The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewJohn Derbyshire Archive
Despite Trump Tergiversation, Immigration Increasingly Divides Parties. and Raise A Fosters to Oz Sen. Fraser Anning!
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

When it comes to squishiness on immigration, the Trump Administration is now setting the pace. Every week brings news of some new concession to the business lobbies on legal immigration.

I don’t have to go looking for these stories. They pop up every few days. Washington Times, March 29th: DHS to double seasonal guest worker increase (by Stephen Dinan) The story tells us that Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen has approved an extra 30,000 seasonal guest worker visas. That’s 15,000 extra over last year’s increase.

This increase also comes earlier in the season, which, the report tells us, “will give employers more time to apply and plan.” Well, isn’t that nice for them.

Secretary Nielsen is just as worthless on illegal immigration. She showed up on Tucker Carlson’s show earlier this week to talk about the tens of thousands of Central Americans coming across our southern border without authorization every month and being released into the U.S.A.

Nielsen emitted billowing clouds of hot air. On compulsory E-Verify for employers:

Clip: Carlson: “How about this: Why wouldn’t your agency write an executive order, present it to the President, have him sign it, and do it tomorrow?”

Nielsen: “Everything is on the table. We’ll do everything we can within our authorities (sic).”

Carlson got the same answer on the birthright citizenship executive order the President offered us before last November’s elections.

[Clip: Nielsen: “Y’know, Tucker, I think the President’s been clear: All of that is on the table.”]

E-Verify, birthright citizenship, visa tracking, stop remittances(or at least tax them), … “All of that is on the table.”

And that’s where it sits—on the table, turning brown and curling up at the edges like last week’s sandwich.

On the table.

Madame Secretary, with respect: “On the table” butters no parsnips. Americans are not impressed by things lying uselessly “on the table.” We want action—clear, decisive action, like your directive the other day to import 30,000 foreigners to do seasonal work—but we want action forAmerican workers, for American sovereignty, for a demographically stable nation to bequeath to our grandchildren.

When shall we see that clear, decisive action, Madame Secretary?

Mr. President?

But note that immigration patriots are at least getting rhetoric from Trump—more than they would have gotten from any random Bush. I am under orders not to repeat that We Are Doomed too often on And there is a Big Picture development that transcends Trump trivia.

What actually divides our two main parties? We know of course that Republicans are the Stupid Party while Democrats are the Evil Party; but what are the substantive issues that really separate them?

This has of course varied across historical time. The Republican Party started out sectionalist, as the anti-South Party. They’d prefer me to say “anti-slavery,” and to be sure abolitionists had a home in the early party; but so did Free Soil advocates, who just didn’t want slavery expanded into new territories but many of whom were indifferent to slavery as a moral issue.

The impression you get from contemporary sources is that most pre-Civil War Republican Party voters wanted blacks to stay in the South, preferably but not necessarily as free citizens; or else be shipped off to black colonies in Africa or the Caribbean.

If a Donald Trump had shown up in 1860 promising to build a wall around the slave states, I bet he’d have won in a landslide.

After the Civil War the GOP coasted along for a while as the Party of Victory in that war, then morphed across the turn of the 20th century into the party of capitalism, most especially of the small businessman and his beloved tariffs, while the Democrats drifted leftwards into progressive social reform. The sectionalist stamp was still strong, though, with Democrats solid in the old Confederacy down to the 1960s.

With the great expansion of higher education and knowledge work after WW2, meritocratic elitism began to rise, bearing aloft the standard of essentialist egalitarianism, most especially of race and sex denialism.

This “New Class” easily took over the Democratic Party. Its rise stirred a reaction, though: Richard Nixon’s “Silent Majority,” Donald Warren’s “Middle American Radicals.” The old South, where meritocratic elites were thinner on the ground and race realism was strong, swung Republican.

This was a new kind of sectionalism, the beginnings of what I call the Cold Civil War. The sectionalist line no longer cuts cleanly across the nation: it now separates one county from the next, one city district from the next. It cuts through neighborhoods and streets, even through individual families.

That’s the history of the two big parties in a nutshell—familiar to all of us, I think.

OK, but what’s the key defining issue today? What, more than anything else, separates the two parties? Immigration, that’s what.

