"The Grand Plan - Asianization of Australia

Race, Place and Power" by Denis McCormack

30 pages Available at cost from the Social Contract Press

1-800-352-4843

This paper argues that Australia's elite developed a long-term plan and strategy to integrate Australia into Asia. This integration was to be pursued at political, economic and cultural-demographic levels. McCormack presents an impressive array of evidence to substantiate his case. The Asianization strategy was adopted by Australia's elite initially without the knowledge or support of the Australian people and, more recently, against the polled opinion of most Australians. The material McCormack assembled documents the growing separation of Australia's managerial elite from the aspirations and values of most Australians over the past thirty years.

It was the British who settled Australia and laid the roots of Australia's culture. Post-1945 migration to Australia was mainly from Britain and other European countries. Today, Australia remains largely a European society in cultural and racial terms. About 80 percent of Australians are people with European ancestors, two percent are the indigenous Aboriginal people, and some ten percent are of Asian ancestry. This last category has expanded rapidly, from a baseline of one percent, since the end of the Vietnam War, when Vietnamese boat people began arriving. In recent years, Asian immigration into Australia has expanded to make up 40-60 percent of yearly intakes.

From the nineteenth century, trade unions, political parties and most Australian people supported racially selective immigration. This support arose from a desire to restrict the inflow of cheap Asian labor in order to support the living standard of the working men and women of Australia and to protect the country's cultural heritage. In 1949, when the Labor Party was in power, Prime Minister Ben Chifley said that any tampering with this policy to secure economic gain for a small affluent minority or by a few impractical sentimentalists would arouse widespread indig-nation. After all, he noted, Australia was only asking for the same right as that recognized and practiced by all other nations, namely the right to decide the composition of its population. In less than fifty years, this stance has been completely overturned and this paper documents proof that the termites were in Chifley's own administration.

McCormack traces the bi-partisan dismantling of Australia's traditionally restrictive immigration policy using the system's own sources. (In passing, he refers to the significance of the year 1965 for both Australian and U.S. immigration policy.) This dismantling involved a certain amount of stealth and deception (now freely admitted) on the part of some bureaucrats, politicians and the reforming activists who worked to change Australia's' immigration policy. In a 1995 speech to the Australian Chinese Forum, the Labor Prime Minister Paul Keating proclaimed his government's Asian vision for Australia. Asia was where Australia's security and prosperity lay, he said; it was where a growing number of Australia's people came from and it was where Australia wanted to be. The Asianization-of-Australia strategy had never before been so clearly enunciated by a political leader. The revolution had indeed begun and it was now writ large on the wall for the Australian public to see.

Over the past twenty years, much of Australia's political and economic elite has been awestruck over the East Asian economic miracle. Great has been the eagerness to attach the Australian economy to the strong economic growth which many East Asian countries have recently enjoyed. The economic integration of Australia into Asia was sought by targeting Asian countries with Australian exports of minerals, energy and farm produce and encouraging Asian investment and Asian tourists into Australia. The current economic meltdown in Asia gives much pause for thought on this strategy. The cultural-demographic integration was to be achieved by promoting the new state religion of multi-culturalism, facilitating Asian immigration into Australia, using Australia's high quality (but cash-strapped) educational system to attract fee-paying Asian students, teaching Asian studies and languages in Australian schools and universities, and fostering cultural exchanges between Australia and East Asian countries.

At the political level - at the urging of foreign affairs bureaucrats, big companies and newspaper editors - Australian politicians kowtowed and cultivated friendly relationships with East Asian leaders. Concentrating virtually all foreign policy efforts on East Asia, they chose to shut their mouths about human rights abuses and environmental vandalism in nearby Asian countries. They initiated joint defense training and military exercises with Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia and nurtured the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum to promote free trade in the region. During the 1980s, armies of government-subsidized Asiacrat thinktanks, including economic, cultural and academic groups, sprang up. All of these groups promoted Australia's integration into Asia.

However, the entry of independent Member of Parliament Pauline Hanson onto Australia's political scene rocked the establishment. In her maiden speech in parliament in 1996, she stated that Australians were in danger of being swamped by Asians. The elite was horrified. Every newspaper in the country attacked her as a racist. While large numbers of Australians flocked to hear her speak, leftist thugs were bused in to disrupt her meetings.

In recent years, several Labor Party politicians have gone on the public record as saying that they do not care if most Australians end up looking Asian as the years pass. Talk about a cultural death wish! The arrogance of these politicians and their contempt for their own people and culture is staggering. Ostensibly the elite's consternation is that Hanson could damage Australia's standing in the Asian countries. Australian journalists have fallen over themselves to get the opinions of dictatorial Asian leaders on Australia's so-called "race debate." In an effort to squeeze money out of the government, educational and tourist bodies have blamed Hanson for damaging their Asia-centered foreign exchange-earning industries.

Two months before Hanson's bombshell speech McCormack's paper was presented, under police protection, to Australia's most prestigious Asiacrat conference, the twentieth anniversary conference of the Asian Studies Association of Australia. To date, this paper is the only document on the history of the attempt to integrate Australia into Asia, which has been placed firmly on the public record. McCormack's paper has been tabled in Australia's federal parliament by Graeme Campbell, independent Member of Parliament and leader of the fledgling nationalist Australia First Party. A copy of the paper (together with a copy of the Winter 1996-97 issue of The Social Contract, Vol. VII, No. 2) has been presented to all federal politicians, including the Prime Minister's office, which requested an extra copy, and to many senior journalists and political commentators. While McCormack has been named in parliament as having contributed to the rise of Pauline Hanson, his arguments on the Asianization strategy have not been challenged by any political or academic commentator. His paper has drawn favorable comment from serious long-term observers of migration into developed countries in the United Kingdom, France, Germany and the United States.

A reflection of McCormack's thesis has come most recently from a senior Singaporean Minister, Information and Arts Minister George Yeo, who is also the Second Minister for Trade and Industry. Questioned by a journalist about the Hanson factor, Yeo said that he was confident that Australia would become more and more a multi-racial society. The Asianization of Australia, he said, enjoys a broad consensus in Australian society, especially among members of the political and economic establishment. Yeo commented that the recent brouhaha over immigration into Australia was to be expected because it was not possible for such a sweeping reorientation of Australia toward East Asia to be achieved without intense domestic debate and minor social upheavals. In fact, he said, he was surprised this uproar had not taken place earlier. Yeo appears unaware that critics of a massively unpopular immigration program have long been suppressed and denounced as dissident racist scum by Australia's elite. McCormack's paper is part of the rising tide of democratic revolt against this suppression. TSC