Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 
Send Topic Print
The far right (Read 9819 times)
Acid Monkey
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Goth Father

Posts: 1064
EU
Gender: male
Re: The far right
Reply #15 - May 21st, 2008 at 10:22pm
 
I have to agree with mantra - it was Barton's Protectionist Party that implemented the White Australia Policy and Whitlam's Labor Party that implemented a series of amendments which prevented the racial aspects of the immigration law. In the end it was Labor's Racial Discrimination Act 1975 that effectively killed it.

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Acid Monkey
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Goth Father

Posts: 1064
EU
Gender: male
Re: The far right
Reply #16 - May 21st, 2008 at 10:23pm
 
freediver wrote on May 21st, 2008 at 7:07pm:
It's interesting isn't it Acid how some people put so much effort into into pigeon holing people into only two groups, then attacking the 'other side'. Such a waste of time.


Agreed.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
deepthought
Gold Member
*****
Offline


In Defence Of Liberty

Posts: 2869
Re: The far right
Reply #17 - May 21st, 2008 at 11:00pm
 
mantra wrote on May 21st, 2008 at 8:14pm:
Very helpful neferti.   According to Wikipedia - the Protectionist Party under the leadership of Sir Edmund Barton instigated the White Australia Policy.  After that - the major players in the Party split themselves up between the Liberals and the ALP.

Looks like the blame can be laid equally on both parties.  


You're wrong.

The bill was introduced by Edmund Barton but the only restriction in it was to limit immigration according to an English language test.  It was the leader of the Commonwealth Labor Party (as the splinter group was called prior to the metamorphosis into the ALP) Chris Watson, who pressed for an amendment which refused entry to people based on their colour.   This amendnment was supported by (another Lieborite) MP Billy Hughes who was even prepared to break ties with Britain who were opposed to such racial vilification.

But Liebor got their way and the bill was passed.

It was reinforced by Liebor all the way, including before WWII when Liebor PM John Curtin wanted the country to remain entirely British.

There were a series of amendments and relaxations through the 50s and 60s (all conservative party PMs) culminating in Harold Holt's decision to allow non-Europeans the same residency rights as Europeans.  From that point on non-European settlers doubled and trebled right through and into the early 70s - long before Gough came along to root the country.

And it was only in 1978 and 1982 (Fraser - another Liberal) made two policy changes which removed forever the favouritism towards British subjects.

The legislation which required compulsory detention of illegal immigrants was introduced by a Liebor government.

Racism has always been Liebor policy - it remains so today with the opposition to 457 visas and migrant workers coming almost entirely from the left.
Back to top
 
WWW  
IP Logged
 
lapaz62
Junior Member
**
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 98
Re: The far right
Reply #18 - May 21st, 2008 at 11:52pm
 
Tosser
Back to top
« Last Edit: May 21st, 2008 at 11:59pm by lapaz62 »  
 
IP Logged
 
lapaz62
Junior Member
**
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 98
Re: The far right
Reply #19 - May 22nd, 2008 at 12:13am
 
What causes racism, is people like you, forcing people to live with people that they dont want to live with. There is no country that has benifited from immigration in recent times, none. France, America, England, Australia, all going down the crapper. People since the beginning of time have fought against invaders and intruders from other lands, its not going to stop any day soon.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
deepthought
Gold Member
*****
Offline


In Defence Of Liberty

Posts: 2869
Re: The far right
Reply #20 - May 22nd, 2008 at 6:07am
 
lapaz62 wrote on May 21st, 2008 at 11:52pm:
Tosser


Is that a statement or a question?

lapaz62 wrote on May 22nd, 2008 at 12:13am:
What causes racism, is people like you, forcing people to live with people that they dont want to live with. There is no country that has benifited from immigration in recent times, none. France, America, England, Australia, all going down the crapper. People since the beginning of time have fought against invaders and intruders from other lands, its not going to stop any day soon.


What 'causes' racism is attitude - exactly like you have displayed.  You are displaying the attitude typically seen in a leftard.  I hear this kind of thing from union thugs.

And you are talking about two different things here anyway dude.  Migration is not multiculturalism and vise versa.
Back to top
« Last Edit: May 22nd, 2008 at 6:16am by deepthought »  
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Acid Monkey
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Goth Father

Posts: 1064
EU
Gender: male
Re: The far right
Reply #21 - May 22nd, 2008 at 3:26pm
 
deepthought wrote on May 21st, 2008 at 11:00pm:
The bill was introduced by Edmund Barton but the only restriction in it was to limit immigration according to an English language test.  It was the leader of the Commonwealth Labor Party (as the splinter group was called prior to the metamorphosis into the ALP) Chris Watson, who pressed for an amendment which refused entry to people based on their colour.   This amendnment was supported by (another Lieborite) MP Billy Hughes who was even prepared to break ties with Britain who were opposed to such racial vilification.

