I believe in private property rights and the right to discriminate. Logically then, I believe that any group of people (including racial or religious groups) should be able to buy property and use it as they wish. If you are white and you only want to live with other whites, then you should NOT use political power to remove non-whites from Australia, but you should be allowed to join together and buy a block of units (or a farm, or whatever) which only accepts whites.
That’s pretty controversial stuff. I wonder if it would sound better if we had the same proposal by a non-white group?
The Islamic Council of WA is looking at setting up a Muslim-only housing development (with hall, conference centre & recreation facilities). They argue that separation allows different groups to pursue their own customs without offending other groups, and it allows for easier social interaction. Perhaps. The counter-argument is that this “apartheid” undermines broader social cohesion and is divisive. Perhaps.
Personally, I wouldn’t want to live in a place that was too homogenous. I like diversity and I am happy to live in a multi-racial, multi-religious, mulit-cultural neighbourhood. But that’s just me. While I may personally disagree with some lifestyle choices that other people make — I believe we should all have the freedom to make those lifestyle choices.
One advantage of allowing people to pursue their own lifestyles voluntarily on their own property is that you take away the need for them to become politically active on the issues that annoy them. Instead of lobbying the government for fewer immigrants, anti-immigrants can choose to live in a “non-immigrant” area. Instead of lobbying the government for special rights and funding for minority cultures, those cultures can choose to live together and maintain their own culture.
I don’t think such “exclusive areas” will be very popular, and I doubt many would survive in modern Australia. But they should not be banned.