How tragically ironic that Tony Abbott was dumped as PM some two weeks after vindication of his bravest and most controversial policy.
His popularity rating had been on the nose among Australians generally and the Liberals in particular. In Europe however, he would have been guaranteed a walk in gig as Prime Minister in any one of a dozen desperate countries right now.
How quickly we forget his contribution to the viability of this nation. He had barely unpacked his budgie smugglers when he launched his attack. He blindsided not only the bloodthirsty people smugglers, but also the gigantic bloodsucking multicultural industry.
In one brilliantly executed coup, the entire “compassionate" Left were exposed. Suddenly we all saw that the hands which had reached out in welcome had blood dripping from them. Even John Howard, the perennial political survivor was left with his mouth open.
Sarah Hanson-Young would never again be able to claim that tragedies “happen all the time”. Everyone now knew that it was her stupid policies which had created this human wreckage. Everyone, that is except Angela Merkel. Her, and all of the Left wing diehards who still refuse to believe the evidence of their own lyin’ eyes.
Angela was clearly racked by guilt over what the Nazis did to the Jews. This is quite understandable given the circumstances. A professional counsellor might have explained however, that few Germans alive today had any part in this tragedy.
Unfortunately, she felt that she needed to assuage Germany’s collective shame by offering a home to 800,000 of the most virulently anti-semitic people that Europe had seen since….well, since the Nazis.
Clearly she hadn’t consulted with the Jewish community before formulating this policy.
She clearly hadn’t consulted with Tony Abbott either. Had she done so, she might have airlifted in the predominantly Christian and Yazidi victims huddled in camps in Turkey and Syria.
Instead she decided to make it a, “first past the post” marathon. The glittering prize was a shiny new German passport with a built in supply of endless welfare payments.
Not surprisingly, the first (but surely not last) wave of contestants were not the traumatised victims of Islamic aggression. They were the fittest, fastest, richest and most advantaged Muslims of the region.
They streamed across Europe’s porous borders just as fast as their Nike Airs would carry them.
The Press has so far failed to notice that these people also represent the exact same demographic that has been streaming into Syria for the last couple of years to fight for the Islamic State and other fanatical suicidal jihadist groups.
Whilst the events of the last couple of weeks have seemed astonishing, they were entirely predictable and resulted from two terrible ideas. Once you understand just how bad these ideas are, the coming European disasters are also entirely predictable.
It was Jefferson who warned us that, “A nation that wishes to remain ignorant but free, wants what never was, and never will be.”
Thomas Jefferson was no fool. When JFK invited a collection of Nobel Prize winning scientists to the Whitehouse, he quipped that it was the greatest collection of human intelligence the building had seen since Jefferson had dined there alone.
We have excelled in many areas of human achievement. At the same time however, we have allowed ourselves to be ignorant of the consequences of these two seductive yet awful notions.
The first of these ideas is that wealth should be “re-distributed” from the rich to the poor. It is not hard to see why this idea should be so popular, particularly amongst the poor. Whilst I could (and hopefully will) write an entire book on why this is such a bad idea. For the sake of brevity, let’s just examine the most basic point.
Redistribution of wealth, income equality and social justice all sound so noble and compassionate. These words have been twisted and perverted however, to mask their true intention.
Rich people already give lots of money to poorer people. They do this voluntarily in a number of ways. Some of them invest in businesses which employ people. All of them give money to others in exchange for services, whether it be the mowing of lawns or servicing the Ferrari. Many wealthy people willingly give to charity. Bill Gates and Warren Buffett are recent examples.
“Redistribution of wealth” implies something completely different. It is about taking more than people want to give. This can only be done through force, or the implied threat of force. If you refuse to pay the money which is demanded, then sooner or later you will be facing armed police and jail time.
The proper term for demanding money with guns is “armed robbery”. This may not have such a pleasant ring to it as “social justice”. By calling it by its proper name however, we can see clearly why it always has such a disastrous impact on societies which fall for it.
We are not talking here about citizens contributing to the upkeep of government. We are talking about using the coercive power of the State to take money from groups or individuals deemed “too wealthy”. The loot is then handed to other groups who they feel are more deserving (usually starting with themselves and their mates). Christians and Jews have always had a head start in understanding and avoiding this disastrous idea.
This may be why their societies are so successful. “Redistribution of wealth” breaks two of the Ten Commandments. Thou shall not covet and thou shall not steal, are cast-iron laws. That is why (despite what the current Pope may imagine) Christianity and Judaism are entirely incompatible with Socialism or Communism.
Marx understood this fact, which is why he was diametrically opposed to religion (which in his world meant Christianity and Judaism). Sadly, few Christians today seem to grasp this point.
Both Socialism and Islam however, are rooted in a system of plunder. It is their common desire to re-appropriate property which makes them such willing (if seemingly unlikely) bedfellows.
A society based on armed robbery is not a good place to be. Producing goods in such a society becomes difficult if not impossible. The gap between rich and poor (robbers and robbed) expands rapidly. Poverty, misery and eventually starvation are the inevitable result.
How many times do we have to repeat this experiment for people to understand? How many people starved to death in Russia and China alone? Every time this idea is tried it results in the same catastrophe.
Australians have not yet travelled too far down this road. Most people still retain a cultural aversion to helping ourselves to what is not ours. Whilst welfare dependency is growing alarmingly, we are still (thanks largely to technological advances) able to sustain the system for the time being.
