The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Multiculturalism – what the figures really mean > Comments

Multiculturalism – what the figures really mean : Comments

By Graham Cooke, published 10/3/2011

Racism is relative, but even with the best relativities in Australia it is still shocking.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
Your displeasure with racism is irrelevant in the monkey see monkey do pursuit of a Great Big White Ballot Box carefully stimulated to produce the required Manna from Heaven.
Posted by Wakatak, Thursday, 10 March 2011 6:25:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'll repeat a point that I've made before. Islam is not a race.

Whilst I think that many of the anti-muslim/islam sentiments expressed by some have little bearing on reality that does not make it racism.

We should always have the right to express concern about or dislike for what can sometimes be extreme ideologies/faiths or even particular cultural practices without being subjected to the label of racist.

The downside is that racism can hide behind the facade of concern about particular issues but that's the risk.

It should also be possible for people to disapprove of the actions of Israel (or any other nation) without being considered racist.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Thursday, 10 March 2011 7:09:08 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I would be curious to see the actual questions asked, as the figures quoted are more than a little vague.

Well, reading the methodology of the report, the relevant question would probably be '2a: Are there groups that don’t fit into Australian society? Which groups?'

'anti-Muslim sentiments'

What does that mean? Saying 'I think burqas are oppressive to women'? 'Islamic suicide bombers are fanatical murderers'? (self-evidently true, but does not thus mean that 'all muslims are fanatical murderers').

'stated they were anti-Indigenous'

What, they actually said, 'I am anti-Indigenous'? Excuse me for finding that a little unlikely. Perhaps they said, 'I hate aborigines'?

Regardless, given the generic nature of the question, I suspect that there was plenty of room for the authors of the report to cast the answers in a light that most suited their own prejudices.
Posted by Clownfish, Thursday, 10 March 2011 7:56:23 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I was once an anti aparteid demonstrator and a confirmed anti racist.

Now I am a proud racist.

What began my conversion, was that the only excuse that the inner city trendoids could use for minority dysfunction, was the "blame the White Guy for Everything" excuse. Now, as a person who was brought up to recognise racism, that sure looked like a racist argument to me.

You can not educate me to be an anti racist, and then use racism against my race, as a way of explaining everthing that is wrong with the world. Hitler tried that with the Jews.

So, I started to think Objectively instead of Subjectively.

I noted that some minority groups are a pain in then butt in every western country in which they have settled. And I have noted that these poor Oppressed ethnicities are usually a lot more racist than my own race.

In addition, it is a cultural universal that people simply prefer to live among their own people, people that they consider their kith and kin, and with whom they feel safe with. The continuing balkanisation of Australia into monocultural ethnic enclaves underlines this self evident fact.

As a white person, I too wish to live amongst my own people. People who generally share the same values, attitudes and behaviours that I do. And I do not see anything wrong with demanding a discriminaory immigration policy which will ensure that my people's culture remains dominant in my own country.

Multiculturalism is like Socialism, how many times must it fail before people realise that it is a bad idea? It has resulted in surging crime rates, ethnic branch stacking of electorates, and a serious reduction in my civil liberties in order to combat imported terrorists.

No thank you. Every country shopping "refugee" on planet Earth wants to go to Canada, Australia, the USA, or New Zealand to live with the Anglos. As an Anglo, it sutre looks to me like my culture is a success, and it is worth preserving by discriminating against unassimilatable, trouble prone ethnicities.
Posted by LEGO, Thursday, 10 March 2011 8:43:07 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
>>..it would be interesting to know just what sprang into people's minds when the question [about Muslims] was put to them.>>

Graham Cooke,

I would really like to know what springs into your mind when you use the words “multicultural” “multiculturalism”.

Do you mean that every citizen of Australia regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, skin colour, national origin, gender or sexual orientation has the right to do anything they please so long as it does not conflict with the laws of the land as set by democratically elected legislatures and interpreted by independent judiciaries?

Do you mean that a person’s dealings with the organs of the state should independent of their race, ethnicity, religion, skin colour, sexual orientation, national origin and, with certain obvious exceptions, gender?

Do you mean that anybody irregardless of race, ethnicity, religion, skin colour, national origin, gender or sexual orientation has the right to be secure in their person and property?

Do you mean that anybody irregardless of race, ethnicity, religion, skin colour, national origin, gender or sexual orientation may claim the same political rights and freedoms that are accorded any other Australian?