...

There were a series of amendments and relaxations through the 50s and 60s (all conservative party PMs) culminating in Harold Holt's decision to allow non-Europeans the same residency rights as Europeans.  From that point on non-European settlers doubled and trebled right through and into the early 70s - long before Gough came along to root the country.

And it was only in 1978 and 1982 (Fraser - another Liberal) made two policy changes which removed forever the favouritism towards British subjects.



Actually, your statement is true within context but is misleading and incomplete.

It actually was Barton who introduced the Immigration Restriction Act 1901 where he was quoted to say at its implementation "The doctrine of the equality of man was never intended to apply to the equality of the Englishman and the Chinaman." Early drafts of the act explicitly banned "non-Europeans" until pressure from Britain forced Barton to remove the wording for fear of offending the British colony of India and Japanese allies. The "dictation test" was introduced instead.

Relaxation of the Act:
1947 - Non-Europeans are allowed to settle in Australia for business reasons. Labor PM Ben Chifley.
1950 - Colombo Plan. Liberal PM Robert Menzies.
1957 - Non-Europeans who have been in the country for 15 years or more can become citizens. Liberal PM Robert Menzies.
1958 - Revised Migration Act 1958 removed the dictation test. Liberal PM Robert Menzies.
1959 - Australian citizens allowed to sponsor Asian spouses for citizenship. Liberal PM Robert Menzies.
1964 - Conditions of entry for non-Europeans relaxed. Liberal PM Robert Menzies.
1975 - Racial Discrimiination Act 1975 made the racial criteria for immigration illegal. Labor PM Gough Whitlam.
1978 - Revised Migration Act 1978 removes all criteria relating to the country of origin of any applicants. Liberal PM Malcolm Fraser.

Your cited reasons of having only the Liberal Party playing the part in the death of The White Australia Policy is misleading. You cited only the "50s and 60s" and then jumped to Fraser in 1978 (bypassing the most significant and the ACTUAL death of the policy in 1975).

"all conservative party PMs" is really only 1 PM - Menzies.

Smiley
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: The far right
Reply #22 - May 22nd, 2008 at 3:44pm
 
Thanks Acid for the unbiased account of the history.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
lapaz62
Junior Member
**
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 98
Re: The far right
Reply #23 - May 22nd, 2008 at 4:27pm
 
What causes racism, is people screwing up their own country, then coming to screw up yours, a ghetto is not made up of educated law abiding citizens, its made by poor uneducated, corrupt people with little respect for the law and thats what immigration is giving us. If you are the son or daughter of immigrants then you infact have the bias, ask Aussies who have a few generations here, not ones that have one.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Acid Monkey
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Goth Father

Posts: 1064
EU
Gender: male
Re: The far right
Reply #24 - May 22nd, 2008 at 4:51pm
 
Furthermore, it is true that after Federation, the Protectionist Party (pre-Liberal) was formed with the support of the Australian Labor Party on the priviso of restricting and/or removing prohibited non-Europeans. However, that was 107 years ago! Things have changed since then - a lot of water under the bridge etc etc.

While Liberal PM, Menzies can be accredited as the initiator of the decline of the White Australia Policy it was Liberal PM Howard who brought back the ambiance and remnants of it.

While the Australian Labor Party may have been partied with the Protectionist Party in the Immigration Act 1901 it was Labor PM Whitlam who saw its death.

This is neither black or white; left or right. I think neither party can claim the moral high ground in this issue.

Smiley
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
deepthought
Gold Member
*****
Offline


In Defence Of Liberty

Posts: 2869
Re: The far right
Reply #25 - May 22nd, 2008 at 5:56pm
 
Acid Monkey wrote on May 22nd, 2008 at 3:26pm:
Actually, your statement is true within context but is misleading and incomplete.

It actually was Barton who introduced the Immigration Restriction Act 1901 where he was quoted to say at its implementation "The doctrine of the equality of man was never intended to apply to the equality of the Englishman and the Chinaman." Early drafts of the act explicitly banned "non-Europeans" until pressure from Britain forced Barton to remove the wording for fear of offending the British colony of India and Japanese allies. The "dictation test" was introduced instead.

Relaxation of the Act:
1947 - Non-Europeans are allowed to settle in Australia for business reasons. Labor PM Ben Chifley.
1950 - Colombo Plan. Liberal PM Robert Menzies.
1957 - Non-Europeans who have been in the country for 15 years or more can become citizens. Liberal PM Robert Menzies.
1958 - Revised Migration Act 1958 removed the dictation test. Liberal PM Robert Menzies.
1959 - Australian citizens allowed to sponsor Asian spouses for citizenship. Liberal PM Robert Menzies.
1964 - Conditions of entry for non-Europeans relaxed. Liberal PM Robert Menzies.
1975 - Racial Discrimiination Act 1975 made the racial criteria for immigration illegal. Labor PM Gough Whitlam.
1978 - Revised Migration Act 1978 removes all criteria relating to the country of origin of any applicants. Liberal PM Malcolm Fraser.

