What a dispiriting article.

There are so many points to debate here but one question I have is that the author states

"...European-brought plagues like Aids"

What does this mean? It did not arrive there, it came out of Africa and spread around the world I thought, is this not the case?

Yes Europeans do owe Africa and did contribute greatly to many of the problems that exist today. There is no doubt that colonial times were immoral, barbaric and exploited the cultures of indigenous people from Peru to Australia to Africa.

However is now not the time to cease blaming Europe for Africa's problems and for Africans to take control of their own destiny instead of wallowing in the wrongs of yesteryear? The HIV virus is widely thought to have originated in Africa but despite this the African continent is the furthest behind in combatting it. This cannot be solely attributed to a lack of resources- until very recent times the ANC officially considered HIV a European ploy to stop Africans breeding and treatable by herbal medicine.

In addition there is greater Africa's inability or perhaps unwillingness to deal with despot after despot. Take Mugabe for example. Thabo Mbeki cannot bring himself to condemn him despite the fact that 5million starving refuges have flowed into SA from a country that was once regarded as the 'bread basket of Africa'. The Chinese find the situation hysterical because while everybody blames Europe they sit back and reap the substantial trade benefits of having backed Mugabe's ZANLA terrorists.

Where was Africa during the genocides in Rwanda, Burundi, Sudan etc? Once again commentators were so fixated on blaming the west for these tradgedies that they overlooked the fact that Zimbabwe, Angola and the DRC had tens of thousands of troops fighting diamond wars just hours away from potentially intervening.

Yes Europeans helped stuff Africa. But more certain than that is the fact that Africans aren't helping to fix it!

Africa is a continent, not a nation and it can't all be lumped in and treated as one. There are 53 nations in Africa, with a total population of 900 million. The history of those nations is diverse as is where they are now and where they will go in the future.
The September 2005 edition of National Geographic magazine is devoted to Africa (the continent) and is well worth a read.

“We will remove all the white man’s vestiges such as borders and land ownership…” and implicitly, remove white man himself completely. Bashir, this sounds an awful lot like Robert Mugabe.

I thoroughly appreciate your passionately expressed potted history of the Europeanisation of Africa, but expelling the white man is not going to happen.

“…and just like the old days, we will move around the continent and let our animals graze wherever the rain falls and pastures abound.”

No chance. Nor anything remotely like it.

It is unfortunate that you place totally negative connotations on everything that Europeans have done in Africa. While I agree that many attempts to help have had adverse consequences, some of them of extraordinary scale such as medicines leading to population explosion, I think you need to acknowledge that a lot of genuine effort has gone into helping Africa.

Regarding the initial waves of ‘invasion’, Jared Diamond’s book and current TV series, ‘Guns, Germs and Steel’ explains why this came out of Europe, and not only into Africa but around the world. But if it hadn’t been Europeans, it would have been some other group, sooner or later. The fact is, this sort of human movement, resulting in the suppression of aboriginal peoples was going to happen in Africa, as it did in Australia, North America and the rest. This has happened throughout the history of humanity. For that matter it has happened throughout the history of life on earth.

So as hard as it might be, I think we need to just accept what has happened…. and stop thinking of it in, quite frankly, very strong racial terms.

...indeed other commenters, the CURRENT genocidal overthrow of the Africans by Arabians in the Sudan is not merely horrific and illegal but it illustrates a sordid and revolting alternative to European colonialism.

African women must just love all these alternatives. If they were ever consulted, that is. They may 'choose' a traditional, superstitious lifestyle of utter subjugation and hard work OR perhaps another foreign-imposed but 6th century religious lifestyle of utter subjugation and hard work. Ripper.

Returning to the past is a bizarre approach to tackling the future. Not only is it idiotic (exactly which historical period do you choose and why?)but it's not what a lot of people there want, it seems.

For example, traditional lives and regimes could never even begin to encompass the 2005 election of female Liberian leader, Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf. Upon her rise, some said...

"Marie-Madeleine Kalala, Human Rights Minister in the transitional government of the Congo, another country gripped by civil war, said Johnson-Sirleaf's victory is a cause of joy and pride to the women of Africa.

Asha Ahmed Abdalla, a woman who vied for power in another war-torn country, Somalia, said: "The world is a better place when run by a woman.

"The presidency in Liberia and the first woman chancellor in Germany are glorious moments for the whole female community in the world," she said in reference to Germany's first woman government leader, Angel Merkel.

"If I were elected president, I'd have promoted peace and democracy rather than supporting civil strife like the male leaders in Somalia," Abdalla added.

"Margaret Thatcher, Benazir Bhutto and Mary Robinson contributed to the advancement of civilisation in their country as well as in the world," she said referring to past women leaders of Britain, Pakistan and Ireland, respectively.

"Women are less corrupted than their male counterparts," Abdalla said."

http://www.mg.co.za/articlePage.aspx?articleid=256376&area=/breaking_news/breaking_news__africa/

Notwithstanding the over-optimistic, hyperbolic description of women and their leadership examples, the fact remains that Africa is DESPERATE for help and you can't turn back the clock, you can't stop people from learning, trying,doing and evolving. And why, why on earth, would you?

To rid Africa of all white trace would be a mammoth task. All the cities,hospitals,schools, transport road sea and air,electricity etc etc. It took a long time to build up ,it will take time to tear down. And then Africa can revert to tribalism, slavery and all the delights of a primitive society.
The ganja weed will show the way.

Only Africans can solve Africa’s problems. The few vestiges of colonialism left are what remains of the institutions and business networks allowed go to wrack and ruin by Africans after the ‘imperialists’ left. Harping on the past and blaming Europeans for the ruin that is Africa today is merely an exercise in self-pity.

The author yearns for an Africa that he knows only from history. Most of us can empathise with this: the old days always seem better in retrospect. But, thinking about the past keeps you in the past. The past is interesting, we learn from it, but we don’t want to live there.

All monetary aid to Africa should cease. I don’t like to see kids on TV starving anymore than most others do, but sending money and food to Africa only perpetuates the problem by keeping more people just ‘alive’ enough so that they can have more children to start another starving generation and so on.

The author recalls that in the pre-white Africa, the population never outgrew itself because of natural disease and lack of interference with nature. Everyone lived a tolerable life because the population was controlled.

Education, democracy, private enterprise and survival of the fittest are the only things which will save Africa. People who cannot currently provide for themselves in the modern world are beyond help. Organisations and ageing rock stars contribute only to further suffering with their self-aggrandising stunts.

Entire civilizations have disappeared over the ages because they were overtaken by change. Who are we to decide that Africa or any other country that cannot keep up with the times is not part of that process?

Leigh you do love to throw the odd hand grenade.But you knew the lefty's would be seething to repond to that load of twaddle.Your know nothing adhominen malfeasance is palpable.[Deleted for flaming. Poster suspended for 2 weeks.]
And yes I am a lefty and proud of it,and it is my lifes work to ameliorate the darkness of conservative oligarchic fascists.

Dear Philb
its such a pity that you posture yourself as a 'Lefty'. 'Concerned person' would be adequate mate and probably alienate a lot less people. The 'evil right' against which you pit yourself is something which is part of human nature, and exists and will continue to manifest itself in every age. (same for the idiological Left I guess). The exploits of 'white' colonial powers in Africa were but an extension of the 'lust of the nobility' for more territory and power and prestige, but also, it was a competition with other colonial powers in the interests of survival- economic and military.

History also includes Neo colonial adventures by communist powers and they might be a little further behind the scenes but still have the same national interests.

BASHIR .. you wistfully long for The familiar, the childhood memories etc.. the culturally significant, and you (like most of us) are romanticising and idealising your own past. (its classic CULTURE SHOCK :). Many of us experience that in regard to the cultural and racial texture of our own country. So, given that you feel the same, as a migrant, I suggest this is quite normal, and nothing to do with race.

But you know something ? We can actually experience a greater joy, and a love from and for our fellow pilgrims in life, even across racial and cultural barriers. I experienced that in Borneo, I now long for the types of things you mentioned but I'm divided. I feel them for Asian tribal people, Chinese merchants, even Malay Muslims who all formed a part of a precious time in my life, and I'm white from the top of my head to the sole of my foot.

For me, the treasured memories are of a renewed multi racial/tribal community, a Christ centered one. Of shared meals in our home with many different races and languages full of laughter and happiness, but all one in Christ.