Or do you mean something different?

If so, what?

What on Earth do you mean by “multiculturalism?”

PLEASE do tell.
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Thursday, 10 March 2011 9:48:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A survey from the plastic city is useless. Canberra is made up of numerous public servants who jobs depend on consensus politics. It is easy to say that you love everyone until your house is broken into or you are abused in the street for not providing grog money regularly. Hating the fruit of Islam is not racist as Islam is not a race. Do a survey of Rugby League and Aussie rules players and they will tell you they are not sexist. Give many half the chance to use a young drunk girl and a number will take it. I suspect surveys especially in Canberra are people more answering politically correctly because they don't want to be labelled racist. Keep believing your dogma (multi culturalism) Graham but until you live next door to anti social people you really have no idea.
Most Aussies are racist by your definition but very tolerant compared with other nations. The vast majority of my friends are Aussies with different skin colours that come from afar. That should not stop me or anyone else calling a spade a spade just to avoid being labelled 'racist'by some bureacratic definition.
Posted by runner, Thursday, 10 March 2011 10:03:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I had a little trouble working out just what the writer was saying but he is right to the extent that most Australians rarely have meaningful contact with many of these minority groups - muslims, indigenous people - and so do not have feelings for them one way or another. (If asked they may express some opinion, however.)

The only minority group with which we could have a US-style problem is that of Asians, as they seem to be both far more numerous and visible than any of the others. But nothing much seems to be happening there.

Indians are moving up, but again there are just not enough of them at present to really make much of an impression on the general population.
Posted by Curmudgeon, Thursday, 10 March 2011 10:09:48 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
stevenlmeyer,

Exactly, the author expresses the standard conflation of race and religion and also, as usual, really doesn't define 'multiculturalism'.
Any one who seriously thinks that he or she can make a case that antipathy towards Islam is necessarily racist is welcome to try.

This is never ending,article after article with the same category mistakes,the same failure of definition, it's all very depressing.
Posted by mac, Thursday, 10 March 2011 11:33:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lego, I am interested in why you think that 'White Australians' have the right to occupy Australia. Is it because they invaded it and destroyed the Indigenous inhabitants? If so, if another ethnic group occupies Australia by force, are they then the rightful owners?

You say that people want to live amongst their own kind for protection and safety. You might call it the human instinct? Why then, do people marry those who are not of the same race as themselves? Why do people be-friend, vote for, work with and enjoy, the company of others who are not of the same race as their own?

What you are saying might have been true once. In pre-civilized times people were interested only in their basic human needs, the need for shelter, safety, food etc. They formed tribes (which were much smaller than the modern day 'white' group which is actually comprised of several groups which are not in fact 'your kind'. Modern day 'whites' are descendants of groups as diverse as celts, anglo-saxons, francs, vikings etc, not one uniform group).

These days, society is much more complex. Trade relations and political agreements on a bi-lateral or multi-lateral basis make modern affairs very different from the ones that tribal groups might have engaged in. Multiculturalism is a feature of this modern society. People from different ethnic backgrounds with different language skills and religions form the back bone of Australian relations with other nations. The rising power and economic strength of China means that having Chinese delegates and economists within our country actually helps us to grow our partnership with this nation. Do you really think we could just go back to 'White Australia' and still maintain healthy relations with these important trade and political partners? What would be the reaction do you think? Would it be good for Australia?

Alienating ethnic minorities within this nation is a big mistake. It is damaging to our international image, and runs counter to our attempts to cultivate a dignified and modern identity in this modern era.
Posted by Triumph, Thursday, 10 March 2011 11:41:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Further to stevenlmeyer's questions to the author about what he actually means by multiculturalism, we have to be careful to avoid accepting a definition which means that 'any practice is acceptable as long as it is within the law'. In fact, some practices are within the law but are still discriminatory, usually against women. We rightfully ban honour killings and female genital mutilation in Australia - they are against the law. On the other hand, in many cultures represented in our multicultural society, girls do not get a fair go. They are pulled out of school early, they have a disproportionate share of chores in the home compared to boys, they do not have as much freedom of movement and sometimes have to wear clothing which constricts their ability to play. In many cultures within our multicultural society, women do not get a fair go either. They lack choice in clothing, movement, bearing children, working outside the home and being financially independent. Sounds like Australia a couple of generations ago but we have moved on thanks to the women's liberation movement of the 1970s and since. Perhaps some of those who were questioned in the poll and expressed anti-Muslim sentiments were simply expressing opposition to such discriminatory practices. They may all have been women! You never know.
Posted by popnperish, Thursday, 10 March 2011 2:04:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Australia is, of course, one of the most peaceful and tolerant societies on earth. We have, for the past 60 years, run the world's most successful immigration program, achieving economic development and cultural enrichment while by and large maintaining social cohesion. This is no small achievement and clear evidence that Australia is not a racist nation.

