White Australia policy

[Excel]

The chief architect of the policy, Alfred Deakin, believed that the Japanese and Chinese might be a threat to the newly formed federation and it was this belief that led to legislation to ensure they would be kept out:

"It is not the bad qualities, but the good qualities of these alien races that make them so dangerous to us. It is their inexhaustible energy, their power of applying themselves to new tasks, their endurance and low standard of living that make them such competitors

Was it justified?

[EliasAlucard]

He feared their potential, collectivist group competition. So yes, it was justified in a sense, or at least his thinking was rational from a racial point of view.

[Excel]

He feared their potential, collectivist group competition. So yes, it was justified in a sense, or at least his thinking was rational from a racial point of view.
Probably was justified and it looks like the hard work of the early settlers since the days of captain cook is paying off.
http://rst.gsfc.nasa.gov/Sect6/sydney-australia.jpg

[Sevastopol]

Yes it was justified,

IMO Chinese are good hospitable people,
some Japanese are as well, but I had a kid in my class who said very racist things towards Africans and always tried to suck up to the white people.
So that ruined my whole respect for Japanese people, besides Japanese people worship whites.
I find that funny.

[Excel]

besides Japanese people worship whites.
I find that funny.

Its probably because Japan lost the war to the West. Therefore a strong victor is always idolized by the weaker one.
To be fair all whites are practically worshiped in almost all four corners of the globe.
In Dubai they would pay a Northern European with the same skills as an Indian/Egyptian 20x more. Its a white mans world which is largely populated by non-whites.

[Geto-Thracian]

Its probably because Japan lost the war to the West. Therefore a strong victor is always idolized by the weaker one.
To be fair all whites are practically worshiped in almost all four corners of the globe.
In Dubai they would pay a Northern European with the same skills as an Indian/Egyptian 20x more. Its a white mans world which is largely populated by non-whites.

That's because we have the best combination of features and traits of all the races.

There is only one thing we are clearly the best at and that is creativity....oh, and war!:D

[Excel]

That's because we have the best combination of features and traits of all the races.

There is only one thing we are clearly the best at and that is creativity....oh, and war!:D
No disrespect but when i say whites i refer to Northern Europeans :lol:

[Stygian Cellarius]

The chief architect of the policy, Alfred Deakin, believed that the Japanese and Chinese might be a threat to the newly formed federation and it was this belief that led to legislation to ensure they would be kept out:

"It is not the bad qualities, but the good qualities of these alien races that make them so dangerous to us. It is their inexhaustible energy, their power of applying themselves to new tasks, their endurance and low standard of living that make them such competitors

Was it justified?

It is justified. If you view it objectively, from an evolutionary point of view. If you view it as an observer of a different species from Space. Which is what I like to do, hence the "Cosmic Perspective" listed below my avatar. Every species or subspecies has a natural right to preserve their genetic kin. That is the way the rest of the animal kingdom works and is how we have worked for millennia, up until about 60 years ago.


Imagine if you wandered off into the wilderness and decided to build your own home. So you build a large cabin with all the necessities life requires, plus more. You invent new tools to increase efficiency; to reduce the amount of time and energy to complete a task. Freeing yourself to spend that time and energy on other tasks to get even more done. To accomplish more things.
You have children, build a schoolhouse for them and teach them everything you have learned in life plus the sum of every generation before you. They inherit the material culture that you labored to create, plus the immaterial culture (tradition, etc.) of you and your ancestors. You live with your family and have re-organized nature with such success that survival is beyond secure. Just what you would want for your children. Besides, they were your motive, you did it for them.

Now imagine that their are others in the wilderness, but they haven't built a home as nice as yours. Nor have they ever thought of the new tools you created. Eventually, they see the stuff of your creation, the products of your mind and labor and understand that it is more efficient in securing survival than what they have. So they want it.

What moral obligation do you have to allow anyone else to move into your cabin and acquire the fruits of your thought and labor? None.

This scenario has played itself continually over and over throughout history. In the past, those that wanted to acquire the greater culture of others took it by force. There was no other way. Today there is another way, they can just emigrate to the the civilization that has those things and use the culture of others for themselves.

[Anodyne]

Its probably because Japan lost the war to the West. Therefore a strong victor is always idolized by the weaker one.

The Japanese, in contrast to the Chinese, have idolized Europe since the late 19th century. Yet, at the same time, have felt superior. They seem to think their superiority comes from their cultural values.

[Scoket]

It dont see how it matters whether it was justified or not. It didnt work. I meet a lot of exchange students over here and there is one thing they all seem to comment on, no matter where they are from. That is that they cant believe how many asian people and foreigners are here.

One exchange student told me that she expected everyone to have light hair and light eyes. She couldnt understand why Australians were so 'rare'. I had to take her out to a little country town so she could see that they still existed.

It seems to be one of the first things they are taught in their 'exchange' class as well. I always get asked about it later as if all Australians are experts on it.

[Nephilim]

Its probably because Japan lost the war to the West. Therefore a strong victor is always idolized by the weaker one.
To be fair all whites are practically worshiped in almost all four corners of the globe.
In Dubai they would pay a Northern European with the same skills as an Indian/Egyptian 20x more. Its a white mans world which is largely populated by non-whites.


Duabi the Whole UAE cannot be compared to Japan. Duabi was never independent nation from European colonization, and even now they just enjoy pesudo-Independence since they belong by de facto into Great Britian and U.S. Thus the colonial mentality is persent among them. Also Daubi is vile and evil place where slavery and prostitution ran unchecked. Young Men and Childern are enslaved in labour, and women in the sexual slave trade known as the White slave trade, it has nothing to do with race, their is women of various ethincities. Also many the companies that are in UAE are owned by Westerners since they do most of the infrastructure. UAE and most Gulf have thrived from the destruction of my people, the Iraqis and they continue to benefit from our blood, just like the Jordanians.