I share your feelings. it's best to try to integrate them into the present.. you will feel the same about now also :)

Dear David.Your post is as usual succinct and to the point,and to risk pissing in your pocket your knowledge style and layout is to be commended,and its clear your comments like mine are off the cuff(apart from when you quote the bible)and not plagiarized from the net or an encyclopedia,the latter obviously being free to use in any matter deemed necessary.We all derive our info from somewhere.(I guess).

"Proud to be a lefty" Now are you sitting down David?I once shock horror, voted for Malcolm Fraser.I must confess my hand in the polling booth was trembling at the time,and no it wasn't the result of a good night on the turps.I thought at the time he was the best man for the job.Now Malcolm does have his faults,believe it or not I am beginning to admire the man ,in his dotage he is becoming quite the statesman,unlike the current twerp we now have.

I hate all politicians(not all) with equal fervour,most of them are parisites, on the left right or in between and to lazy to get out of there own roads.In some cases they are imbeciles.They ingratiate themselves at election time, then its business as usual.

Now David who I alienate myself with at time time of life is of no consequence,however if caring about the planet,my fellow man,fighting exploitation,and pissing off conservative nuff nuffs,makes me a trendy lefty,I wear that badge with pride.

The biggest problem for Africa is not Europeans, but Africans themselves, African leaders running off with billions, to hell with the rest of the population.

Africans themselves can be extremely racist. I mean look at what the Bantu did to the Pygmies. There is still some debate in Africa as to wether they are really human. They are often kept as slaves by the Bantu and there are plenty of stories of cannibalism involving the poor old pygmies.

I do apologise to Africans for the damage that the Catholic Church
has done in Africa. I'm sorry that we have produced such a nutcase
religion.

Dear oo me, what a load of twaddle, the guilt trip we: “Europeans” should submit to our superiors, what other word of mind conditioning- it could be know other than. “Schizophrenia”- Please, if Europeans are that bad and Simple Mindless sick people Please spare us of your superior mind and relieve the Psychological misery we must bare- and let us be in primitivism, and then when we are ready - Then we Beg you to Bless us with your presence and your good will- Money – Education-Civilization –and to teach us the way of Civility.
The obvious is: You have taken Racism a bit too far; to a point it has become a Pathological obsession and of Psychotic proportions. Typical Marxist trait. Isn’t that the Irony of Leftist Ideology? People are not that stupid or is this a Mind bending Kaiser Trad Machiavellian Moment conundrum: Tuberoinfundibular pathway or Amygdala Conditioning.. Would be My Non P C cultural Marxism Probable cause opinion .MMMmmmmm What planet did I just arrive on?

PhilB... your kind words are appreciated !

ALL and YABBY... *whack* :) you should have read my post boys...
Bashir is fair dinkum experiencing 'Culture Shock'. The symptoms are these.

1/ An unrealistic idealization of the 'old' ways
2/ A rejection and hostility toward the 'new'.
3/ This is usually not a conscious choice.

The usual outcome is as follows:

a) Go Native, embrace with totality the new, rejecting the old.
b) Rejecting the new, clinging with romantic fervor to the old.
c) a Studied adjustment and integration of the old and new into the self.

Often this is caused by the lack of ability to form meaningful relationships and real friendships in the 'new' situation. It can also be exacerbated by choosing to identify exclusively with a small number of 'us' rather than getting out and knowing some of 'them'.

I've seen this among some new missionaries and all combinations of the 3 outcomes.

In other words, Bashir is not being entirely rational, due to culture shock.
Try to reach out to the guy, and see past his unrealized cry for help.

BASHIR.. be assured, you will be ok with time. Specially when you realize that we white mob actually can be quite nice and friendly.
Don't see in all of us the excesses of the rampaging colonial period

That would be part true D B, but:
Not just immigrants to European nations hold this view; it is a contemptuous view of the Left. And the view from the right Ideological is theoretical garbage, Common sense and logic with a bit of decency is what the left despise, Providing excuses and rewarding failure is not going to solve anything, just compounding the problem and adds fuel to the ready resentful public sick of the Elite lootery bashing us to death with subliminal rhetoric of Guilt and Misery.
Try doing the same in reverse order, I guarantee we would be shot first ask Questions later.
Not a good way to win friends and Influence people in the realms of those in reality and certainly publishing such thoughts is something heavy in the mind to produce such contempt. I would uphold hold my first view on the matter.

Then just imagine if Andrew Fraser had wrote such an article in reverse, how many nuclear weapons would the lefty looters find to detonate upon him?
Case closed.

Bashir posts another hostile racist attitude by his inference that the Black African cultural past was better than what the White culture has given to Africa. We do not need more racist slurs on past Anglo-Celts what we need is assimilation today into a world society.

Boaz_David I have to agree to your posts that the gospel of Christ is the only hope for a truly unified and civil society. I have Black African Christian friends here in Sydney they are wonderful people - they have no longing for their former tribal ways.

Quote B_D, "For me, the treasured memories are of a renewed multi racial/tribal community, a Christ centered one. Of shared meals in our home with many different races and languages full of laughter and happiness, but all one in Christ,"

There are those that wish to live in the past and those that wish to forget it, along with the responsibility they, or their forbears, have for its corruption. I sympathise with Bashir. There is nothing wrong with wanting to live in a simpler time in the cocoon of familiar surroundings. It is one of the devices of memory that what we had was seamless, consistent and safe yet what we have is fraught with uncertainty and loss of control. Africa’s experience gives much credibility to the latter. It would be difficult to argue otherwise, however as with some of the postings, to blame the victim for the state of their situation is a shallow and short sighted conclusion but an easy one, hence its appeal.
The world is a series of remote continents no longer, yet, I am afraid to say the plight of your continent will remain in a backwater. The west is obsessive about two things, Bashir, colour and substance. Black is only important when the substance is oil.
My sincerest best wishes in your quest.

PHILB,

I’m sure Germans would be interested in your racist remarks. I am not German, incidentally. And, unlike you, I don’t stereotype people according to race or nationality. Your have a serious problem there – blaming a whole nation for the remarks of an individual about whom you know absolutely nothing.

Cultural superiority? Who mentioned it?

Your “life’s work (is) to ameliorate the darkness of conservative oligarchic fascists”, eh?

I’ll overlook the grammar and assume you mean that you intend to ‘remove’, not ‘improve’ this thing you hate. And where did I mention oligarchy? I was talking about natural selection, not the rule of a few. Good luck to you. You must be a more powerful person than your posts suggest.

Criticise me all you like, but at least think before you write. Your great Crusade will need more than name calling and merely disagreeing with other people to have any hope of success

PhilB - great posts

BD - agree with much of what you have to say.

Yes Bashir is indulging in some romanticising of the past - quite understandable. However reality must raise its ugly head (this is where I disagree BD) and suddenly believing in a religious deity aint gonna be a substitute for the hard work required to unify and create a strong and vital Africa.

The whites aren't going to go away - they and the original inhabitants need to join hands and work together.

With its remaining (and still vast) resources there is no reason why Africa can't become independent and a virile economic force on the world stage. Look at the contribution Africans have made to the USA - when given the opportunity.

Bashir - your blog is prolific and heartfelt - I haven't time to read all. Suggest with your talent for prose to put together that novel or autobiography.

While I don't agree that the clock can be turned back, please keep the writing coming - I am learning a lot thanks to people like you.

I refer to my first post on this article and would like to add the following. We all know colonialism was wrong. I think we are also all smart enough to admit that stronger empires/ countries take over weaker ones, and that this has always been the case and always will be. Today's economic hegemony has replaced colonialism and is undoubtedly a less blatant more insidious problem.

Yet there is absolutely no logical reason why the OAU cannot become a power itself in world economics. However as pointed out by previous posters Africans themselves have largely failed to create the equal, transparent and corruption free democracies they yearned for during colonial times. In fact on a recent trip to Harare I found myself engaged in a conversation with several black Zimbabweans who were convinced Ian Smith had been a much better prospect for the country than Mugabe-this was particularly astonishing when I found out two of the three were ex-ZANLA guerillas!

Mbeki's South Africa is currently pursuing a super agressive 'affirmative action' campaign in which black Africans are being allocated positions in sport, industry, government and commerce that they are simply not qualified to fill. Not only does this create fear amongst potential investors but it also spawns uncertainty amongst the population. As one coloured SA cricketer recently said "it takes very strong individuals to overcome the fear that they might not be where they are on merit."

Mbeki stated when he first came to power that he would pursue reconciliation and would not marginalise the white population- a noble statement considering the past. I fear that this has proven impossible and that SA will continue down the path of resentment that has caused greater Africa to disintegrate. Africans must remember that holding a grudge is not hurting their former colonial masters or Afrikaans rulers but rather themselves

Bashir

Thank you for your article. Gave me heaps to think about. I guess our Indigenous people could present a similar argument - well some of it anyway.