Confusion is inevitable however when people mix up individual opinions with institutional and personal behaviour. Racist practice is generally speaking a crime in Australia and, despite my personal misgivings, increasingly so is racist language. Sadly, this article fits too easily into the negative stream of contemporary opinion,moralistic rather than moral and contemptuous of human beings.
Posted by Senior Victorian, Thursday, 10 March 2011 2:16:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Mr Triumph,

I think that the best thing that ever happened to the aborigines was the coming of the British. If the British had not colonized Australia, somebody a lot less humane most certainly would have done so. And if nobody had done so, Australia would be just another dysfunctional black country holding out the begging bowl and being a problem to the rest of the world.

My premise, that people prefer to live amongst their own, is validated by the increasingly monocultural ethnic ghettoes now springing up within Australia and dividing our community on geographical lines.

Multiculturalism has been a social catastrophe in Europe, where even the leaders of France, Germany and Great Britain have recently made public statements admitting that it has been a mistake. Then there is the “great melting pot” of the USA where the “hyphenated” Americans call themselves “African-Americans”, “Italian-Americans”, “Hispanic-Americans” and so forth, and where crime, welfare dependency, and general dysfunction occur in those suburbs containing concentrations of certain ethnicies.

And who is championing multiculturalism? Well, you could start with Labor’s Immigration minister Chris Bowen, who’s electorate of McMahon includes the increasingly Arab suburb of Fairfield, where hardly a night goes by without another drive by shooting. According to the NSW Bureau of Crime Research (issue no. 57) 55% of the handgun shootings in the entire state of NSW occur in two notorious ethnic ghettoes. And you want immigration to increase so that this cancer can spread? No thank you. I do not want my suburb to end up like Cronulla, where car loads of ethnic men descend to harass and intimidate Australians on the beach and on the streets.

Finally, I take objection to your “holier than thou attitude” where you pretend moral superiority over me. I am loyal to my own people, and I consider that a virtue, not a vice.

As for Australia’s “international reputation”, who are you kidding? All over Europe and the USA, white people are getting fed up of the determination of people like yourself to make us commit social suicide through immigration.
Posted by LEGO, Thursday, 10 March 2011 3:12:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well, let me be the first to say...

Welcome back, redneck!
(http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/user.asp?id=6232&show=history)

I knew I'd heard the term "trendies" somewhere before.
Posted by AJ Philips, Thursday, 10 March 2011 4:33:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sorry, that contributed nothing to the discussion, but it was in reading this line that it all came together...

<<And if nobody had done so, Australia would be just another dysfunctional black country holding out the begging bowl and being a problem to the rest of the world.>>

LEGO,

What makes you think that Australia would have simply been a "begging bowl" that was "a problem to the rest of the world" if no-one ever settled here?

Wouldn't Aborigines have simply continued living the way they'd been living for 40,000 years prior to British settlement had they no contact with the civilised world?
Posted by AJ Philips, Thursday, 10 March 2011 4:53:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Wouldn't Aborigines have simply continued living the way they'd been living for 40,000 years prior to British settlement had they no contact with the civilised world?" As Lego pointed out, someone else would have "invaded" if the British hadn't. If the nirvana you propose had occurred, of course Aboriginals would be happily wiping out megafauna and burning the countryside. That nirvana doesn't exist, and the reality is that a majority (not all) aboriginals are lazy and disfuctional. The history of the world is chockablock ful of displaced people. Are Turks native to the Anatolian peninsula? No. Are the Celts native to Britain? Most likely not. The opinion of Canberrans on Muslims and Aboriginals (despite the crassness of the questions) might possibly be as a result of contact with these cultures? I've lived in or near both, and never want to repeat the experience. Individual Muslims can be wonderful people (in spite of Islam, not because of it), but en masse, the quality of life for an Anglo goes right down, and I'm tired of their permanent victimhood and demands for special treatment- when the majoity aren't special people, not to mention their entrenched mysogyny and Jew-hatred.
Posted by viking13, Thursday, 10 March 2011 6:58:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Erm... viking13, had you read the sentence before the one you responded to, you’d see that I was actually responding to LEGO/redneck’s “And if nobody had [colonised Australia]...” scenario.
Posted by AJ Philips, Thursday, 10 March 2011 7:26:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I agree with you Graham Cooke, Soccer is a truly awesome international game. As a world game it has surface and true depth.