Back in February, during the congressional fight over funding for Trump’s wall, I went to NumbersUSA and looked up the immigration score cards on all the members of the House Appropriations Committee with a voting record. I tweeted out the result.

Executive summary: The 23 Republican members had a spread of ratings, from two members rated A down to one rated F-minus. The median rating for Republicans was B-minus.

Of the 29 Democratic members, one was rated D and two were rated F. The other 26 were all, every one of them, rated F-minus.

B-minus is not actually very impressive from an immigration-patriot point of view. There’s considerable squishiness over immigration on the Republican side, due of course to big-money business donors looking to imported workers to keep wages down.

But the striking thing is the near-total absence of squishiness among the Democrats. F-minus, F-minus, F-minus, F-minus, F-minus, F-minus, … These guys are rock-solid.

It’s the defining issue between the parties in our age. We may as well call them the “Immigration Control Party” and the “Open Borders Party.”

It’s a tectonic shift that seems to be happening regardless of what the Trump Administration is actually doing.

Finally some good news: Down in the antipodes, ripples from the March 15th mosque massacres in New Zealand continue to spread out.

Brenton Tarrant, who committed those massacres, is actually an Australian; so the event generated even more interest in Australia than it would have anyway. That interest has brought forth a hero: Sixty-nine-year-old Fraser Anning, who has a seat in the 76-member Australian Senate.


Senator Anning is … I think the word is “colorful.” He is plain-spoken and straightforward in what we used to consider a classically Australian style, although in recent decades the loathsome turbid waters of Political Correctness and feminized sensitivity have risen and drowned much of the cultural landscape Down Under.

Anning is culturally conservative: hates homosexuality and abortion, opposes multiculturalism, and—you may want to position yourself near the fainting couch for this one—in his maiden speech to the Senate last year, called for a referendum on re-introducing the White Australia policy that his country practiced up to the 1970s. That policy limited permanent settlement of immigrants to white people.

Senator Anning responded to the New Zealand killings by saying

As always, left-wing politicians and the media will rush to claim that the causes of today’s shootings lie with gun laws or those who hold nationalist views but this is all cliched nonsense.

The real cause of bloodshed on New Zealand streets today is the immigration program which allowed Muslim fanatics to migrate to New Zealand in the first place. Let us be clear, while Muslims may have been the victims today, usually they are the perpetrators.

Lawmaker hit by ‘Egg Boy’ censured for blaming New Zealand mosque shootings on Muslims,by Emily Jacobs, New York Post, April 3, 2019

That had them reaching for the smelling salts from Brisbane to Perth, from Bunda to Wagga Wagga, from Kalgoorlie to Kookaburra Springs.

There were condemnations, a motion of censure in the Senate, and a petition to remove Fraser Anning from the Senate (although there is apparently no constitutional way to do that).

One young chap was so incensed he snuck up behind the Senator in public and broke an egg over his head. Senator Anning span round deftly and bopped his assailant very accurately on the jaw, twice.

Nothing abashed, this week Senator Anning registered a new party, Fraser Anning’s Conservative National Party. He also published a spirited open letter to the Australian Prime Minister—you can read it at the Occidental Observer, on Facebook, or at Australia’s Pickering Post—defiantly asserting his objections to mass Muslim immigration:

It is a matter of causation, not moral blame, that until recently we were largely immune to this problem because until the 1970s Western populations were, for the most part, ethnically, culturally and religiously homogenous.

I believe that these changes were initiated by governments, not requested by the people, who generally wished to retain their way of life, as did others around the world.

The Japanese people have no wish to bring in millions of Vietnamese and grant them citizenship. The Chinese don’t want to be swamped with Indians.

No people wish for this. We didn’t vote for it and we weren’t asked.

You can take issue with Senator Anning’s bluntness, and even with his arguments. I, for example, would take issue with his saying that Australians didn’t vote for mass immigration and weren’t asked.

It is true that in Australia, as here and in Britain, all the big old political parties, with various degrees of honesty, promoted mass Third World immigration. It’s also true that there are difficult institutional barriers to getting a new party established.

Still, no-one has to vote for the established parties.