Leigh, as usual, I enjoy your posts.

Cheers
Kay

I kinda understand where he is coming from. When a new culture is forced on another that cultures stays still in time. It stagnates or dies, doesn't grow or evolve. So there is a feeing that for it to evolve or become a valid culture once again you have to have to go back to where it all stopped or stagnated. So yes, you have to go back and start from where you left off. Everywhere this happens, people harp on about what happened so many hundreds years ago when they feel is the time their culture was last valid and whole.

So I understand but at the same time think it will never work, too much time and cultural pollution for anything so simple.

I agree with Bashir Goth on most points.

I wonder if a white Australian would be allowed to question the arrival of black Africans into Australia?

Bashir Goth rues whites going to Africa. Are whites allowed to rue blacks coming to Australia? The answer is no.

I am not saying I am for or against black immigrants.

I'm new to this forum discussion approach, but it does seem to me that there are 2 opposing sides that go head to head.

At the centre of this debates there appears to be disagreement about the role of racism in world history.

Some appear to suggest it was/is a pivotal ideological informer of social policy and historical practice, others contend that it is not or that racial injustice is therefore inevitable and therefore right.

Following the latter appeal to a theory of what could be called a Darwinian enivitability and hypothetically would the takeover of this nation by say Africa be justified simply on the basis of 'Might is Right'.

I'm sure many would say no, but this then appears to contradict totally their retro-analysis of world history and take-over of many non-Euro nations.

Peace.

Bashir Goth presents a well thought out article, which is close to the truth. Sure they aren't helping themselves, but how can they when their leaders were trained by the west and use western style government, unlike the forms of conflict resolution Bashir speaks about in the past.

We can't go back in time, yet I see the paranoia growing in the right wing christian ranks, as they try to pass the buck again.

Bd, at least has an understanding of how much their life style meant to them and how content they were within that. That will come again, but in a more advanced and understanding way. I fear it will be at a great lose of both population and resources.

It may be, that in time they will return to moving around their continent, as will lots of humans in the world. But their return to a better way of living with the environment, will be along side technology that will help that occur in a sustainable way.

I just hope people like Bashir can hold out until that time and use their superior intellect and understanding of natural life they have, to evolve that in peace and harmony with nature. As well as evolving their understanding. I am sure that they well remember, what certain sections of Europeans have done to their country and lifestyle.

I see nothing positive in dragging people into our own stupid approach to the world. With the right example, they follow willingly. We can see where the christian European example has placed them, no excuse for that is there.

LEO welcome to OLO !

"Might" does not make right, but it does make the laws :)

Might is also the main determining factor in the status quo in pretty much every country including Australia. Advancing into new territory is often seen as manifest destiny. (quite wrongly of course) As a Christian, I often use the little verse "All have sinned" and in relation to the expansion of nations, colonization resource exploitation border/territorial wars etc, they indeed have.

The Japanese denuded Korean forests for timber when they were the colonizing power.(leaving their own in tact)
The USA was just as 'sinful' as the Japanese at Pearl Harbour, when they sent gunboats with Commodore Perry around 1854 to force Japan to open up for trade. The USA is sinful in trying to remove Labors clause about evergreening patents in our free trade agreement.
Mark Vaile 'sinned' when he deceptively stated "We have the protection of the Patent system and medicines will not INcrease in price" (the fact is, they wont DEcrease either if patents can be evergreened and generic drugs are kept out)

So, when it comes to 'sin' there is plenty to go around.

The principle demonstrated by the repentance of Zachaeus when Jesus passed by, is a good guide of how to resolve past sin (where practicable) "To those I defrauded, I restore to them fourfold"
We can't give back 4 Australia's to the indigenous people, but we sure COULD give them unpaid wages and plenty of interest.

I don't really see evidence of 'cultural or racial superiority' here. I think you are misreading if u do. What u do see though is a passionate defense of "OUR" culture simply because its ours.

Thanks for the Welcome Boaz David,

I'm not attempting to be misleading and to take you up on your last point in which you state - "don't really see evidence of 'cultural or racial superiority' here. I think you are misreading if u do. What u do see though is a passionate defence of "OUR" culture simply because its ours".

From what I understand you are implying that a pan-Australian culture exists and that this is shared culture that cuts across a variety of ethnicities. Is this what you are saying? Is this a defence of a flexible or inflexible monoculturalism?

If we accept the thesis that monoculturalism does have a history and had very diverse conditions for its emergence then surely this emergence came from a type of multiculturalism at some point. Is the argument toward monoculturalism denying this same history?

Peace.

The basis of Australian culture rests in the principle:
All persons are equal.

Any one who assumes or acts as if they are superior by a condescending attitude because of authority, race, education, religion etc will soon be cut down or exorcised from mainstream society. This happens in the workplace, sport, and community shared events. Just listen to the conversations at work when "know it all" bosses lord it over workers - there is soon conflict. It is a matter of assimilation to be equal even if more educated. There are subtle nuances that are observed in attitudes that demonstrate equality.

We are in this world together for the benefit of all and not for ourselves.

Beautifully written, Bashir. Thank you! I can fully understand you wanting to reclaim your nation and return it to its former state. Even if it were possible for you to shut your gates to Europeans though, I agree with other posters here that it is doubtful a return to simpler times could ever be made to work. Too many Africans have succumbed to the Western model and are as addicted now as we are to "the modern beads of slavery". I doubt too that the West would ever relinquish its interests in Africa's resources and its potential markets.

Some well thought-out comments, Boaz-David, but I couldn't help thinking your tone at times was somewhat patronising. Your position of cultural superiority tends to blind you to the good in other cultures. Western culture is not the pinnacle of enlightenment you and others claim it to be. For a start its rampant devouring of resources is totally unsustainable. On its current course many would argue it is more likely headed for self destruction rather than the glory days you seem to imagine.

"Black is only important when the substance is oil." A great line Craig and spot on.

Bronwyn,
Another "beautifully written" post from you. Whay an interesting concept "the modern beads of slavery" . Re DB I find I agree more with him, than I disagree, however on this one I disagree, and agree with you that our civilisation is not the pinnacle.

Even though I am a Catholic, I think the religious pinnicle is Buddism, a peacefull, tranquil religion, suited to ongoing peace and harmony.

As for a civilised role model the Scandanavian countries like Sweeden, Norway etc, take a lot of beating, in my humble opinion.

I have hope every time I notice a post with your name on it, I agree with all your posts so far, they are inspirational, please keep up the great work.
Regards, Shaun

Surely this article is taking the piss? "Death from Malaria was just a thing that happened like rain"?

This article should be in the next edition of Britannica as an example of the myth of the Noble Savage.

Actually, on re-reading the last 2 paragraphs, this guy is definitely taking the piss...

"We will remove all the white man's vestiges such as borders and land ownership; and just like the old days, we will move around the continent and let our animals graze wherever the rain falls and pastures abound. We will die and be buried in our soil and our bloated bodies will no longer be washed on foreign beaches."

A modest proposal indeed. Bravo sir.

Hi LEO
no, I’m not saying there is a culture which spreads across all ethnicities here. I’m saying that there is a cultural flavor/texture which is predominant with AngloBritCeltic roots. (including Magna Carta)

This is borne out by ABS statistics, giving approx 74% of Aussies of such background. Please don’t misunderstand me, I don’t say this with a sense of ‘cultural superiority’ but of ‘difference’ from other cultures.

The differences of Anglo culture to say -Polynesian or Eastern European are noticable. We don’t greet people by rubbing noses nor by men kissing men on each cheek usually. Not that those things are ‘bad’, not at all, they are just ‘not our way’. But among their own group ‘go for it’. No biggy. Just don’t slobber on my left and right cheek when I meet you, the culture here is a good solid handshake :) Bron, there’s plenty of ‘good’ in other cultures, its just not ‘our’ good, in the legal and social structure sense.

It would be extremely unfair for a group of say Hispanic illegal immigrants to arrive in the US, then be graciously given an amnesty, and the next thing be screaming about ‘Why is English the language of education and not Spanish’ ?...(then the Chinese, the Vietnamese, Cambodians all say the same-but its unworkable), I Hope u get my drift.

