The Asianisation of
Australia
An Exposé of the
"Asian Future"
Being Forced Upon Australia
(A summary)
This document is a summary of a larger document of the same title
ASIANISATION: A POLICY OF MANY FACETS
The Asianisation of Australia is not just a single unconnected issue of immigration. There are historical, political, and economic aspects to this undeclared policy of the major political parties.
It appears that our nation's future is set to be determined by the high levels of Asian immigration that we are to have imposed upon us over the next few generations; that Australia will end up with an "Asian Future", which will destroy the previously homogeneous character of an essentially European Australia.
Asianisation is, in effect, the re-colonisation of Australia. It is being carried out by grovelling politicians who seek to "integrate" our nation into Asia; to "do a deal" whereby they supposedly achieve some economic and political benefits in return for our subjugation in political, cultural, and demographic terms. Also, in many ways, Asianisation fits in with the cosmopolitan-internationalist ideology held by most multiculturalists (including the majority of our country's politicians and Establishment figures), as well as alleviating the "white guilt complex" apparently held by so many of these cosmopolitans.
The Establishment's Asianisation policies have led to much frustration and anger being felt within the community, by those Australians who feel that they are being dispossessed and have been cheated by successive governments. As one letter-writer put it: "Australians have become second class citizens in their own country. Asian immigrants, especially so-called "refugees", can receive various government benefits and help - in areas such as employment and housing - that average Australians miss out on. At the same time Asians take tens of thousands of jobs that would normally go to Australians - while thousands of our students miss out on a university education because their places have been taken by overseas students from Asia".
It is essential that Australians recognise the reality of the current situation: that Asianisation means not only the dismissal of Australia's independence, but also the destruction of our national identity and culture.
ASIANISATION: A DELIBERATE POLICY
The Asianisation of Australia is deliberate Establishment policy.
There are two major reasons for the Asianisation of Australia. The first is social: various cosmopolitan-internationalist "do-gooders" have decided to try and create a "Brotherhood of Man" here.
The second is economic: powerful financial and political individuals and groups want a rapid expansion of Australia's population, in order to create a larger consumer market, as well as to provide a cheaper work force. For these reasons the Labor, Liberal, National, and Democrat parties, as well as big business and multi-national corporations, all encourage mass Asian immigration.
There are various methods by which the Asianisation of Australia is being carried out. Consider the following points:
1) Programmes of mass Asian immigration have been carried out as part of a deliberate policy of "Asianisation". It has been estimated that Australia will be predominantly Asian in three to four generations.
As has been exposed by Professor Geoffrey Blainey, European immigrants are actually discriminated against and are discouraged from migrating to Australia.
2) It has been known by Australian governments for many years that the family reunion category of the immigration programme strongly favours Asian immigrants, and - over several years - the family reunion component of the immigration programme has been steadily "bumped up", thus ensuring a huge increase in Asian immigration.
3) During the 1970s and 1980s, immigration guidelines were changed, whereby the emphasis on the importance of having a grasp of the English language was lowered - yet another move which enabled an increase in the number of Asian immigrants.
4) The "humanitarian" immigration category (which includes the refugee, special humanitarian, and special assistance sub-categories) is also well-known as being favourable to Asians (in the 1980s Polish refugees were discriminated against, while Vietnamese refugees were discriminated in favour of).
5) It has also been revealed by Nick Bolkus, then Labor Minister for Immigration, that "In relation to the business skills program ... that the Government had moved specifically to target the Asian region".
6) The result?: We need only to look at the increase of the Asian population in Australia. In 1966 there were only about 49,400 Asians resident in Australia. But by 1991, following the immigration changes made by various Liberal and Labor governments from 1966, the Asian population in Australia had incredibly risen to about one and a quarter million Asians (i.e. 7.4%: 1,288,000; comprising 1,055,000 full-Asians, 233,000 part-Asians). By mid-1995, after further Asian immigration and the natural population increase of Asian ethnics, this figure rose to approximately 1,600,000 Asians in Australia, out of a population of only just over 18 million (i.e. 8.7%). By mid-1996, people in Australia of Asian and Third World descent would be well over 10% of the total population.
