I was reviewing the advertisements in a discrete local employment agency that places servants with members of the aristocracy and upper classes and noted the frequency with which this phrase appears. The fact that the advertisements are in Hindi, Mandarin, and French, as well as English seemed a little surprising, but then upon enquiring further I was told that the word “foreigner” is an adjustable one and can be fitted onto nearly everyone as required.
This seems to set at nought the efforts of the Citizens Levelling and Moral Purity League to make everyone equal. Good or bad is not the issue as long as these traits are equally distributed. I suspect that the supply of an valet to a Chinese clothing manufacturer from the general store of talent encompassed by the Irish Day Labourer Pool would go some way to producing…something, and an entertaining something at that. It is a pity that it is debarred.
Of course there is also the difficult legal point in a country like Australia of who exactly IS a foreigner. The indigenous population claim that everyone else is, the Anglo Saxons claim everyone else is, the locally-born ethnic minorities claim everyone else is…taken as a lump it may be that the entire nation is staffed with foreigners and no-one can really find the basis hominum from which to measure out accurate doses of bigotry.
For my part I think that anyone who is not entitled to vote in the Commonwealth elections is a foreigner. This, at one time, included myself and my mother until we became naturalised citizens and free of the nation. Following this definition it would include citizens of other nations, imbeciles, and anyone under 18. I think this a fine idea. I would probably keep most of the imbeciles but go amongst the rest and winnow them out. Particularly the spotty schoolchildren. They might be allowed back in when they are 18 if they could get an endorsement from an aristocrat.