SEAN and BRONWYN... my eyes are glazing over here :) .. I’m mystified about how my posts were patronizing or suggesting cultural “superiority” ? (curious look) Could you be more specific about what prompted this conclusion from my posts in this thread ? I get the impression that ‘superiority’ is something projected ‘onto’ my posts, rather than derived from them, because I don’t try to promote such an idea. I DO promote ‘difference’ and priority with the legitimacy of our existing (anglo/brit) culture as the prevailing one, but not on the basis that it is superior, simply that it’s ours, just as much as Polynesian or Asian is that of other groups. Help me out here, Bron.. “patronizing” and Sean.. “Pinnacle” ok :) chapter and verse pls.

Come back Lucy!
Where are you when we need you?
If you read this, please send us an email from on high - telling it how it REALLY was so far back in time: when the lions (and hyeanas)played; to the unappreciated benefit of our species, doiing us proud; when they prevented us from rabbiting on impossibly as we now do with present human numbers.
Africa, dear Africa - the origin for us all.
Colin

Although I think the sentiment is relatively obvious from previous posts, I thank most of you for your interesting posts. I do feel however, compelled to comment on the words of some.

Freidrich, surely you cannot be serious when you say: "I wonder if a white Australian would be allowed to question the arrival of black Africans into Australia?” It seems fairly obvious to me that the white Australian is a colonialist himself and, contrary to popular opinion, was not here first. Indigenous politics and issues are undoubtedly being suppressed under the current government, but I had no idea it was leading to people forgetting about this nation’s indigenous people’s existence!

That aside, I found this to be a very interesting article and I agree with your post alchemist. There is no doubt in my mind the problems in Africa can be solved through innovation and hard-work at the grass-roots level. The African people as a whole need to be empowered and the fact of the matter is that we are not doing enough to facilitate that. Whilst I do agree that only Africians can help the African predicament, I do believe the privileged people of the world (ie, 'the west') have a critical part to play. It is easy to wash our hands of the African problem and say ‘they’re all corrupt’. It should be everyone’s responsibility to limit the needless death of any human being, and it is something people seem to easily losing sight of.

And as for you, Philo, "The basis of Australian culture rests in the principle: All persons are equal", what rubbish. We have a history of treating people differently – I’m sure the stolen generation, the people going into their 5th year in a detention centre, the East Timorese whose resources we are openly stealing, even the single mother trying to put her kids through school whilst we give tax breaks to the CEO on 13 million a year can all attest to that. The fact is that most Australians are about as forgiving of difference as their small world and convenience allows.

I refer to my previous posts and add the following. J kenno I see your point of view but I find it difficult to reconcile how exactly the west can help anymore.

The west cannot be expected to contribute more and more aid when the past 3 decades have shown tens of billions of dollars to have little impact on the suffering of African populations. Intervening in the domestic politics of certain African 'democracies' to ensure aid is directed to where it is needed is not an option. The bleeding heart lefties would undoubtedly label this as patronising, paternalistic and ultimately racist.

Furthermore I cannot see how economic concessions to the OAU would be sensible either. The OAU is in a strong enough position to negotiate its own deals. Latin America has shown this is possible and indeed the OAU successfully campaigned in Doha for significant trade and pharmaceutical concessions. The problem is that those who lead/ influence OAU policy do not have a conscience nor a appreciation of the suffering of Africa. There ideology has been fashioned by communist Russia/ China and thus human rights is not at the fore of their considerations.

I believe that Sir Geldoff would be far better served to organise a concert at the gates of Robert Mugabe's palace- for it is within the walls of that institution (and the palaces of other African dictators) that the fate of Africa resides.

I am wondering Who are these privileged people , are they The Elite Looters, Liars, etc. of the Elititude Who know better and will tell us what is good, or is it the Hard working man earning his worth and trying- striving for better and earn his keep. You can certainly pick who gets paid by our tax dollars by the very nature of their contribution. No Idea.

perhaps the removal of trade tarrifs and subsidisation of uncompetative farmers by the 'west' (and east), allowing farmers in productive areas of africa to earn fair return for their work and thereby educate themselves and their children, would be a start?

nope, too hard, its much easier politicaly and economicaly to throw money and complain, than to adjust the global buisness model to minimise exploitation

Bashir Goth “We will remove all the white man’s vestiges”

Would those vestiges include modern pharmaceuticals
Or Electricity
Or Water Pumps

Should “Africa” pursue a policy by which the vestiges of “White men” be the only ones to be removed or should “Arab vestiges” likewise be removed (from “Africa”).
Should the “European” Spanish remove the remaining vestiges of the “Moors” ? – Queen Isobella started that and the outcome was as “productive” as all the other small minded actions of the fearful possessed.

Whilst this article appears to be about “Africa”, it seems to be published in an Asian publication on an internet website, (oh another “white man’s vestiges”)

In short, this hypocrite, Bashir Goth, is complaining about those nasty “xenophobic” Europeans defending their borders, whilst simultaneously proclaiming the right of “Africa” to not only to do the same but to extend this action to remove all “vestiges” of European presence. All this, of course, it is claimed as being first published from Dubai (based on the home address of the website which carried it).
Dubai is hardly a paragon of parliamentary democracy, Then, we might also consider the rights and circumstances of “guest workers” in Arab countries and whether such a system is closer to economic slavery than equal representation as a free migrants.

I think the benefit of this article is to remind us that hypocrisy and bull-dust is not the unique preserve of “Europeans” or those of “European descent”. This article proves that hypocrisy and bull-dust is universal. It proves that hypocrisy and bull-dust is blind to matters of “quality”. It proves that men of any ethnic origin, are indeed equal and equally capable of producing meaningless drivel with which to incite the gullible.

Whilst everyone is entitled to their view, before they start dumping muck on other ethnic groups, they might look at their own history to avoid confirming their own hypocrisy.

"Whilst everyone is entitled to their view, before they start dumping muck on other ethnic groups, they might look at their own history to avoid confirming their own hypocrisy."

Well said Mr Rouge, I'm sure you'll agree that this can be applied to anyone that 'dumps' on Indigenous Australians as well.

Leigh."Im sure Germans would be interested in your racist remarks"Oh Leigh,you are so cutting,I will self flagellate later with a damp lettuce leaf,and teach myself not to be such a racist bastard.You knew very well where those remarks were leading.[Deleted for flaming. Poster has been suspended for 2 weeks.]
"I'll overlook the grammer" Oh please give me a break.Grammer, spelling, nuance of the english language,an intellect does not make.My pet galah can't spell and knows even less about grammer,however he does talk and that makes him smarter than you.

BOAZ_David, Your January 14 post was patronizing, especially the second half. Unless you know more about Bashir than his article suggests, I think it is quite presumptuous and arrogant of you to assume that he chooses to mix with small numbers of fellow Africans instead of mixing more widely. Or that he is being irrational and suffers from cultural shock. Not to labour the point too much but I feel there is a definite talking-down-to tone in this post and I'm sure I've noticed it in other posts but frankly I can't be bothered checking for further evidence. Your statement, "SEAN and BRONWYN... my eyes are glazing over here" was also patronizing. Having said that, I do enjoy your posts and usually think they contribute something worthwhile to the debate.

Shaun, thank you for your kind words. At the risk of BD and others suggesting some kind of love-in, I enjoy your posts too and hope to see many more of them. I agree, the Scandinavian countries are great models to aspire to. I'm a little more sceptical when it comes to Buddhism, but I have to admit it's probably one of the better religions.

Col - In relation to your statement, "Whilst everyone is entitled to their view, before they start dumping muck on other ethnic groups, they might look at their own history to avoid confirming their own hypocrisy", I think you should practice what you preach. You obviously have little understanding of the history of the European colonization of Africa. Try reading "Guns, Germs and Steel" as a good start. If you do you will see that, contrary to your assertion, Bashir has an excellent understanding of his country's history. You will also see in relation to your question, "Would those vestiges include modern pharmaceuticals or electricity or water pumps?" that Africa managed perfectly well without them for thousands of years.

"Africa managed perfectly well without them for thousands of years."

If you consider subsistence hunting and gathering, starvation, endless tribal warfare, slavery, and a complete ignorance of science, medicine and philosophy to be "managing well", then I guess you are right.

The situation in Africa today, even with all it's problems, is still far better than it was pre-colonisation.

LEO – as well as Indigenous Australians who dump on others too.

Bronwyn “Africa managed perfectly well without them for thousands of years.”

(To elaborate on Yobbo’s succinct and accurate post).

Tell that to the victims of Arab slavers (oh yes Europeans were not the only slave traders)
Tell that to those with Leprosy.
Tell that to those dying from all number of maladies which European developed pharmaceuticals, disinfectants and medical practices have prevented or curtailed.

