Tim Soutphommasane is Australia’s unwanted, un-needed, and unwelcome Race Discrimination Commissioner. Born in France of Laotian parents, this clammy fraud rakes in $300K as a Rudd Government appointee. His job, if it HAS any meaning, is to ear-bash Australians about being “racist”, and “too White”. He has the non-White privilege to hold this title and its remuneration until 2018, by which time he will hopefully meet with a serious accident involving an airplane propeller and a radioactive suppository.
As of today, 29/07/2016, this podgy mixed-race gerbil along with globalist Westpac CEO Brian Hartzer launch ‘Leading for Change’, which is a program designed to sack Whitey from his own gig. And the best reasons they can come up with for this act of ethnic displacement is, “better financial performance”. Yes, it supposedly makes good business sense to not have Whites around in their own country, which might fly in the face of historical and empirical truths, but this isn’t about monetary-acquisition, any more than it pertains to spelunking.
Their template for White Displacement comes at a time where Europe is being deliberately flooded with millions of black and Haji “rapeugees” who can’t let a day go by without committing a barbaric act of mass murder on its peoples. These atrocities will not alter the will of European leaders to continue this process of outright genocide against Europeans, any more than it will stop the flow of money from those like George Soros to activist groups and media supporting this evil agenda at all costs.
Their template for White Displacement comes at a time where Europe is being deliberately flooded with millions of black and Haji “rapeugees” who can’t let a day go by without committing a barbaric act of mass murder on its peoples.
At the same time, a struggle is on to wrest the American presidency from a Democratic party with a black Moslem President and his White-female would-be successor who both condone the murder of White police officers, and endorse the group Black Lives Matter, which is treating Whites much like Jewish Hollywood has us believe Jews were treated in 1930s Germany.
Yes, in total chorus with these conspicuous events affecting Whites the world over, today the “Human Rights Commission” releases their “blueprint” to “rethink Anglo-Celtic bias”. In a booklet entitled Leading for Change: A blueprint for cultural diversity and inclusive leadership, they spell out how and why to go about this.
The headings are deceptively ominous:
- Measuring cultural diversity: collect data and report progress
- Accountability and targets
- Dealing with bias and discrimination
- Professional development: cultivate diverse leaders
Meanwhile, the content is six-million percent free of racial bias (except for its bias in favour of racial bias) and so fiscally sound you could toss it on a roulette table and scoop up a tower of chips.
There is mounting evidence that more diverse organisations achieve better performance. Analysis conducted by McKinsey, for example, indicated a positive relationship between a more diverse leadership team and better financial performance.
This means that before Australia received its squillions of brownish immigrants Aussies were living in the dirt trying to catch worms to feed their emaciated families. There was no money for anything because a lack of diversity meant we were all bog poor, so why any of these dynamic coloured peoples ever wanted to bring their economic miracle here in the first place is a hard call.
If under-representation of cultural diversity in leadership is symptomatic of bias and discrimination, this is not without its consequences. While there is limited research that has authoritatively quantified the financial cost of racial discrimination to society at large, they are likely to be substantial.
See, if you mix subjectivity with no scientific proof whatsoever you are guaranteed to get the answer you want. In this case, that “racial discrimination” costs society zillions of dollars and leads to holistic angst. And we know this because “limited research” suggests it is “likely”. And this limited research was carried about by people who are not racist Anglo-Celts, so it is not only accurate down to the microdot but also financially more responsible given the argument.
For an organisation to lead on diversity and inclusion, it has to put its money where its mouth is. It must not only dedicate serious resources to it, but also make it part of its managers’ performance appraisals. Leaders may require their direct reports to take responsibility for promoting cultural diversity, such as through sponsoring initiatives or mentoring diverse talent.
This means, quite sensibly, that apart from his or her (most likely ‘her’ given the general direction of all this) ascribed duties, the manager must now ‘police diversity’ within the organisational ranks or face the wrath of demerit. This will lead to a hiring policy that absolutely discriminates against anyone White, at a time when locals, such as nursing graduates, are losing jobs and careers as companies hire foreigners on working visas for reasons that nobody has had the good grace to bother explaining.
This approach worked wonders at Facebook, we are told. We are given a large paragraph gleefully recounting the miracle that was worked via positive discrimination against anyone with White skin:
Few were surprised when, in 2014, a number of US tech firms published diversity data that showed an underrepresentation of diversity – especially women and African-Americans. But some are now taking action. Perhaps most notably, Facebook introduced a course for its employees, Managing Bias. According to COO Sheryl Sandberg (OY VEY!), ‘one of the most important things we can do to promote diversity in the workplace is to correct for the unconscious bias that all of us have.’ Recognising that ‘organisations which consider themselves highly meritocratic can actually show more bias’, Sandberg said that ‘managing bias can help us build stronger, more diverse and inclusive companies – and drive better business results’. Facebook worked with researchers to develop Managing Bias, which it shares with the public through a dedicated website, managingbias.fb.com. The course includes case studies and workshop sessions. Using a series of videos to introduce topics to staff, the course focuses on four types of biases: Performance Bias, Performance Attribution Bias, Competence/Likeability Trade-off Bias, and Maternal Bias. While some of the biases relate exclusively to gender, others also have relevance to race and culture.
We also get a history lesson.