ASIAN IMMIGRATION
Asian immigration is now 46.5% of the total permanent intake, whereas European immigration is now only 26.7% (1995-96 figures).
Of the net permanent intake, Asian immigration is now 60.3%, while European immigration is only 28.9% (1995-96 figures).
In 1991/92, 73.5% of the net permanent intake was from Asia (!!!!).
Note: "net permanent intake" is the migration increase calculated by subtracting the permanent departures from the permanent (settler) arrivals. Net migration statistics are important, as they reveal a more realistic picture of Australia's population increase via migration.
TABLE 1
SETTLER ARRIVALS
A COMPARISON
U.K. &
Year Asia % Europe % Other % Total %
1959/60 2 694 2.5 97 498 92.1 5 695 5.4 105 887 100
1969/70 16 869 9.1 147 086 79.5 21 144 11.4 185 099 100
1979/80 26 602 32.9 31 276 38.7 22 870 28.3 80 748 100
1989/90 55 560 45.8 38 386 31.7 27 281 22.5 121 227 100
1996/97 37 456 43.7 22 167 25.8 26 129 30.5 85 752 100
.
TABLE 2
NET PERMANENT GAIN
A COMPARISON
U.K. &
Year Asia % Europe % Other % Total %
1979/80 25 846 44.0 22 176 37.8 10 709 18.2 58 731 100
1989/90 53 901 57.7 30 395 32.5 9 074 9.7 93 370 100
1996/97 33 355 59.7 15 864 28.4 6 676 11.9 55 895 100
.
TABLE 3
NET PERMANENT AND LONG-TERM GAIN
A COMPARISON
U.K. &
Year Asia % Europe % Other % Total %
1979/80 28 318 36.8 26 773 34.8 21 847 28.4 76 938 100
1989/90 63 346 61.0 32 122 30.9 8 398 8.1 103 866 100
1996/97 57 124 60.5 24 247 25.7 13 025 13.8 94 396 100
.
THE FUTURE ASIAN POPULATION
IN AUSTRALIA
What does the future hold for our nation? Australia's most respected demographic expert, Charles Price, has already published his projections: "the year 2020 would see some 2.7 million persons of unmixed Asian origin and about 3.9 million persons of part Asian ancestry; a Total Descent figure of 6.6 million persons of whole or part Asian origin; that is, 26.7% of the total Australian population". So, it is expected that in just over 20 years, over a quarter of Australia's population will be of Asian origin!!!
Phillip Ruthven, Executive Chairman of Ibis Information International (a company specialising in economic forecasting; "a strategic and information consultancy advising most of Australia's top companies") has forecast in The Age Good Weekend Magazine that Australia will be a "neo-Eurasian nation" by 2010, turning "Eurasian" by mid-century, and becoming "Asian" at the end of the next century (that's only three to four generations away!). In an article in The Australian Ruthven stated that Australia will be half to two-thirds Asian by the end of next century.
TABLE 4
THE INCREASING ASIAN PERCENTAGE OF AUSTRALIA'S POPULATION
| Year |
|
1945 |
1966 |
1991 |
2020 |
2090 |
| % |
|
0.3 |
0.4 |
7.4 |
26.7 |
66.7? |
THE UNDEMOCRATIC NATURE OF ASIANISATION
The Asianisation of Australia will mean the destruction of our national identity and culture.
It is also a fact that the Australian people never asked for this process of Asianisation; nor were any referendums ever carried out; nor were the people - as a whole - ever consulted. The reason for this is simple: the Government knows that most Australians are opposed to the Asianisation of their country. Therefore, this policy has been carried out by subterfuge and stealth; by lying and cunning; by knowingly ignoring the wishes of the community - therefore implementing a process which is one of the most evil and undemocratic actions in Australia's history.
