BDS in Australia is deeply against the grain

from Q&A last night: Audience jeers over comment.

Tensions escalated after a member of the audience pointed out that the Jewish community faced a “dual threat” from the far right and from extremists.

Tim Wilson said it had to be dealt with from the top.

“I don’t want to see any further discrimination in our country, be it racist discrimination or other forms of discrimination. We’ve got to do what we can to deal with it … it’s something that has to come from the top,” he said.

Mr Wilson then pointed out the Greens supporting the BDS motion (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) was a “direct attack” on the Jewish community.

“I’m going to need to jump in there,” Ms Jacobs interjected.

“Firstly, I don’t actually think that’s Greens policy, I’m happy to be corrected if I’m not true but boycotts are not about anti-Semitism,” Ms Jacobs said.

She said anti-Semitism was about “targeting an Israeli state that is inflicting an apartheid regime,” which was met with furious jeers from the audience.

“You can jeer all you want but Palestinians have the right to live and go about their lives as do Israelis,” Ms Jacobs said.

Mr Wilson hit back at her.

“I need to say very directly that Israel is not an apartheid state,” he said as the audience erupted in applause.

In 1931, even as the Nazis were rolling into Germany, Australia chose as its Governor-General Sir Issac Issacs. It’s still a different country out here. Even among the left, although not among the Greens, anti-semitism is anathema.

The future of multiculturalism around the world

Vic Alhadeff, CEO of the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies.
Vic Alhadeff, CEO of the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies.

The first Muslim MP in the NSW parliament has sparked a row overnight, refusing entry to a respected Jewish leader to a Labor Party multicultural launch.

Upper House MP Shaoquett Moselmane refused entry to Jewish Board of Deputies CEO Vic Alhadeff at the launch of the Labor Union Multicultural Action Committee launch last night saying, according to Mr Alhadeff, that he was not a Labor Party member.

The full story here.

Then this from the United States: Palestinian Congressional Candidate ASSAULTS Jewish Journalist at Political Event.

A journalist was assaulted by a soon-to-be congresswoman while asking her questions at a political rally for U.S. Congressional candidate Ilhan Omar in Minnesota on Saturday.

Rashida Tlaib, a Palestinian Muslim who won her primary in Michigan’s 13th Congressional District on Tuesday, forcefully grabbed Jewish journalist Laura Loomer and stole her phone when Loomer approached her to ask questions at the rally.

And then from the UK: British Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn Admits, After Months of Lies, That He Was In Fact “Present” At Ceremony Honoring the Terrorists Who Slaughtered Israeli Athletes at the 1972 Olympics.

Here is @yaelberda ‘s hero, leader of the British Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn, laying a wreath at the grave of one of the terrorist murderers of the Israeli Olympic Team in Munich in 1972. Yael, You are Disgusting!! pic.twitter.com/piGqLhYTFG 

View image on Twitter

Jordan Peterson in Australia

Sounds just like JBP everywhere else. And here he is talking to Bettina Arndt.

And if you are just looking for the highlights.

And with Leigh Sales on the ABC.

And on a supposed comedy interview.

This is how this last interview is described.

Controversial Canadian psychologist Dr Jordan Peterson explains to Tom why keeping his room clean is important, why identity politics suck, and why the ABC should be less Marxist.

And the heading is absolutely right: “Jordan Peterson DESTROYS Tom Ballard.”

And this is the audio from his presentation in Melbourne.

A nuclear Australia?

Via Instapundit which notes “China is going to end up hemmed in by nuclear powers at every turn, if they don’t rein in Li’l Kim”: Going Nuclear? The Optimal Posture and Force Structure for Australia. Bottom line:

“Australia would not consider such a step lightly,” but history has shown that changes in geopolitics can sneak up on nations before they are aware of the dangers they face, Let’s not fall victim to this. Let’s be ready and discuss options now before it is too late.

If you look at the map you must wonder why it hasn’t happened already.

Bill Clinton was advocating open borders while in Australia on 911

To understand the problems we face with ISIS it is essential to understand the mindset of those who lead the parties of the left, and now even some parties of the conservative right. This is from The Age on September 11, 2001: Open borders to all: Clinton. Here are the relevant parts of the article but you can read the whole thing at the link:

Bill Clinton believes Australia should not shut its borders to immigrants and those genuinely seeking asylum but should open its arms to cultural diversity.

Free trade and an open-door policy would bring prosperity, the former US president told a meeting of 35 Australian business leaders in Melbourne yesterday.

“He discussed the immigration issue in Australia and he took a position on it,” said Tom Hogan, president of Vignette Corporation, host of the exclusive forum.

“The (former) president believes the world will be a better place if all borders are eliminated – from a trade perspective, from the viewpoint of economic development and in welcoming (the free movement of) people from other cultures and countries,” Mr Hogan said.