'What the figures really mean,' does not delve into issues of culture and difference. It does not discuss the degree of tolerance or empathy required to promote greater human understanding. It fails to consider the emotional intelligence or how to overcome defensive responses toward others who sit outside the square. Nor does it list the innovation and creativity possible if we were to look mindfully at the meaning of "Multiculturalism" here with the city of Canberra.

As a newbie, I find Canberra delightful in some ways and socially hostile in others. The dimension I probe is the zone where 'racism' is seen not just to be about color. That stigma and discrimination are more often about perceptions, judgmental behaviors, projection and fear modes [of production]. It is about sector experiences as much as class. It includes the difference between exclusion and inclusion. The core finding I question here is connectivity as opposed to cultures that act-out, in ways perhaps unintended that result in placing barriers of disconnectivity. This is a side of Canberra not many like to talk about. Robyn Archer described this trait at the Time to Talk 2030 Canberra forum as " Canbarrians are shy."

Given you are a well meaning journalist, I ask that you write an article that tackles the need to develop greater understanding through strategies that build and generate new cultural ["Ding an sich"]. Cultural cohesive pathways that embody the ideologies of the individual cultures and the relationships between people, We do need to address "connectivity" and a renewal between sectors here in Canberra.

I dream for an open, transparent and inclusive society where strangers are not treated with ignorance, and those with visible difference who struggle to stay connected are not left standing cold by the various inner circles.

As with light rays of reflection, the phase may be retained or inverted depending on the indices of refraction. I say let us spread the light.

Thank You,

http://www.miacat.com/
Posted by miacat, Thursday, 10 March 2011 7:50:17 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Mr Phillips.

You appear to be a person who believes that aboriginal people lived Edenic lives prior to those nasty white people turning up and wrecking paradise. But even Jared Diamond’s book “Guns, Germs and Steel” admitted that the population of aboriginal people at European arrival was only around 300,000 people, and this after 40,000 years of occupancy of this continent. Their mortality rate therefore must have been horrendous, underlying the generally accepted truism that the lives of barbarian people are typically “hard, brutish, and short”.

Confirmation of this comes from First Fleeter Lieutenant Watkins Tench, who noted that when the cold weather came to Sydney Town, “all that the aboriginal people could do was sit in their caves and shivver.” Tench also noted in his renowned accounts the extreme brutality which aboriginal men visited on their women, and that Governor Phillip himself intervened to prevent an aboriginal man from beating to death a young aboriginal girl. I repeat, the best thing that ever happened to aboriginal people is the coming of the British, especially if you were an aboriginal female.

As to why Australia would have been a “begging bowl”, it is because every single black governed country on planet Earth is dysfunctional. I used to believe that this was because of colonialism, because the only excuse that people who believe in racial equality can come up with to explain this phenomenon, is “Blame the White Guys” for Everything". Which, as I have noted in my previous posts, is a racist argument submitted by people who claim that they are not racists.

It took me a few years of being an anti racist to see through this doublethink. When I did, I began to think objectively instead of simply parroting the slogans of the educated, inner city elites.

So, what I was faced with to explain the reasons for black dysfunction, were two racist arguments. “Blame the White Guys", or the realization that in general, black people are not very intelligent. The concept that all races are equal is simply a sacred humanitarian belief peddled by evangelical humanitarians.
Posted by LEGO, Friday, 11 March 2011 5:46:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lego

In relation to a few tens of thousand of years of human civilisation, it is only in relatively recent years that all races have stopped brutalising their own or others of the same "race". Sometime and somewhere early in that mix European Homo sapiens were mating with another species, Homo neanderthalensis.