The undemocratic nature of the implementation of the Asianisation of Australia can been seen in the following notes:
1) Refusal to hold a referendum. There have been various calls for a referendum on the subject of immigration, but all of the major political parties have refused or ignored these calls. They know what the outcome would be. In 1988, one opinion poll showed that 70% of Australians thought that we should hold a national referendum on immigration policy".
2) Give little or no publicity to organisations opposing Asianisation. It is an established media tactic to give little or no coverage to organisations opposing Asianisation and Multiculturalism. Many media outlets follow this tactic; and in those rare instances where coverage is given, it is almost always negative.
3) The media's "conspiracy of silence". As the editor of The Australian Financial Review once admitted, the media in Australia have co-operated with the government in maintaining a "conspiracy of silence" in relation to immigration policies.
4) The Government's "conspiracy of silence". In 1993 Bob Hawke, former Labor Prime Minister, confirmed that "the major parties had reached an implicit pact to keep immigration off the political agenda". The major political parties have been prepared to impose mass Asian immigration upon our nation, to advance the interests of their cosmopolitan-internationalist beliefs, despite their knowledge that most Australians opposed their plans).
5) Government-approved "brainwashing". The Sydney Morning Herald exposed how "The Department of Immigration had a plan to feed themes sympathetic to immigrants into popular television soap operas". The intent was (and is) to use television as a propaganda tool for the promotion of Australia's "Asian Future" and to try to create an atmosphere of acceptance for the increasing Asian proportion of our population.
Australians can only wonder as to what other amazing plans the Department of Immigration, and other government departments, have "cooked up" in order to indoctrinate and "brainwash" the public into accepting Asianisation and Multiculturalism.
6) "Brainwashing" via advertising and the media. Various government institutions give "positive discrimination" (a euphemism for discrimination against Australians) to Asian immigrants; and, in matters of public propaganda, often seek to have Asian ethnics portrayed in disproportionate numbers or "in a positive light".
7) Covering up research results; and the suppression of intellectual dissent. On several occasions over the years, studies have been kept hidden from public view because their results were not in accordance with what the government expected.
8) Bans on so-called "racist" immigrants. In 1987, it was revealed that intending immigrants have to undergo a "rigorous settlement assessment to screen out extremists, including racists, holding views inconsistent with Australia's multi-cultural and multi-racial society". Of course, to cosmopolitan-internationalists, anyone who opposes Multiculturalism is an "extremist".
9) "Brainwashing" of students. Trainee teachers are unofficially screened for so-called "racist" views (the same often applies to other positions within the public service). Teachers are also well-trained in Multiculturalism, and are encouraged to promote internationalism; both philosophies which have only one end for Australia: Asianisation. To this end, teachers are "armed" by internal training sessions, special journal articles, and even entire books (for example, Anti-Racism: A Handbook for Adult Educators, all of which have been developed to help brainwash students (euphemistically called "shaping students' attitudes") into the doctrine of Multiculturalism (and hence, our "Asian Future"). Teachers seize upon the opportunity to preach multiculturalism in a whole range of classes.
As Donald Horne has stated: "I agree with Al Grassby that one of the great battles for multiculturalism must be fought in the schools".
10) Willingness to ignore democracy. In order to carry out their anti-Australian policies, the cosmopolitan-internationalists of the Establishment are quite prepared to cast democracy aside in pursuit of their goals. Cosmopolitan-internationalists believe that, no matter what 75% of Australians believe regarding immigration, the self-given duty of the Establishment's media and politicians is to press on with immigration policies that are opposed by the majority of Australians.
11) Racial vilification laws, and the silencing of dissent.
"We will not allow to become a political issue in this country the question of Asianisation" - Bob Hawke, 1984 (then Labor Prime Minister).
