Foxy,

"However a democracy is most likely to survive in a society in which there is a general consensus on basic values". The value of what? A coin? A lounge suite? A footpath?

There should really be a basic value to life, human rights and a safe society.

"And a widespread commitment to the existing political order. Who? Labor and Liberal political parties that have dominated the political scene? By the way, in terms of an "order" would you like fries with that?

After the last Federal Election there was a senate investigation, into the minor parties and their election - none of the three major parties (including the Greens) were happy with the election outcome. We should have a full investigation into Australia's electoral system, so it is fairer, democratic and representative for all - that equals new political parties and independents, not less - for a major change in our political culture - more action and less yelling and screaming in parliament.

Finally on values - where do our two major parties stand on refugees? No difference. As a result our country and its people lose out, as other nations see it as their "right" to have appalling "human rights" policies. The journalist currently in an Egypt prison and his family see the realities.

NathanJ

<<Finally on values - where do our two major parties stand on refugees? No difference. As a result our country and its people lose out, as other nations see it as their "right" to have appalling "human rights" policies. >>

Quite right, old chap...the major parties should just have IMPOSED an open borders policy.

Hey -come to think of it -- they need not even have had an election all they had to do was consult you and you would have told them what was morally permissible.

By the way NathanJ --What "other nations" have adopted appalling human rights policies *BECAUSE* of Australia immigration stance?

Dear Nathan,

I think you know quite well the context and
circumstances - of what we're discussing here.
If not, go back and re-read my posts.

I get the distinct impression that all you're
interested in - is simply stirring.
I'll leave you to it.

Foxy,

It's not simply stirring - that is a sidestep away from the issue. It's constantly used by some people who want to avoid facing up to many basic facts.

It's a very easy way out.

In terms of SPQR's comments visit: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/policy/iran-protests-over-manus-island-riot-death-report/story-fn9hm1gu-1226831342422?nk=eb4d83daeed5244243da306db8f1f15f and you'll see my point - re the Iranian governments policy stance on refugees in terms of their views of Australia and our policies.

People don't have to agree with Australian Government laws just because other people or parties say so. We really need to have good quality, well researched policies that benefit our global environment for all.

That is not a crime.

Dear Nathan,

You seem to not understand the points being made.
There is no question about the right of citizens
to criticize the government and their policies.
However, a country where the citizens choose to
ignore the laws descends into chaos just like
Syria and Iraq. Is that what you want for
Australia?

People who refuse to acknowledge the rule of law
as laid down by democratic institutions do not
acknowledge the rights and liberties of others -
terrorists fit into this category. They do not
recognise the right of others to live without
being maimed, the right to live without being
bombed - and as such they forfeit the right
to join in Australian citizenship. We are asking
all our citizens to subscribe to a framework
that can protect the rights and liberties of all.
These are Australian values. And they have kept our
society stable.

I have nothing more to say on the subject.
We seem to be talking at cross-purposes.

Nonsense! NathanJ.

Your initial charge was: << As a result our [country’s immigration policy] other nations see it as their "right" to have appalling "human rights" policies. >>

Note well the "as a result" part.

When challenged you linked me to Iran’s criticism of happenings at Manus Island. So we would have to assume –following your comment—that seeing what happened at Manus (or rather the big noise advocates tried make about it ) Iran suddenly adopted appalling human right policies –tit for tat like! And we both know that was not the case --WHAT WAS SAID TO HAVE HAPPENED ON MANUS HAD ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING ON IRANS INTERNAL POLICIES –so your charge was total baloney.

Countries like Iran often back at countries like Oz who criticise them --and they are more than happpy to use the rumours & lies fed to the media by Oz advocate groups.