And when Bashir Goth has removed the last vestiges of “European occupation” from the African landscape, please enlighten me as to who is going to replace the European women who provide the services of the fistula hospital to African women? (http://www.fistulafoundation.org/)

As a woman (based on your logon name), you should have some knowledge of exactly what fistula is, how it occurs and what you might think if you were so unfortunate as to suffer from it and be an outcast in your own society. You might also dwell on what a difference these European women doctors could make to your future.

So do not bother to play the “it was beautiful until the nasty Europeans spoiled it” card.
You know that is crap and If you do play that card, you are either lying or deluded.

If you think cannibalism, tribal warfare, malaria, female circumcision and many other blights both environmental and social which befell Africans were the result of “European colonisation” then there is no point in even acknowledging your existence.

If you want to go around in hair shirt and ashes feel free to do so.

If you want to parade faux-pity on Africa because you happen to possibly be European, do so.

But do not do it in my name and do not expect me to stand quietly by whilst you make an idiot of yourself and in the process malign the leading contribution which Europeans have played in the civilising and beneficially developing not only Europe but every other continent of the earth, Africa and Australia included.

Dear Bronwyn
thanx for the encouragement to reflect on my attitude. I have done. Just a little anecdote, I was listening to a Pastor on a tape one time, and he related how he never remembered those who complemented him but he ALways remembered those who criticized him :) I guess because criticism attacks our sense of who we are, and we feel threatened. But, in the electronics arena, lack of negative feedback will often open the way to very unpredictable and unstable outputs.
So.. its all good.

Let me make a point from a Biblical quote if I may.

“John the Baptist came neither eating nor drinking, and you said, "He has a demon!" The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and you said, "Look a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!" (Matthew 11:18-19)

Probably one of the all time best examples of ‘ya cayn’t win’ :)

One persons ‘confidence’ is another persons ‘arrogance’.

I should not have used the word “Inability” (suggesting a lack of relationship skill) in forming relationships, but ‘unsuccessful’ (suggesting other reasons may have occurred) would have been more appropriate. Good relationships in a new situation generally heal culture shock.

When I mentioned culture shock. I do so from a trained perspective. We looked closely at case studies and theory, and our own experience. Bashir showed classic symptoms, based on his post and I believe that stating as much might be helpful to him personally.

The ‘small group of people ’ was indeed a bit of a jump, though it does fit the pattern. I assumed as much because of the other things he mentioned. So, granted, I was making unsubstantiated assumptions. Bashir is welcome to correct me :) But that would not change the impression I gained of him experiencing culture shock. Have you read ‘Future Shock’ by Alvin Toffler ?
It shows how all of us, even in our own culture can experience the condition, simply due to ‘rapid change’. I also recommend this one when thinking about the impact of feminism on male identity. http://www.anthroprof.org/documents/Docs102/102articles/steelAxes.pdf

Mahatma Gandhi, when asked what he thought of Western civilization said - “I think it would be a good idea

My brother in-law is a First Officer in the Merchant Navy; I did not believe him when he mentioned that the most common sight on ether cost: East or West of Africa was Human remains floating in the Ocean, don’t be shocked, it has been like that for many many years. When sighted, obvious assistance is summoned but not forth coming if you get the meaning and there is too many bodies. Has any one seen that video yet?
Such is the romance of Primitive Tribalism, they kill them selves off and no body cares, not even the media, Perhaps the Elites of world power just assume it has already been looted, so there is nothing left for them to loot, Sounds like some Governments around the region so we send in more Loot for them and Africans still die. That sounds closer to the truth than this Lefts pathetic garble. Bloody culture shock, what excuse is there for the other dribbler’s- Pathological denial?

What an extraordinary article. As combative in its way as anything we have seen here, and expressed in a way that makes it very difficult to argue with. There are no facts to dispute, just an outpouring of dismay. No logic to bandy with either, there simply isn't any. One man's opinion, pure and simple.

We can't argue whether Bashir Goth's mythical African would be "better off" if he hadn't been discovered back in the days when the Europeans were building trade empires across the globe, because there is clearly a fundamental difference in what he and we consider "better off". But nor should we feel guilt for the actions of previous generations of Europeans: they had different values and objectives.

As Bashir Goth himself admits, the people of Africa were changed by their experiences. and it is an immutable fact of life that the clock cannot be turned back. Change is permanent. But compared to previous centuries, the world today generally frowns upon outright theft of a country's resources. So the more-developed economies tend to encourage economic growth in the countries that have those resources, through a more equitable form of trade – simple economic self-interest will do that.

If a country chooses some other way to proceed, so be it; eventually they will return to some more primitive form of existence outside the world economy. But it won't be the same as it once was.

It is understandable for Bashir Goth to lament, but he will eventually come to understand that looking back isn't the answer. Things happen, and they cannot be made to un-happen. Not the Holocaust. Not the rape of the Sabine women. Not the twin towers. Not the Great War. Not the Rwandan genocide. Nothing that has been done can be undone, even by the most ardent do-gooder.

In the meantime, it would be more polite if we were to empathize with the emotion expressed in the article, instead of lecturing the guy on how he should should feel the same way that we do about the colonization of the African continent.

I think, Pericles, that you have have reminded us all that the purpose , surely, of having a forum is to allow for empathy or argument on the subject of the actual articles that are written. This constant degeneration into name-calling and subjective arguments based upon each other's personalities somewhat defeats the purpose to my mind.
I realise that not everyone is - nor is expected to be - familiar with the paradigms of debate. But surely we are all familiar with the effects of constant pejorative aimed at ones beliefs or attitudes? And surely we are capable of understanding through the very emotive narrative we are discussing that this was written by someone who, for whatever reason (yep. culture shock is as good a lable as any)is feeling confused, disempowered and very, very angry.

If any of you have ever had to house families of African women and children in your garage for months on end; if you have had to make your way through scores of homeless, slowly dying children in order to get to the shops; if you have had friends and relations killed by armed, lawless bands of twelve and fourteen year olds then you might not be quite so damning towards the author of this article.

No, of course we can never go back to either Neverland or the Garden of Eden, but anger and misery make us long for such things. The current ills of Africa are myriad and diverse but part of the misery is caused by the unsuccessful hybridisation of different cultures. The bastardisation of social policy which results may be what the author is referring to in part. Currently neither rural nor urban Africans are accorded the rights of free Europeans but neither do the majority have knowledge or access to traditional customs. They are torn between two cultures and have no positive identification with either.And for most, just like us, their biggest worries are their children's future,
And Leo? I reckon your succint Ghandi quote was a miracle of irony and passive resistance. It was also damned funny.

The Married and elderly Mahatma also slept with young unmarried girls ....

hmmm maybe we should adopt that idea also.

He said and did a lot of things.

The result of his peaceful non violent resistance was Indian Independance, which led to one of the most brutal and bloody ethnic wars of all time as the Muslims and Hindus no longer having the over arching military umbrella of the British, unleashed their true 'violent' feelings against each other.

His 'non violence' was good for some, extremely 'terminal' for hundreds of thousands of others. What a pity that the British were so greedy, that they bled the wealth of India like a slaughtered pig, that the ingratiated themselves at the expense of Indians, that they use all their resources to plunder Indias resources both human and material.

If they had done for 'others' as they would have done to themselves, perhaps there would never have been or needed to be a Ghandi who also said

"I like your Christ, but I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

and

"I do not want my house to be walled in on all sides, and my windows to be closed. Instead, I want the cultures of all lands to be blown about my house as freely as possible. But I refuse to be blown off my feet by any".

...to which I add 'a hearty 7 fold amen ! but human nature being what it is, I'd restrict the numbers and origins. :)

I am concerned about our Australian Indigenous people. I have no concern about people from other countries. I am concerned about our mentally ill people and our homeless people.

I am sick and tired of the do-gooders and femi-nazis telling me what to think.

I know what I think. Care for underprivileged Aussies first!

Kay

Agreed Kayweb,

I care most for the homless aussies and the old deros in oxford st, i really dont give a rats a**se about anyother culteral problems.

BD, That last quote about blowing cultures was spoken by Indira Gandhi (Indian Politician and Prime Minister. 1917-1984.) See http://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indira_Gandhi

Mahatma Gandhi (October 2, 1869 – January 30, 1948) was the spiritual and political leader of India who led the struggle for Indian independence from the British Empire.

Bashir is either a morosic pessimist always reflecting on the past blaming the world for his predicament or a very clever storyteller. I think the latter, judging from the amount of comments he receives each time he appears on OLO.

In his last article he was blaming the muslim fundamentalists for depriving him (and his offsprings) from his childhood folkloric islamic rituals.