Mr Clinton showed an understanding of the political problems Australia faced, but said he supported the ultimate wisdom of a borderless world for people and for trade.

He spoke for 45 minutes on topics ranging from the urgent need to combat AIDS to global economic issues. He spent another 45 minutes answering questions.

Mr Clinton said he believed the US was a better place for having opened its borders to a diversity of peoples and cultures.

Of the global economic downturn, he said half the problem arose from real economic issues and half of it was due to self-fulfilling prophecies. If people talked gloom and doom long enough and often enough, he said, what they feared generally came to pass.

This is the progressive internationalist creed and no event in the modern world will change their views. And they have the power to cause our borders to open and remain open no matter what the rest of us think or wish.

Ironically, Bill Clinton was in Australia on 911 while at the same time John Howard was in Washington.

[Via Steve Sailer]

World leader in climate scepticism

I saw this at Tim Blair the other day which I found quite depressing, even though he wrote it up in a kind of upbeat way: We’re Number One! We’re Number One!. And sure enough, there we are at the top, as reported by the SMH: Australia tops the world for climate change denial: study. So far so good, right? Alas, it’s when you get to the detail that you see just how much we are the best of a very bad lot. This is the same excerpt as taken by Tim:

Nearly one in five Australians do not believe in climate change, making the country the worst in the world for climate sceptics, a study of almost 20,000 people has found.

The research by the University of Tasmania found 17 per cent of Australians thought climate change was not real, compared with 15 per cent of people in Norway, 13 per cent of New Zealanders and 12 per cent of Americans …

“Despite the findings of climate scientists, the proportions of climate sceptics appear to be increasing in many countries,” the study said.

That means that 83% think not just that the climate is changing, which it always does, but that humans are responsible and we need to stop doing whatever, or change something or other, as a matter of urgency, to make it stop changing. And the story finished with this:

Highly educated people and those who lived in a large city were also less likely to be climate sceptics.

The kind of people, that is, who write news stories for the press, and see our 17% as “the worst in the world”. Absolutely unconscious on the part of the writer, this highly educated inner-city university grad. So what facts are these judgements based on? We here all know that global temperatures haven’t risen in almost twenty years, and then this just arrived this morning in my inbox:

Just one cool summer caused the much-worried-about Arctic icepack to swell by no less than a third in 2013 and it has grown even more since – more than making good its losses during the previous few years. Meanwhile of course, the southern sea ice around Antarctica has continued to spread out and cover bigger areas all the time, a circumstance which has frankly stumped climate scientists as their models cannot account for it. Antarctic ice hit a new all-time record last year, in fact.

Whether the climate is changing or not, it is the 83% who will determine who gets to govern this country. It is SH-Y who may better represent average opinion in Australia than anyone else around.

Do we really want a transfer of power from the parliament to the courts?

The US is moving into failed-state territory. There is still lots to admire, but as time goes on, there is fewer and fewer of its social institutions that I think are of much use to the rest of us. It is an example in so many ways of what not to do. Its big cities, now overwhelmingly run by Democrats, are a lesson in wreckage. Outside of new technologies, there is so little to learn from the US at the moment that it is frightening how such descent can occur during the space of less than a single lifetime.

There is an article on the op ed page of The Australian today, Bills of rights are overrated, like the Magna Carta, written by Michael Sexton SC, described as “the author of several books on Australian history and politics”. If the rest of what he’s written is as good as this, I will have to read the lot. The kind of sentimentality over judicial concern for our freedoms is all very nice, until you watch how quickly every judicial system buckles the minute some totalitarian regime takes over. Here he is looking at whether Australia needs a Bill of Rights:

It would be easy to say a bill of rights is a lawyers’ picnic and that is why it is strongly promoted by some sections of the legal profession. While it is true, however, that a bill of rights inevitably leads to increased litigation, most human rights lawyers in Australia are funded by the taxpayer, either as academics or in community law centres, so their interests in this area are not directly financial.

The real problem with this group is that they welcome a transfer of power from the parliament to the courts and do not see this as anti-democratic. This in turn is because they tend to see every problem as having a legal solution, even if they are fundamentally economic, social or political questions. These kinds of issues are not changed into legal questions by being given to courts. All that happens is that courts are then required to decide economic, social and political questions.

The approach of human rights lawyers is demonstrated by the litigation in Australia concerning persons who arrive in the country without going through the normal immigration procedures. Some of these persons may be the victims of political persecution but most are potential economic migrants.

There have been numerous challenges to federal legislation in this area over recent years, with many of the cases going all the way to the High Court. The lawyers mounting these challenges do not accept that immigration control is a political decision for the government of the day and they rely in part on international law to say no Australian government can exercise complete control over entry to the country.

