A Travel and vacations forum. TravelBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » TravelBanter forum » Travel Regions » Australia & New Zealand
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Asianisation Of Australia - All Australian citizens must read!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 24th, 2004, 12:59 PM
Aussie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Asianisation Of Australia - All Australian citizens must read!

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 futu "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 figu "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.



  #2  
Old July 24th, 2004, 01:43 PM
Peter Webb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Asianisation Of Australia - All Australian citizens must read!

Firstly, allow me to apologise to anybody who takes offence, particularly
the many Asians on this ng.

The first part of the article below is a reasonably factual account of the
increased numbers of Asians in Australia (9% ?) and gives some of the
reasons why this has been encouraged.

I completely support the increased levels of Asian migration for exactly the
reasons he quotes (although he seems to diasapprove).

The second part - which I just skimmed - seemed to be some kind of moan that
he wasn't consulted and doesn't like it. Just as well nobody consulted him -
he appears to be some kind of kook.

Peter Webb



"Aussie" wrote in message
. ..
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 futu "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 figu "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.






  #3  
Old July 24th, 2004, 10:11 PM
Mark H
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Asianisation Of Australia - All Australian citizens must read!

"Aussie" wrote:

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.


much supposed fact and statistics deleted

So what's your point? This is a travel related group.

And I'd much rather share this great country with our asian
neighbours than the redneck likes of you and certain other
ethnic groups.

Mark.

  #4  
Old July 24th, 2004, 10:11 PM
Mark H
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Asianisation Of Australia - All Australian citizens must read!

"Aussie" wrote:

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.


much supposed fact and statistics deleted

So what's your point? This is a travel related group.

And I'd much rather share this great country with our asian
neighbours than the redneck likes of you and certain other
ethnic groups.

Mark.

  #5  
Old July 24th, 2004, 10:11 PM
Mark H
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Asianisation Of Australia - All Australian citizens must read!

"Aussie" wrote:

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.


much supposed fact and statistics deleted

So what's your point? This is a travel related group.

And I'd much rather share this great country with our asian
neighbours than the redneck likes of you and certain other
ethnic groups.

Mark.

  #8  
Old July 26th, 2004, 02:12 PM
Freda
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Asianisation Of Australia - All Australian citizens must read!

Sounds more like the "National action" extreme right wing mob to me


--
Please reply to the list as my email address is a fake
"Peter Webb" wrote in message
...
Firstly, allow me to apologise to anybody who takes offence, particularly
the many Asians on this ng.

The first part of the article below is a reasonably factual account of the
increased numbers of Asians in Australia (9% ?) and gives some of the
reasons why this has been encouraged.

I completely support the increased levels of Asian migration for exactly

the
reasons he quotes (although he seems to diasapprove).

The second part - which I just skimmed - seemed to be some kind of moan

that
he wasn't consulted and doesn't like it. Just as well nobody consulted

him -
he appears to be some kind of kook.

Peter Webb



"Aussie" wrote in message
. ..
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 futu "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 figu "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.








  #9  
Old July 26th, 2004, 02:12 PM
Freda
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Asianisation Of Australia - All Australian citizens must read!

Sounds more like the "National action" extreme right wing mob to me


--
Please reply to the list as my email address is a fake
"Peter Webb" wrote in message
...
Firstly, allow me to apologise to anybody who takes offence, particularly
the many Asians on this ng.

The first part of the article below is a reasonably factual account of the
increased numbers of Asians in Australia (9% ?) and gives some of the
reasons why this has been encouraged.

I completely support the increased levels of Asian migration for exactly

the
reasons he quotes (although he seems to diasapprove).

The second part - which I just skimmed - seemed to be some kind of moan

that
he wasn't consulted and doesn't like it. Just as well nobody consulted

him -
he appears to be some kind of kook.

Peter Webb



"Aussie" wrote in message
. ..
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 futu "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 figu "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.








  #10  
Old July 26th, 2004, 02:12 PM
Freda
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Asianisation Of Australia - All Australian citizens must read!

Sounds more like the "National action" extreme right wing mob to me


--
Please reply to the list as my email address is a fake
"Peter Webb" wrote in message
...
Firstly, allow me to apologise to anybody who takes offence, particularly
the many Asians on this ng.

The first part of the article below is a reasonably factual account of the
increased numbers of Asians in Australia (9% ?) and gives some of the
reasons why this has been encouraged.

I completely support the increased levels of Asian migration for exactly

the
reasons he quotes (although he seems to diasapprove).

The second part - which I just skimmed - seemed to be some kind of moan

that
he wasn't consulted and doesn't like it. Just as well nobody consulted

him -
he appears to be some kind of kook.

Peter Webb



"Aussie" wrote in message
. ..
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 futu "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 figu "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.








 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
READ BEFORE POSTING rec.travel.europe FAQ Yves Bellefeuille Europe 3 March 25th, 2006 10:05 AM
Documents required for entry into Canada Ted Elston USA & Canada 0 May 3rd, 2004 03:09 PM
needs lots of amateur photos of Australia for CD project Kookaburra Australia & New Zealand 5 March 16th, 2004 07:30 PM
More on How Australia Is Torturing 60,000 Sheep on a Ship to Nowhere! Rainer Wolfcastle Australia & New Zealand 16 October 1st, 2003 07:36 AM
Hey Australia - How Many of The 60,000 Sheep Did You Tourture or Kill Today? Rainer Wolfcastle Australia & New Zealand 39 September 29th, 2003 11:25 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 TravelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.