Ironically, it is the latter group (muslims) that is going to deliver Africa from the remainder influence of the west and take the dark continent to a even darker future.

@meredith & kalweb,then why make a comment on this topic?
People are discussing Africa, yet you jump on a this topic that doesn't concern you. That doesn't make sense.

By the way Mahatma gandhi was a known racist.To black south africans that is. look at this:
http://www.dalitstan.org/books/gandhi/gandhi1.html

Ranier
thanx for that correction. I grabbed it from one of those 'quotes' sites and didnt really check which Ghandi.. the point is still valid though I think you will agree.

Life goes on :)
cheers

BD, Well, much to the mortification of the majority of 'Strayans', my mob are continuing to struggle not to blown down. But it seems when the shoes are on their feet they can't relate to the the sense of purpose in our political claims at all. Don't you find it interesting at many of negative comments about this article come from people who have never been to Africa. Very small town thinking indeed.

Ranier.. well.. each to his own on the postings.. I guess various individuals have a limited 'white' perspective on some of this, not a criticism, more of an observation.

Your 'mob' don't need to be blown over by us, and I hope you never will be. In truth, all I want is for the indigenous side of Australia to come to grips with the unchangable historic reality of 'now' and be the best people they can be. You seem to be doing ok.

As you well know, my view on this is that people will be transformed when they are 'in Christ', and I don't see any other way. There are other apparent ways of course, but they end up being circular arguments about historic injustice, rights etc etc. I'm sure there are structural injustices present, just like for the Irish during post Cromwell, absentee (Anglican) landlords owning most of Catholic Ireland... and where such structural injustices can be addressed and fixed, I'm all for it.

My biggest concern is that indigenous people might be attracted to a radical Islam, via intermarraige and prison conversions, where Islamic theology would place them on the side of "Allah and his apostle" who own the world, and 'Fight them wherever u find them' (i.e. those attacking Islam) as opposed to the 'Honor the Emperor'idea of Christianity, couple this with some strategic Arab funding for up and coming 'freedom fighters' along with fundamental discontent and we have a very ugly situation brewing.

In fact, its almost like this was plucked out of a Marxist revolutionary handbook, except that Arab money is available and they believe in Allah.

The pseudo Christian Bogomils of Bosnia joined the Ottoman Turks for similar reasons. (and became Muslims)

Not exactly on topic, but meant to be helpful as something to reflect about.

DB, just a little nudge, mate. Indigenous begins with an upper case 'I'. Many Aboriginal people do not recognise white sovereignty and as such prefer any reference to Aboriginal Australia to have a capital signifier. At the risk of being labelled a 'leftie', it is a courtesy that is not without its merits.

Before I commence I would like to say that I am a white male, of Irish heritage.

Africa was always destined to destroy itself but white people certainly helped! I was talking to a very well-traveled man once who told me that the worst places on earth are those that England has been the longest.

How true. My father has sponsored children in Tanzania and South America, two places that Europeans have s_it on. And now I sponsor a young boy in India, a country rooted by poms.

As for Australia, I support Aboriginal Australians (real Australians), I do not celebrate Australia day (invasion day) and am personally ashamed of my white ancestors for their brutal mistreatment of native Australians. I grew up around Aboriginal people who were my neighbours and we have a respect that will never be lost.

As a teacher I have a strong commitment to teaching Aboriginal children while allowing them to speak and write in their own dialect. I feel obligated to give these children the best opportunity possible to embrace and uphold their remarkable culture while gaining the skills necessary to function in a country dominated by white poms.

Yes you are right, white people have a lot to answer for.

Some small minded people making comments about Africa,people who may have never ever, left their backyards . Visit a foreign country first,try and find-out where your computer was made, or why nice clothes never cost Australians hundreds and hundreds of dollars.
Or why foreign tourist are so important to Australia's economy.Then you can talk about who you don't care about.Noone is an island.

Tubley. I agree with you that Europeans have alot to answer for but 'the very well travelled man' you referred to must either have been french or only ever have travelled to ex-British colonies...

Ivory Coast was a French colony and now has the highest rate of maimed people in the world. Mozambique was Portugese and has the capital (Maputo) with the highest rate of disease. Vietnam (French) struggled for a very long time to overcome a complete lack of infrastructure designed for Vietnamese, as did Algeria. The most terrible places in the world though would have to go to the central African nations including Burundi, the Congo, Rwanda, Uganda-none of which were British colonies.

India and Australia are both examples of colonies where British common law, education and health have prevailed, and while it must be recognised that the indigenous in Australia have been treated poorly, it must be acknowledged that if they had been under Portugese, French or Spanish rule it is doubtful any would be left.

craigB says to DB "..Indigenous begins with an upper case 'I'. Many Aboriginal people do not recognise white sovereignty and prefer any reference to Aboriginal Australia to have a capital signifier."

I agree some follow this convention. Many don't, as it's not a signifier of much more than Aboriginal. It is more of a weasel word to insert into bureaucratese to establish a polite group think where there was no group before. I think it is erroneous, to pretend it is a good idea. I feel it insults and obscures Aboriginal backgrounds far too much.

There was no nation state before the English colonised. There were long trade/communication routes, but with perhaps 1m people of different appearance and different customs speaking just a few of 260-odd languages, there was certainly no national consciousness so much as local, internecine and cooperative engagement over resources and territory, lifetime attachment to a very specific part of a much bigger landscape and a widespread fear of the sea.

Tasmania has been cut off for 12,000 years and the inhabitants weren’t sea-faring so communication with the mainland through a huge language and geographic barrier was no doubt practically non-existent.

To lump Torres Strait Islanders who are aboriginal, but not Aboriginal, as Indigenous obscures particular backgrounds again from a respectful, less ‘single-package’ view.

Finally, by claiming some people don’t observe "white sovereignty” are you suggesting that Aboriginal friends you cite are racist? Warren Mundine will be President of the ALP shortly (if not already) and he might not agree that Aboriginal people are natural bigots or as one-eyed as you make out. Most Aboriginal people today are Anglo-Irish-Aboriginal in their heritage, so should they just simply beat themselves up in an act of historical retaliation?

Blame and Shame is a game we can all keep playing like a broken record but it teaches us little about anything good. Do we want real progress after brave activism and truthful criticism of our history? Surely, it is in the real lives of real individuals we’ll find it, not in rhetoric invented to obscure truth and complexity once again.

Ro stated, “It is more of a weasel word to insert into bureaucratese to establish a polite group think where there was no group before”.

Well in fact there was a/is group thinking before that utilised a lower case 'a' as in 'aborigine', part of the fauna and flora.

One only needs to look at the no-name effigy of an 'aborigine' on the 2 dollar coin to realise that constructions of Aboriginality were created for mostly white use and a signification of proprietary over a 'people'.

As for sovereignty and nationhood, may i suggest you familiarise yourself with some of the scholarship and theory surrounding international laws and treaty making with Indigenous peoples.

I don't have the room to give you a quick tutorial here. What I can say is that the illegal acquisitions of this country (in reference to international precedents in law that go back 500 years and more) have never been truly considered in law here or internationally.

This does not mean native dominion was not recognised, albeit outlawed by decree. For example a proclamation made by Sir Richard Bourke Governor General and Governor in Chief of the Territory of New South Wales, written on the 26th August 1835 stating that no-one (in NSW) is able to take possession of vacant lands of the crown under the pretence of a treaty with the 'Aboriginal Natives'.

Ro, I'm assuming of course that you are interested in becoming more knowledgeable about these matters. But if this is just a case of you wanting to vent your spleen over 'aborigines' and anyone else (i.e., Craig) that recognises these errors in the ‘conventions’ of thinking about Indigenous people and history- don't let me hold you back, you've got plenty of back up and company here in OLO. Don't hold back, let it rip mate, I've heard it all before.

Ro, I am still trying to decipher how a small, seemingly innocent comment can instigate a tirade of barely comprehensible vitriol. I did not present anything that could be even vaguely interpreted as blame or shame.

“ Finally, by claiming some people don’t observe "white sovereignty” are you suggesting that Aboriginal friends you cite are racist?” You are drawing a long bow, indeed, to play the race card but it is a typical and transparent ploy. Terra Nullius, as a doctrine, was overturned by the High Court and the ramifications of that are still to be played out. Do you blame any Indigenous peoples for being critical of a sovereignty that its own laws find suspect? Common sense tells us that the sovereignty over this country is not going to change but that does not mean that there are not basic flaws in its foundation. As far as I am aware there are no laws forbidding Indigenous peoples believing that the land was, and is, theirs. If you find an inherent racism in that concept then you do not have a point, you have a problem.

