Australia’s Largest Christian News Site

Nations and borders are God-ordained, ethnic homogeneity fosters social trust, and mass immigration threatens Australia’s Anglo-Celtic identity and cultural cohesion.

Here are some brief points describing my views on immigration, culture, and race.

1. God created all peoples. All people bear His image. As a Christian creationist, I reject notions of evolutionary racial hierarchy or moral superiority.

2. God created nations, and national borders are a natural consequence of nations. There is nothing evil about national borders or nation-states. I think you can find this in the Bible, ranging from the Tower of Babel to Acts 17.

3. Human beings are tribal and naturally have affections for people similar to those in their own tribes. The more similar, the more affection and trust; the less similar, the less affection and trust. As individuals, we can and do have friendships outside of our own ethnicities, but at the macro-social level, ethnic homogeneity is a social good. There is a whole literature on the social good of ethnic homogeneity — see David Goodhart’s book.

4. Immigration must not be understood at the individual level — “I have a mate who’s Asian but as Aussie as Steve Irwin” — but at the macro-social level, i.e., what kinds of communities and social dynamics will emerge when we bring people in by the tens or hundreds of thousands?

5. I am not a national-ethnic purist, but I am an advocate of ethnic homogeneity. The difference is that ethnic homogeneity can tolerate xeno-immigration up to a point, and that point is when social homogeneity and trust begin to strain. In this respect, I do not believe that bringing in peoples from non-Anglo-Celtic backgrounds to Australia is problematic per se.

The distinction between ethnic purism and ethnic homogeneity is crucial for my position. In this respect, I do completely understand why the White Australia Policy was so important to legislators up to World War II and afterwards. They should not be condemned for believing in and implementing the policy.

Social Harmony

6. I think what has made Australia great is, for the most part, character traits associated with Anglo-Celtic peoples. Northern Europeans are quite different from Southern Europeans. It is not abstract values that made Australia a fit country for post-World War II migrants to come here, but an Anglo-Celtic peoples with their distinct pathologies and histories. This is why if over five years we brought 1000,000 Brits or Boers into Australia, we would not see social tension in the way we have over the past five years with Indian and Chinese migration.

7. Post-World War II Europeans came to a country already built, but they added to it, and they made a great contribution. But they also came to a country with a strong sense of self-identity and an overwhelmingly large Anglo-Celtic supermajority. They knew exactly what they needed to assimilate into, and the dominance of the Anglo-Celts made assimilation much harder to resist than it now is.

8. All non-Anglo-Celtic immigration has a watered-down national identity. It’s unavoidable. The question is whether the extent to which it was watered down was seriously detrimental. I’d say the post-World War II European immigrants brought a lot of good to Australia, but there was definitely a cost in terms of self-identity. It may have been worth it, though. I do believe we could have sustained some non-European immigration as well, but it has been done very irresponsibly and insidiously.

9. As soon as we recognise that the essential identity of Australia was Anglo-Celtic, and to some extent also European more broadly, we see why mass immigration from the non-Western world is seriously dangerous to national identity and homogeneity. Again, we are talking at the macro level.

10. The reason politicians talk about vague “Australian values” as our identity is because as soon as they admit the undeniable historical fact that our character has been first and foremost Anglo-Celtic, then they have to explain why they are bringing in so many people from the global south.

Even those who say our immigration programme should only be about culture and not race have to admit that once we see that Australian character is essentially Anglo-Celtic and, to a lesser extent, more broadly European, it still makes sense to redirect our immigration programme away from the global south and towards Europe. In other words, even the cultural nationalists have to care about where the immigrants are coming from.

Our Home

10. The desire of an ethnos, an ethnic people, to want to remain the overwhelming demographic in the country they created needs absolutely no justification. Its righteousness is simply self-evident, as self-evident as the desire of the family who built or bought a house is to ensure that the occupants are family and very close friends or extended family only. To not understand this is to be devoid of an element of humanity.

11. To say that Australia or any other country should have an ethnically selective immigration policy no more assumes racial hierarchy any more than a family that doesn’t want all the neighbours to move into the house, thereby believes that their neighbours are inferior.

12. In all seriousness, things in the West are getting culturally and demographically so bad that we must be speaking up about it all.

13. When people call me a racist, all they are doing is confirming in my mind that I’m on the right track. If you are speaking about immigration and national identity, and leftists are not calling you a racist, you’re probably not helping.

14. The common argument that in Revelation, Heaven is made up of people from all nations and therefore we should have a multicultural immigration policy has two problems. First, it’s a picture of Heaven, not the world as it is. I suppose theologians might call this an over-realised eschatology. Second, it proves too much, because these people are all worshipping the same God, so anyone who seriously sees this vision as an ideal vision for Australia must also be opposed to all non-Christian immigration to Australia, and must aspire to something not unlike Christian nationalism.

15. Contrary to what people may think, I do not enjoy talking about this at all, and I am acutely aware that many of my Asian, African, Middle Eastern and Indian friends may be hurt by my words or simply conclude I’m a racist. If they read these points and still conclude that, so be it. I don’t hold it against you. Believe it or not, I’m actually glad that you have found your way into Australia, and I think that is compatible with all the views I have stated.

If your response is that if my views were implemented then you would never have found your way into Australia, all I can say is that I would consider that a sad but necessary consequence of pursuing an overall better system of immigration; much the same as if we tightened the standards to get into university or become a teacher or doctor, it would inevitably mean that many people who really would have been great students, teachers or doctors will miss out.

If you read my words and wonder whether I ever liked you or had affection for you, please don’t wonder. I wasn’t faking. But Australia is on the edge of a cliff, and I cannot be silent about what I think is the best way to think about it all.
God bless you all.

___

Image courtesy of Adobe.