Hanson argues both for a cut in Asian immigration to Australia
Correction: Hanson simply stated she'd prefer to see skilled migrants coming into Australia, because non English speaking, non skilled migrants in large numbers would put a strain on the Australian welfare system. Migrants who are skilled however would be benefiting the Australian ecomomy.
September 1996, Hanson warned that Australia is in danger of being
swamped by Asians.
I see how some may see this as racist, and she could have used a better word than "swamped", but she was however refering to the number of migrants from Asia compared to any other country. She also if I remember correctly, (correct me if I'm wrong) linked this back to the need for "skilled" migrants instead of just letting anybody and everybody into the country.
Furthermore, she blames preferential policies of the government which provide "opportunities, land, moneys and facilities" to aborigines for encouraging separatism, and therefore calls for the end of such special treatment.
200 years later most Australians have to work to buy their own shitty white picket fence in Sydneys inner suburbs for some ridiculous amount of money. Even farms in the drought cost a shitload more than they are worth. Why are tax payers paying for land that Aboriginies can only access, when what happened 200 years ago does not directly affect them now? It is encouraging seperatism because non aboriginal Australians are paying fof their own property and houses, as well as indirectly paying for the given land out of their tax money. I can tell you first hand what happens with land given to some Aboriginies. Once they get it, they aren't interested in it and it then goes to ruin. The farm next door is a perfect example, because every summer we are racing around with the rural fire brigade trying to put out a years worth of grass and foliage that has caught alight. I'm not saying all, but I'm saying when you see it first hand it's a little discouraging and is somewhat off putting towards these "deserving" citizens.
Indigenous Racial Tension
Aborigines have traditionally suffered discrimination in Australia.
Everybody faces discrimination, due to sex, religion, sexual preferences, hair colour, qualifications, age etc.
In 1992 the Supreme Court upheld a claim submitted by Eddie Mabo, an aborigine, which recognized native land rights for the first time.3 This ruling directly contradicts Australia's traditional land doctrine which holds that land ownership did not begin until the Europeans arrived. In December 1993, the
government passed the Native Title Act which recognized native land
rights.4 The land claims which have resulted from this act have angered
the farmers, ranchers and mining companies who control a large
percentage of Australian land and worry that they will either lose control
of their land or be forced to pay rent to the aborigines to use it. These
citizens have become a basis of support for Hanson.
Maybe going to the extreme there, however if it is a direct contradiction of an already standing policy one of them should be changed. Aboriginals fundamentally were nomadic. It isn't like they portioned off land and farmed it for personal use. It isn't like the majority of Aboriginies today exist like they did before white settlement, and given the chance I doubt many of them would. So why do they need specific land titles... Many of them dont live on this land, refering back to my previous point.
William Hayden, a former Foreign Minister, said in 1983 that Australia is
"an anomaly as a European country in this part of the world . . . It is
inevitable in my view that Australia will become a Eurasian country over
the next century or two."6 As Australia gradually becomes more
Eurasian, the nation must struggle to balance its traditional ties to Britain
with its new interest in East Asia. Many Australians find it difficult to
adjust to this new Australian identity.
This is when we question an immigrants motives as to why they chose Australia. 1. Immigrants from war torn countries should have every right to seek solice in Australia. However, I disagree that just because their country is in war, that it is a perfect excuse to seek refugee status. Unless they have directly been affected (ie their house got blown to the shit or their family has been murdered) they should apply for Australian residency like other immigrants, ie
2. Immigrants who come to Australia for a better life. This is probably where the Asian thing comes into play, because Asia is over crowded. Australia however has plenty of space. The problem with this is, most of the Asians and other immigrants are moving to places like Sydney which are running out of room to accomodate them. This is where Hanson believes if we are going to let an increasing amount of Asians into the country, that it is beneficial that they be skilled. It's no use letting oodles of them in because we can, because we cannot sustain such a large population increase if nothing is getting injected into the economy.
There is a regional consensus that Pauline Hanson's remarks damage Australia's ties to Asia.
That's where she is taken out of context and branded racist. Of course Malaysian and Indonesian politicians are going to take offence, theyre Asian for christs sake. Pauline didn't stamp her foot and say fuck off we dont want any Asians, she simply said to sustain a population increase, we need MORE SKILLED migrants into the country.