For over 40 000 years Australia was, of course, solely occupied by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, until the arrival of the First Fleet in 1788. With the colonisation of Australia, the population would become predominantly British (English, Scottish, Welsh) and Irish in background – scholars refer to Australian national identity being shaped during its colonial era by an ‘Anglo-Celtic’ hybrid culture.Such composition in the Australian colonial population was reinforced by cumulative immigration from the British Isles. Significant numbers of Chinese and other immigrants arrived during the gold rushes in the second half of the 19th century; there would also be many thousands of Pacific Islander workers who came to Australia as indentured labourers in the 19th century, largely in Queensland. But immigration restrictions imposed by colonial and later the Commonwealth governments meant the cultural impact of such immigration – namely, of nonAnglo-Celtic origin – was limited. The maintenance of the White Australia policy for most of the 20th century meant that immigration was mainly from the British Isles – that is, until the post-Second World War period. The 1950s and 60s were years when significant numbers of immigrants from Europe settled in Australia. This would inject a new non-Anglo-Celtic European cultural component to the Australian population. The next waves of immigration have been of a non-European origin, with the formal dismantling of the White Australia policy in 1973, and the arrival of refugees following the conclusion of the Vietnam War and related strife in Cambodia and Laos. The late 1970s and early 1980s saw some 70 000 Indochinese refugees resettled in Australia, with many more thousands of these refugees’ relatives arriving in later years through family reunion programs. This has also been accompanied by the arrival of immigrants from other countries in Asia, as well as the Middle East, South America and Africa.
Of course, a hard-line nationalist might just be growing sick and tired of hearing about “40,000 years of Aboriginal occupation” and have become emboldened enough to say that Australia is an entirely different country to anything that the Abo went ‘walkabout’ on. Aboriginals were sidelined as the primitive beasts that natural selection has naturally counted them as. This country that is now being reorganised by ‘un-natural selection’ should pay no deference at all to this great myth of savage nobility. Instead a great big, “Sucked in, you lost” could be blown every time they try and provoke a pang of ‘shame’ and ‘guilt’.
Yes, today the money changers in the hallowed halls of Westpac, one of the greediest and most skunk-like repositories of usury serpents in the land, sit down to prepare us all for a mammoth dive into non-White hegemony courtesy of a man not even born here, and supported by various greed-head traitors, Jews, and Nick Kaldas.
Indeed, Nick Kaldas. The man who greenlighted the Lebanese attacks during the Cronulla civil uprising… the man who has been invested in this country to agitate against Whitey. You can read about him here on the Australia First Party page. There is a little shout out to him hidden in the imprint of this obscene publication,
The Working Group thanks Nick Kaldas APM, who was a member of the group until March 2016. Dr Andreea Constantin provided research assistance, with the support of the University of Sydney Business School.
In his book «Praktischer Idealismus», Kalergi indicates that the residents of the future “United States of Europe” will not be the People of the Old Continent, but a kind of sub-humans, products of miscegenation. He clearly states that the peoples of Europe should interbreed with Asians and colored races, thus creating a multinational flock with no quality and easily controlled by the ruling elite.
Kalergi proclaims the abolition of the right of self-determination and then the elimination of nations with the use of ethnic separatist movements and mass migration. In order for Europe to be controlled by an elite, he wants to turn people into one homogeneous mixed breed of Blacks, Whites and Asians. Who is this elite however? Kalergi is particularly illuminating on this:
The man of the future will be of mixed race. The races and classes of today will gradually disappear due to the elimination of space, time, and prejudice.The Eurasian-negroid race of the future, similar in appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples and the diversity of individuals.Instead of destroying European Judaism, Europe, against her will, refined and educated this people, driving them to their future status as a leading nation through this artificial evolutionary process. It’s not surprising that the people that escaped from the Ghetto-Prison, became the spiritual nobility of Europe. Thus, the compassionate care given by Europe created a new breed of aristocrats.This happened when the European feudal aristocracy crashed because of the emancipation of the Jews [due to the actions taken by the French Revolution]
Although no textbook mentions Kalergi, his ideas are the guiding principles of the European Union. The belief that the peoples of Europe should be mixed with Africans and Asians, to destroy our identity and create a single mestizo race, is the basis of all community policies that aim to protect minorities. Not for humanitarian reasons, but because of the directives issued by the ruthless Regime that machinates the greatest genocide in history. The Coudenhove-Kalergi European Prize is awarded every two years to Europeans who have excelled in promoting this criminal plan.Among those awarded with such a prize are Angela Merkel and Herman Van Rompuy.
The incitement to genocide, is also the basis of the constant appeals of the United Nations, that demands we accept millions of immigrants to help with the low birth rates of the EU. According to a report published on January 2000 in «Population division» Review of the United Nations in New York, under the title “Immigration replacement: A solution to declining and aging population,” Europe will need by 2025 159,000,000 migrants.
One could wonder how there can be such accuracy on the estimates of immigration, although it was not a premeditated plan. It is certain that the low birth rate could easily be reversed with appropriate measures to support families. It is just as clear that it is the contribution of foreign genes do not protect our genetic heritage, but that it enables their disappearance. The sole purpose of these measures is to completely distort our people, to turn them into a group of people without national, historical and cultural cohesion. In short, the policies of the Kalergi plan was and still is, the basis of official government policies aimed at genocide of the Peoples of Europe, through mass immigration. G. Brock Chisholm, former director of the World Health Organization (OMS), proves that he has learned the lesson of Kalergi well when he says: “What people in all places have to do is to limit of birthrates and promote mixed marriages (between different races), this aims to create a single race in a world which will be directed by a central authority. “