Return of the ideological wrecking ball - Kevin Rudd

Now that the position of Australian Prime Minister has changed hands from the slow/stupid nation wrecker (Julia Gillard) back to the fast-talking and devious nation wrecker (Kevin Rudd), it's a good time for a reminder of what Kevin Rudd is all about.

We know that 45,000 boat people have arrived since Rudd softened our border-security policies. And while he is wasting billions on boat people, his party has cut billions from defence spending. And we know that his Labor Party can't balance a budget if their life depended on it. But this is fairly typical as far as left-liberal parties go.

Apart from those obvious failings, however, Rudd can appear hard to understand. He presents as an intelligent, articulate, hardworking, friendly, albeit nerdy, bureaucrat. So you can be forgiven for thinking that Rudd is a safe pair of hands to rule the country. But he is not.

Alas, when you get to the heart of the man, you find an ideologically-driven lunatic of the highest order. When it comes to open-border, diversity-loving, transnational-progressive freaks, Rudd leads the pack. Fundamentally, he does not believe in Australia, and if he had his way, he would open our borders to millions of Asians with his grand delusion of an Asia-Pacific Union.

True, Rudd will have learned from his past mistakes e.g. blurting out his desire for a big Australia (in terms of population) and his terrifying "It’s time to build an Asia Pacific Community" speech. But while he may temper his desires, don't expect him to change deep down.

So here are a couple of quotes that get to the heart of the man. You can expect Rudd to maintain the same goals, except that he'll be more subtle and moderate about his grand delusions.

The best description of Rudd comes from a commenter at OzConservative who described Rudd as an ideologically-driven wrecking ball:
Rudd sees himself as the president of the Asia-Pacific Union, rather than the Prime Minister of Australia. So his constituents are Indians as well as Australians. As shocking as that may be, it is the real Kevin Rudd. The public mistakenly views Rudd through the prism of nationalism. But he is not a nationalist, he is a card-carrying globalist. His top-order priorities are regional integration of Australia into Asia, and advancing global governance. Domestic policies are a low-order priority that Rudd engages in to maintain a nationalist facade. Ban Ki-moon enunciated Rudd's core belief: "This is, after all, an era of integration. Regional integration is taking place all over the world". Hence, like the European Union, Rudd declared that Australia and Asia should move towards one superstate by 2020, called the Asia-Pacific Community.

Subsequently, Rudd has worked on two fronts: to weaken our national identity, and to promote regional standards in its place. He is weakening our identity by maximising the transnational flow of people, ideas and business: hence Rudd's record high immigration and foreign student numbers, relaxed foreign ownership, Asia-centric education, relentless free trade agreements, diversifying the military, etc. He is also centralising education, health, law, national security, as a precursor to harmonising with forthcoming regional standards. Climate change was a handy crisis for advancing global governance. The economic stimulus was about shoring up global interdependence and preventing a backslide into protectionism. His entire tenure has been one long gasp.

In contrast, domestic policies are an afterthought, to maintain the facade of nationalism. But Rudd's facade is cracking and the public is worried about: big population choking infrastructure, foreign buyers forcing up housing prices, immigration straining social cohesion, etc. The ETS [emissions trading scheme] back-flip is the biggest crack in Rudd's facade, but it doesn't reveal a hollowness, it reveals a transnational-progressive ideology where the interests of Australia are an afterthought. Rudd has brought the "era of integration" to our hemisphere and the Australian public still mistakenly views him as a nationalist.

When Rudd announced his Asia-Pacific Union, he said: "The purpose is to encourage the development of a genuine and comprehensive sense of community whose habitual operating principle is cooperation". Which means he wants us to become people without identity and without independent thoughts. Hence, to Rudd, the Australian people deserve no more attention than international students. Rudd is an ideologically-driven wrecking ball, devoid of ordinary sensitivities of identity, social cohesion, carrying capacity, infrastructure, etc. He is a mad ideologue and there are going to be a lot more collective gasps, as he dissolves Australia into Asia, until the public wakes up and votes him out.
And here's a reminder of his terrifying It’s time to build an Asia Pacific Community speech:
The European Union of course does not represent an identikit model of what we would seek to develop in the Asia Pacific.

But what we can learn from Europe is this – it is necessary to take the first step.

In the 1950s, sceptics saw European integration as unrealistic.

But most people would now agree that the goal of the visionaries in Europe who sat down in the 1950s and resolved to build prosperity and a common sense of a security community has been achieved.

It is that spirit we need to capture in our hemisphere.

Our special challenge is that we face a region with greater diversity in political systems and economic structures, levels of development, religious beliefs, languages and cultures, than did our counterparts in Europe.

But that should not stop us from thinking big...
So there you go. He does not believe in Australia and he would open our borders to millions of Asians tomorrow. I read one estimate that 20 million Asians would move here under an Asia-Pacific Union. Rudd is barking mad.

Nobody but Rudd and a few fellow lunatics want such open-borders idiocy. But yet he persists as if it's for our own good.

So what's it like inside the head of a man so unhinged from the natural and normal desires of everyday people? What's it like to fight against the natural order of things and bring together disparate people? It's probably something like this (language warning):

File under: man v. nature.

No comments:

Post a Comment