As my family thinks about its place in Australia, again I wonder if Fraser Anning imagines himself as brave. He regarded his speech as loosening the gag of political correctness and cultural Marxism. And, yet gagless, he only retold the most repeated cliché about Australia being under risk from Muslims.

He did not bring to the surface an uncomfortable or new truth. His maiden speech in parliament was mostly a testimony to a far-right fragility. For, his Australia’s feigned vulnerability before Muslims (who make up 2% of the population) comes from a deep-seated sense of entitlement.

The folly about the loss of this country’s culture, despite its obsessive control and militarisation of its borders, masks a true absurdity. Some straight white Christian conservative men feel marginalised. It takes a while for me to understand how. But, the slightest of disturbances in their universe has now led them to consider a “final solution”. Such first-world fragility is beyond belief for most of humanity who survive in wretched conditions. But that a faux vulnerability turns apocalyptic at the slightest encounter with cultural change is scary.

Fraser Anning speech 'straight from Goebbels' handbook', says Pauline Hanson Read more

I can hardly imagine how such frail characters would endure if they tried leading the life of a Muslim immigrant fleeing Syria.

As a Muslim who grew up with the images of war on terror, I constantly have two recurring daydreams. I see the drone image produced by RT, a television network funded by the Russian government. It shows a fly over a destroyed Damascus suburb, and the grey ghost-like area of the capital full of ruined buildings with only their frames remaining. It fills me with guilt. There is also another image that returns, of a three-year-old lifeless Alan Kurdi’s body washed up on a Turkish beach. It fills me with pain.

Before these horrors, I cannot understand how some in this vast and overprotective country, which has had a forced hand in the real destruction of life in Afghanistan and Iraq, can see Muslims only through the lens of their own western civilisation’s supposed loss. Why is it repeatedly about the Muslim as a fictional threat and not the concrete reversal? I doubt if the likes of Anning ever ask themselves whether white men in suits standing in parliament with speeches about “solutions” are a proven threat to so many of us people of colour?

Play Video 1:15 Bob Katter says Fraser Anning’s speech was 'solid gold' – video

We have to ignore plenty of recent Australian history, if not all, to explain the delusion of Anning’s absurd worries. Despite his and Bob Katter’s posture of holding up to an imaginary cultural Marxism, which he misreads as a Gramscian call to take over culture, the truth is their far-right brethren name for leftists best characterises the pair’s politics. Its built on snowflakes.

The slenderest burden of social stress – such as violence by a minor percentage of immigrants – becomes unbearable. It brings about Katter’s meltdown as well as demands from him to win back the country’s non-existent ideal past. I do not doubt that in their mind their concerns are real. But Australia is not experiencing a crisis about its racial identity. Such absurdity should be ignored. Their stress simply results from an interruption to what is racially familiar to them.

Australian senator calls for 'final solution to immigration problem' Read more

Consider their call to reinstate a white racial serenity to an already dominant white society. Their cry is about comfort, not survival. In the dominant position for so long, this brand of Australian conservative white male was essentially always racially comfortable. History has spoilt them. Now they grumble at how there are too many kebab shops and have developed unchallenged expectations to remain “pure”. They have not had to build tolerance for racial discomfort. They did not have to learn to survive like Indigenous Australians had to. They need not value tolerance like Muslims in Australia who must tolerate their ritual complaints.

Perhaps the issue is that these men who fear a loss of their country to immigrants enjoyed an unconscious right to a true belonging to Australia. The country instilled this racial belonging through a whiteness embedded in its culture. Everywhere they looked, they saw their racial image as the country’s image. Their heroes and their teachers and their sporting characters reflected their race. They saw themselves throughout history as winners, not colonisers. They even saw themselves as a blue-eyed god.

Play Video 2:13 Politicians unite in condemnation of Fraser Anning’s speech – video

It is rare for the Anning type of conservative white Christian man to experience a sense of not belonging. Hence, their entitlement becomes naturalised and taken for granted. Any interruption to this is destabilising and frightening to them. They respond as if something is wrong in the universe and look for grand external narratives that triggered their discomfort. It leads to an outrageous retaliation made up of no facts and plenty of agitation.

They dislike the slightest sense of feeling disorientated. Their insistence on comfort (often at the expense of saving immigrant lives) proves one thing at least. Their concerns trivialise the tale of inhumanity towards people of colour. It falsifies the accuracy about what cultural genocide means. And, it is not like they have to go far to know what it means.

The Coalition has been playing with fire on race, and this is their inferno | Katharine Murphy Read more

It is because they cannot think through racism and its history with accuracy. It is because they never have to ask themselves what true safety might mean for an African-Australian looking for a restaurant in Melbourne at night.

I do not know how many times we have to hear the white boy cry Muslim wolf.

I do not know how this country’s politicians and commentators can keep degrading and beating up on Muslim immigrants and asylum seekers, and maintain their posture of humanity.

For, I believe the moral compass in us all would much prefer a country built on the character of brave souls who sacrifice all to make a new life. Who would not favour that courage and will to survive, to be the backbone of any country, rather than the self-assumed bravery of men in suits who hide behind parliamentary privileges to play the victim in a factless rant? Who would prefer a country of spoiled whingers who confuse comfort with safety and who confuse a negligible loss of white straight male Christian privilege as a fight for their entire nation’s survival?