I was about to add: “indeed, no-one has to vote at all …” Then I remembered that Australia does in fact have mandatory voting, with a $20 fine if you fail to vote—not a bad idea, in my opinion. [How Compulsory Voting Works: Australians Explain, by Tacey Rychter, NYT, October 22, 2018]

Still, there must have been minor parties people could vote for that didn’t push mass immigration. Or voters could have staged a strike—a voter strike!

Yet Aussies—like Americans and Brits—went on voting for the major parties. In that default sense, contra Senator Anning, we did wish for it; we did vote for it.

But see what I’m doing there: I’m arguing back, as cogently as space and my abilities permit, against Fraser Anning’s points, which he has very cogently expressed.

That’s what’s supposed to happen in a free, self-governing society. We make our points and argue them in public. The one who persuades the most listeners advances to the next round.

Australia’s elites are having none of that! They are laboring mightily to silence Senator Anning, just as their counterparts here are laboring to silence dissident voices like ours here at

Further quote from Senator Anning’s open letter:

In order to lock-in permanent mass immigration, you multicultural elitists have annihilated the bedrock principle of Free Speech from our society.

This is the foundational principle on which our system of democracy is built.

That was the point where I stood up and cheered.

Strength to your arm, Senator—and to your pen.

If you ever find yourself out here on Long Island, the Fosters are on me.

2010-12-24dl[1]John Derbyshire [email him] writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjectsfor all kinds of outlets. (This no longer includes National Review, whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him.) He is the author of We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism and several other books. He has had two books published by com: FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT(also available in Kindle) and FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT II: ESSAYS 2013.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Australia, Donald Trump, Immigration 
Hide 38 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Again, this one should be 2 posts to keep the comments section organized – could you bring this up to Ron, please?

    On post 2:

    I could watch that video over and over! Egg boy must have taken a pretty good blow to have dropped his phone. Any self-respecting young person today would feel naked without that smart phone in his hand, and I think all he’s doing near the end of that video is trying to figure out what he did with his phone – dazed and confused, haha.

    Your point on the voting history of Australians brings up this: Just as in the US, the major parties are nothing but different squads of The Party. By “major parties”, I mean the high-level politicians IN them. You write about the median B- score of those 23 congresscreatures of the Appropriations Committee. So what? What about the rest of them? How come, since 1995, every single thing out of the Congress/Senate is something I don’t like, especially about immigration? Nothing good gets done. There are gentleman’s agreements to make sure the guys in the more conservative districts have their asses covered for re-election.

    I agree that Americans themselves can be split by party line pretty well based on their view on the immigration invasion.

    Perhaps down under, the major party candidates are well selected too, and there is not much choice but to vote third-party. There is where I DO agree with you, John. There is always that choice, but NO, “you’re throwing away your vote” is the stupidity you hear about that. People have been voting for the lesser of 2 evils and getting evil every time. (The “stupid” of the Stupid Party is just a ruse by this point, IMO.)

    • Replies: @follyofwar
    , @silviosilver
  2. Daniel H says:

    That clip is great. Fraser Anning is 70 years old and he could slap the tar out of a handful of these ANTIFA-styled punks with one arm tied behind his back. Fraser is healthy and robust. May he be around for another 20 years. Australia needs hime. The west needs him.

  3. Rich says:

    Can we make this Anning guy Dictator of the English Speaking World for a year or two until the mess we’re in gets straightened out? The guy is great. I could see Trump throwing a couple of punches if someone hit him with an egg, but the rest of the American politicians? Sanders head would be split open, O’Rourke would be flailing his arms around, all the dem ladies running would probably just screech and cry, Biden would give the guy a hug. If someone had thrown a bucket of water on Hilary, everyone who’s seen “The Wizard of Oz” knows she would melt.

    • LOL: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  4. It’s VB, not Fosters, you chud.

    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
  5. anon[788] • Disclaimer says:

    Australia should be wrested back from the descendants of the rapist convicts and war criminals ( of Vietnam war of Afghanistan war of Iraq war 2003 ) No mercy . The leaders like her should be tried for contempt of humanity, for falsifying realities, and for incitement to violence against 3 rd country’s immigrants and should be sent to the Jail that housed the slaves in West Africa .

  6. Priss Factor [AKA "Asagirian"] says: • Website

    White National Liberation means White Nationalists minding their own business in their own white nations.

    White Global Domination means White Globalists serving Jewish supremacism to wage Wars for Israel, oppress Palestinians & deny them nationhood, and to spread globo-homo garbage all over.

