cods wrote: ↑Mon Nov 19, 2018 2:50 pm
Beware the Yellow Peril....in the North....
I think Menzies said it...
It predates Menzies by over half a century, Cods:
Australia
In the late 19th century, Australians desiring a proper country and a white society, feared the Yellow Peril for possession of the continent. The racialist fear of the non-white Asian Other was a thematic preoccupation common to invasion literature novels like The Yellow Wave: A Romance of the Asiatic Invasion of Australia (1895), The Coloured Conquest (1904), The Awakening to China (1909), Fools' Harvest (1939). They usually featured an Asian invasion of the "empty north" of Australia, which was really populated by the Aboriginal Australians, the native non-white Other.[55] In the novel White or Yellow?: A Story of the Race War of A.D. 1908 (1887), William Lane, a journalist and labour leader, believed that a horde of Chinese people legally arrived to Australia overran white society and monopolized the industries important to exploiting the natural resources of the "empty north" of Australia.[55]
In 1910, fear of the Yellow Peril prompted the nativist Australian Natives' Association to create the White Australia badge with which wearers could identify their racial loyalty.[56]
The Yellow Peril was used to justify the White Australia Policy, which excluded brown-skinned peoples of Melanesia from immigration to Australia.
White nation
As Australian invasion literature, White or Yellow? reflects Lane's nationalist racialism and left-wing politics in a future history of Australia under attack by the Yellow Peril. In the near future, British capitalists manipulate the legal system and successfully arrange the mass immigration of Chinese workers to Australia, regardless of the socioeconomic consequences to Australian common folk and their society. The economic, cultural, and sexual conflicts that resulted from the capitalists' manipulation of the economy provoke a white-yellow race war throughout Australia. The racialist representations of Yellow Peril ideology in the narrative of White or Yellow? justify white Australians' killing the Chinese workers as an existential response for physical and economic control of Australia.[34]:26–27 Moreover, the leaders of the labour and trade unions greatly opposed the importation of Chinese workers, whom they portrayed as an economic (low-wage) threat to Australia, and as a moral threat (libertinism) to Christian civilization, which addresses the psychosexual theme of miscegenation (mixing of the races), which is an apolitical call to racial unity among white Australians.[34]:24
Culturally, Asian-invasion novels expressed the white man's sexual fear of voracious Asian sexuality with scenes of a white woman in sexual peril, usually rape or seduction, aided by the sensual and moral release of opium.[55] A white woman who was raped or seduced by a Chinese man had suffered "a fate worse than death". Thus defiled, the woman is a sexual untouchable to other white men.[55] In that moralistic vein, in the 1890s, labour activist and feminist Rose Summerfield voiced the white female sexual fear of the Yellow Peril by warning society of the unnatural lust in the eyes of Chinese men when they looked upon the pulchritude of the white women of Australia.[34]:24
Racial equality thwarted
In 1901, the Australian federal government adopted the White Australia policies, initiated with the Immigration Restriction Act 1901, which generally excluded Asian peoples, especially the Chinese and the Melanesians. Historian C.E.W. Bean said that Australian racialist exclusion was "a vehement effort to maintain a high, Western standard of economy, society, and culture (necessitating, at that stage, however it might be camouflaged, the rigid exclusion of Oriental peoples)."[57] In 1913, the film, Australia Calls (1913) depicted an invasion of Australia by "Mongolians" defeated by ordinary Australians with resistance and guerrilla warfare.[58]
In 1919, at the Paris Peace Conference (28 June 1919), supported by Britain and the US, the Australian Prime Minister, Billy Hughes, vehemently opposed Imperial Japan's recommendation for the inclusion of the Racial Equality Proposal in Article 21 of the Covenant of the League of Nations on 13 February 1919:
The equality of nations being a basic principle of the League of Nations, the High Contracting Parties agree to accord, as soon as possible, to all alien nationals of states, members of the League, equal and just treatment in every respect, making no distinction, either in law or in fact, on account of their race or nationality.[59]
Aware that Britain opposed the formal inclusion of the clause to Article 21 of the Covenant, the conference chairman, US President Woodrow Wilson, prevented de jure racial equality among the nations of the world by unilaterally requiring a unanimous vote by the participant countries. On 11 April 1919, most countries in the conference voted to include a universal clause for racial equality Article 21 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, opposed only by Britain and the US. Moreover, to maintain the White Australian policy, the Australian government sided with Britain in the vote against Japan's clause for racial equality, a defeat in international relations that greatly influenced Imperial Japan to turn from co-operation to confrontation with the West.[60]
[
Source]
they are an inscrutable race.. give almost nothing away.
yet somehow they always manage to come out of top....
I think you mean, "on top", Cods.
Not necessarily so. The Chinese have been for several hundred years "on the bottom" of most engagements with the West. All you're seeing today is a resurgence of the Chinese back to their pre-eminent position. They were, until about the 17th century, the richest and most advanced nation on the Earth.
Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. - Eric Blair