As far as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are concerned, I always use that distinction whenever appropriate.

The comment that I put forward to BD was one politely offered to me by an Aboriginal person quite a while ago. It was offered without vitriol or an editorial on their history. Forgive me if I take her word above yours.

My post was not about rhetoric, it was about courtesy. You turned it into a post about racism, barely concealed anger and, in your own words, the “blame and shame” show. That you are passionate about the issue is obvious and laudable but you do not do Indigenous / non-Indigenous relations any favours by countering courtesy with anger

tubley, appreciate your thoughtful postings - both here and on other threads.

I'm not nearly as certain as you seem to be though about the following statement - "Africa was always destined to destroy itself but white people certainly helped!" I agree entirely with the second part of the statement but must query the first part.

From my previous understanding, and reinforced recently by Bashir's article and watching "Guns, Germs and Steel" on SBS, I would argue that Africa, before colonialization, was a stable and self-sustaining civilization. It had already been in existence for countless generations and, if not for the introduction by whites of totally inappropriate farming methods and indiscriminate land clearing, would in all probability have continued to evolve and adapt slowly to survive indefinitely. Like all indigenous populations, the Africans knew how to live simply and harmoniously within their natural environment. Their lifestyle of course was frugal and harsh, but they knew how to survive. They knew how to keep diseases like malaria in check.

I realize there's no turning back the clock. And so of course does Bashir. I do think we need to acknowledge though that the West is not the fount of all wisdom and that others have learnt the key to survival far more successfully than we ever will. Recognizing the strengths of hunter-gatherer civilizations is no more a romantic notion than the dreamworld fantasy promoted by some on this thread that global capitalism is the solution for places like Africa.

Not meaning to have a go at you, tubley. Most of this is really directed more towards some of my earlier critics. But I certainly don't agree with your statement that Africa was always going to self-destruct.

"Yes you are right, white people have a lot to answer for."

Umm, before you rush off on too many guilt trips Tubley, perhaps you should read history.

If we look at Africa, all was not nice and sweet and romantic. The Bantu, who now dominate, did that by virtually wiping out the Pygmies and the San. Still today Pygmies are held in virtual slave like conditions, as discussions proceed whether they are really human. The Bantu in fact, have no better history then the Europeans, its just that the boot is now on the other foot

Hey craigB there was no vitriol nor anger intended but tone is difficult to convey. Apologies for making the criticism incomprehensible though :) We are debating and I called the use of the word 'indigenous' with a capital, rhetoric and i think it is. You were referring to courtesy, I was illustrating another side of that coin.

The racism comment refers to your original statement "white sovereignty" rather than say, early "English" sovereignty. There's little colour about the concept of national sovereignty except a designation makes it so. Divisive terms like this, I think, interfere with the point of sovereignty and unnecessarily force some people to live in constant conflict with our past. "Male sovereignty" would be similar in a way.

By all means take another's words before mine - you don't know me - but our respective historical grasp has little to do with our skins. I don't like calling people or regimes black/white in the context of this specific debate because it seems angry, plays the man not the ball, and is a intellectual cul-de-sac when it is probably an historical cultural clash you are really referring to.

For my own part, I'm keen to see that what are left of our primarily pama-nyungan languages here do not disappear entirely. They were/are, as a world group, unique linguistically and yet very different from each other. They and the non-pama-nyungan type up north reveal an interesting (not necessarily better, no) way to categorise the observed world and, I think, they sound good too.

As far as things having to be played out in the future, that is the nature of history, that's not ominous or anything it's called social progress. Nullius was a relic of common law and it and other things are taking a while to get over but is that a reason for not getting over them?

Anyway, I may not convince you that 'white sovereignty' is an angry term and capital I 'indigenous' is in the end silly sophistry rather than courteous but all this is off-topic, probably better reserved for another space or place. cheers.

tubley - i thank you for your valuable post and I do agree. I am from a similar background to you (I am from English Irish heritage and grew up in outback NSW around Aboriginal peoples) and I agree. I am plain sick and tired of people flaming on about how to fix the 'Abo problem' when they have never even spoke to an Indigenous Australian.

As for wre's comments, I think the Indigenous people of Australia would indeed appreciate if their weren't any colonialists left. They would not have had generations stolen from them; be forced into slavery; have their land stolen and then have to prove it is there’s in a foreign court; whilst be consistently told 'we know what’s good for you', up to present day. You understand my point.

As for another point, since when does a person have any standing to judge how another culture exists and operates, and compare it to their own? People cop-out behind the 'we need to westernise Africa to solve their problems' whilst supporting governments who encourage pharmaceutical corporations to patent AIDS drugs and monopolise their availability to 3rd world sufferers. Problem solved indeed.

And as for Ro: "Most Aboriginal people today are Anglo-Irish-Aboriginal in their heritage, so should they just simply beat themselves up in an act of historical retaliation?" and just where do you gain the standing to spew such a rabid generalisation. Keep you sweeping labels to yourself mate.

I risk being accused of suffering from poikiloderma of Civatte but here goes. I thought style guides suggested that aboriginal should be used as an adjective. And further, that the word Aborigine/s was to be used as a noun to describe an individual, or, that whole group of people.

Back O/T, Bashir wants nothing to do with Europeans so I assume I can walk on by when confronted by the posters of pitiful African children who have no idea what clean water is. Am I absolved from reaching for a coin when charity collectors tell me that African children need text books?

Sage,
Anglo-exCatholic-Taxpaying-Australian.

JKenno
I must take issue with your comment 'Then they would not have had generations stolen' in connection with the White invasion. Do you really .... REALLY believe that ? or.. do you suspect if it was not 'this' group of whites it would have been 'that' group of whites from different countries.. or even those 'yellow' people from up north way.
I claim it was historic inevitability that Australia was colonized by SOMEone.. and if it was say the Japanese, going on track record, I seriously doubt if they would have had anything other than contempt for the 'backward Indigenous' people as they tend to regard non Japanese.

This is most important in the discussion of the Indigenous situation.

There is one other response to Culture Shock which I didn't mention in a previous post, and that is 'limbo' neither going native or retreating to ones 'own and known' the Limbo position is probably the most dangerous because it is not able to sink down roots on either side.

I suspect many Indigenous people are exactly there.

Bashirs post seems wistful.. a longing for what deep down I think he knows is a romanticized version of 'the old days', but the 'now' confonting him, is so foreign to values and social mores he cherishes, perhaps he cannot embrace 'us' either.. specially given that he is also a traditional Muslim.

Craig,

keep up the good work on correcting errors, but please don't waste a whole post JUST on that (and specially just on me).. I'm sure you can provide some further analysis of the actual issue at hand also no ?

Tubley, Africa was always destined to run into massive strife, because and only because one or another foreign peoples were always destined to invade and conquer, or at least massively disrupt. Without that input, I don’t think Africa was destined to destroy itself. Sure, the internal history of displacement would have continued, such as the Bantu over their neighbours, but this would not have meant anything like the strife we now see.

Similarly, Australian indigenous culture was not at all destined to destroy itself.

Yes you can point the finger at the English for “their brutal mistreatment of native Australians”. But as wre points out, the Portuguese, French and Spanish would probably all have been much worse.

I certainly don’t celebrate invasion day. But neither do I any longer dwell too much on the history of the spread of humanity. I said earlier on this thread that this has happened throughout the history of humanity and indeed throughout the history of life on earth. Further to this; it is a fundamental ecological principle… and humans are no more strongly driven to it, nor in a more aggressive manner, than many other creatures on earth. We just happened to have the power to be much more destructive about it.

The day humans escape our ecological principles will be the day we really mature. We have to escape the fundamental ecological principle that drives us to continuously breed up and to base everything on continuous growth. We are nowhere near escaping this, which means we are nowhere near reaching sustainability. The invasion of foreign lands has just been part of this same principle. The population will continue to rise and the discrepancy between resource demand and supply will continue to increase until we enter another phase of ‘invade and conquer’ in the very near future.

Australia with by that time about 25 million people, sitting next to Indonesia with 330 million, and looking invitingly empty and resource rich to 1300 million Chinese had better take notice

wre

The gentleman I mentioned was ironically of British descent. A Christian Brother who worked as a missionary in almost every country in the world. I know the missionaries have alot to answer for themselves but I think his point was worthwhile.

I’m thinking that you suggested that through British colonization (Australia/India) that those countries may have received the better of prevailing invaders. The lighter of punishments? Perhaps – but that hardly makes it right.

Thanks Bronwyn andjkenno for your encouragement. The feeling’s mutual.