    Under White Nationalism, whites nations remain white, and non-white nations are left alone.

    Under White Globalism, white nations are invaded demographically by non-whites, and non-white nations are taken over militarily, financially, and by cultural imperialism by the Zionist-controlled globo-homo West.

    White Nationalism sounds better than White Globalism.

    What we need is a hearing on White Globalist Crimes of Empire and Genocide.

    But the US is ruled by Jewish Imperialists who do everything to persecute White National Liberationists and Palestinian National Liberationists who say NO to (((White Globalist))) Empire.

  7. a{ll true and well said. But is it going to stop in the US? How? The open-borders people want millions more immigrants, and the Immigration Patriots (whether they are patriots is highly debatable) want to prevent assimilation. So, at least, various of their leaders have said, though I do not include Mr. Derbyshire in this as I do not know his views. Together, they ruin the country.

  8. @Rich

    Haha, Rich, but water boy better make sure he melts every part of her, or his body will be found a few months later, the tragic result of a suicide via 3 shots to the back of the head … or falling asleep on the railroad tracks. If you’re going to take on the Klinton Klan, you’d better go all the way.

  9. I take it we are in replacement full swing.


    that is unfortunate. But it’s not as if it wasn’t coming.

  10. @Fred V. Reed

    … and the Immigration Patriots (whether they are patriots is highly debatable) want to prevent assimilation.

    I have no idea where you’d get this idea from, Mr. Reed. Immigration patriots would be overjoyed if the 40 – 50 million immigrants to the US had been assimilating, but assimilation does not work for large numbers. That’s why they’d like this Feral Gov’t of ours to STOP DIGGING, and would rather many illegal aliens and green card holders leave, since they’re obviously not going to assimilate.

    I think you have this whole “exhange of bodily fluids” thing that you got from somewhere on your mind. Many white nationalists don’t believe in interacial dating and marriage, but that’s not all assimilation is about. Not a big share of immigration patriots are white nationlists either.

  11. unit472 says:

    Trump isn’t doing nothing on immigration. There was an encouraging story that Mexican police are no longer giving ‘humanitarian’ transit visas to migrant caravans heading towards the US border and that they are stuck at the Mexican border. This was, apparently, the result of Trumps threat to close the border.

    Obviously that got Lopez Obrador’s attention. It won’t stop lone migrants infiltrating through Mexico but it will end the formation of caravans of thousands of women and children which is the real problem as it is hard to deport them once they enter the US. Single male immigrants ( and some now stuck at the migrant camp are from the Congo and Haiti) garner little SJW and media sympathy so can be deported much more easily.

    Anecdotally I notice far fewer arrests of Guatemalans etc for drunken driving here in SW Florida. Apparently the word is out in the tomato and strawberry fields that get caught doing that and you get turned over to ICE for deportation not spend a few days in jail and get released.

    • Replies: @follyofwar
  12. MBlanc46 says:

    Thanks, Mr Derbyshire. We need a bit of good news now and again.

  13. Priss Factor [AKA "Asagirian"] says: • Website

    Soviet tyranny was dogmatic.

    Globo tyranny is just crazy.

  14. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @Fred V. Reed

    Are you the Unz Review columnist Fred Reed who insults en masse but doesn’t respond to commenters?

    If so, can we scratch “too busy” from the potential explanations?

  15. SafeNow says:

    “It’s a tectonic shift”

    Or, as Ariel sings in The Tempest, we have “suffered a sea change.” Oops, so sorry, so immoral of me, for quoting from the traditional Western canon, which now has been “refreshed” into a new and improved version. File the Boeing Max and the PG&E wildfire prevention program into that file. File the fallen Santa Anita Racetrack horses into that file. File landscapers who have a degree in horticulture into that file. File torque wrenches and tightening patterns. File destroyers that get hit by merchant ships. File 250,000 annual deaths caused by medical negligence. I call this new, relaxed-proficiency, relaxed-conscientiousness philosophy “Get it basically okay.” (I wonder where this came from.) This, perhaps more than anything, is our tectonic shift.

    • Replies: @bc
  16. If you ever find yourself out here on Long Island, the Fosters are on me.

