Not my representative: Intelligent people - Irrational Arguments

I was going to write specifically about a discussion I had with Ian Nelson (QLD Senate - One Nation). 


Instead I've decided to write about what frustrates me about intelligent, extremely passionate people with ideals based on incorrect facts and irrational arguments.


I just got off the phone to a One Nation senate candidate in Queensland - Ian Nelson. We had an excellent discussion about some of the "4 Questions".


The first impression I get is that here is a reasonable man. Like most of the candidates I've spoken to, he's well spoken and intelligent... 



We are nearly in agreement on so many issues, Ian doesn't believe Carbon is a problem, he thinks scientists are making a lot of money out of pushing the Carbon issue. But when talking of pollution in general, he says 

"How many Four Wheel Drives do you see in the city? They spew out pollutants five times more than your average car.. That's where we should start!"

When I say I'm for taking all pollutants not just carbon - Ian says "that seems much more sensible".


We tend to agree that much of the 'refugee problem' has been created by American foreign policy.


Then we part ways...
Border protection - more specifically multiculturalism. 


While Ian supports genuine refugees and on-shore processing, he arcs right up when talking about Muslims, Lebanese and Asians that he links to gangs.


Now you can't call Ian a racist because his wife is Thai - BUT (there's always a but)...


He does however attribute our country's declining standard of living to the influx of "these people", mainly the muslim ones that arrive on boats. He start quoting bizarre stats like 

"our standard of living has fallen 50% since we started allowing them in"

and that 

"90% of gang violence is from Muslim and Asian gangs."

Ian seems to genuinely believe that "these people" are violent and dangerous people, that: 

"...all this violence in Victoria is from Lebanese and Asian gangs. These are facts"

For starters, I'm not sure that these ARE the facts.

• The Melbourne "Gang Land Killings"  involved 'families' with loose ties to Italy, Ireland, Bulgaria and Greece among others.
• The UN developed "Human Development Index" score puts Australia second in the world last year (having risen from 3rd in 2007) - it looks at three factors: Life Expectancy, Knowledge and Education, and 'Standard of Living' 

Apparently based on such facts, Ian's not for a fan of multiculturalism, though: 

"don't get me wrong, the Italians, the Greeks - we love them"

..it's just the current influx from the middle-east that he's concerned with because they don't assimilate.

I remind him that these Italians and Greeks formed tight knit communities of "greasy wogs" of the 60s and 70s, now "we love them".

He doesn't see the link - he believes the big difference is that the Italians and Greeks weren't Muslims. 

So which logic do we choose to believe?

Do we believe that nationality or ethnicity are the root of gang violence? 

Do we believe that "boat people" are sponges on society and have caused a 50% drop in our standard of living?

How can we ignore the fact that Italians, Greeks and Bulgarians were involved in the gang violence? Do we say "Italians and greeks are dangerous"?

How do we say we've had a 50% reduction in our standard of living since we started letting "these people" in when other indicators show we're pretty damn well off?

And speaking of these dangerous gangs...

I found a 2002 paper from the New South Wales Parliamentary Library Service Briefing Paper, titled Gangs in NSW. It digs somewhat in to the issues of gang violence but makes an interesting distinction, should we call groups of ethnic individuals that hang out together a gang? According to the paper:

With respect to the use of ethnic identifiers in the context of the ethnic youth gang debate, a  problem with ethnic identifiers is highlighted by a recent study which showed that whilst half of the youths interviewed stated that they “hang out” in public with their friends, only 10 percent of those youths identified themselves as a “gang” (or considered “their group to be a gang”). In other  words from an observer’s point of view, there could be the appearance of a much higher incidence of gangs than would reflect the actual reality. 

Sure, there's Lebanese kids that do nasty shit, and Asian kids that commit crimes, there's also "white Aussie thugs" that glass people in the face. 


Sure police crime - catch the assholes responsible, and put 'em in jail. I agree, there's much more that needs to be done. 


But why are we making this an issue of ethnicity?

We reap what we sow...

When we start lumping ethnic issues in to a debate on crime, or start using crime as a rebuttal to multiculturalism, we start down a slippery slope which ends in racism. 

We keep wanting "these people" to integrate in to our society, but we allow the actions of small groups to colour our impression of an entire nationality or religion. We tell them they're not welcome in our communities and say things like:

"Why don’t they settle in a country where they can enjoy their Muslim culture?"

We breed mistrust and isolation, then we wonder why ethnic groups become tight-knit, or why we have the occasional issue with 2nd or even 3rd generation Australians from ethnic backgrounds 'acting out'. 


"These people" (more often their Australian kids), are trying to reassert their 'heritage' in whatever random misguided way they choose.


I'm upset because Ian could be a good representative...

It upsets me that otherwise reasonable people can have their views distorted by misinformation they receive. So much so, that they believe the misinformation themselves.

Distortion that is fueled by politicians pandering to the lowest common denominator, which in turn gives credence to overly simplistic media reporting of complex issues.

What upsets me most of all, is that Ian could be a good representative for me - he seems flexible in many of his ideas, seems to think across broad ideas and issues, and appears willing to listen to my point of view.


Unfortuantely, we have irreconcilable differences when it comes to our belief in the equality of all, the belief that a multicultural society is stronger than a boring plain monoculture. 


Ian doesn't seem to think that Australians have the capacity to live in harmony with these other cultures (or vice versa), even though we've done it time and again. 


I hope he's not right.


ObM.