However look at nations such as Afghanistan which did not observe this colonial mentality because they did not get colonized by the Europeans and failed. However the Anglo-American invasion might change this, but the Afghans are still proud people, who will not bow to anyone.Look at any uncolonized nation by White European powers, they don't have those thoughts or actions.

The Japanese admire Europe but at the same time see Whites as inferior to them. Like you said it was because of the Japenese lost of the war, but its not part of the colonial legacy

[Nephilim]

It is justified. If you view it objectively, from an evolutionary point of view. If you view it as an observer of a different species from Space. Which is what I like to do, hence the "Cosmic Perspective" listed below my avatar. Every species or subspecies has a natural right to preserve their genetic kin. That is the way the rest of the animal kingdom works and is how we have worked for millennia, up until about 60 years ago.


Imagine if you wandered off into the wilderness and decided to build your own home. So you build a large cabin with all the necessities life requires, plus more. You invent new tools to increase efficiency; to reduce the amount of time and energy to complete a task. Freeing yourself to spend that time and energy on other tasks to get even more done. To accomplish more things.
You have children, build a schoolhouse for them and teach them everything you have learned in life plus the sum of every generation before you. They inherit the material culture that you labored to create, plus the immaterial culture (tradition, etc.) of you and your ancestors. You live with your family and have re-organized nature with such success that survival is beyond secure. Just what you would want for your children. Besides, they were your motive, you did it for them.

Now imagine that their are others in the wilderness, but they haven't built a home as nice as yours. Nor have they ever thought of the new tools you created. Eventually, they see the stuff of your creation, the products of your mind and labor and understand that it is more efficient in securing survival than what they have. So they want it.

What moral obligation do you have to allow anyone else to move into your cabin and acquire the fruits of your thought and labor? None.

This scenario has played itself continually over and over throughout history. In the past, those that wanted to acquire the greater culture of others took it by force. There was no other way. Today there is another way, they can just emigrate to the the civilization that has those things and use the culture of others for themselves.


Yes but the fate of the Native Australian was one of pain and misery, whom when the Europeans invaded their lands. Their was not even integerity or respect in their treatment of the natives.

Australia was not wilderness it had many tribes of the original people who lived their. However when the Europeans discovered Australia, they took it by force, and then created as a large prision for convicts that were sent into to exile.

You can not build home at the expense of another people, and this what happened in Australia. Thus its not the Europeans, and the policey fails, and it becames unjustifed due to the fact that land is not theirs but of the Australian Aborgines. Know the European Australians, will feel who , the Aborgines felt when they were displaced. The torture that Aborgines faced, can not be even mentioned do to the sadistic and cruel nature.

You have no moral obligation if the land is yours, but land that has been taken away from the original people, and claim it yours, then you have moral obligation to bring in new comers, and share in the land or home that you intruded and took by force.

People emigrate for variety of reasons. One of those reasons is wars, and they have no more safe homeland to live in, not because the culture of that specific nation is superior in "civilization". For example their are many Iraqis who have migrated to various parts of the world, and ofcourse the West. When Iraq was doing quite well for itself before the American leds and sancations which crumbled the nation, their was hardly any that were immigrating outside their nation.


The Western economy depends on immigrants thats a fact. Also their is negative brith rate in the West, and thus immigrants are need to fill that void.

Your analogy does not work in most of the New World and Oceania/Australia the reasons those were not the homes of the Europeans. It can be applied in Europe however their is some truth their, but Europe needs immigrants to move its economy also, this why their was start of the guest worker program.

[middleinitialh]

The chief architect of the policy, Alfred Deakin, believed that the Japanese and Chinese might be a threat to the newly formed federation and it was this belief that led to legislation to ensure they would be kept out:

"It is not the bad qualities, but the good qualities of these alien races that make them so dangerous to us. It is their inexhaustible energy, their power of applying themselves to new tasks, their endurance and low standard of living that make them such competitors

Was it justified?

His fear was justified - as is anyone's fear who isn't up for some competition.

But the policy wasn't. Today, our government is still based on the UK parliament model with Japanese, Chinese (and every other non-European) people still poorly represented in positions of power. The closest Australia ever came to becoming a Japanese colony was WWII! The Japanese and Chinese make a huge contribution to Australia with their money and their culture and we're better for it!

[middleinitialh]

It dont see how it matters whether it was justified or not. It didnt work. I meet a lot of exchange students over here and there is one thing they all seem to comment on, no matter where they are from. That is that they cant believe how many asian people and foreigners are here.

One exchange student told me that she expected everyone to have light hair and light eyes. She couldnt understand why Australians were so 'rare'. I had to take her out to a little country town so she could see that they still existed.

It seems to be one of the first things they are taught in their 'exchange' class as well. I always get asked about it later as if all Australians are experts on it.

Hahaha well she "expected" to see a stereotype. Australia is a modern western country that depends on immigration to better its economy so Australians come in all colours and no-one needs to learn that in school :whoco:

So me, my other Asian friends, my tanned (love the beach) Armenian, Slovenian, Syrian etc... friends are not real Australians because we're not blonde/blue-eyed? We were all born here and we pay our taxes, we respect other people, we love our country and we don't litter. I'm sure there are many Anglo-Australians who don't see us as a threat. Not that I have to justify anything to you...

[Tyrannical]

Various other groups weren't too keen on UK domination such as India, China, Japan. They wanted the White man out.


So I'd say there was nothing wrong with the White Australia policy as other races would have behaved the same way. I'd say the real wrong was probably ending the policy, and it would not be immoral to send the non-Whites back to their respective countries.