    The resilience of this trope is pretty funny when you consider how unpopular Fosters actually is here (in Melbourne anyway). I’ve literally never seen or heard anyone order it, nor have I ever known anyone to nominate it as his favorite beer. I barely even recall it being advertised. The most recent memory of an ad I have is the “Foster’s Cup,” a preseason football competition that ran in the early 1990s.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    , @YetAnotherAnon
  17. bc says:

    Yes. This is what society’s descent will look like–not an apocalyptic event, but the persistent erosion of competence.

  18. @unit472

    Just wondering, unit 472, but are you sure that large migrant caravans are still stuck on the Mexican border? Tucker Carlson has been on the illegal immigration issue almost nightly, and he hasn’t said anything about migrants being stuck for some time. Before the midterms Tucker had stories of Central American migrants being stuck in Tijuana, and how thousands of them camped there were ruining the city. The mayor and local officials were interviewed about the appalling unsanitary conditions. Trump stationed active duty military on the border, though then SecDef Mattis was opposed to it.

    Now, Tucker is saying that more migrants are making it into the US than ever (more than under Obama) and are able to stay indefinitely as they know to bring a child with them (who may not even be theirs). So, both things cannot be true. Also, isn’t it true that active duty military have been pulled away? Some National Guard has been mobilized, but they are no match for active duty soldiers, I think.

    • Replies: @unit472
  19. @Achmed E. Newman

    Derby advocates for “a free self-governing society” yet is sympathetic to Australia’s “mandatory voting” which is enforced by a fine. These ideas are self-evidently contradictory. A free society CANNOT COMPEL its citizens to engage in the voting process or it is NOT FREE! Free people have the right to be left alone. But, if they do choose to vote, then it should be made harder, as our Founding Fathers intended.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
  20. @Schlomo Shekelstein

    I had the same reaction, but just try to find Victoria Bitter outside of Oz!

  21. In parliamentary procedure, when a bill or a motion is “laid on the table,” it means that it will no longer be considered. Perhaps DHS Secretary Nielsen is secretely letting us know that there are no plans for any measures cutting back on legal immigration or significantly impeding invasion.

  22. Antonius says:


    Stating the obvious.

  23. “We want action—clear, decisive action, like your directive the other day to import 30,000 foreigners to do seasonal work—but we want action forAmerican workers, for American sovereignty, for a demographically stable nation to bequeath to our grandchildren.”

    Derby baby, you’ve got to stop!!! You imported and created a Chinese family that is demographically UNSTABLE into the USA. Your grandchildren will be Chinese or black. They will never be American.

    Again, the best way to help the demographic stability of the USA is to move yourself and your Chinese family to Asia.

  24. KenH says:

    E-Verify, birthright citizenship, visa tracking, stop remittances(or at least tax them), … “All of that is on the table.”

    Ole Tuck should have demanded to know who long those things are just going to sit “on the table”. My guess is they’ll still be on the table when election day 2020 comes around and carnival barker Trump will tell us we have to re-elect him so he can exercise those options. Then if by some miracle he wins he’ll just dither and tweet for four more years.

    Trump gets a B+ for rhetoric but a D when it comes to action.

    Australia is lucky to have a man of courage like Fraser Anning. If America had a representative of like courage he would be unceremoniously booted out of the Jewish occupied Cohengress in “free” America. Apostasy to militant multiculturalism is not allowed. Every brand of racial nationalism is permitted except for white nationalism.

    America need to reinstitute the “white America” immigration policy we had up until 1965 when Jewish activism ushered in a “brown America” policy which now delivers one million hostile non-white aliens every year on a “legal” basis and more when you include the various work visa scams, “refugees” and phony asylum seekers.

  25. Realist says:

    What actually divides our two main parties? We know of course that Republicans are the Stupid Party while Democrats are the Evil Party; but what are the substantive issues that really separate them?

    Republicans are nutless and Democrats are brainless. There are no significant differences, both are wings of the Deep State. Any issues that appear to be at odds are to mislead.

  26. Fraser Anning must have the thickest of skins. The amount of abuse he is copping from the despicable Australian SJWs * from the south of his country is off the charts. Yet still he keeps coming. There seems to be a rich seam of reactionary conservatives in rural Australia (from where Tarrant himself sprang from) and it will be interesting to see how many (extremely shy) votes he gets in the anonymous silence of the ballot box.

