The migration malarkey in Australian politics
Tagged Global Living, GrrArgh, Site-Related • PermalinkIt's Election Season in Australia and every party's Immigration policy is making my blood boil. They all think migrants - particularly non-refugees like myself - are somehow contributing to the downfall of Australian society, and even the Greens have hidden their xenophobia ("You can buy your way into this country if you're rich or you're highly skilled." - nonsense, Bob Brown) behind "ZOMG CLIMATE ISSUES!!".
The only Aussie politician who has been honest about this whole thing is Brisbane Lord Mayor Campbell Newman, who has openly acknowledged that cutting international student numbers will bring a major hit to the Australian economy:
Cr Newman told brisbanetimes.com.au the city was spending money to attract even more international students to study here because they provided a big boost to the local economy.
"I think it's a really important thing, and it's important for not just the money that's made from fees and from supplying accommodation, food and clothing and all those sorts of things," he said.
"It's important because ... these people who study here - they're going to go back home, if they've had a good experience here ... they're going to be literally ambassadors all their lives for us; they'll think fondly of Brisbane and they'll bring their families here and all that sort of stuff."
At least I can respect him for not bringing in other argy-bargy about climate change or the "Australian way of life" or other things. It's all about the money. We migrants pay full fee for everything and get nothing in benefits, even up to 2 years after permanent residency. The only reason Australia's able to afford HECS, Centrelink, scholarships, and all the other fun stuff citizens take for granted is because it comes from the pockets of migrants and students who don't even earn enough (yay visas getting in the way of work!) to get their tax return back.
I have been quite disheartened with how very little has come in the way of public support for migrants from local Australians, particularly from the left-wing side who seem to be quite fond of making themselves sound like they're better than the Conservatives (who are oddly enough mostly of the Liberal party). As evidenced above, the Australian Greens have their misconceptions, and nowhere in this debate has anyone actually ever bothered to ask a migrant. Y'know, the people affected by all these law changes and election rhetoric? But because we can't vote, we have no influence on local politics - and because historical and recent imperialism has messed up our home countries anyway we're all coerced to move to countries like Australia anyway because it's a much better life even with all the bureaucratic trouble! Silence isn't support, people.
Thankfully there are people who are calling the politicans - including Bob Brown - out on their crap. I don't know how much influence they have, or whether they will get the support of a wider voice - the xenophobic "OMGZ THE DARKIES ARE COMING WITH THEIR SHARIA BURKAS" crowd seems to be really loud and common - but they're there. We just seem to be quiet voices in the noise of rabble.
Here's some:
ABC Unleashed: Greens' population policy no better than the others:
Let's be clear. If you are a refugee fleeing persecution, then a Green government will embrace you. But if you are fleeing something as banal and commonplace as poverty, economic hardship, low wages, a lack of opportunity or jobs, or if you're just looking for a better life for you and your family - then the door to Australia is closed.
The Greens are torn. On the one side, they have supporters who value Australia's role accepting more refugees and providing opportunity for migrants.
But on the other side, they have supporters who see people as the ultimate environmental problem. Each Australian has a relatively high carbon footprint. So, for some environmentalists, the goal should be to make sure there are as few Australians as possible.
That means keeping foreigners out. Poor people are better for the environment. They can't afford gas guzzling cars, or always-on-standby plasma televisions, or gaudy McMansions with heating and cooling systems.
Anyway, that's the theory. Many people holding this view say we should increase foreign aid, but they are convinced the effective path out of poverty - immigration - should be blocked.
Green Left: Why cutting immigration won't help:
"Overpopulation" has long been a euphemism for "the pressing surplus of non-white poor". By classifying them as "surplus", overpopulation theory denies them the very right to exist. Not only have they no right to exist, but this is presented as "scientific" fact, the operation of the "law of nature". The historical, political, economic and social reasons for poverty and environmental degradation become irrelevant.
Faced with a choice between acknowledging the need to confront the most powerful sections of society to demand that the driving force for development becomes meeting the basic human needs of all people in an ecologically sustainable way, or pointing the finger of blame at the poor and powerless, the overpopulationists take the easy and (for First World, relatively affluent, white people) more comfortable way out. In focusing on the number of people as the problem, they don't just let the existing social relations off the hook, they obscure them.
[...]
To blame immigrants to the First World (or the mass of people around the world) for the environmental crisis we all confront is not only "scientifically" insupportable, but also erects barriers to uniting the victims of the crisis in action to reverse it. If we are to truly "think globally and act locally", we will welcome more refugees and migrants to this land and, in the process, encourage and convince them to join with us in the struggle for a society which puts human rights and the environment before profits.
World People's Conference on Climate Change - PEOPLES' AGREEMENT:
Developed countries, as the main cause of climate change, in assuming their historical responsibility, must recognize and honor their climate debt in all of its dimensions as the basis for a just, effective, and scientific solution to climate change. In this context, we demand that developed countries:
[...]
• Assume responsibility for the hundreds of millions of people that will be forced to migrate due to the climate change caused by these countries, and eliminate their restrictive immigration policies, offering migrants a decent life with full human rights guarantees in their countries
Now where's the rest of you?
