them is plain stupid.

Thanks Kay (Kalweb), and welcome to the fray!

As a computer literate you will find yourself in a rather masculine medium. Angry too.

Males adapt more readily to technology. (This is not to do with greater ability, just natural inclination.) For this reason, OpinionOnline commentaries tend to be dominated by young men in a virtual state of warfare. I know my own gender pretty well.

Sometimes I wonder if this debating space is at all productive. At best it is a reasonably safe outlet for aggression. Maybe a place where disempowered folk can develop themselves, by learning to hear others, develop their maturity and appreciation for democratic values.

But at worst maybe it is no more than a breeding ground for growing intolerance and ethnic partisanship? When I hear some of those angry diatribes I think: “These folk may as well be in Northern Ireland, the West Bank, Kashmir or Rwanda. ”

I only hope the war of words and ethnic diatribes will work their way through before Australia becomes too poisoned by this inane culture of intolerance. Will the pendulum swing back to reason, or are we on a one-way trajectory?

Good luck.

Gecko
Re your comment that those who are inclining to ethnic partisanship are like those in:

Northern Ireland,
the West Bank,
Kashmir or
Rwanda

Are you suggesting that those places have no grounds for ethnic hostility ? At what point does it become reasonable to defend ones culture and social fabric ?

You are observing in the forums an evolution of self awareness of Australians, brought about by attacks on what has long been assumed to be our unchallenged way of life.

Until the Tutsi rebels began to 'pick off' the Hutu politicians one by one, the Hutus regarded them just as an 'annoying pest' but when they saw fellow leaders dropping like flies from Tutsi assasins they reacted.

The Irish conflict is rooted in history, one aspect of which was nearly ALL land in ALL Ireland being owned by Absentee English Anglicans.

Here in Australia, we saw on national TV a muslim youth counsellor who declared that the Muslim males he works with are characterized by 2 major attitudes.

1/ They regard 'skips' as Inferior.
2/ They hate western values.

Now, you can call a quacking, feathered, webbed footed flat beaked animal a donkey if you like, I call it a duck.

People are standing up to be counted for their 'ethnicity'and culture. -That you are surprised by this is most suprising to me.

The best way for such incidents to be handled is the police. But when the Premier of NSW owes his political life to dependancy on the Islamic vote, and you note how police have been systematically under-resourced, specially in places like Cronulla (from 17 down to 1 shopfront member) and how magistrates have white-anted the credibility and morale of the Police, its little wonder people are upset and cynical about 'fair playing fields'.

I don't feel so powerless anymore. I've noted that the many MANY emails and phone calls I've made may be just little grains of sand but a lot of sand gives you a BEACH, and it appears to have shaken the NSW government into going for a sunbathe