    * the most hysterical and deranged in the English speaking world with the exception of private school Dubliners.

  27. anonymous[479] • Disclaimer says:

    wwebd said – I drink beer a couple times a week.

    Fosters is reliably good.

    In USA grocery stores they put it next to the Kirins and they usually sell by the can, not by the sixpack, which is good.

    Hey, anytime you want to make fun of Americans for not appreciating good beer, go ahead, but lots of us know a lot about beer.

    Not to derail the thread, but I can tell you so much about bad beer – the iron filings taste in upstate New York cheap beer, the Pizza hut mozzarella trick that Budweiser used for about 40 years (approximately 1975 to 2015, the first year their beer ads at the Superbowl were a flop), the horrible water that Schiltz used, the Milwaukee water in bad Milwaukee beers, the desiccated hops in Coors, the cheap trick of putting lemon peel taste that Texas cheap breweries engage in to cover the cheap yeasty/moldy wheat – all that.

    The Fosters that is sold in the USA has none of those faults.

    Not a beer that can withstand being enjoyed at less that the optimal temperature, but no recurring faults. If an American offers you a Fosters it is a fucking compliment, don’t be a pussy and make fun of the offer.

  28. MEH 0910 says:

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
  29. MEH 0910 says:
    @MEH 0910

  30. @Achmed E. Newman

    Perhaps down under, the major party candidates are well selected too, and there is not much choice but to vote third-party. There is where I DO agree with you, John. There is always that choice, but NO, “you’re throwing away your vote” is the stupidity you hear about that. People have been voting for the lesser of 2 evils and getting evil every time.

    Australia uses instant run-off voting, so you can vote for small, single-issue parties without fear of throwing your vote away. Theoretically, this makes it much easier for small parties to grow into big parties, although it hasn’t really happened yet. The Greens are displacing Labor as the biggest left party in a handful of urban constituencies, and One Nation is threatening to do the same to the Liberal-National coalition (ie conservatives) in a few others on the right. But two-party dominance largely remains.

    It may be of interest to readers here to learn that the Labor candidate for Prime Minister in the 2004 election, Mark Latham, recently joined One Nation.

  31. unit472 says:

    AP story from a couple of days ago. Mexican police used to just wave the caravans through but now are making them apply individually for a transit visa. No doubt the Mexican police can be bribed but the net effect is to stop the caravanistas at the Mexican border and without the safety of numbers and official permission and assistance getting to the US border the numbers will fall as long as Mexico keeps it up.

  32. Svigor says:

    I really enjoyed watching Anning punch that little snot in the face. Perfect way to ruin his video, too: “yeah this is epic watch me get punched in the face twice.”

    I was about to add: “indeed, no-one has to vote at all …” Then I remembered that Australia does in fact have mandatory voting, with a $20 fine if you fail to vote—not a bad idea, in my opinion. [How Compulsory Voting Works: Australians Explain, by Tacey Rychter, NYT, October 22, 2018]

    I prefer our electoral system, which has a sort of mandatory voting, via the electoral vote; those who don’t vote are, in effect, voting to agree with their majority (IOW, electoral votes are powered by population but decided by voters).

  33. anon[871] • Disclaimer says:–Clinton’s decision to use a private email server while serving as Secretary of State was motivated at least in part to circumvent public records laws about official correspondence, a practice gleaned from the previous George W. Bush administration, and therefore one is compelled to deduce that included obscuring the origins of the attack on Libya, which in turn trace back to, among other things, personal financial gain for the Clinton Foundation and its operatives like Sidney Blumenthal. That email scandal, a goldmine for the conspiracist-inclined loons in the Republican base, provided Donald Trump with reams of talking points that were undeniable and gave him an edge when combined with his economic populist and nativist rhetoric. The humanitarian disasters that we have seen occur at home and abroad since Election Day 2016, in other words, are indebted to the Libya disaster, ”

    Let Srteve Bannon,Miller, Trump, Spencer know and let Mr Derbyshire figure this out that Domino Effect was not inbuilt in Communism but in US policies which still have not been corrected repudiated and held accountable.

  34. Anonymous [AKA "Reverend Cailen Cambeul"] says: • Website

    Quote: “You can take issue with Senator Anning’s bluntness, and even with his arguments. I, for example, would take issue with his saying that Australians didn’t vote for mass immigration and weren’t asked.

