…from the quill of Antisthenes the Younger
Our journalists and our academia welcome any criticism of Australia, in particular from overseas. It is mostly the now no longer fashionable and thus unmentionable “cultural cringe”, cringe which I would be first to admit, was often justified. Our ‘artists’, especially, have much to cringe for.
Australian third rate actors, “artists”, actresses who could not convincingly fake an orgasm, writers and similar Hochstaplers denigrate the United States at every opportunity, but move there as soon as a cheque is large enough to secure some living and publicity. At the publicity lean period they then announce how ashamed they are of Australia because of its treatment of women / Aborigines / trade unionists /single mothers / LGBTTTI people / Maoris / academics / environment / journalists / doctors’ wives / by nasty Menzies / Howard / Abbott / Australians.
Thus any condemnation of Australia, however idiotic and baseless, by any UN agency and by such paragons of human rights as Saudi Arabia, North Korea or Communist China is always very welcome by our self-annointed elites.
So called refugees are a good example. Let’s take one of our critics, Communist China and her record. China, believed by all red-starry-eyed economists to be a second largest world economy has, perhaps surprisingly, a refugee record ( in cops’ parlance ‘form’, ‘previous’).
After the Third Indochina War in 1979 China did accept refugees. That war got a wink on the 1st January, 1979, when Chinese Vice-premier Deng Xiaoping told US president Jimmy Carter: “The little child is getting naughty, it’s time he be spanked.”
China did not like the Vietnam’s successful fight against China’s protege Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge, and presumably neither did the great humanitarian Carter. On 17th February China invaded northern Vietnam and withdrew on the 6th March, with both sides declaring victory.
Apparently, both just before the war and after, some 300,000 ethnic Chinese entered China from Vietnam. They claimed persecution, which Vietnam denied while hinting at their fifth column activities. The migrants were told where to go and what to do. “Within a decade many of the Vietnamese had been issued with identity cards and the household-registration documents that entitle holders to government-subsidised education and welfare.” It took ten years, for people talking the same language, i.e. brothers and sisters?
“Most now (2015, thirty-six years later) have full rights as Chinese citizens. The government, however, still classifies them as refugees.”
Antonio Guterres, former socialist president of Portugal, President of the Socialist International and the United Nations’ High Commissioner for Refugees, praised his Chinese comrades by describing that as “one of the most successful integration programmes in the world”. I guess that Gillian Trigg, a bird of the same feather, the President of Australian Human Rights Commission would have described that even more gushingly and compared it with the oh so horrible record of Australia.
“Aside from the Vietnamese, China has only 583 refugees on its books – most of them from Somalia and Nigeria. This year about 60,000 Burmese poured across the border into China to escape fighting between rebels and government forces. The Chinese government denied UNHCR access to the camps where they were briefly housed. Refugees from North Korea never even get a shelter. China calls them ‘criminals’...”*
Some of the reluctance to accept migrants stems from the Chinese inferiority complex; some from the horrid precedent of Europe’s multiculturalism. In the meantime the proggies wait with baited breath for the refugee no 584; for further evidence of the Communist government humanity.
Considering R&R ( rape & riot) jihadist invasion of Europe, the Chinese policy could be wise, but they ought not to preach and lie to us – though telling Communists not to lie would be like telling the Green voters to think.
*/ All the quotations are from the now solidly pro-global government, socialist, no-borders, pro-sharia and the Islamic terror apologist The Economist of 10-10-2015 Almost home, pp.31-32