Racial Vilification laws have been enacted at both state and federal levels specifically in order to crush the opposition of Australians to the Asianisation of their country (not, as various politicians have suggested, to stop illegal behaviour against minorities - as such behaviour is already covered by existing legislation, such as laws relating to offensive behaviour, assault and battery, defacing property, incitement to riot, etc.). As Mark Uhlmann, editor of The Record, so clearly stated: "A major aim of Federal racial vilification legislation ... is to complement the social intimidation which already greets anyone, particularly in public office, who dares to criticise matters connected to immigration and multiculturalism".
12) The result?
Asianisation means that Australia will no longer be a nation (in the true sense of the word), but will simply be another area on the map populated by the teeming masses of Asia (or rather, a mixture of Asian peoples - with a large number of Africans, Melanesians, and Polynesians thrown in for good measure).
Apparently, Australia is following the process of destruction being dealt out to all of the liberalistic, guilt-ridden, bleeding-heart White countries of the world.
MOVES TOWARDS ASIANISATION:
AUSTRALIA'S "ASIAN FUTURE",
AND THE "LABOR" SIDE OF POLITICS
It is all too easy to see a definite bias towards Asia from politicians, government officials, and various people in prominent public positions (especially in the business sector). For their own personal reasons (whether it be for motives of ideology, self-promotion, or for chasing profits) many of these people have insisted on telling us that "Australia is a part of Asia" (contrary to geographical realities), or that our country has an "Asian Future".
While some earlier instances can be traced, widespread talk of Australia being "part of Asia" really began in earnest with the Labor government of Bob Hawke (first elected in 1983). As Professor Richard Robison has noted, "When Labor came to power in Australia in the early 1980s, ...a deliberate "look north" policy was adopted, identifying Asian economies as the engine room of world growth and placing Asian markets at the heart of Australia's strategy for internationalising its economy and world view".
There are many example's of the pro-Asia viewpoint of the Labor Party's leaders:
"Australia's destiny lies in Asia and the Pacific" - Al Grassby, 1982 (Labor's former Minister for Immigration, then Commissioner for Community Relations).
"The increasing Asianisation was inevitable" - a spokesman for the then Immigration and Ethnic Affairs Minister, Stewart West, 1984.
"Australia is a part of Asia" - Bob Hawke, 1985 (then Labor Prime Minister).
"For Australia the logic of greater enmeshment with the regional economy is very clear. The Asia-Pacific region is the most dynamic area of the world economy and developments in our region will play a decisive role in shaping Australia's economic future" - Bob Hawke, 1989 (then Labor Prime Minister). Hawke also spoke of "our growing appreciation of the Asian component of the Australian population".
"Australia's future lies inevitably in the Asia/Pacific region" - Gareth Evans, 1990 (then Labor's Foreign Minister).
In 1983 Bill Hayden (then Labor's Foreign Minister) gave a remarkable speech alluding to Australia's future: "Australia is changing. We're an anomaly as a European country in this part of the world. There's already a large and growing Asian population in Australia and it is inevitable in my view that Australia will become a Eurasian country ... I happen to think that's desirable". He also said that Australia: "should welcome the process of gradually becoming a Eurasian-type society ... we will become not just a multicultural society - which seems to me to be a soft sort of terminology anyway - we will become a Eurasian society and we will be all the better for it".
Even though Hayden's views were widely reported, no politician or government official condemned his comments, leading many to believe that the Labor Government and Liberal-National Opposition generally concurred with his views. Hayden further compounded his statements the following year, when he revealed his "vision" that Australia should have a population of 50 million, predicting an upsurge in migration from "the obvious Asian populations around us ... (and the) large Polynesian and Melanesian population in our near region".
In 1997 Malcolm Fraser, ex-Liberal Prime Minister of Australia, supported Hayden's 50 million target figure: "Australia's population has grown 2 1/2 times since 1945. There is no reason at all why we could not grow 2 1/2 times again by the middle of next century. We would then be a nation of 45 million to 50 million people."
Phil Ruthven, Executive Chairman of IBIS Information International, believes that Australia's population should be driven up much higher than 50 million. Ruthven's views have been reported in The Age: "Mr Ruthven believes most of the new settlers should come from countries north of Australia. The United Nations says Australia could support 125 million people, more than twice the population of Britain, but Mr Ruthven reckons 450 million is not an unrealistic figure."
