Former Australian Senator David Leyonhjelm commits the sin of noticing:
If you have been watching TV lately, you will have noticed that many advertisements include at least one black or brown person.
Some of the family scenes, such as a black and white couple with kids that are clearly unrelated to either, are artificial to the point of absurdity. Actors with black or brown faces must be getting plenty of work.
Increasing sales is not the only purpose of these ads though; what they are doing is virtue signalling about diversity. It is the same reason there are many more black and brown presenters at the ABC and SBS.
I must admit that when I initially read this, I was more than a little astounded. You see, Leyonhjelm based his entire parliamentary career on being a libertarian.
That is sort of like basing your entire international cricket career on backyard cricket and whether or not “over the fence” is out.
Libertarians inhabit an imaginary world, a world only enabled by Western civilization, where people can do whatever they like in the privacy of their own home because they are all mature and everything will turn out just fine.
Reality conflicts with this childlike worldview, so the above passage did indeed catch me by surprise.
Has Leyonhjelm grown up and cast off his dedication to childish fantasies? Unfortunately, the answer to that is a resounding no. A few short paragraphs down the page and we come to this passage:
That said, diversity itself is not the issue. As a country of immigrants Australia is incredibly diverse, something we might expect to see in our media. It is not healthy for either our democracy or civil society if people assume we all think the same because they never hear alternative views.
And that’s the point – it’s what we think that matters, not what we look like. Focusing on race, particularly the appearance of race, does not reflect our diversity. We should be hearing and seeing diversity of views.
There is so much fail here that it is almost hard to know where to begin. But I will start with the claim that Australia is a nation of immigrants.
This is a lie. Australia was never anything of the sort; at least not until after we helped save the world in the Second World War that is.
Before the end of that conflict, Australia was a British colony. Nations of immigrants don’t go around passing laws such as the White Australia Policy.
This lie was only established in the last 20 years, after 50 years of unceasing immigration policy, a policy on which the Australian people were never asked as to their own desires on the cultural makeup of their own nation.
The nation of immigrants lie is a retrospective attempt to rewrite Australian cultural identity. Leyonhjelm himself is a child of Swedish immigrants to Australia, so perhaps he was brought up with this idea firmly in mind. Whatever his upbringing, it does not make it true.
According to Leyonhjelm race does not matter. All that matters, is what people think. This is complete nonsense, but what would he have done?
Control the thoughts of everyone in Australia who are engaged in bad think, defined by him?
Perhaps we need to control what people are able to say around the kitchen table? No, that is a desire of the left.
Race does matter, becuase culture is bound up with it. Culture is downstream of race. It is not the Australian soil that imparts to me a sense of homecoming when I return to that continent.
It is the roar of the Anglo-Saxon bog Scots-Irish crowd at a game of cricket. They are my people and around them I am comfortable. Around them I have a community.
There is no community in diversity. Instead, there is a separation into tribes and a breakdown of trust. This forced immigration program and subsequent cultural change creates a society of strangers.
A stranger is not someone that you don’t know; it is somebody foreign. The foreignness that I now find in my own country is not a result of people thinking differently.
It is a result of people being alien to me. The reason that the thoughts are different is because the thinking processes are alien.
Foreigners do not think like us because they are not us. They are an other, and nothing will ever change that.
Leyonhjelm for some reason is obsessed with wanting to hear alternative views. Well, we’ve been hearing alternative views since the cultural revolution of the 1960s, and to be frank it hasn’t got us anywhere.
Western civilization had already worked it out, but for some reason an entire generation thought that they knew better and as a result have torn down our nations attempting to locate the great new idea.
Diversity of thought is anyway a meaningless objective. Just how much diversity of thought is required? Is this measurable? Is it attainable, and even if so, is it desirable?
What exactly are the benefits to the original Australian people of all this diversity of thought? Neither Leyonhjelm, nor anyone else for that matter, ever makes the case for why it is desirable.
Now Leyonhjelm is confused as to why so many black and brown faces are on the television in entirely inappropriate scenes.
He claims to be morally superior by attempting to focus on views instead of skin colour, but ironically it is the left and their dedication to replacing whites with minorities that have the true handle on the situation.
Race is everything and after that comes your reality. Until the right firmly embraces this reality then nothing will be achieved.
The left have embraced race under a foundation of lies. The right will begin to win when we embrace race under a foundation of truth. An ugly truth, no doubt about it. But truth, nonetheless.
Diversity, whether it be thoughts or race, is an undesirable objective in of itself. The left desires diversity based on race, while libertarians desire diversity based on views.
But just as races are not created equal, neither are views. The idea that Western civilization, the most superior and successful civilization in the world, needs to pander to other views is ridiculous.
But worse than that, it is a dangerous betrayal of what we were bequeathed by our ancestors.
The confusion in our public sphere of debate, where we cannot even decide if men in dresses are women or not, is indicative of the broad malaise that this diversity of views has given us.
More is not better, and quality will always win out over quantity. There will come a time when Australia will indeed be a nation of immigrants, and at that point it will cease to be the Australian nation.
It will be something else and not of our own choosing. While we still have the power to choose our destiny, we would be wise to use it. Because time is running out.