Pandering Lies will not help the Refugee Situation

We are all appalled by the news of Islamic terror attacks in Britain, Australia and elsewhere However, is it as simplistic as Douglas Murray “Why Australia needs to stand firm and protect its borders” like us to believe. For many decades we have had Muslims migrating to Britain, the EU, United States and even Australia and yet the terror attacks and the hijacking of the 70s were not in the name of Allah. The Dawson’s field hijacking was committed by the PFPLA (Popular Front for Liberation of Palestine). The PFPLA was not even religious! They are a secular Marxist-Leninist organisation. In the 80s we have Al-Qaeda which was form as a result of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Even the 9/11 attack on America has more to do with America’s entry into the first Gulf War because of Saddam Hussein invasion of Kuwait. If Murray is fully honest with the facts than he would acknowledge the examples of attacks that he raised only appeared with the rise of ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) in 2014. Even ISIS claim of link to Islam would have to be questioned given that ISIS leaders are entirely former Iraqi military and intelligence officers. More importantly they were members of Saddam Hussein’s Ba’ath government. The Ba’ath party is based on Arabic nationalism and its ideology is secular. Another Australian columnist David Kilcullen pointed out that there would be on ISIS if not for the Second Gulf War.

So Mr Murray, please stop pandering your baseless extremist views to attack the UN’s attempt to solved the increasingly urgent need to save millions of refugees. Closing our doors to the dire situation will not improve our safety. More importantly, we need to help front line nations like Jordan and Lebanon where already overcrowded refugee camps are being made to take more while the brutal dictator Bashar al-Assad continue to massacre his own people.  If UN cannot help countries like Jordan and Lebanon then the refuges problem will get much worse and it will make the current situation like a walk in the park.

Progress was not built on walls

Currently in the cinema is the movie “The Great Wall” starting Matt Damon. The movie is about a European mercenary group, while searching for gun powder, ended up joining forces with Chinese soldiers fighting alien monsters on the famed Great Wall of China. Fighting alien monsters on the Great Wall is certainly the stuff of Science Fiction but the Great Wall is very real and has over two thousand years of history. The wall was built to keep various nomadic groups from entering China. The wall had been rebuilt many times, the version we see today is from the Ming dynasty (1388-1644). Towards the end of the Ming dynasty the Great Wall failed to defend China from being over taken by foreign invaders. In the 14th century, the new Ming dynasty had sought to strengthen the Great Wall so as to keep out the Mongolian tribes from Northern China. By the 17th century the Ming began to face pressure from the Manchus. In 1644, the Ming general Wu Sangui opened the gates of the Great Wall thus enabling the Manchus to march onto the capital at Beijing. Any wall, no matter how strong, can be undermined by just one single traitor. In the case of Wu, he and his frontier garrison was sandwiched between the Manchus and Chinese rebels intended on bring down what remain of the Ming dynasty. Wu chose the Manchus and this event heralded the start of the last dynasty of China – the Qing dynasty.

The Ming dynasty lasted three centuries and for a significant portion of those 300 years, the Ming emperors poured great resources onto the rebuilding and the maintenance of the Great Wall. There is no doubt that the emperor’s mandate from heaven hinged very much on his ability to protect his empire and ensure continued prosperity for his subjects. But was the Great Wall the only solution available to the Ming emperors? The return of the once British colony of Hong Kong to mainland China is often a reminder of the backward and chaotic world of the Qing dynasty. And yet it was the Qing reformer Liang Qichao that reminded the world of the long forgotten Chinese explorer Zheng He. Admiral Zheng He, under the sponsorship of the Yongle Emperor, made expeditions to Brunei, Java, Thailand, India, the Horn of Africa, and Arabia. According to Wikipedia his first expedition consisted of more than 300 ships carrying more than 28000 crewmen. Zeng He commanded seven expeditions before the expeditions were stopped by Xuande Emperor (Yongle Emperor’s grandson). One has to wonder what China would be like today if Xuande chose to continue his grandfather policy. Instead of an insular Ming dynasty that hid behind the Great Wall, the Ming could have created a second silk road through naval power. Such a corridor would not only exchange goods but also ideas that could have benefited China and beyond.