MOVES TOWARDS ASIANISATION:
THE "FELLOW TRAVELLERS"
The pro-Asia attitude expressed by the leaders of the Labor Party was echoed by many of their cosmopolitan-internationalist "fellow travellers":
"It's not easy for people of English-speaking background to accept the fact that we are a South-East Asian country" - Frank Galbally, 1984 (then chairman of the National Advisory Council of the Special Broadcasting Service).
"We must realise Australia is an Asian country, not European. We must be Asians racially as well as geographically" - Eddie Lui, 1989 (Chinese-Australian community leader).
"Nowadays when one talks about Australia's image, the question which almost invariably arises is to whether Australia is part of Asia ... it is" - Dr Peter Wilenski, 1992 (Secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade).
In 1994, Bill Ferris, (then the immediate past Chairman of Austrade) said that Australia needed to focus its attention on Asia, and should resist "attempts to 'de-Asianise' our immigration and education programs".
"I think that the increased emphasis on Asian migration and a lot of things related to Asia will in the long-term enrich Australia" - Dr John Yu, 1996 (Chief Executive of the New Children's Hospital, Sydney, and "1996 Australian of the Year"). The Australian reported that Dr Yu "was adamant the Asianisation of Australia was a positive development".
"Australians are learning, with varying degrees of enthusiasm, to accept that our future lies in the Asian region" - Judith Brett, 1997 (teacher of politics at LaTrobe University), writing for The Age.
MOVES TOWARDS ASIANISATION:
THE "CONSERVATIVE" SIDE OF POLITICS
Even though the specific push for Asianisation began with Bob Hawke's Labor government, the Liberal and National parties have not been slow to follow Labor's lead. Although some noises were made by various people in the Liberal Party about a need to return to a "balanced" immigration programme, such as by Andrew Peacock in 1984, and by John Howard in 1988 (which he recanted in 1995), basically the Liberal Party and other "conservatives" have acquiesced - if not openly assisted - in the carrying out of the policy of the Asianisation of Australia:
In 1971, the then Liberal Prime Minister, John Gorton, said: "I think if we build up gradually inside Australia a proportion of people without white skins, then there will be a complete lack of consciousness that it is being built up ... and that we will arrive at a state where we will have a multi-racial country without racial tensions - and perhaps the first in the world".
In 1972 Don Chipp, then a Liberal Minister (later to be the leader of the Australian Democrats), told television viewers that "I would like to see a stage in the 1980s where Australia is becoming the only true multi-racial country in the world, and that is the Liberal Party's aim".
In 1977 the then Premier of Queensland, Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen (National Party) stated that "Japan, as a country that does good business with Australia, is surely entitled to send emigrants to our State. There is no bar to Japanese people who want to migrate to Australia".
"I have heard people come in here today and say that our future lies with Asia and the Pacific and therefore we must increase Asian migration. That is not questioned" - Andrew Peacock, 1984 (then Leader of the Liberal Party).
One political commentator reviewed the situation of the Liberals in 1996 regarding Asianisation: "The new Liberal Government has announced policies to stop new immigrants getting the dole for their first 2 years here; and for the slashing of family reunion immigration - both are measures which will affect Asian immigration - and no doubt, these policies have been designed to pick up the anti-immigration vote. Thus, Prime Minister John Howard, hopes to bolster the Liberal Party's vote, at the same time destroying much of the base of support for AAFI and Australia First, without actually solving the immigration-Asianisation problem ... Howard's Liberal Government may slow down (not stop) Asian immigration, but it will not stop the Asianisation of Australia."
Indeed, in October 1996, John Howard spoke of an Asian Future for Australia: "(regarding) the Asia-Pacific Region ... of course we remain deeply committed to that region. Our political, our economic, increasingly our people to people future is tied up with that region and rightly so."