    “It is true that in Australia, as here and in Britain, all the big old political parties, with various degrees of honesty, promoted mass Third World immigration. It’s also true that there are difficult institutional barriers to getting a new party established.

    “Still, no-one has to vote for the established parties.”

    As you admitted, voting is compulsory in Australia. Further, voting for fake politicians like Mickey Mouse for example, or writing GTFO on a ballot paper is a criminal offence. The other problem is that just about all Australian electoral parties are divided into two camps: Satellites of Liberal (Oz Rep.) or Labor (Oz Dem.) Through the use of preferences, a vote for the satellite is a vote for the Lib/Lab.

    The entire idea of Independents being able to form a bloc to bring about the rise of a government that the majority voted against has only arisen in the last ten years. This has also lead to Independents turning votes over to what their constituents would consider to be the enemy.

    Australians also do not vote for the Prime Minister. Australians vote for a local politician in the House of Reps. Which is modelled on the UK Parliament. If your local rep. gets in, it’s a point towards one of the two, Lib/Lab taking the lead.

    The Australian Senate is modelled on the US Senate.

    So the problem is that Australians simply cannot vote out either of the two mainstream parties. Like Americans, all Australians can do is swap one for the other as both lurch further to the LEFT.

    Referring back to the 1970’s, there was a Prime Minister named Malcolm Fraser of the Liberal – or what in those days was considered to be the Conservative Party. Fraser was elected in a landslide in an attempt by many to stop the imminent death of the White Australia Policy – a massive influx of Vietnamese and other Boat People/Illegal Aliens, international students and non-White immigrants. Fraser later laughed that he was not in any way at all Conservative. Fraser boasted that he was raised in a Jewish family, and it was his ambition to destroy White Australia. <– All of this was available on Wikipedia until some years ago. Now it is considered to be anti-Semitic to tell the truth. You should be able to find reference to it on Malcolm Fraser's Wikipedia page in the page history section … compare old versions.

    As for voting for Fraser Anning and his new party, we can't. Only the people that live in Fraser Anning's electorate can vote for him, and if they vote against him, his party is dead. IF Anning has others join his party, it's the same with them.

    And still, when Anning gives his preferences to the dual party Lib/Lab system, then a vote for Fraser Anning is a vote for Lib/Lab.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  35. dfordoom says: • Website

    So the problem is that Australians simply cannot vote out either of the two mainstream parties.

    Of course they can. They simply choose not to. If enough people vote for a minor party it ceases to be a minor party and becomes a major party. If you can make the right preference deals you can win an election with less than 40% of the vote. Julia Gillard won the 2010 election with 37.99% of the vote.

    But Australians won’t do it. It would require long-term thinking. It would require putting that nation’s interests ahead of selfish personal interests. It would require putting some thought into voting. So they won’t do it.

    Just as Britons won’t vote out either of the two mainstream parties, and Americans won’t vote out either of their two mainstream parties. For the same reasons. Short-sightedness, selfishness and stupidity.

    The horrifying thing about democracy is that you really do get the government you deserve.

  36. @silviosilver

    There’s a ‘proper’ Aussie beer called Coopers, owned by Australians. The bottled Pale Ale is nice stuff and available in the UK.

    Fosters became ‘iconic’ in the UK back in the day because of the Barry McKenzie comic strip in Private Eye magazine and the associated films (see youtube). Here’s a still – he’s arrived in France and is being checked by French Customs.

    Nearly all ‘iconic’ national beers are now owned by giant multinational brewers.

  37. anon[288] • Disclaimer says:

    In Australia, the current America-besotted government is prosecuting two whistle-blowers who revealed that Canberra’s spooks bugged the cabinet meetings of the new government of East Timor for the express purpose of cheating the tiny, impoverished nation out of its proper share of the oil and gas resources in the Timor Sea. Their trial will be held in secret.”

    East Timor should send more people to Australia until the country recants and reorients its course.

  38. Many cross-over voters who embraced Republicans due to their fake championing of reduced immigration were motivated mostly by economics, albeit the fact that minority groups stick together in racist skin-pigmentation factions in workplaces and politics is troublesome, particularly since they are close to being the majority in this nation if grouped together. Since each of the minority-group factions regards its skin-pigmentation brethren as superior to the other minority factions, Democrats may be kidding themselves about rainbow coalitions.