Sadly the Ming dynasty were not the only ones who believe that shutting out the world is the only way to protect ones culture and prosperity. The Qing dynasty was to repeat the same mistake in setting up the Canton System to restrict trade with foreigners.  Yet out of this backward looking decision the British brought about the colony of Hong Kong. Today with China being the world’s economic engine it is easy to forget that for several decades many on the mainland look enviously at Hong Kong economic growth. All this only changed in the late 1980s when Deng Xiaoping turnaround Mao’s economic disasters and open up China.

Modern day Japan with her efficient Shinkansen (bullet train) also had her experiment with close borders and trade barriers. In the late 16th century, Japanese contact with Europeans has brought about new goods, new technologies and ideas (Christianity). By the late 17th century a significant portion of the population of Kyoto (Japan ancient capital) had converted to Christianity. The scale of this conversion is even more amazing when one see the enormous number Buddhist temples in Kyoto today.  This exchange was even encouraged by the then leader of Japan Oda Nobunaga. However Nobunaga’s successor Toyotomi Hideyoshi was suspicious of the Europeans and the Sakoku Edict was put in place[i]. The edict first decree forbids (violators are executed) Japanese from leaving Japan and forbids (violators are executed) Europeans from entering Japan. The second decree forbids Catholicism and the third decree severely restricts trade with foreigners.

Have the world learn anything from these historical withdraw into isolationism?

Mexican wall will only bring down North America. It will make America Great-ly stupid

---

[i] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sakoku_Edict_of_1635

We need dreamers - La La Land - A Review

Went to watch La La Land (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_La_Land_(film)) with Christine. The movie the uses the term "La La Land" for two things. Firstly LA is short for Los Angeles and secondly we often say someone is is living in La La Land to say that he or she is a dreamer.
The two main characters of this film certainly seems like dreamers. On the one hand we have Seb the jazz musician who wants his own jazz club in the "classical" jazz style but he is way behind in his bills. On the other hand we have Mia who is an aspiring actor who keeps getting knocked back.

The movie starts in what seems like a boring traffic jam scene somewhere in LA the audience is left breathless when driver after driver came out of their cars to start singing and dancing in the middle of the traffic. The whole movie is very visual, Emma Stone (Mia) wears brightly colourful clothing and one can't help but remind us of famous musicals from the 50s like Gene Kelly dancing in the rain. We see Seb and Mir breaking doing their tap dancing moves!

One of these dancing scenes occurs when Seb takes Mia out on their first date which somehow ended in the LA Griffith Observatory. They dance round and round the Obervatory's Focault pendulum. From the Focault pendulum the couple ended up in the planetarium where the they started rising up into the sky and the starts  almost like Mary Poppins. Were we supposed to see this as another reminder that we are watching a pair of dreamers in love?

The theme song "City of Stars" talks more of dreaming but now we don't dream alone.

Sebastian's Verse: Ryan Gosling & Emma Stone]
City of stars
Are you shining just for me?
City of stars
There's so much that I can't seeWho knows?
I felt it from the first embrace I shared with you
That now our dreamsThey've finally come true
[Mia's Verse: Emma Or Ryan  Gosling]
City of stars 
Just one thing everybody wants
There in the bars
And through the smokescreen of the crowded restaurantsIt's loveYes,
 all we're looking for is love from someone else
A rush
A glance
A touch
A dance


Well you will need to go and watch it and see if you too is a dreamer!

Advocacy 2016

2016 must be one of the worst year in terms of world politics and democracy. IS (Islamic State) has been waging conventional and unconventional warfare against the West since 2014. To even call it the Islamic State is giving legitimacy that it doesn't deserve. Nevertheless we are now stuck with the label. We shouldn't be surprised that the political pendulum has swing to the right. Starting BREXIT, our own federal election and then the election of Trump as the incoming president of the world's most powerful country - the United States. Clearly a large number of people in the West believe that they only safe if they can regain what they feel is the status quote.