MOVES TOWARDS ASIANISATION:
BIG BUSINESS
Economics plays a large part in the current policies of Asianisation: As has already been pointed out, powerful financial and political groups want a rapid expansion of Australia's population, in order to create a larger consumer market, as well as to provide a cheaper work force. Also, it is believed that, by making our country "Asian", Australian businesses - and the general economy - will be able to obtain economic benefits by being enmeshed with the "economic dynamo" of Asia. For these reasons, all of the major political parties, big businesses, and multi-national corporations happily encourage mass Asian immigration.
Several big-business executives and employer groups have called for a large rise in Australia's population; for example:
Hugh Morgan (Chief Executive of Western Mining) has proposed a figure of "about half a million migrants annually".
John Elliott (Managing Director of Elders IXL) advocated that "we aim at a quarter of a million a year".
The Chamber of Commerce has called for an increase of up to 180 000, and the Master Builders' Federation has said the annual intake should be 150 000. The Business Council of Australia, one of the country's largest employer groups, said that immigration should be increased to more than 180 000.
The Australian Chamber of Manufacturers "has called on the Federal Government to increase Asian immigration" and, in particular, "says it wants more immigrants from Asian business communities such as Hong Kong and Taiwan".
MOVES TOWARDS ASIANISATION:
ENMESHMENT WITH ASIA
(SELLING AUSTRALIA'S FUTURE
FOR ASIAN MONEY)
Alan Renouf (former Secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs, and a former Ambassador) has said that "immigration can be a useful diplomatic tool" and has advocated "a larger flow of Asian peoples" on the basis that such an action "could cement materially Australia's ties with such countries".
In 1980 the then Head of the Immigration Department, John Menadue, said that "Australia was eager to attract migrants, but traditional source countries such as Great Britain could be gradually edged out ... as Asia became more industrialised it would be possible to attract large numbers of skilled Asian immigrants".
Professor Stephen Fitzgerald declared in 1992 that "this decade will see the progressive Asia-orientation of the Australian economic environment".
In 1995, the then Labor Prime Minister, Paul Keating, stated "Asia is emphatically where this county's security and prosperity lie. It is where an increasing number of our people come from and - unambiguously and wholeheartedly - it is where we want to be ...Our efforts on free trade, multiculturalism, and education and training are all part of the same strategy".
It would seem that it is towards Asia that business leaders, government bureaucrats, and politicians of all hues (Labor, Liberal, National, and Democrats) are looking to provide the "future" for Australia. Some observers have commented that it would seem that there is an implicit "trade-off" involved: in return for being enabled to economically enmesh Australia with the growing Asian economies, Australia will in turn demographically enmesh itself with Asia's populations. As one government Minister is reported to have said, "we are part of Asia and our economic development, our future is inextricably intertwined with Asia - tourism, trade and economic development".
The price that Australia is expected to pay for this "trade-off" involving economics, politics, and immigration was made quite clear by Malaysia's Prime Minister, Dr. Mahathir, when he stated that Australia could only be accepted as an equal in Asia when 70% of its people were of Asian ethnicity. Dr Mahathir said "Possibly with more Asians settling in Australia - maybe the proportion might be 70 per cent Asian, 30 per cent people of Caucasian origin - perhaps that's when there will be no problem at all".
The sad fact is that our nation's Establishment is selling Australia's future for Asian money.
THE FUTURE?
It is finally being recognised by a large segment of the population that the Asianisation of Australia is underway. This process has been admitted by a number of prominent people.
Greg Sheridan, Foreign Editor of The Australian, wrote: "Crucial policy changes of the 1980s led directly to the Asianisation of almost every sphere of Australian life".
It was reported in The Bulletin that "Professor Stephen Fitzgerald, of the Australia-Asia Institute, has argued that the "Asianisation" of Australia is already underway and that in the not too distant future Australia will be a "honey coloured" part of an East Asian community".