Your cited reasons of having only the Liberal Party playing the part in the death of The White Australia Policy is misleading. You cited only the "50s and 60s" and then jumped to Fraser in 1978 (bypassing the most significant and the ACTUAL death of the policy in 1975).

"all conservative party PMs" is really only 1 PM - Menzies.

Smiley


I wasn't aware that Robert Menzies, Harold Holt, John McEwen, John Gorton and William McMahon were actually all 1 PM - Robert Menzies.  Uncannily versatile that dude.

And you confirmed what I already said that Barton introduced the legislation but you missed out the truth about the Liebor Party people who pressed for amendments to exclude 'coloured' people.

Your report, which according to freediver is 'unbiased', is laden with bias.

The dude who wanted to exclude the darkies and the orientals was a full on Liebor dude, name of Chris Watson who became the first Liebor Party PM in 1904.

Quote:
Watson and White Australia


The first principle of the Australian character, as far as Watson was concerned, was that Australians should all look like each other. The idea of a White Australia underpinned Australian identity and was crucial to the survival of the nation, as Watson explained to the Australian Parliament during the debate on the Barton Government’s Immigration Restriction bill in 1901. Watson claimed that Australians lay
exposed to a real threat of ‘racial contamination’
unless the Commonwealth government legislated to introduce uniform, national restrictions against non-European immigrants. This disease of illegitimate difference would insidiously creep in and infect white Australians, imported by that most obnoxious of alien categories, ‘
the heathen chinee’,
as he belittled Chinese immigrants to Australia
.

Watson cursorily acknowledged that his concerns about immigration to Australia by Asians, Africans and indeed by Pacific Islanders were ‘tinged with considerations of an industrial nature’, Labor’s traditional objection to cheap foreign labour being imported to undercut Australian wage rates and conditions. However industrial issues were far from the real concern animating Watson’s fears. The essential question, Watson asserted, was

Quote:
…whether we would desire that our sisters or our brothers should be married into any of these races to which we object. If these people are not such … as we can expect to give us an infusion of blood that will tend to the raising of our standard of life, and to the improvement of the race, we should be foolish in the extreme if we did not exhaust every means of preventing them from coming to this land, which we have made our own. The racial aspect of the question, in my opinion, is the larger and more important one; but the industrial aspect also has to be considered.


I expect freediver will thank me for correcting your bias Acid.
Back to top
 
WWW  
IP Logged
 
lapaz62
Junior Member
**
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 98
Re: The far right
Reply #26 - May 22nd, 2008 at 6:14pm
 
Anyway Nothought, what makes pro- immigration any more valid that anti- immigration, is it because thats the side you favour, so the rest of us are obviously less valid that you, hooray for you.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Neferti
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 7965
Canberra
Gender: female
Re: The far right
Reply #27 - May 22nd, 2008 at 6:16pm
 
Acid Monkey wrote on May 22nd, 2008 at 3:26pm:
"all conservative party PMs" is really only 1 PM - Menzies.

Smiley


No, it isn't.

Menzies 1949-1966
Holt  1967-1968
McEwan (took over after Holt 'died') 23 days
Gorton 1968-1971
McMahon 1971-1972

Question:  Who was in Federal Government when the Referendum on Aboriginals went through?  Wink
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
deepthought
Gold Member
*****
Offline


In Defence Of Liberty

Posts: 2869
Re: The far right
Reply #28 - May 22nd, 2008 at 6:19pm
 
lapaz62 wrote on May 22nd, 2008 at 6:14pm:
Anyway Nothought, what makes pro- immigration any more valid that anti- immigration, is it because thats the side you favour, so the rest of us are obviously less valid that you, hooray for you.


The nick is deepthought dude.  And I have no issue with a pro-immigration or an anti-immigration position, everyone is entilted to their opinion.  The issue I have is with people from the left, who are blatantly racist, attempting to attribute racism to we righties.  That is far, far away from the reality of historical fact.

I am discussing racism here, not migration.  You, however, confused migration with the policy of multiculturalism, and they are two separate doctrines.
Back to top
 
WWW  
IP Logged
 
lapaz62
Junior Member
**
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 98
Re: The far right
Reply #29 - May 22nd, 2008 at 6:43pm
 
Thats like saying a left shoe is different to a right shoe, they are infact different, yet they are the same.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 
Send Topic Print