In January, I suggest that the only way to Peace in Iraq is for Sunnis and Shite to work together

In Feb of 2016 my response to Dennis Atkins article

A letter in March 2016 on ISIS

Just like clock work, we have Pauline Hanson rolling out the new (but not improved) One Nation. They gained 4 seats in the Australian Senate. Don't be fooled by the number. Australian senators are voted into the upper house through proportional representation. It is not as if there is a now majority of people wanting to vote them. You only need 14.3% of the state vote to be a senator. And thanks to Malcom Turnbull, we had a double dissolution election which mean all senate seats were up for grab and each senator only needs 7% and not 14% to get in.

On Saturday 19/11/2016, the Courier Mail in their Saturday colour magazine made a great deal about how One Nation is going to be threat to the major party in the next Queensland State election. Nothing like a bit controversy to sell newspaper. Here is what I wrote to the editor:

  

But we cannot just tell the truth about the Australian Politics in light what  I feel is the almost irrational move to make controversy leader. Apparently, One Nation supporters like way that Pauline Hanson say what they want to say but are too afraid to say because of political correctness. Political correctness and self censorship only exists because we are not willing to try to know the truth through better understanding. This is something that Auntie Jean (an Australian indigenous elder) tells me. 

You can understand why Australians are so upset, especially when one sense that our leaders care less (by the way that includes One Nation, see their infighting). Take for example, the numerous high rise that are being constructed in the inner suburb of Brisbane. Has any actually explain the LNP dominated Brisbane City Council (BCC) that Brisbane is not an Asian city and that the BBC don't have to do their bit choke us all to death! And so I wrote a letter to the Westside News. They are great because they combined my letter with others who have similar concern. Really the BCC really needs a kick up its backside.

Finally for the end of 2016, I am able to use the idea of Richard Gibson (the principle of Brisbane School of Theology) sermon in St Andrews. Richard basically argued that we can't stop baby Jesus from growing into Jesus the man. The really cool bit is that my letter got published (the edited version). Even cooler is the fact that Leahy seems to have taken on my theme about raining peace. Well I hope has (on the opposite page).

Leahy's cartoon can be seen here.

https://www.facebook.com/leahycartoons/photos/a.10150656674687688.390716.321732052687/10154182759747688/?type=1&theater

Section 18C, Free Speech and Judeo-Christian Heritage

Politicians clambering to water down section 18c of the racial discrimination act needs to understand that the right to free speech is not boundless. This is clearly seen in our parliamentary debates. The role of the parliamentary speaker is to ensure that members of parliament exercise their rights to free speech in a way that honours the parliament and all Australians for whom her members ultimately serve. In addition, the saying: “play the ball and not the man” is universally accepted to imply that free speech is never meant to be a free for all.

This short essay raises two questions: Can we exercise free speech without reference to history and our responsibilities to our fellow Australians? How should free speech be exercised in light of our Judeo-Christian heritage?

In the recent Queensland University of Technology (QUT) discrimination case: One of the student involved, Alex Wood, is supposed to have complained on Facebook that QUT (is) stopping segregation with segregation. Presumably Wood tried to say that the preferential treatment given to indigenous students is a form of discrimination against non-indigenous Australians. The three QUT students involved do not seem to understand that the general public actually practice “positive” decimation. Australian society’s treatment of disabled Australians is an example of positive discrimination. If these three students were to be denied access to a disable parking at QUT, would they still be complaining about discrimination? They would not because they would immediately recognise that disabled Australians are disadvantaged. Are these students, their legal representatives and the judge (judge Jarret) in the initial trial even aware of the plight of indigenous Australians? Are they not aware that indigenous Australians have a much lower life expectancy than the average Australians? Are these students not aware of Australia’s poor treatment of indigenous Australians? If they are then is it not reasonable to expect them to be careful in how they exercise their rights to free speech on Facebook? Is it not reasonable for them to have some empathy for indigenous Australians and therefore defer their rights to access QUT’s computers designated for people less fortunate than them? 

If these students, their legal representatives and judge Jarret are not aware of the plight of our indigenous Australians then should they not be? George Santayana said "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it”. It seems that Santayana is right; we are no longer telling the next generation about some of the unsavoury parts of our history? White washing our history does not help anyone. A functioning democracy requires citizens who not only are aware of their rights but who are also willing to excise their rights within the context of their responsibilities to their fellow Australians.