    But cross-over voters do not care about the mechanics of how corrupt, bought-off politicians weave together enough minority voters by pandering to them to keep their jobs at $174k. We care about the impact of immigration on wages, hours and job access. We care about our lack of leverage in a labor market flooded with immigrant laborers, many of whom are able to undercut Americans due to multi pay layers from Uncle Sam for womb-productive sex—for producing little US citizens—while taking jobs in a country where 95 million working-aged citizens are out of the labor force and where the average employed person works only part time.

    We do not need more workers in a part-time / gig economy in which so many citizens are sidelined from the labor market. We need a labor market where work has more value. It never will if employers continue to have access to a multitude of foreign-national job seekers, especially since many of those workers are aided by the US government, which subsidizes their basic living expenses, like groceries and rent that has gone up by 72% since 1995 for the majority of American workers whose wages are not supplemented by government for womb-productive sex.

    Fake Republicans are not calling for an end to the means-tested welfare programs that rig the labor market against millions of US citizens. Fake Republicans support free EBT food, subsidized rent, free electricity, monthly cash assistance and up to $6,431 in yearly child tax credit cash for citizens and noncitizens. Fake Republicans support rigging the labor market for some groups, rewarding citizens and noncitizens for womb-productive sex and part-time or gig work that keeps them under the earned-income limits for means-tested welfare programs.

    Republicans used to be the party that opposed welfare. Then they discovered how welfare helps employers to reduce their labor costs, not just through a welfare-fed immigrant workforce, but through a single-breadwinner-mom workforce.

    Those of us who crossed over to vote for Republicans simply let ourselves be conned by the siren song of a pro-American-worker labor policy that none of the Republicans on the ballot, including Trump, ever supported.

    But there is no alternative on the other side, not when even Bernie Sanders puts skin-pigmentation factions ahead of American workers’ wages, even though American wages have fallen for 40 years concurrent with the massive increase in immigration. Sanders is the closest thing to an old-school FDR Dem that they have, but even he gets down on his hands and knees, bowing down and spouting out the corrupt Neoliberal Uniparty’s talking points on immigration.

    I always regarded wishy-washy independent voters as uniformed people who did not have a comprehensive understanding of the Democratic Party’s platform. They just shifted in the wind, voting on single issues in some cases. Well, a single issue can unveil what a party really stands for, as opposed to what it pretends to stand for.

    I was a loyal Democrat for decades until finally switching over since the immigration issue revealed the fakery of the left side of the Uniparty. There is a big gap between theory and action in the Democratic Party. When your party acts against the key issue that distinguishes them from the “opposite” party, you’re not “informed” when continuing to vote for them, but you are letting them get one over on you.

    Post-FDR, the Democratic Party was supposed to be the party that represented the interests of American workers, not the interests of workers who are Mexican nationals, Indian nationals, Central American nationals, African nationals, etc., etc., etc.

    The Republican Party always represented the interests of business, and I once owned a small business, like many Americans who have been shafted in a rigged labor market that is anti-American-worker, albeit Republicans mostly represent big business. And I knew that. But why was I voting for a pro-labor party that did everything it could to undercut American workers by representing the economic interests of foreign nationals?

    Many cross-over voters have now admitted to ourselves that Republicans just used the issue of immigration to gain power so that they could push through a massive tax cut for the employers of the foreign nationals who have displaced so many American citizens in the labor market. And they’re bragging about it while 95 million American citizens remain out of the labor market, with millions more underemployed.

    I’m not enough of a math person to know whether or not the cross-over voters who have jumped off of the Trump train due to the bold betrayal of American workers are the “Silent Majority” of Trump’s 1% victory margin. Most of those cross-over voters won’t bother to write a multi-paragraph post about it. They’ll just vote for the other side or stay home on voting day.

    There are a few Republicans who have the integrity to stick with American citizens on the issue of reducing mass-scale immigration, but they are not on the ballot, likely for a reason, whereas Trump looked like a real outsider on the surface. He is not. Trump is the Establishment. He’s just a fabulous actor, as some actual actors have noted.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All John Derbyshire Comments via RSS