In recent centuries, burning at the stake was a common event, particularly for women. Most people escaping Europe to colonise America, Australia and New Zealand were escaping brutality by other Europeans.

The Aborigines of Australia were, and probably still are, a variety of different nations spread around the Australian coast, as diverse as Europeans from Portugal to Poland were and are.

You take the cake for generalisation and blatant racism.
Posted by McReal, Friday, 11 March 2011 6:20:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Mr McReal

Australians are often accused of racism, and my reply is “name any country or ethnic group who is not racist.?” The very act of having a border to your country is an act of racism, as it discriminates between citizens and non citizens, and is usually the traditional border between different ethnic groups, religions and cultures.

Racism can be defined by the concept that one race is superior to another, andI think that this concept is valid. Human beings come in a variety of colours, shapes and sizes, which simply reflects the evolutionary idea that species will evolve characteristics which give them an advantage within the local environments in which they evolved. Hey, even I will admit that black skin gives an advantage to black people in the tropics as regards to solar protection.

But the noun “racism” seems to have morphed into something completely different from its original form. Its meaning has been extended to denounce those who express their contempt of other social groups, be they ethnic, religious, or national. The word “racism” is being used by the UN, and the motley collection of Human Rights and Anti Discrimination QANGOS in state and federal governments, to prosecute people who verbally criticize their favoured minority groups.

I find this to be illogical. To begin with, I can be called a “racist” if I attack Muslims or the Muslim religion, even though Muslims are not “a race”. This because the state anti discrimination boards also claim to protect “belief systems.”

But isn’t Nazism or Racism a “belief system” also? Yet by some application of Doublethink, anti racists will viciously attack anybody who criticizes the wearing of a burkha, yet would scream abuse themselves at anybody walking down the street wearing a swastika armband.

Mr McReal, under this increasingly popular new definition of “racism” that has been promoted by the anti racists people themselves, everybody is now a racist. Because every one of us identifies groups of people we do not like, and who values, attitudes and behaviours we hold in contempt.
Posted by LEGO, Friday, 11 March 2011 12:47:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
mac

and others

I really REALLY REEEAALY! wish the exponents of "multiculturalism" would, JUST FOR ONCE, explain what they mean!
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Friday, 11 March 2011 1:52:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"The very act of having a border to your country is an act of" ... statehood or sovereignty or both.

I agree that "Racism can be defined by the concept that one race is superior to another"

Yes, "Human beings come in a variety of colours, shapes and sizes" ... which simply reflects the evolutionary idea that the human species has diversified, with some of that phenotypic diversity reflecting characteristics which give some races an adaptive advantage within the local environments in which they have been settled. Some variation in characteristics do not seem to confer advantage or disadvantage.

Attacking or vehemently criticising a [different] religion is not racism; it is spiritual abuse.

Nazism or racism are not necessarily belief systems - the former is a doctrine, that included racism, the latter is a dogma.
.
Posted by McReal, Friday, 11 March 2011 3:43:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
stevenlmeyer, Fri 11 Mar, 1:52:22 PM

I'm not sure multiculturalism is pushed for the sake of it. It just happens.

We all enjoy various aspects of various cultures. Fish'n'chips is a result of Jewish culture meeting UK culture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fish_and_chips#History.

Food, dancing, drinks have become universal from various cultural origins.
Posted by McReal, Friday, 11 March 2011 6:07:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Mr McReal

The denigration of Muslims is usually labeled as “racism” in everyday speech and in every newspaper. I repeat my self evident premise that the meaning of the word “racism” has been expanded by people such as your good self to signify the contempt of religious groups. But if you refuse to accept that, then there is no point continuing down that track.

Now correct me if I am wrong, but the way I read your last post, it appeared you agree with me that genetic variations produced by evolutionary forces have given some ethnicities advantages within the local environments that they evolved in. If you believe that, then you are tacitly admitting that some ethnic groups have genetic characteristics that give them superior characteristics in order to survive in the environments in which they evolved. Claiming that any national, race or ethnic group has superior genetic material is racism. You must be a racist. Good boy. Welcome to the club.

Lastly, you claim that Nazism is not a belief system. Well if Nazism is not a belief system, then neither is Islam. Could I remind you that both Islam and Nazism hate the Jews? And both Hitler and Mohammad claimed that people who were not of their particular religious or racial group were sub human? In addition, both Hitler and Mohammad instructed their followers to spread their faith by making war upon their neighbours.