This could change much sooner than most of us could imagine if we fall for the second appalling idea.
This idea is that national borders are an impediment to human progress. Once again, it is a beautiful sounding idea which is an easy sell to our impressionable school children. Once again, to fall for its allure could have devastating consequences. Let’s have a closer look at why.
Humans have always arranged themselves into groups. That is how we survive and progress. These groups have varied from tribal to national. Like all other creatures on this planet, we compete for limited resources. The groups we form enable us to do this. The removal of national borders implies a single global family, happily joining hands together.
For this to happen, we would all need to simultaneously abandon our wish to compete for resources. Unless human nature was to inexplicably change overnight, this just isn’t going to happen.
As our progressive friends will happily admit, many societies have different cultures. They celebrate this diversity and assure us that all cultures are equal. They aren’t.
Cultures can arrange themselves in different ways. They can either be productivity based, plunder based or some combination of the two. As previously noted, a productive society is a much better place to be.
There is however, one major impediment to the sustainability of a productive society. The a….holes who live next door. Productive societies produce wealth.
This wealth attracts plunderers like bees to a honey pot.
Much as I would like to believe otherwise, the success of the English speaking world is not due to any genetic superiority. All of the English speaking countries are either Islands, or they are so far removed from credible threats as to be safe from plunder (Mexico is not really a credible threat).
England was small enough to govern yet large enough to defend itself. With the English Channel and considerable luck, it has avoided invasion since the disaster of 1066.
Once the Scots were admitted into a union, the British mainland faced no threat of land-based invasion. With its borders secured by the ocean, it no longer needed to maintain a standing army.
From that time on, Britain and its Island colonies underwent an explosion in prosperity, productivity and technological development. The scale of this advance was unprecedented in human history. The result was a huge reduction in the gap between rich and poor and the emergence of the first middle class ever.
The basis of these incredible achievements was threefold. We had secure borders, a homogenous society and a common culture. This culture was a productive one, based on the capitalist protection of property. This was underpinned by the biblical commandments not to covet or steal.
Things have changed however. Our technology has shrunk the continents and the oceans around us. This is wonderful in many ways but it has brought with it a new and very dangerous risk.
The oceans are no longer the barriers they once were. People can move around like never before. This introduces new risks and we are not dealing with them very well.
Mass transportation combined with lax immigration laws have produced a phenomenon unheard of in human history. Masses of people from plundering societies a world away are now strolling through borders under the guise of “refugees”.
Thanks to our acceptance of “redistribution of wealth” they are then immediately plugged into generous welfare systems.
These can be plundered at will without even firing a shot.
Combining a welfare state with an open border policy is like leaving a gold AMEX card on the kitchen table with your front door wide open.
Most Richardson Post readers now understand Islam. Whether through my book or other sources, you “get it”. Islam is the most successful system of plunder ever developed. Islam today is not mostly in a position to achieve plunder through conquest (except in Iraq and Syria). It does have other methods however, which are just as effective given this situation.
These methods largely depend on lies, deceit, corruption, subterfuge and high levels of immigration and procreation. Once inside a society, Islam encourages its followers to drain money and power from the host society in any way possible. With our welfare state and “trust based” society, it has been like taking candy off a baby.
With such a gigantic transfer of wealth going on, it is no surprise that a bloated industry has grown up to facilitate it. Refugee lawyers and advocates, multicultural departments, anti-discrimination boards and so forth, all get rich on one outcome. Keep the flow of people coming in to feed off the welfare state.
In Brisbane, 97.3FM is one of the city’s largest radio stations. One of the most commonly heard adverts on that station is for a law firm called “No Borders Migration”. I don’t know how much this costs but I am guessing a lot. I assume that many of these kind of organisations are also large donors to the political parties.
With government and media gorging on the proceeds of a multicultural open border policy, it is small wonder that Abbott was so unpopular. He certainly lacked political acumen and wasn’t the most articulate speaker. That alone can’t explain the negativity he faced however.
The fact that he volunteered to risk his life for others in both the rural fire service and the surf life savers is never mentioned. The fact that he had to wear unfashionable swimwear in one of these roles is never forgotten.
What is done is done however. I feel we have lost a great ally in Tony Abbott but we sure as hell haven’t lost the war. We are the ones who will win or lose this fight. We can’t just sit back moaning and waiting for someone else to do something. Why? Because they won’t. It is up to us and we need to keep the pressure on.
Malcom Turnbull may be leader of the Liberals, but that doesn’t make him God. He was dumped from the leadership once before for ignoring his party and hopefully won’t make that mistake twice.
We need to contact our MP’s and let them know how we feel. We can make a difference if we speak up. We need to let them know that Tony was on the right track. We need to let them know that Turnbull’s ignorance about Islam is dangerous. If he persists in his fantasy, we can now look to alterative Parties.
These are dangerous times. We have to ensure that what is happening in Europe right now will never happen here. We have to keep pressure on our leaders and let them know that their jobs depend on it.
When MPs receive a letter from a constituent they take notice. They know that 1,000 others feel the same way, but are too lazy to write. If you want to know the best ways to contact your MP and get tips on how to write an effective letter or email you can click here.
Please take time to let our leaders know that we are not sheeple. This country is not theirs to give away to anyone who demands it. This nation is on loan from our children and I for one, intend to hand it to them as a free and prosperous country.