Should hunch my shoulders tuck my head in and keep walking
But not taking indy on, after such a post, is gutless
That murdering thing, like every terrorist, has a brain
He no one else, is responsible for his actions
Look at your post indy, it could be said just about anyone, including his victims, are to blame
The cost of right wing blind extremism should be talked about
Many will die because this act took place
Hate breeds hate

The cost of right wing blind extremism should be talked about
Belly,
That's your most hypocritical post to-date !

This forum is not full of hypocrites.
There's always room for more.
:-)

Foxy said- Also suggesting that any one would find the Dalai
Lama to be a "white nationalist" is equally repugnant.

Answer- I wonder how Foxy would interpret the Dalai Lamas comment "Europe is for the Europeans". To me it indicates that Europe- and the nations within Europe- the France, Germany, British, etc should be for the French, the German, the British stock that had been there for hundreds of years. These are all have white "phenotypes" or physical appearance. This surely means the Dalai Lama believes in the loose and broad concept of "White Nationalism" for Europe. I'm sure he would have a different view if these European stock started occupying Tibet.

Foxy said-

Foxy Comment 1-
We've all heard the Australian "us" and "them" views.
That the Australian "us" was disappearing in a
"tidal wave of immigration" that was sweeping away our
national identity. We've heard the arguments that Australian
culture was white, English speaking and opposed to
multiculturalism and every conceivable migrant community.

Answer 1-

1. Australia did have what is called anecdotally a "white Australia policy" (an explicitly White Australia policy) this was changed due to the views of certain influential people and organisations in the context of the Australian political landscape.

Foxy Comment 2-

We've heard these lurid tales of an implicitly white
Australia under demographic attack and also of the
blaming of " äctivists, academics, and politicians" for
impposing multiculturalism on an unwilling populace.

Answer 2-

Activists, academics, and politicians have advocated and used their political influence for imposing multiculturalism in Australia and more broadly. Both dominant major parties (who represent their own interest groups) advocate multiculturalism (the "Australian Labor Party" more than the Australian "Liberal Party") so this could create an environment where voters feel they can't vote against immigration even if they believe that immigration is not in their self interest. In addition to this those against immigration are labelled as racist and demonized in public forums including the workplace at universities, etc.

Anecdotally and Statistically the demographics of Australia have changed over time- personally I have seen significant changes in the demographics of Australia and the Western World over the last decades especially in certain contexts where dominance of certain groups have grown to greater than 90% over the Traditional population which has declined to under 10% in these segments. One could expect to see a high degree of alienation of Traditional components of these segments.

The Social Libertarian's could argue that this demographic change is not significant or there are counter balancing positive effects of this demographic change. It's well known that in politics you always upset someone- this brings us to political ethics- and the question of "what is responsible use of power"

Mostly the Social Libertarian's seem to shout down other views without even addressing the points raised.

Foxy Comment 3-

Nothing more needs to be said really - it's all the fault
of the communists, socialists, leftists, et al.

Answer 3- Professor Patrick Deneen from Notre Dame University in his historical and research into Classical Locke Liberalism (the father of our form of government in the western world) has compared Liberalism to Traditionalism and Social Liberalism/ Economic Liberalism.

It appears that the powerful have inherited/ colluded/ created a political environment that increases the Liberal nature of the community with every political cycle- and decreases the Traditional nature with every political cycle.

Both Social Liberalists and Communists have certain views in common- it indicates a continuing probable influence of Communism on Social Liberalism- the father (Marcuse) of the New Left (Social Liberalism) developed his ideas based on communist principles.

High Immigration is a Socially Liberal policy. It's seemingly based on the idea that people should be able to live anywhere and in what ever nation they want- "freedom of movement of people". There are corollaries to these principles.

This seemingly contradicts the idea that culture and nation are linked.

So given that the free movement of people is a socially liberal policy and socialists and leftists are supportive of socially liberal policies it seems to follow that primarily the changes to demo

In conclusion- Traditional Conservatism is seen as the political stream- that opposes (Left and Right) Liberalism (blind freedom) that dominates the political landscape in the Western World.

Traditional Conservatives are "against Globalism" and "for Nationalism", against Marxist Communism, against extreme business, against extreme social policies, against progressivism for it's own sake.

Traditional Conservatives tend to believe that we can only protect "our own piece of the world" maybe through this we can set an example for others. We can't save the world. We wouldn't want to impose our will on it anyway. They have a right to create (or destroy) their own communities in their own nations just as we do