Although, If I had to pick which one was worse, I would have to choose Islam. Even Hitler did not instruct his followers to beat their wives, nor did he order that Nazis should be offensive to non Nazis in everyday life, nor the were Nazis noted for murdering former Nazis who turned their backs on Nazism.
Posted by LEGO, Friday, 11 March 2011 6:26:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lego,

I would like to retract my agreement about your definition of racism and subsequently state -

"Racism can be defined by the concept that someone claims one race is superior to another".

Nowhere else have I agreed with your racist rants, and I now repudiate them. My general comments about some phenotypic characteristics being a result of evolution, and some Not, was to try to water down your exaggerated claims. Agreeing that any national, race or ethnic group has *some* genetic material that confers some advantage in some environments is NOT racism.

Do not overstate my attempts to moderate your tone.

I will not interact with you on this thread again.
Posted by McReal, Saturday, 12 March 2011 5:53:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Australia is an Anglo ruled nation that immigrates many races and faiths purely for GST Federal power and for the sole benefit of Heather Ridout's Mass market profiteer Corporations, while externalising the costs of such massive migration to hard working mums and dads.

This SMH article http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/take-a-look-north-for-the-road-ahead-20110311-1br72.html
highlights the stupidity and unsustainability of this "backwater" governing mentality.

RACISM is merely a side effect, a very small part of the overall consequences of overcrowding designed for one purpose only: To razz people up so they will spend more money and give the Federal Governmet Anglos cult a bigger economy to play with.

AFAICS true Racism doesn't exist in Australia. What we are seeing is just survival instincts rising in decent people who have been overcrowded like holocaust victims in cattle-cars. Only, our gas chambers are Big-W, Coles,Aldi stores and choked freeways. They won't destroy you straight away but like those WWII cattle cars we will destroy each other out of misguided survival soon enough.

Keep immigrating and Australia won't be fit to live or raise kids. And it will be because of GREED not racism.

Also its been my experience that experts in anti-racism are usually rallying for more immigration, either because they wish to politically strengthen a particular race or because they have profitable externalised cost business investments that GROW on more & more immigrants. Its also my experience these people never live next door to any race other than their own. Such is the corruption stemming from the very highest offices in this land.
Posted by KAEP, Saturday, 12 March 2011 9:00:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
McReal writes
'Racism can be defined by the concept that someone claims one race is superior to another

Should the evolution fantasy be true you could come to no other logical conclusion.
Posted by runner, Saturday, 12 March 2011 9:34:05 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Runner writes:

>>Should the evolution fantasy be true you could come to no other logical conclusion [that one race is superior to another].>>

Evolution is not a fantasy but runner does have a point.

I do not like the word race which is rather ill-defined. I prefer the word deme.

I cannot improve on the Wikipedia definition:

>>In biology, a deme is a term for a local population of organisms of one species that actively interbreed with one another and share a distinct gene pool. When demes are isolated for a very long time they can become distinct subspecies or species.>>

So people from East Africa and West Africa may loosely speaking be said to belong to the same “race” but they belong to different demes.

Given what we have learned in the past decade about evolution and how fast organisms can evolve we certainly cannot rule out the possibility that different demes have a different spread of talents and abilities.

We also have to consider the “founder effect.” I cannot improve on the definition given by the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

>>When a population is very small after the movement of some individuals to a new area that is unoccupied, the genetic makeup of that new group will differ from the makeup of their original source area just by random chance depending on the genetic structure of the founding individuals.>>

The human race originated in Africa and spread to the rest of the world in three great waves of migration. We cannot know whether the people who left Africa were a representative sample of those who remained behind.

What is more it is possible that by sheer chance there were genomic differences between the groups that populated Europe and those that populated Asia.

I am not saying different demes do differ in eg intelligence. I’m just saying we cannot rule out the possibility.
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Saturday, 12 March 2011 10:35:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Mr McReal

I am not surprised that you are now retracting your previous statement, as it has obviously occured to you that you have just shot yourself in the foot.

The reason why I am running rings around you and making a fool of you, is because your belief that all races are equal is incorrect. It is simply an article of faith which you have accepted without question. You have also accepted the fashionable view that all racists are uneducated, cretinous, black hearted villains, who need to be put in place by "intelligent" and educated people such as your good self.

