Australia’s Largest Christian News Site

John Anderson challenges Nyadol Nyuon’s rejection of Anglo-Celtic culture, arguing that immigration, social cohesion, shared values and economic pressures cannot be separated.

John Anderson held his ground in a firm exchange with South Sudanese lawyer Nyadol Nyuon on immigration.

Anderson pushed back against Nyuon, who asserted during the 14 September ABC forum that white Anglo-Celtic culture didn’t exist.

Nyuon also said she considers monoculturalism to be a myth.

What Does Anglo-Celtic Culture Actually Mean?

Asked about Anglo-Celtic Australia, immigrants respecting the laws, values and way of life, she answered,

“I understand some of it, but I find some of it sort of hard to place.”

“The idea of Anglo-Celtic, I think, it goes back to this notion that Australia is sort of monocultural.”

“Australia has never been monocultural,” she said.

“Before European settlement, there were Indigenous people here who spoke multiple languages and considered themselves to be people of different nations.”

Nyuon clarified, “I’m not trying to accuse anyone here of necessarily being racist.”

“I just think that if we start talking about terms like Anglo and stuff, it creates this idea that there is some form of white culture that exists somewhere and can be recreated here in Australia.”

“There is no white culture. There’s Italian, French, and Argentinian culture. There is no white culture that is being threatened.”

“I have no intention of assimilating,” she declared.

“Yet I went to law school and studied the law, and respect Australia’s laws.”

“I think the majority of immigrants do.”

Anderson Challenges the Multiculturalism Narrative

Speaking to multiculturalism and her refusal to assimilate, Anderson noted that this was Nyuon validating concerns about mass immigration and social cohesion.

“There appears to be significant numbers of various groupings of people in Australia who do not respect [the law].”

People “who come here with the express intent of trying to set up an enclave of their own culture, which doesn’t match.”

“Until we come to grips with that, you will not settle this debate, and you will not see the sort of social cohesion we need.”

Two essentials to being safe, he argued, “are a cohesive society, and good economic management” of that society.

“We’re not cohesive anymore,” Anderson explained, and the nation’s economy is sliding backwards.

“We’re in danger here of missing what’s really happening in this country.”

“You cannot disaggregate very real levels of concern about immigration.”

On the housing crisis and immigration, he said, we’re increasing demand above our ability to supply.

“The broader issue is that Australians are feeling they’re becoming poorer. They are becoming poorer.”

Reasserting his point, when answering what “Anglo-Celtic” culture means, Anderson said,

“Let’s accept a few realities. We’re becoming poorer. People feel a lot of financial stress.”

People think that “immigration is one of the major problems.” To some extent, he said, they’re right.

“We’re not against immigration as a people. I don’t believe we are. I’m certainly not.”

“A balanced, reasonable immigration thing is good economically,” Anderson affirmed.

“It’s good socially whilst we agree that, if you like, the law of the land really does apply, but we need to realise how badly broken it is.”

One Nation’s popularity shows, he continued, Australians think the system isn’t working, and that “we’ve lost too much as Australians.”

Defining Anglo-Celtic culture, Anderson said, it wasn’t some vague idea of “Aussie values.”

Anglo-Celts “gave us our dignity as individuals.”

“We recognise dignity, the rule of law, all equal before the law. The common law applies to the prime minister just as it applies to somebody else.”

“We believe in the separation of the secular and the sacred.”

“We know that security forces in this country are now having to monitor a very significant number of people who are anything but committed to our way of life and the respect and dignity of all other Australians.”

The Deeper Battle Over Australia’s Identity

A human rights advocate, Nyadol Nyuon’s apparent issue with Anderson is his opposition to multiculturalism.

Her denials that Anglo-Celtic Australia exists seem to stem from a passion for multiculturalism and a subtle embrace of Critical Race Theory.

In 2021, the refugee-turned-lawyer told the National Press Club that she arrived in Australia as a teenager.

There, Nyuon lauded the Whitlam and Fraser governments of the 1970s for “dismantling” the European underpinning of Australia.

For her, multiculturalism is “a bold and even revolutionary social concept.”

“For the first time [Australians] started seeing diversity as a strength instead of seeking comfort in being part of the British Empire.”

Multiculturalism allowed for Australia’s globalisation.

Notably, Nyuon mentions the very same Anglo-Celtic culture she says doesn’t exist.

For example, she credits multiculturalism for giving Australia egalitarianism.

This gave minorities, women and immigrants, Nyuon argued, “wealth and security” that “until recently was mostly preserved for Anglo-Saxons – white males.”

She then called for a renewed, bolder, more revolutionary multiculturalism, while referring to Christchurch, the mosque attack, “white supremacy and far-right extremism.”

If multiculturalism is to “come of age,” Nyuon told the Press Club, “it needs to be improved.”

During the 2021 address, she called for a “rethink of multiculturalism’s role as a grand and revolutionary concept.”

This means rewriting Australia’s constitution, institutions and relationship with the British monarchy.

Her exchange with Anderson on the ABC suggests she still holds to these views.

Effectively: Australia won’t end “racism” until multiculturalism (COEXIST) becomes constitutional.

In May, Nyuon revealed that she was handing back her Order of Australia Medal (OAM) and renouncing her Australian citizenship.

Nyuon seems to regard white people in a majority-white country being in leadership positions as evidence of “racism.”

As News.com reported, “Ms Nyuon accused her former employer, Victoria University and WorkSafe Victoria of double standards.

“Racism,” she said in 2025, “is Victoria University and WorkSafe Victoria defaulting to white-led organisational judgment over the professional and lived expertise of Black and Brown women.”

Nyuon “claimed she had left [WorkSafe’s WorkWell Respect Network] early after becoming concerned about being used as “corporate blackface”.

According to the report, while Nyuon “stressed gratitude” to Australia, her alleged experience was a “good enough example of what it can mean to be here, especially when you are a Black woman.”

Worth noting that these claims are contradicted by her Australian (likely taxpayer-funded) university qualifications, Order of Australia Medal, National Press Club and national broadcaster platforming.

Instrumental to understanding Nyuon’s context, her late father, William Nyuon, was an alleged warlord.

He was called out by the Australian government in 1992 for ordering the execution of two UN workers.

Then Senator Gareth Evans said that four people were killed after “William Nyuon and his followers went to a UN camp to demand food.”

“The two UN officials on duty explained to the group that the food was available only for southern Sudanese civilians whose livelihoods had been destroyed during the war.”

“Nyuon ordered his bodyguards to shoot the two officials,” Evans recounted.

“The two witnesses to the shootings were kidnapped and later killed.”

This adds weight to Anderson’s warning,

“If we don’t have cohesion. If we don’t have agreement on who comes here and [about] what sort of country we’re going to be, one of the first things that will happen is that you’ll break trust.”

He then rightly concluded: the elites are making a big mistake by refusing to stand with the concerns of Australians on social cohesion and mass immigration.