In discussions on Twitter following the establishment of a new pro-immigration campaigning group, Boundless Plains To Share (@BoundlessPlains), there is a consensus emerging that open borders are the only solution to Australia’s immigration impasse.The ‘consensus’ she talks about is a bit one-sided, consisting as it does purely of the Left.
The humanitarian argument is dead in the water; people don’t want to be charitable.Well, no, not quite. What people don't want is to have that natural impulse to be charitable change their country and their way of life and put increased pressure on them to support a growing class of welfare moochers.
But the Left can't face that head on. So, she believes that ‘the terms of the pro-immigration argument have to shift’ in order to convince these awful majority that what Alana and her fellow travellers want is right.
… the facts remain that thinking of others as charity-cases, despite the best of intentions, dehumanises them creating a disconnect between "us" and "them" to the extent that even Australians whose own families were effectively refugees (for example, many Lebanese people) have decreasing empathy for those portrayed as "queue jumpers" and "economic migrants" in disguise.Because it would never occur to the Left that maybe these people had a point; they've gone through the process, so seeing someone else resort to emotional blackmail to skip the hard bits will rankle. No, that can't possibly be.
The two-pronged move to (a) open borders, thus making migration part of the daily reality of a globalised world, and not an expensive, largely performative, and ultimately futile exercise in securing borders, and (b) humanise asylum seekers by talking about them as people "like us" would have the effect of detoxifying the poison that is contemporary asylum and immigration politics in Australia.
Allow asylum seekers to come to Australia by any means (even if considerably larger numbers arrive, this will never reach European proportions, and Australia has plenty of room for them all).Heh! She fondly believes that not enough will want to come in to make a difference; I want some of what she's smoking!
Allow asylum seekers to work. This saves the government a lot of money, as current spending on detention and deportation of asylum seekers, especially off-shore is already costing the Australian public billions and will increase exponentially…And further squeezes the job market for everyone else.
To open borders would release Australian politics from the stranglehold created by the asylum issue, whereby everything is overshadowed by the race to appear tougher, more resolute, indeed more cruel than the next man or woman…
The left has to take the bull by the horns. No more prancing around the issue, paddling in the safe shallow waters of humanitarianism, and call for the only workable solution: free movement for all.Be careful what you wish for. As a comment here points out: As Milton Friedman said: “You can have open borders, or a welfare state; you can’t have both!”
6 comments:
"We'll let you in, so long as you vote for us" (c) Anthony Charles Lynton Blair
“You can have open borders, or a welfare state; you can’t have both!”
Well, I'm surprised he said that. Most countries have some sort of welfare system and also some immigration, but the key to this is to restrict welfare to longer term residents or your own nationals or however you wish to define it. Which is what a lot of countries do or have done in the past.
Don't the Aussies have (historically at least, I think it's been eroded a bit) a points-based system where you have to show that you can earn at least $x or have at least $y in savings before they let somebody from the UK or Ireland in?
Seems fair enough to me. It'd be even more bitter if they let in any old Tom Dick or Achmed (like the Lebanese) because their own country is a wreck but turned down law abiding Brits who fancy living in the sun shine.
Have you seen Australian plentiful spaces. Vast arid deserts mostly. Water shortage , housing shortage , etc etc. We have these too.
Recently there was a report of boat people arriving in Darwin to work in the sex industry etc under the kindly guidance of local criminal gangs.
But mostly Austtralia is not wealthy.
Try getting health care - it is doled out like it was a work house.
Painful joints - wait to see the specialist - then wait up to a year to get an operation
How do I know ?
Painful experience.
"... there is a consensus emerging that open borders are the only solution."
I'm with Friedman. I've long advocated having open borders... but with conditions. In essence, you can come here, work, and eventually settle. But there is zero support, no council funded translation services, no benefits until you've paid tax/NI for say 5 years minimum (and yeah, apply the same rule to the locals too). And the open border should work in reverse too; lose your job, fall upon hard times and you go home. Simple.
"... and Australia has plenty of room for them all."
Sure, if you don't mind living in the desert. But room isn't ever the problem. As it becomes scarce, it simply gets more expensive and less attractive to those looking for a better life... I cite examples like Tokyo, Singapore, Monaco. If open borders were adopted worldwide, population numbers would largely remain self-correcting and stable.
We should also remember that as far as the UK is concerned, we already have open borders across the EU.
"Allow asylum seekers to work"
I think this is an immigration category that has had its day. In the majority of cases it's simply being abused. If say you feared for your life here, you'd be on the first fishing boat to France... you wouldn't hitch-hike half way around the world and then smuggle yourself into Hawaii in the back of a truck. So why do we even entertain those that do similar when coming here? I'm aware of our international commitments but frankly anyone coming here and then claiming asylum should automatically be refused unless there are extraordinary and obvious reasons to allow entry. And while on asylum; we should change the law so that anyone granted asylum can never become settled (obtain citizenship). The crisis back home rarely lasts forever; it should therefore be expected that one day you will return to your country of origin... along with spouse/kids if you've chosen to have them while here (or brought them with you).
Well, no, not quite. What people don't want is to have that natural impulse to be charitable change their country and their way of life and put increased pressure on them to support a growing class of welfare moochers.
Amen.
""We'll let you in, so long as you vote for us" (c) Anthony Charles Lynton Blair"
Indeed! Population not voting as you'd like? Import a new one!
"Don't the Aussies have (historically at least, I think it's been eroded a bit) a points-based system where you have to show that you can earn at least $x or have at least $y in savings before they let somebody from the UK or Ireland in?"
Yes indeed. All of which is overruled by asylum and persecution claims. It's a trump card.
"Have you seen Australian plentiful spaces. Vast arid deserts mostly. Water shortage , housing shortage , etc etc. We have these too."
Yup. We get the same argument here about Britain from the Open Borders crackpots.
Well, we like our wild uninhabited space, and we've no wish to make our cities even more crowded.
"If open borders were adopted worldwide, population numbers would largely remain self-correcting and stable."
I don't think so. And I've no wish to live through the intervening period while it stabilises, even if true!
Post a Comment