The problem is, that you have just bumped into a racist who does not conform to your stereotype. Your thinking is entirely subjective, and you need to switch on your brain's critical analysis circuit and begin to understand the subject of racism objectively. Because if you don't, I am going to continue running rings around you.

Racism is normal and natural. What keeps all communities together is the shared values of what constitutes correct behaviour. People feel safe withing their own communities, and they can be very leery of people from other races, religions and cultures who live among them, especially if the behaviour of the new arrivals is detrimental to the safety and prosperity of the host population.

People can be tolerant of minorities, provided that the minorities obey the laws of the primary culture, and are not threatening the status quo through rising numbers, caused by high rates of immigration or birthrate differentials.

Because if a minorities numbers are increasing, especially minorities who's cultural practices are diametrically opposed to that of the host culture, THAT is when the trouble starts. No people have ever accepted becoming a minority within their own territory to an alien culture without hostility towards the people who are invading their territory.
Posted by LEGO, Saturday, 12 March 2011 11:23:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thankfully all man is equal under God rather than the pervese conclusions drawn from a fantasy. All customs and traditions however are not the same. Many aborginal practices before and after white man arrived were and are nothing short of barbaric. The murder of the unborn by much of white culture is sanitized but even more abhorrent considering we should know better. The godless secularist have created an ernormous vacumm for the barbaric religion of Islam to spread. God shows no favourtism when it comes to forgiveness. All who call on His Son will be saved. He is the only true equalizer of race, colour and gender.
Posted by runner, Saturday, 12 March 2011 12:20:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes, runner, darker skin people are evolutionarily superior to whiter skin people, including the resistance to malaria conferred by sickle-cell anaemia.
Posted by McReal, Saturday, 12 March 2011 12:22:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
IT SHOULD BE MANDATORY for all people commenting on multiculture, racism and immigration to state the nationality of their first Australian forbear AND the nationalities of their 8 adjacent neighbours (Usually 3 behind, 2 on sides and 3 across the road).

Otherwise Australia has become the new Dodge City with everyone lying through their teeth to cheat and screw their neighbour.

I have English forbears, and
Greek, Greek, Macedonian, Croatian, Greek, Chinese, Italian, Chinese neighbours.

There is no meaningful interactions and attempts at interraction are met with short shrift.

I would like to know the same statistics for every politician, particularly bleeding heart Laborites and all spruikers of externalised costed immigration like Heather Ridout.

Government statistics on immigration benefits, only reflect which races and how well they are licking government butts at the time. The true statistics on who lives near who and what they are experiencing is swept under a very big and dusty white Anglo Australia carpet, stacked high with GST dollars, in downtown Canberra.
Posted by KAEP, Saturday, 12 March 2011 1:04:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Can some one tell me! how long does it take to lose your indig; status. There are indig; people around that are whiter than me.
My mother was welsh and my father was english. I was born in AU. Am i Australian, or still half english and half welsh. At what point do i become AU.
Posted by a597, Saturday, 12 March 2011 1:14:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
a597 wrote:

>>Can some one tell me! how long does it take to lose your indig; status. There are indig; people around that are whiter than me.>>

Careful!

You could be sued for making comments like that a597.

Yes really.

See: Aborigines sue Bolt over racial writings

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/aborigines-sue-bolt-over-racial-writings-20100917-15gk7.html

>>HERALD Sun columnist Andrew Bolt is being sued under the Racial Vilification Act by a group of Aborigines...

In the first column, published under the headline ‘‘It’s so hip to be black’’ in the paper on April 15, 2009, and on his blog under the headline ‘‘White is the new black’’, Bolt enumerated a list of light or white-skinned people who identified themselves as Aboriginal, and suggested their choosing to do so was proof of ‘‘a whole new fashion in academia, the arts and professional activism’’.

He added that ‘‘for many of these fair Aborigines, the choice to be Aboriginal can seem almost arbitrary and intensely political’’.>>

And

>>On August 21, 2009, Bolt revisited the topic in a column headlined ‘‘White fellas in the black’’, in which he derided the granting of an award for Aboriginal artists to white-skinned painter Danie Mellor and an indigenous scholarship to white-skinned academic Mark McMillan.>>
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Saturday, 12 March 2011 3:19:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So whats racial about that, it is a fact.
Posted by a597, Saturday, 12 March 2011 6:20:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy