|
|
|
| Hate only leads to division, instability, and the erosion of national unity. |
** Hatred does not lead to nation-building, but rather to divisions, instability, and the undermining of national unity.
|
Hate only leads to division, instability, and the erosion of national unity.
18 July 2026
(See translation in Arabic section)
Sydney-Middle East Times Int'l: When calls reminiscent of the "White Australia" policy resurface in Australia, it is no longer a mere passing political statement or a new attempt to attract voters. It becomes a serious warning that threatens the very foundations upon which modern Australia was built: equality, multiculturalism, and respect for human dignity regardless of origin, religion, or skin color.
The statements made by One Nation leader Senator Pauline Hanson during a program with the far-right British activist Tommy Robinson have revived a discourse that Australians believed their country had moved beyond decades ago. Hanson linked immigration problems to the abolition of the "White Australia" policy, which was imposed after the formation of the Australian Federation in 1901 to restrict non-European immigration before being finally dismantled in the 1970s.
Invoking that racist policy, whether directly or indirectly, cannot be considered mere nostalgia for a bygone era, because that era was fundamentally based on discrimination, exclusion, and the preferential treatment of one group of people over another. Furthermore, blaming immigrants, Muslims, and Africans for social and economic problems opens the door to turning entire groups of citizens into targets of suspicion, hatred, and incitement.
This is precisely what compels us to recall what happened, and continues to happen, in several Middle Eastern countries. Major divisions did not always begin with wars or weapons; often, they began with an inflammatory word, a sectarian speech, or the accusation that a group was alien to the nation or less loyal than others. These words then escalated into social rupture, the rupture into fear, and the fear into conflict, before the people awoke to find their countries torn apart, their institutions collapsed, and their societies devoid of self-confidence.
Lebanon, for example, has long suffered from rhetoric that divided the Lebanese along sectarian, regional, and narrow identities. Whenever a voice rises claiming a monopoly on patriotism, or classifying some citizens as more authentic than others, the state weakens and sectarianism advances. The result has been a protracted civil war, displacement, and collapse for which the Lebanese continue to pay the price today.
In Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and elsewhere, sectarian and nationalist hate speech has played a fundamental role in tearing societies apart. Citizens are no longer seen as partners in the nation, but rather as Sunni, Shia, Christian, Kurdish, Arab, or belonging to a specific tribe or region. When a unifying national identity weakens, violence becomes easier, and the division of the country and the incitement of strife become viable projects.
Therefore, what is being said today in Australia should not be taken lightly. Australia is not automatically immune to division. Its strength does not stem solely from its geography or economy, but from its ability to bring together people from diverse cultures and religions under the umbrella of citizenship and the rule of law.
Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke clearly expressed the dangers of advocating a return to the concept of "White Australia," emphasizing that loving Australia means loving it as it is today, not clinging to a distorted image of a country where citizens turn on each other and lose the capacity for empathy and mutual respect.
His analogy of society to an orchestra was highly significant, as he stated that no orchestra can be found where all instruments are the same. Beauty does not arise from a single sound, but from the harmony of different voices. Similarly, Australian society's strength does not come from eliminating difference, but from organizing it within a legal and ethical framework that protects everyone.
The claim that some immigrants came to the country to exploit the welfare system, or that Muslims have children using taxpayers' money, is an unfair and irresponsible generalization. While there may be instances of abuse or excessive reliance on aid in every society, these do not justify stigmatizing or judging millions of people based on their religion or origin.
Immigrants from all nationalities have contributed to building Australia, working in factories, hospitals, schools, farms, the construction sector, and businesses. Members of Muslim, Arab, African, and Asian communities have made significant contributions to the economy, culture, scientific research, and public services.
It is undeniable that Australia faces real challenges related to immigration, integration, housing, and the strain on public services. Politicians have the right to discuss these issues, and governments have a duty to develop well-considered and fair immigration policies, ensuring respect for laws, language, and democratic values. However, there is a significant difference between responsible policy discussions and scapegoating immigrants and exploiting fear of them for electoral gain.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, in announcing the government's response to the report on combating Islamophobia, emphasized that hatred directed against any group harms the entire Australian community, and that diversity is one of the country's greatest strengths.
This is not merely a political statement, but a fundamental truth. When a Muslim is subjected to hatred because of their religion, an Asian because of their appearance, an African because of their skin color, or a Jew because of their identity, the loser is not just the victim, but the entire society, because fear begins with one group and then spreads to others. Confronting Islamophobia or racism does not mean suppressing criticism or restricting freedom of expression. Rather, it means distinguishing between legitimate criticism and incitement, between discussing ideas and insulting people, and between objecting to immigration policies and implicitly calling for the categorization of citizens based on their ethnicity and religion.
The experiences of the Middle East have taught us that nations do not collapse suddenly. The problem begins when a society becomes accustomed to hearing the language of exclusion, then accepts discrimination, then remains silent about injustice, until hatred becomes part of public life.
Therefore, Australia must not allow the mistakes of the past to be repeated, mistakes for which others paid with blood, destruction, and displacement. A return to the slogans of "White Australia" is not a return to a better time, but a regression to an era built on discrimination and injustice.
The Australia we know today is not a country of one race or one religion. It is a homeland for equal citizens, united by law and a shared future. Protecting this homeland is not achieved by excluding some of its people, but by protecting their unity and dignity, and by confronting all rhetoric that attempts to sow doubt and hatred among them.
Hatred does not build a nation, protect borders, provide jobs, or solve housing crises. It only produces division, instability, and the erosion of national unity. Anyone who wants to know where this kind of rhetoric can lead need only look at the bitter experiences of the Middle East, where tragedies began with small slogans and ended with devastated homelands. |
|
|
|
|
|
.jpg)
