Ross Cameron

One of my three brothers recently told me he couldn't take Donald Trump seriously because of his “crazy” policies, citing first, Trump’s plan to “build a wall that Mexico will fund”.  So I figured, might as well go straight to the guts of the matter, and tell you why Trump is right to build a wall to secure America's southern border.

Walls get a bad press as symbols of isolation, fear, xenophobia, Israel (insert standard Left insult).  Walls have been a feature of human civilisation since the first cities in mesopotamia. The most enduring symbol of the world's largest country by population, is a wall.   A right to privacy has no meaning without the right to a boundary.  A the favoured rattle of the infant Left is a "safe space".  Private property - the motivating engine of capitalism - has no power without the right to protect property.  A wall allows its maker to discriminate between friend and enemy, illicit and legal, to reduce risk of pandemic disease by quarantine, to protect food quality by disclosure of source, to protect plants and animals from exotic disease.  I may prefer a world without walls but Al Qu'aeda, diptheria, heroin, poachers, do not extend me that luxury.

Countries all over the Europe are building walls, largely because Angela Merkel's invitation to 1 million Syrians, moved 20 million Africans and unskilled Arabs to strike out for a new life, smashing the orderly processing ability of the twelve countries that border Germany.  Countries all over South America are building walls, largely to contain opportunistic migration, terrorism and the global flow of illicit drugs.  Mexico has been busily building a wall on its southern border - with thanks to a $75 million gift from American taxpayer courtesty of Barrack Obama whose legacy Hillary Clinton promises to maintain.  So it seems the main policy difference is not over the idea of a wall but who pays for it.  Democrats prefer Americans to pay.

The leading scholar of the history of violence is psychologist, Steve Pinker who says the rate of violent death has fallen over the past 400 years in part because of growing respect for “national sovereignty”.  At the heart of the idea of sovereignty, is the right and duty of nations to control access to borders.  As America’s first diplomat, Ben Franklin, advised, “Love your neighbour yet don’t pull down your hedge”.  Pope John Paull II once remarked, "Good fences make good neighbours".  A parent can’t be held responsible for the welfare of a family, if they can’t control who walks through the front door.  

On the question of "sovereignty", Americans face a stark choice - Hillary Clinton's billionaire Svengali adviser, George Soros, is secretly funding 2,000 NGO's around the world whose main goal is to destroy the idea of a national border.  Hillary Clinton tells investment bankers she wants to create "Hemispheric convergence" between north and south America - free movement of people.  Donald Trump wants to build a wall and make American cities safe again.  With a “border” present on maps but not in reality, the USA is fast becoming the northern province of Mexico.  It is no surprise that Hillary Clinton’s highest favourability in South America is in Mexico -  87% approval.  

I support Trump in part because I have observed the fastest way to destroy a nation’s unique character, is to lose border control.  I like unique characters.  I want more of them, not less. Unique countries allow for experimentation and lessons from which others can learn.  Uniformity kills innovation.  Must we all blend into a boring indistinct cultural beige?  We are witnessing this in Europe, as a heaving mass of millions tramples down fences while rushing for Deussche marks at the foot of Angela’s rainbow.  The death toll of migrant boat passage is remarkably similar, whether in the Timor Sea or the Mediterranean – one in 50 end their journey as a bobbing corpse – the women and children tend to drown first.  The Med under Merkel is more morgue than sea.

The question in my mind is not one of racism, fear, privilege or “sanctuary” but old-fashioned competence.  If the political class is incapable of regulating the crossing of a border, it is incompetent to lead.  If you can't regulate migration, you can't maintain public support for new migrants.  Even if the West bears a share of guilt for displacement in countries of origin, “destroy your border” is not the answer to any question worth asking.