Even foreign politicians have recognised what sort of future the Australian Establishment is dragging our country into. The observations of Lee Kuan Yew (Singapore's Prime Minister, 1959-1990) were reported in The Bulletin in 1990: "Lee Kuan Yew sees a steady and inevitable Asianisation of Australia, with our European population ending up as the "white trash of Asia"."
RESISTANCE TO ASIANISATION
Very few people within the Australian Establishment have tried to speak out against our enforced enmeshment with Asia, however, some have expressed concerns over the idea, such as:
A 1989 editorial of The Sunday Herald, entitled "Asia: Our New Cultural Cringe", attacked the "recently discovered article of faith ... that 'Australia is part of Asia' and our only hope of salvation lies in our enlisting as a small contingent in the mighty Asian army ... (the) argument that we need to increase Asian immigration if we wish to increase our trade with Asia is not convincing. Japan, South Korea and Taiwan have not found it necessary to import American, European and Australian immigrants in order to carry on international business. The idea that our future prosperity should be achieved by Japanese living in Australia dealing with Japanese living in Japan is a particularly self-abasing manifestation of the cultural cringe".
A 1992 column in The Bulletin which gave the opinion that "There is a lack of sophistication about the "Let's get closer to Asia" argument, not least because it is all about economic relationships and presupposes that our external economic links will expand if we become Asian in outlook - whatever that means ... It represents a rather simplistic view of our options and is obviously designed to appeal to that section of the electorate which believes that our main foreign-policy concerns should be promoting trade and investment and making our work force internationally competitive ... we must not, for the sake of getting on with Asia, devalue those principles which bear on the quality of our democracy and on international human rights ... Australia is not part of Asia.".
In 1994, Brian Toohey wrote that "Australia's traditional social safety nets will come under increased stress as we enmesh with Asia ... Likewise, there will be increased pressures to take a more quiescent approach on human rights, even though our long-term security interests may be best served by encouraging less authoritarian governments in our neighbourhood."
In 1993 Graeme Campbell, Member of Parliament for Kalgoorlie, made an important point: "it needs to be stressed again and again that Australia is not a part of Asia. It is a separate and distinct nation-continent. We are unique and should be proud of our uniqueness".
Graeme Campbell (Kalgoorlie's Member for Parliament since 1980) was ousted by the Labor Party for his outspoken views, and in a similar fashion the Liberal Party withdrew their endorsement for Pauline Hanson as their candidate for Oxley because of her outspoken views. Nonetheless, in the March 1996 federal elections, Graeme Campbell was re-elected, and Pauline Hanson won the seat of Oxley; both as independents.
Pauline Hanson, in her maiden speech to parliament on 10 September 1996, said: "Immigration and multiculturalism are issues that this government is trying to address but for far too long, ordinary Australians have been kept out of any debate by the major parties. I and most Australians want our immigration policy radically reviewed and that of multiculturalism abolished. I believe we are in danger of being swamped by Asians. Between 1984 and 1995, 40% of all migrants into this country were of Asian origin. They have their own culture and religion, form ghettos and do not assimilate. Of course, I will be called racist but if I can invite who I want into my home, then I should have the right to have a say in who comes into my country".
The courage of Pauline Hanson and Graeme Campbell is to be applauded by all true-blue Australians. However; it should be noted that, all in all, very few prominent people have questioned the direction Australia is taking, in regard to Asia. Even fewer, more outspoken, people have opposed some aspects of our Asianisation. But so far, it is only the Nationalists who will actually oppose the whole spectrum of our nation's Asianisation, and who advocate the steps to be taken to reverse this evil, undemocratic, anti-Australian process.
It is time that all Australians make a stand against the Asianisation of our nation.
A momentum of resistance is building. More people are speaking out, joining patriotic groups, and becoming actively involved in the Nationalist Resistance.
Make the change. Stand up and fight. Join your compatriots in the historic battle to determine the destiny of the Australian nation.
Become an Australian Nationalist.
Be active in the fight for Australia.
5 March 1998
Australian Nationalism Information Database
www.ausnatinfo.angelfire.com