Freedom of speech and many rights that we now take for granted actually originated from the Magna Carta. Lord Denning described the Carta as the greatest constitutional document of all times. Moreover, he argued that it is the foundation of the freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the despot.  2015 was the 800th anniversary of the founding of the Magna Carta. In that year, Thomas Andrew of the Theos think tank wrote “The Church and the Charter: Christianity and the forgotten roots of the Magna Carta”. Andrew wrote: “without the support of the Church, and without the theological developments which provided the Magna Carta’s authors with their intellectual framework, it is doubtful whether 2015 would be remembered as the 800th anniversary  …” If the Magna Carta is so closely linked to our Judeo-Christian heritage then should we not exercise our rights to free speech that is consistent with the same heritage. The rights to free speech empower those under oppression to speak out against their oppressors. In the QUT discrimination case, it seems free speech has (perhaps by ignorance) become a tool to distort history and to perpetuate old racist attitude. How then are we exercising free speech in a way that is consistent to our Judeo-Christian heritage? Or in common vernacular, have those QUT students, their legal advisors and even Judge Jarret given Indigenous Australians a fair go?

Finally as we approach Christmas, we need to remember that Jesus was born in a manger and not a palace and did not grasp on to his rights as the Son of God but instead he gave away his privileges so as to server all mankind. 

Can Disruptive Technologies Change the way we see Road Safety?

Wikipedia describes disruptive innovation as an innovation that creates a new market and value network that eventually disrupts an existing market and value network, displacing established market leading firms, products and alliances. It is therefore easy to see why the taxi industry has such a dislike for Uber.  Aside from the taxi industry disruptive technology might have even more far reaching impact. The Committee for Economic Development of Australia predicts that up to 5 million jobs are likely to be automated by 2030. Disruptive technologies have certainly a very large negative impact on the taxi industry but could disruptive technology actually have benefit for the general Australian public? Could it even change entrenched attitude?

On the 21st of July, I was riding my bicycle on my daily commute from work to home. Part of my home commute involved riding along Benson St footpath (marked with bicycle symbols) between Archer St and Glen Rd in Toowong. Unlike the now much improved Coronation Dr bikeway, this bicycle-symbol laden footpath is interrupt by no less than half a dozen driveways. During peak hours pedestrians, cyclists and cars (leaving and entering driveways) compete for this narrow footpath. On this day, as I approach one of the many driveways, I was suddenly cut off by car a moving very fast into the driveway that I was about to cross. I jammed hard on my brakes and thank God because I was only inches away from smashing into side of this car. Far from apologising, the driver defiantly asked why I was on the footpath. His wiser wife quickly corrected him and pointed out the bike symbols on the footpath. Initially I was upset that I didn’t see the car’s flashing indicator. Did I pay enough attention? The truth only became apparent when I review the video recorded on my helmet mounted video camera (The Contour Roam3). The driver had driven across three lanes traffic in order drive into the driveway that I was about to cross. Another word there was nothing wrong with my peripheral vision. My camera has a wide angle (170 degrees) lens enabling it to pick up objects outside of my peripheral vision.

In August, I came into contact with Jasmin Lill from Quest Community News. I sent her the youtube link to my video and she interviewed me. Subsequently her article was published in the Westside News. The story also appeared on the Courier Mail facebook page. I was very grateful that my dangerous encounter turned out for the good. I was able to explain to Jasmin the threat those driveways posed to both pedestrians and cyclists alike.  Furthermore the so-called bikeway from the Regatta City Cat terminal to the University of Queensland (St Lucia campus) is both dangerous and difficult to ride for the average university students. The Brisbane City Council Active Transport Chair may claim that most of the distance between the city and St Lucia are covered by off-road facilities. The reality is that a significant portion is either too dangerous or too steep for the average cyclists.

Many of the comments on my youtubevideo are supportive but some still hold on to entrenched bias against cyclists. The irony is that cycling could potentially save Australia’s health care system. Recently University of Queensland researchers found the link between physical activity and chronic health conditions. The researchers recommended the equivalent of about 1.75 hours of running a week is needed to stay healthy. How many of us spend that much time in the gym? And yet, I am already doing close to 5 hours of exercises by simply riding to and from work.

