Uncontrolled immigration into Australia, or anywhere, is a terribly difficult situation to write about. Kind hearts and well-meaning actions are not far-sighted.
Australia is a big place, and although everyone is crammed into the cities and centres, of necessity, the land being what it is, there is still room for thousands more people, perhaps millions more.
We know this, despite the cities becoming less livable and traffic-clogged: there is always room for more.
We know this, and it is true, and more immigrants will no doubt be welcomed. But the unthinking person, who with kindness and humanity will welcome all those who risk death and terrible hardship on the unforgiving oceans of the planet, forgets what their welcome will encourage. Their decision is not as easy as they think, for at some stage they themselves will be forced to to reverse their attitude, their humanity, and their kindness. A point will be reached when they too will have to say no, and true sympathy and forethought would say ‘no’ before the damage is done, no matter how cruel that sounds. Recent events (5-9-2015) are heading in that direction.
Why is this so? Simple numbers, statistics.
Think, and think hard. Yes, we are lucky to live in a civilised place like Australia, where for the most part there is democracy, food, land, work. Lucky, because of generations of fair-minded lawmakers. Lucky because of imposed education standards which keep ignorance and superstition at bay.
Do you suppose others, who are also educated, without religious or racial bigotry, but who live in fear in countries bereft of government, would not prefer to live here, in Australia, or France, or Denmark, or anywhere else? Have you considered how many folk would prefer to live in Australia than in their own land? Folk who would risk their lives to get here?
If it were thousands, we’d have them. Even millions, eventually. But conservatively, a hundred million? A hundred million would sign up for Australian citizenship in twelve months, if it was offered. For each boat welcomed today, there would be ten within a month, 100 within six months; word would spread throughout the world. If you could get off a plane in Sydney and receive an Australian passport at the checkout, how many would take advantage of that?
The sad position is that huge populations would come if they could, that is why we are so lucky. We are already here, and safe. All these would-be immigrants are people, like us, and none except the tiny few mean us any harm, and yet, despite our feelings of compassion and kindness, we can not welcome all of them, it simply is not possible; this time it really is not true: we really do not have room. Someone, some time, would be forced to say no, and the situation would become obvious within days, not years, if the door were announced to be open.
This is why, by thinking ahead, the consequences of even the smallest welcome to the smallest number of boat-people must be seen as a disastrous move. The very harsh treatment instigated within the last few years has nipped in the bud an explosion of immigrant shipping, despite the undeniable cruelty involved to those who have become the scapegoats. Their fate has prevented further boats; word soon gets round. If they are seen to be integrated into the community, as must at some stage happen, only their years of imprisonment will remain as a deterrent, and many will accept even that fate to get here.
So the situation is not being cruel to be kind, it is being cruel to survive, because someone, sometime, must say ‘no’, but by the time that happens the massive unemployment and breakdown in services, education, food supply, etc. may never be fixable.
How many immigrants, therefore, can we physically take? Some, of course. All: absolutely not. The question is: how many? Who could decide, and at what stage? Because somebody, sometime, would be forced to say no.
The only solution to this horrible question is ‘no boat people whatsoever, only legitimate entry’. And that, with all its inherent cruelty, is what is happening,
We are so, so lucky to be here, and not there. Never take democracy for granted.
By this attitude I am in danger of being labelled a far-right racist bastard, but I have always considered myself a lefty tree-hugger. I certainly find it surprising to agree with a policy of the present government, but hey, that’s just another facet of democracy.
EMIGRATION FROM PIRATED COUNTRIES INTO EUROPE, OVER LAND AND SEA.
As mentioned, recent escalation of would-be immigrants into Europe, heading mainly to Germany, overland from the East, (September 2015) is proving that the slightest relaxation of border control, the smallest hint of welcome, will provide a signal to millions that a new life in a civilised country is possible. Who would blame these people? We all want a life of quiet endeavour and family security, and these millions are fleeing a tiny minority of ultra-violent monsters, who with modern weapons and stolen cash are butchering all in their path, When the murder has ceased, as the perpetrators age, what will remain will be a wasteland of un-governed, un-farmed terrain.
The thousands flooding into Europe, to escape violent criminal sects in their own countries, will become millions, as soon as there is the slightest report of successful entry to any reasonably well-governed and prosperous community. Those fleeing have every reason to escape the horrors taking place, and every reason to seek out the best that democracy has to offer. The less democratic and less wealthy countries are being by-passed, or used as corridors of transit.
Welcoming democracies, such as Germany and, surprisingly Finland, have no idea of the staggering numbers that successful migration will encourage. This is a prediction that anyone could make, but few have. No news analysts are suggesting that pirated countries will literally lose the majority of their populations in an overwhelming surge of emigration, all headed for Europe initially, as first choice, then elsewhere.
The obvious solution to this looming situation is one that no democratic community is prepared to make. Pirated countries must be made safe, and the pirates driven out, and this can only be done at great expense and inevitable loss of life, and must be done with extreme investment in occupation of enemy territory. Any half-measures have been proved unsuccessful, time and time again.
All European governments will soon realise the necessity of this action as being the only long-term solution to a problem that has yet to become overwhelming. The populations that are fleeing their pirated countries must be able to return in safety, and must have help in forming true democracy under strict supervision to safeguard against dictatorship, nepotism, corruption etcetera, and help in establishing unfettered news agencies.
Massive ground force must establish secure bases at airports and seaports, supported by air defense. Attack of pirate enclaves by air has proved to endanger civilians in disastrous humanitarian and publicity situations. Attempts to establish peace in this way have proved most unsuccessful in the past, due to limited enthusiasm where overwhelming action is needed.
Once an areas are cleared of enemy weapons and obvious enemy fighters, expansion of peaceful territory can begin. The fact that the ‘enemy’ is unrecognisable is irrelevant, once weapons and organisation are dismantled. In fact no major enemy groups may ever be found, but will melt back into their individual towns and villages, where ringleaders and murderers will become pariahs and fodder for future tribunals.
A logical course of events would be for dedicated civilians to arm and fight back: they are the massive majority. This seldom happens. Some groups have a tribal bond capable of defense against insurgents, the Curds, for example, but whole countries often lack basic community values due to generations of mis-rule by dictators, religious sects or corrupt elites, and these countries tend to become wastelands of dereliction when control is dissipated.
A frightening but successful solution to a once-autonomous area in total dissolution is colonial control by a benevolent patriarchal agency. The essence is in the benevolence. Once a generation or two of the natives have become absorbed into the system of benevolent governance, the colonisers can leave.
Initially the colonisers are of course an invading army; there is no alternative.
As I write, this is actually happening ( 7th September 2015). Russia is apparently sending troops into Syria (I’ll check this), but with no benevolent aspirations, judging by past invasions: just domination.