"DISCRIMINATION" IN IMMIGRATION

A reader writes:

A thought about Australian immigration policy: The development of large ethnic sub-communities apparently unwilling or incapable to integrate into the wider Australian community and the symbiotic relationship that their unelected "leaders" have with the multiculturalism industry is really a by product of the Whitlam / Fraser immigration policy era. Whitlam claimed to be killing off what remained of the old "White Australia" policy. This was disingenuous -- as the previous Liberal administrations from Holt to McMahon were the governments that actually abolished the "White Australia policy" progressively over a decade, in favour of a programme based on integration and assimilation.

The Whitlam ministry instituted "multiculturalism" which was effectively sold to Fraser and institutionalised ever since. Neither Whitlam or Fraser ever attempted to sell multiculturalism to the electorate directly. In fact Whitlam argued that immigration of all kinds, including non-european immigration, would be reduced under his government and "family reunion" would provide a conservative alternative to "white Australia". Whitlam was trying to play both sides, defusing concerns from those concerned about radical social change by emphasising lower total numbers and maintenance of traditional sources of immigration, whilst winning support from "ethnic community leaders" and playing up his burial of a policy that was already dead.

Unfortunately 'family reunion' has turned into chain immigration and Australia's stringent criteria applied to independent immigrants (ie those lacking a family predecessor) are bypassed, sometimes by genuine or false refugees, but mainly by legitimate family union immigrants.

In current Australian politics, social conservatives are portrayed as advocates of "discrimination", where the multiculturalists portray themselves as advocates of a "non-discriminatory" immigration policy. This is also disingenuous. All immigration policies other than a completely open door or a completely closed door involve some form of discrimination, and almost no one advocates either of those positions.

In fact social conservatives, by advocating an end to the family reunion "loophole", and the application of the usual rules applied to independent immigrants, could easily argue that their policy is by far the fairest and hence the least "discriminatory" option.

***********************************

CARNIVAL

Carnival of the Vanities is particularly interesting this week. Just two posts for example:

Eric Berlin tells us why ethanol is more wasteful than thermal depolymerization. One hopes that Senator Daschle would bother actually learning the facts, too, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

Jeff Medcalf blogs about the possible results of the US putting pressure on Israel. A frightening scenario, to be sure, but worth reading (and pondering at length).

*******************************