 While the struggle for safe cycling is ongoing. The use of helmet mounted camera is to me the disruptive technology that Australia need to shake up the reckless attitude we have to road safety. In particular, the cyclist finally has the ability to show the hostile and irresponsible attitude that many motorists show towards cyclists. No longer can motorists use aggressive manoeuvre to threaten cyclists. With Gopro style cameras being so widely available such reckless behaviour will be exposed. Past technologies such as speed camera have had little effect on road safety but the combination of helmet-mounted camera, social media as well as technology savvy journalists could be the game changer to improving road safety but the final piece of the puzzle – the authorities need to get on board. As the famous Time Lord (Doctor Who) once said: No one is going to died today!

The politics of blame

Like many Queenslanders, I was shocked when Liberal Party state president Bob Carroll announced last month that he would direct preferences to Pauline Hanson’s One Nation ahead of Labor. But nothing prepared me for the supposed high support that One Nation has in regional areas such as Gympie and Hervey Bay.
One wonders whether regional voters understand what One Nation really stands for and what the true impact on regional Australia would be if its members should gain office.
In September 1996, Hanson shot to fame through her attack on Asian Australians and Australia’s multicultural policy. In her maiden speech to Parliament, she said: ‘Immigration and multiculturalism are issues the Government is trying to address but for far too long ordinary Australians have been kept out of any debate by the major parties. I and most Australians want our immigration policy reviewed and that of multiculturalism abolished. I believe we are in danger of being swamped by Asians.’
Like many on the far-right, Hanson and One Nation attack multiculturalism for favouring migrants over ‘ordinary’ Australians and for being divisive.
The previous government has been attacked for having high immigration at a time of high unemployment but the criticism ignores many studies which show that from increasing unemployment, immigration can have a positive effect on employment opportunities.
One has to look no further than Gympie for record unemployment rates, particularly among the young Gympie’s high support of One Nation implies that the residents have swallowed the line that migrants and multiculturalism are the cause of all their problems.
What right-wing groups such as One Nation have failed to explain to voters is the true reason for their suffering. Are Asian immigrants to be blamed for the closure of the local bank, Australia Post, employment agency or Medicare office? Are Asian immigrants behind the conservative Government’s competition policies, which have seen the downsizing of government services?
The pain caused by globalisation cannot be solved by attacks on immigrants and yet it seems that John Howard’s government has been rather slow to defend minority groups such as Australians of Asian background. Could it be that Howard’s government hopes it can continue its conservative policies unhindered while the immigrant community bears the blame for Australia’s unemployed?
Professor James Jupp of the Australian National University listed the dimensions of multiculturalism as:

• The right of all Australians to express and share their individual cultural heritage, including their language and religion.
• The right of all Australians to equality of treatment and opportunity and the removal of barriers of race, ethnicity, culture, religion, gender or place of birth.
• The need to maintain, develop and utilise effectively the skills and talents of all Australians, regardless of background.

Multiculturalism is limited in that it is based on the premise that all Australians should have an overriding and unifying commitment to Australia’s interests and future and requires all Australians to accept the basic structures and principles of Australian society.
It also imposes obligations as well as conferring rights - the right to express one’s own culture and beliefs involves a reciprocal responsibility to accept the rights of others to express their views and values. Hanson ignores such principles and makes a simple-minded comparison to Ireland and Bosnia as reasons for opposing a multicultural Australia.
The residents of Gympie, Hervey Bay and other regional areas must ask themselves whether attacking Australians of Asian background is the only policy that One Nation has for countering the effect of globalisation and whether attacking Australians of Asian background will solve Gympie’s unemployment.
Voters should be aware that the politics of blame is far more divisive than any policy currently in place, spreading swiftly to all sections of the community. Arguments which separate Australians and pit them against one another can have terrible results.
Without the migrant community, One Nation will simply exploit the division between urban and regional Australia, which could result in urban Australians turning against regional communities because of misconceived notions of wealth and mismanagement within farming and regional communities.
The resounding vote for peace in Northern Ireland shows that even once bitter enemies, the Catholics and the Protestants, can live together. If there can be unity in Northern Ireland, why not in Australia?

Published in The Courier Mail, 27th May 1998

by Anthony Lee Australian Democrats (Asian) candidate for the state seat of South Brisbane.