Trump’s wall is a practical step to regulate human movement but its greater role is to be a symbol of American resolve.  The attraction of an LA lifestyle, (Real Housewives, Crown Princes, Bay Watch, 90210, Melrose etc,) to a mobile young male in poverty, cannot be overstated.  The daft Californian liberal promise of “sanctuary cities” is a global neon sign saying “come whatever the risk”.   You will not stop boats by accident. 

I presume to offer an opinion to an American audience, because you guys started it here and because Australia is the only country to secure its borders, after losing them, in the past decade (in fact we’ve done it twice following stupid bone-headed decision by the ALP and Greens and useless academics and activists who long for a means to resolve their white shame).  Australians lucked out as the only people to occupy an entire continent so we have no land borders to patrol.  We have, however, faced a swelling armada of small crowded boats, purchased as disposable widgets, to carry an equally disposable human cargo, in a thriving criminal conspiracy, which grew over five years of progressive idiocy, to move 50,000 unauthorized arrivals, across the Timor Sea but left well over 1,000 souls in a watery grave.

 Opposition Leader Tony Abbott announced in 2012 that if elected, his government would “stop the boats”.   The stark  “three word slogan” was attacked by the New York Times, the United Nations, the Indonesian Government, the Australian Labor Party, the Australian Greens, the head of the Department of Immigration and a chorus of George Soros funded “NGO’s” in the “compassion industry” that grew up around “asylum seekers”.  

 Prime Minister Julia Gillard told Australians that “Mr Abbott is lying to you – he cannot stop the boats”.  Ms Gillard’s mantra was that arrivals result from “push factors” in countries of origin and changing policy would not stop the boats.  Gillard’s immigration Minister decried “This policy is damaging Australia’s relationship with Indonesia”.  Labor stumbled from one incoherent, legally faulty “regional solution” to the next.  The boats kept coming. 

 The UN Human Rights Agency lodged a protest.  The Australian Greens launched a legal challenge.  Meanwhile, the drowning continued and Australia’s fastest growing industry was building migration detention centers, which filled (with many children) as fast as they could be built.  The human inventory was so great, the people smugglers went into business murdering their clients and harvesting their organs – a logical product extension in a ruthless criminal conspiracy.

 Opposition Leader Tony Abbott did not flinch.  He and Major General Jim Molan, and Migration Minister Scott Morrison, understood that the audience we had to convince was not the “love media” but a group of Javanese criminals, making a purely financial calculation or reward for effort.  On election, Prime Minister Abbott adopted a suite of measures, some novel, some harsh, all designed to send the same, clear, message, echoing Australia’s greatest post-War MP John Howard – “We will decide who comes to Australia and the manner in which they come”. 

 Abbott, Morrison and Molan, supported by Cabinet and a resolute backbench, outsourced migration enforcement to a multi-agency task force, led by the Australian Navy, called Operation Sovereign Borders (OSB) began “boat turn-backs” at sea “when safe to do so”.  When the junk captains began deliberately scuttling boats, the Department purchased a fleet of purpose built seaworthy skiffs, into which the rescued cargo was loaded and returned to its port of origin.  While the Labor Government had issued daily press on all matters “asylum”, OSB reclassified actions at sea as “operational” and subject to secrecy, denying people smugglers, the oxygen of information. 

 Tony Abbott failed as Prime Minister but saved Australia.  When it became clear to those seeking a migration result, that they would not be granted Australian citizenship, the boats stopped -  just like that, in the twinkling of an eye.  The drowning stopped.  The “border” became real again and the natural hospitality of the Australian people which supports fair migration, was allowed to surface, once we felt our leaders were doing their job, not excusing their failure.

 The most common lost shot in golf is the short putt.  Sometimes you will see an amateur leave two or even three putts short of the hole.  The problem with leaving the ball short is that you never gave yourself a chance of sinking the putt. You must begin with a plan to shoot beyond the hole to have any hope of success.

 This is the Trump approach.  Whether on the Pause, the Wall, ISIL - Trump is providing the missing piece in the policy puzzle – American resolve.  

Good luck mate.