Better what we have than leave such decisions to Her Honour Justice Triggs.

Is there a coming war with China?

David Archibald has been saying this for as long as I can remember. This is from a year ago, from a year ago:

China has built an offshore oil drilling rig, numbered HD-981, specifically for the purpose invalidating other nations’ claims to seabed they thought was theirs. There is no doubt about the purpose of the rig given that a Chinese state oil company official once called it “our mobile national territory.” Its primary purpose isn’t commercial. If China can drill an oil well on some other country’s seabed, they can then claim that it was China’s territory all along. The rig is having its first outing to that purpose off the coast of Vietnam, accompanied by 86 Chinese vessels including a submarine. Vietnam responded by sending 30 coastguard vessels to interfere with the Chinese drilling rig. Ramming of Vietnamese vessels by the Chinese ones has been reported.

Miscalculation might not lead to war because there is nothing miscalculated about what China is doing. China intends to start a war.

As far as Archibald was concerned, this war was inevitable. Then yesterday, we had this at Drudge from The Telegraph in London, US-China war ‘inevitable’ unless Washington drops demands over South China Sea. This is how the story starts:

China has vowed to step up its presence in the South China Sea in a provocative new military white paper, amid warnings that a US-China war is “inevitable” unless Washington drops its objections to Beijing’s activities.

And we are right in the thick of it. From The AFR again yesterday, China using Brazil resources as lever against Australia:

China will use its growing relationship with Brazil to pressure Australia into running a more independent foreign policy, according to analysts and academics, as Beijing seeks to use its economic muscle for strategic influence.

Chinese Premier Li Keqiang signed $US50 billion ($63.5 billion) worth of deals during a state visit to Brazil last week, including a loan facility to help iron ore miner Vale increase production.

In a sign that Beijing is increasingly looking towards Brazil for food and mineral commodities, China also pledged to lift a ban on Brazilian beef.

“If Australia gets closer to the United States we will see China increase its purchases from Brazil, while reducing its trade with Australia,” said Wu Xinbo, Dean of the Institute of International Studies at Fudan University.

“The alliance between Australia and the US is a major constraint on the relationship between China and Australia.”

And now today, picked up at Drudge: Japan to join U.S., Australia war games amid growing China tensions.

Japan will join a major U.S.-Australian military exercise for the first time in a sign of growing security links between the three countries as tensions fester over China’s island building in the South China Sea.

While only 40 Japanese officers and soldiers will take part in drills involving 30,000 U.S. and Australian troops in early July, experts said the move showed how Washington wanted to foster cooperation among its security allies in Asia.

It’s a very messy world out there. I hope someone is paying attention.

Economic and social disparities

econmic disparity by religion australia 2011

From The Australian today, Statistics lay bare stark economic and social disparities for Muslims. The stats are from the story which begins:

The dictionary defines assimilation as the ability of groups to succeed and prosper in societies built on different religious and cultural building blocks. The idea is always controversial and raises fundamental questions about how far people with vastly different belief systems and social practices need to “change” to succeed in the society where they have been implanted.

Do they need to change at all? Can nations operate coherently as what former prime minister John Howard described as a “federation of cultures”? Is a single culture even feasible in a global, mobile world where diversity is a hallmark of every society? Where is the magical line where integration reaches a viable point of cohesion?

The assimilation, or social integration, issue has risen most starkly in Australia in recent years through the growth of the nation’s Muslim community against the backdrop of terrorist activity across the world and growing examples of young Australian Muslims being radicalised and joining extreme Islamic groups in the Middle East.

Domestically the struggle of many Muslims to infiltrate Australia’s economic mainstream is evident in poor employment outcomes, a mismatch between their relatively high skill and education rates and jobs secured, high welfare dependency, low home ownership and a high incidence of household poverty.

Most research suggests that some of the employment problems relate to discrimination against people who are visibly Muslim. However, for women in particular, there are also religious-based employment restrictions that vastly limit acceptable job options and leave many permanently disenfranchised from mainstream work.

Accommodating disruption

Craig Emerson has a column on Ideas needed for next economic growth phase. Here are, according to Emerson, “five ideas that could make a material difference to Australia’s future living standards”. He is certainly right about that, but you would think he would want to see our living standards rise rather than fall. The five:

1. A very fast train.
2. Lift the asylum seeker intake.
3. Double teachers’ salaries.
4. Increase land tax.
5. Accommodate disruptive technologies.

The support for “disruptive” technologies I find revealing. Why doesn’t he just say support the market and encourage entrepreneurial change? It’s not ideas that cause change but commercialisation of the ones that will work by the private sector. Everything else is almost inevitably waste. See the NBN and the series of Desal plants scattered around the country for recent examples.