The given link from the Centre for Independent Studies
is a series of essays that raise relevant issues:

"The success of Australia's cohesive and multicultural
society over the past sixty years or more has depended on
a simple compact in return for the citizen being free to
maintain private cultural and religious traditions, the
state expects observance of our norms and laws".

What follows are views on diversity. Is it division or
unity and is there a multicultural threat to Australia's
liberal democracy and what next for multiculturalism?

Worth a read. Food for thought.

http://cis.org.au/publication/the-future-of-australian-multiculturalism/#:

It seems that multiculturalism has been idling along without a great
deal of hassle. "Their a queer mob" was an example of that.
If the problems with Arabs could be deleted, the atmosphere would be
much calmer.
I see an Ice Hockey match is cancelled "for security reasons".
Guess where the visiting team is from ?
Why should we put up with this nonsense ?

The Centre For Independent Studies is a Libertarian group adopting a naive ideological multicultural philosophy without considering the survival of the locals. According to the article- "Multiculturalism and the promotion of diversity was originally intended to counter the ‘whiteness’ of Australian society that was a legacy of its founding."

The CIS seems to say that multiculturalism is inherently anti-white and Anglophobic and that this is a good thing.

The CIS seems to imply that killing cultures is necessary for "objectivity". This is the sort of fanatisicm that is causing genocide, seemingly in the mouths of people such as Foxy.

Principles of Libertarianism can be useful tools within certain constraints, as production is necessary for survival, but when the principles of production are extended perversely to destroying the people being produced for, it subverts nature, turning life giving production into death.

As Francisco D'Anconia says in the speech, money represents the production of value, but...
http://www.capitalismmagazine.com/2002/08/franciscos-money-speech/

Libertarian's believe that all problems can be solved with money. Money is usually a strength- but as Rand says- it doesn't replace stupidity.

Culture should be subjective not objective to their own survival and their own nation. Why would anybody try to convince someone that they should be "objective" about their own survival?- A morbid evil seduction.

Cause and effect. Another case of bait and switch, paradoxical trickery, substituting life for death. Transparent attempt of one culture killing another culture- money for death- but what use is the money if it kills you.

The sort of Edward Bernays style- evil consumerist "heart before mind" strategy to cause mass psychosis sociopathic formation. Uncle Freud seemingly projected his own 'issues' onto western society.

We need to transcend the paradox.

People are practical or theoretical but both are held hostage to their position in hierarchical society. That doesn't mean that hierarchies are bad, they have "limitations". The wise have an amazing vocation, to give their lives, and very soul, tortured till pure, to the conceptual patterns of dreams, to create the fabric of society, embued in their spirit.

100 generations ago- Aristotle was about practical experience, real politik, Plato about abstract theoretical conceptualisation, ideology, idealism. Socrates- might is not right. Thought is hostage to survival in interesting ways.

Machiavelli 10 generations ago, compared the subsidiarity localization practical experiential model of the Catholic Church, with the "mighty" authoritarianism theoretical "objective" model of the Ottoman Turk's.

Nietzsche 3 generations ago, compared the 100 generations of the Knightly practical "productivity" code of morality, with the Priestly/ Academic theoretical "pity" code.

The members of a decaying social system will try and preserve it, to preserve their individual position, waiting for a new leader arrives. When the decay is great enough, spontaneuous systemic explosive fragmentation occurs. Individuals and diads in tune with nature have a better chance. But what is the cause of the fragmentation- has it simply extended beyond the scale of design- are there toxins in the oitment- or is it cyclical??

The psychotic paradoxes of toxic thinking.

Academia and universities have definitely used multiculturalism and immigration "successfully" it seems, in a contemptible sort of way, as the major beneficiaries of the Education Industry. It's given professors a way to buy new foreign cars in exchange for their betrayal of the Australian ancestral people.

Being a traitor can be a very profitable success, at least in the short term, to individuals and their families.

It seems that Foxy considers it a success.

" It's given professors a way to buy new foreign cars in exchange for their betrayal of the Australian ancestral people. Being a traitor can be a very profitable success, at least in the short term, to individuals and their families."

This is typical neo-fascists talk; All the problems of the "proletariat" are caused by the underservicing elite class of the "inteligencia", supported by a Marxist political class, all profiting from the misery of the working class.

What the Kudos Kid doesn't realise is, that as a neo-fascists himself, his political ideology is closer to Marxism (horseshoe politics) than to any moderate main stream democratic liberalism. Given power these far right extremists would move quickly to shut down any opposition, that would include expulsing society of the parasitic so a new utopian (fascisms) social order can be instigated. Hitler and Mussolini did it, so to on the other side, Stalin and Mao did likewise.

Kudos Kid, is it true all those university professors are driving around in taxpayer funded Lamborghini's? You're probably that far gone you most likely believe it.