After seismic waves of right wing populism have swept across the Western world, now appears a good time to replicate the same here.
So while One Nation has experienced a controversy- laden rise in the polls, the time has come more generally for Australian people and politicians alike to put their own citizens first, and for an ‘Australia First’ ideology to dominate our cultural landscape.
But, as we are told frequently by the establishment status quo, shouldn’t enhanced intercultural relations be preferred to the nationalistic mantra of ‘Australia First’?
Undoubtedly, technological developments and trends have been an overwhelming force for good, in allowing for collaboration with others across the world in previously unfathomable ways. Arguments (albeit flimsy), could be made to suggest that further dialogue amongst different parts of the world, has made the world safer and less prone to conflict.
But my pushes for Australia to regain its patriotic tendencies in spite of globalism, are not tied with an effort to turn back the hands of time.
Instead, I wish for Australia to seek a different path which accommodates for technological and futuristic developments, while also acts to preserve more traditional boundaries along ethnic, cultural and national lines.
However, after centuries of human activity culminating in unprecedented globalization and interconnectedness , why should we now alter this historic route and pursue ‘Australia First’?
Shouldn’t we all become ‘citizens of the world’ and enmesh ourselves under a single banner?
Contrary to this thinking which until recently was the relatively unquestioned orthodoxy of the Western world, I believe all Australians, whether they be in positions of great political power, or are humble bloggers such as myself, should move to put their fellow Australians first.
Whether this be in regards to issues of culture, entitlements, immigration, trade or foreign policy, we should move to assist Australian people first given our shared cultural bond.
A globalist might consider such sentiment akin to close- mindedness, ignorance and bigotry.
But the truth is very different.
In reality, ‘Australia First’, is akin to aiding a family member first during times of emergency, in place of helping a stranger.
Quite clearly, most ordinary people possess some altruistic characteristics, and if we saw a stranger facing life- threatening circumstances, we would likely move to offer assistance.
But if the average person had to choose between saving a complete stranger and a family member, with whom he shared with a common ancestry as well as existing emotional and historical connections, this person would likely help his family member first.
This seems like obvious reasoning when expanded to the national level, but instead when we think of people in need, our consciences often lead us to consider the hardships faced by others around the world.
Nevertheless, once we understand the logic behind our intrinsic desires to care for family members and friends first, we are inevitably lead upon a patriotic course.
Our country is fortunate in comparison to others, but still possesses many problems. So why not improve our own country first?
Likewise,’Australia First’, is a means of preserving the greatest country in the world.
Whether it be Australia’s beaches and open spaces, tolerance, economic wellbeing, British past, democratic traditions, peaceful history, or our relaxed, straightforward culture, this country appears to be the best on Earth.
Sure, Americans, Brits, or Norwegian people might offer alternative arguments as to why their country is ‘the greatest’, but the mere fact that hundreds of thousands of people across the world flock to Australia every year, is testament to our nation’s tremendous character and spirit.
So as Australia is a beacon of light and prosperity for others to emulate, wouldn’t it make sense to preserve the great place that already exists, by putting ‘Australia First’?
The nature of our political system also leads to supporting an ‘Australia First’ mandate.
As in Australia, whether it be in local, state or federal elections, only Australian citizens are permitted to vote.
There are no votes cast by Indonesians, Indians or Africans, as instead politicians at all levels are elected exclusively via the will of the Australian people.
Obviously, if someone wants to use public office to further the interests of those overseas, they are within their constitutional rights to do so.
But the purpose of our political system is for politicians to represent the interests of the Australian people.
This is something that has always befuddled me when democratically elected politicians have advocated for policies which markedly harm the Australian people.
Like when the Australian Greens brazenly diminish the importance of background checks on illegal immigrants, or when calls to restrict immigration of Syrian refugees is immediately rejected as being Islamophobic, when such policies carry substance in reality.
As while Australia should always keep an open mind to the world, we should never be ashamed nor deterred, to place the interests of our own before those of outsiders.