hink of it all - of the life that is! Study your friends and foes!
Study the past! And answer this: "Are these times better than those?" The life-long quarrel, the paltry spite, the sting of your poisoned pride! No matter who fell it were better to fight as they did when the world was wide.
Racism or a reasonable opposition to Pluralism?
"Four out of every five respondents to the survey, conducted in the wake of recent controversial statements by the Howard Government, believed immigrants should be forced to adopt Australian values when they arrived.A recent speech by Mr Costello in which he said new arrivals to Australia should be forced to live by the country's existing values drew widespread support, with 79 per cent of respondents backing his point of view.
While the survey showed broad community support for recent statements by Prime Minister John Howard and Treasurer Peter Costello on racism and immigration, respondents overwhelmingly disagreed with Mr Howard's assertion... that there was no underlying racism in Australia."
::View Article::
So, Australians feel a natural opposition to having their values compromised but are feeling guilty about this self-perceived 'racism'.
They shouldn't because a stance against pluralism, the promotion of multiple sets of cultural values under the one political entity, is not necessarily a racist one. Quite to the contrary. The only possibly way for each unique people on this earth to maintain its traditional bonds (as opposed to merely economic or 'modern' bonds) is for each to live according to their own values and to promote these values internally. Pluralism by definition means compromise and the lowest common denominator.
In an educational context for example, as you get more and more different cultural systems involved, it becomes 'politically incorrect' to teach, with any real depth, one particular set of values, one particular cultural history/legacy, one particular conception of what is 'good' and 'bad' for society, etc.
What results is that no one particular take on any of these things gets taught at all! No common attachment to any particular history is conveyed, no common attachment to any particular conception of what is 'good' and 'bad' is conveyed, and thus no common good prevails beyond what is 'good' to all the different cultures that have been accommodated: buying and selling things: economic transactions.
Under Pluralism you increasingly get the state of affairs in which people view their political entity as simply a means for individual gratification rather than as a SHARED project. Materialism and individualism prevail. Culture turns into a giant rat race for a McMansion and a plasma TV, violence on streets and in cities escalates, and society basically turns into a generic mass of people who are living together but who increasingly dislike each other: because everyone has to compromise their values to live TOGETHER under one generic political entity.
Join Corrupt Australia's dissection and expansion of modern political discourse: A stance against pluralism is not racism! Pluralism, or the 'massification'/cramming in of different value systems under the one political entity, results in social atomisation and decay in the long run. It is failure. Parallelism, which says that we need parallel communities based on shared ethnicity, culture, history and values is the future. Organic societies are the future.