OZ ‘s Identity and Migration

I was thinking of writing about the hole in the sky and I reckon lots will be writing in on that as well. So I decide on a sensitive topic that is real and still bothers me.

Personally, this is my two cents worth based on my personal observations during my educational stay in Australia. And this is also the reason I withdrew my application halfway through my permanent residency in Australia after much careful deliberations.

What constitute the Identity of Australia? Should Australia be a cohesive Multicultural society? Or should Australia suspend its identity of being apart of Asia for political-economic sake but wallows in its self-fulfilling prophesy of rejecting an Asian-tic people and its influence (Asianization) citing erosion of OZ’s identity as an explanation? Namely, the National Republicans.

People get deluded into blaming the “Asian” for bottle-necking the demographic of OZ population. They are unaware such tool as a propaganda is one of the easiest way to garner political support for a given group. Through steady blaming and consistently channeled hatred at descriptive characteristics of a given group. It is not uncommon, as we seen first hand how Hitler does it during political rally during his speech to fan emotions for prejudiced support. Common laymen are easily susceptible to stereotyping and attributing behavioral qualities that in truth varies from individual to individual. Such a political strategy is a rather cheap shot that is often lost in the watering down of what constitute “Asian” or “Asian-ness”.

If we adopt the late Edward W. Said’s “Orientalism” and Benedict Anderson’s “Imagined community” perspective, we might even understand better that Asia is “South-east” only relative to enthnocetricism. The master and servants’ servitude continues its new saga from the hypocrisy of US treatment of Indians to the apartheid of South Africa. The trilogy should rightly be so of how the aboriginal are marginalized – they are biased towards unemployment when there the law states equal wages for Australian with an “Aboriginal” tag. So much for an Australian being the new European country allowing colonization and eugenics policy on its own.

The solution I proposed is a system of migration based on meritocracy with two blind eyes cast on racism, sexism, nationalism and ethnicities. The selective criteria is purely based on merits, free from corruptions and does not discriminate an individual based on his or her nationality, sex group, sexuality orientation(s), race(s) and ethnicities. This is a system built to control and “filter” migration. For instance, not everyone is allowed migration as in, preferences are given to those who merits themselves to do so. They are able to contribute with skills or talents of some sort to the overall well being of the country as an individual. They are economically sound and able to finance or invest in business that generate employments and churn out products with export potential. Socially and culturally, they have a given set of values that can contribute to moral health without contradicting the political and social stability of the country.

I wish Australia well and decide not to settle there as a second-class citizen, where the rightful first class Aboriginals Australians are not even first-class citizen. I’ve since decided at a place built on meritocracy and equality (hierarchical status almost minimal) where an individual with talent will shine through sheer hard work. It is not an American dream; it is reality in an Asian country they label as a “Fine City”. And William Gibson rightfully quotes it as “Disneyland with a Death Penalty”. And where William is from, it is likely to be a place where the sentence is past, and they like to hold on to that right.