Bronwyn and Ludwig – when I said Africa was destined to destroy itself I meant itwas highly vulnerable to forced change and its means of coping with these changes not particularly effective. Africa was self-sustaining like you say. But any changes were met with catastrophic consequences – an archaic chain reaction across the continent. I think any foreign exposure would have tipped the harmonious balance – particularly British exposure.

Ludwig, I think Australia will be looking quite tasty for Asia in few years time, interesting challenge for all involved.

Yabby

No it wasn’t sweet and romantic but what civilization is? Internal conflict is inevitable but when we reflect on the large scale catastrophes caused by white influence it makes such conflicts look small.

The world is a set of scales – the person next door is rich but the one across the road is poor. Where one gains another loses. One loses another gains. Simple economics.

Same for countries. Have a look at your pants, your shoes, your rug on the floor, your tablecloth, your dinner plates or the toys your kids play with. You buy them cheap at warehouses because some poor eight year old kid was made to work in a factory for fourteen-hour days. Same for continents – we can throw down a three course meal and complain that it wasn’t cooked right when there are people in Africa starving to death.

Sage

Your absolution comes from yourself, not Bashir. If you can live with the knowledge that your comfort comes through another’s misery then the burden may well be with you.

tubley - what confusion!

>>The world is a set of scales – the person next door is rich but the one across the road is poor. Where one gains another loses. One loses another gains. Simple economics.<<

What utter rot! If this is the case, then world GDP would not change at all.

Economics, whether simple or complex, has never stated that it is a zero-sum game, in fact quite the opposite.

By increasing the ability of poorer countries to trade with larger ones, economic benefits accrue to each.

How do you suppose that it is possible for China, the fourth-largest economy in the world, to grow at 9% p.a., if it can only be at the expense of another country? Just that growth itself - in your fantasy one-wins, another-loses scenario - would wipe out the total GDP of a dozen small countries. Ask yourself, why hasn't this occurred?

On another topic. In your Irish-slanted rant against the British, it is interesting that you seem to have omitted the United States from your list of their colonial failures. Any particular reason?

Ludwig, I appreciated and agreed with much of your post.

However, to all those who started prefaced the posts with an explanation of their ethnic origins,

You are racists, your utterances are racist. You have either uttered proclamations to your racial origins or expressed self-loathing about them and as such tainted the rest of your post.

Before Anglo-Saxon Englishmen colonised Australia, the Saxons colonised England and in so doing, annoyed the Angles, who had previously displaced the Celts. The Romans did not help either, despite constantly fighting the Picts.

I would suggest no group has ever been happy about their “colonial masters”.

However, those who suggest being a colony of the Britain was the worst thing should observe what happened in the French, German and Belgium colonies of Africa and consider, had the English not colonised Australia, how Kooris and others, who happened on Australia before the British, would have fared under Indonesia’s record of “colonial benevolence”.

Why Indonesia? Because that is the likely choice of alternate colonist for today.

Australia would suffer, just as East Timor suffered. The record is still being discovered of exactly how bad a job of genocide did Indonesia perpetrate on East Timor. 180,000 Timorese starved and brutalised to death and Gough Whitlam endorsed the Indonesian occupation, colonisation and presumably the genocide which followed to our collective shame.

I am English by Birth, Australian by choice. Ultimately I am happy (not proud) to be of English heritage but

I am not responsible for the actions of my forefathers.
I take no credit for the actions of my forefathers.

In the future my wish would be to be considered first an Australian.

England was a melting pot of different ethnic groups. Australia is a melting pot of different ethnic groups.

“Racists” are the frauds and shysters who hide behind the merits or deficiencies of one "ethnic group" versus another.
The Reality of human history is, it is "individual people" doing "individual things" which causes anything to happen, good and bad.

Ethnic origin is just an accident of conception.

BD & Ludwig, you seem to be condoning a position that colonialisation of any country naturally involves cultural genocide and forced separation, which leads me to believe you almost feel it is acceptable.

May I remind you of my EXACT words: "I think the Indigenous people of Australia would indeed appreciate if their weren't any colonialists left. They would not have had generations stolen from them; be forced into slavery".

I never condoned the activities of any other imperialist power. Nor did I say the British are necessarily worse. Your words do, however, highlight entirely the problem. Mainstream Australia is perfectly happy to 'dub-down' the disgracefulness and significance of these acts by saying it could have been worse or 'its not our fault'. Crap. Just because worse or comparable atrocities may have occurred in other 'conquered' countries does not mean these acts are in any way acceptable. Are you saying that they are? I trust not. The fact that it could have been done by another is not, in my opinion, "most important in the discussion of the Indigenous situation". Does the fact that the Nazi Holocaust occurred affect the significance of subsequent genocides? Plainly it doesn't.

And Ludwig, ("neither do I any longer dwell too much on the history of the spread of humanity") - I am relatively sure that humanity was already firmly established in the continents now known as Africa and Australia long before the Colonialists came. I do not believe that the term ‘humanity’ carries with it some inescapable attachment to capitalism and profiteering yet, despite your comfort with assuming that it does

While the West continues to pour free grain and money to feed poor Aricans that will still want the Wests grain and money. That is why they are travelling North to reach the sourse of all this charity.

Projects have been developed to assist the Indiginous peoples to survive in a selfcontained sustainable community. However they look at what is happening elsewhere and want what they see.

Don't imagine this conflict is somthing new it is the nature of the continent and has thousands of years of survival where the food remains.

Ask any South African if they prefer their 9-5 job or the ancient tribal Africa. They might like it for a holiday but as a way of life?

jkenno, you write; “you seem to be condoning a position that colonialisation of any country naturally involves cultural genocide and forced separation, which leads me to believe you almost feel it is acceptable.”

No. Colonisation does not automatically involve really ugly relations, but the tendency has certainly been in that direction. It is not a matter of believing whether it is acceptable or not, it is matter of understanding it in the bigger scheme of things.

“I am relatively sure that humanity was already firmly established in the continents now known as Africa and Australia long before the Colonialists came.”

Um, what? Are you implying that I thought Australia and Africa were empty of people before European colonisation?!

“I do not believe that the term ‘humanity’ carries with it some inescapable attachment to capitalism and profiteering yet, despite your comfort with assuming that it does”.

I think you need to be very careful about your assumptions gleaned from reading other peoples’ brief comments, and what you assume to be their assumptions. Invaders and colonisers nearly always did have capitalistic profiteering motives. But the invadees didn’t. You certainly can’t attach those tags to all of humanity

BOAZ_David

Please watch "A Current Affair" tonight - Chennel 9 Sydney. Would be very interested in your thoughts.

Cheers
Kay

Pericles, it was intended as a simplistic model. Of course India gains financially from making shoes and cricket bats for white people but only very minimally compared to what western nations are gaining through their labour. And yes, China has a huge GDP but look at the conditions in which it works. My scales metaphor did include but was not limited to money, but your assumption is interesting.

The bloke next door owns a house and rents to another - one loses, one gains. Of course the whole thing is simplistic but you surely see what I was aiming at.

I do agree with your comment about the USA. But just to clarify - do you mean the initial white colonisation of what is now the USA? Or did you mean the American cultural imperialism that is spreading all over the world right now through our TV screens, music, pop culture and war?

Economic concepts.
Well westerners at the moment, you think they are prospering, but when there is lesser employment opportunities to earn an economic living, where do you think the wealth will come from to purchase the slave labor imported goods from those countries. Or do you think Governments just ramp up the money printers. You see: total garbage, all you are doing is what is known as parasitic existence and it is unsustainable. Total destructive to be honest.
With all the mineral resources of Africa, is all worthless without the knowledge and motive force to harness it, so we go back to primitivism and tribal wars, or is that what some want?
Pericles;
Small indulgence: on this thread: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4010
Your Knowledge about the Magnacata if you can help. Thanks

Perhaps we should stop sending aid to Africa. According to Bashir Goth the blecks don't need help from whites. I wonder if Goth knows the white race is dying under the weight of the "multicultural" society.

South Africa is going great guns under the bleck regime so maybe Bashir is right. The whites in South Africa are lapping it up. Never had it so good.

Hi Kay
yes..I watched it. Fascinating stuff.. how they can show the public all the video of the 'anglo's and catch them but the video of the ME thugs.. wellll that's a different story eh.. 5 weeks.. etc..only 2 arrests.....

As I watched that incident..with the brace and manly 'No 8' launching out on probably the most stupid of a 'king hit' that missed its target by at least 2 meters.... and then all of the 'swarm' sinking the boot into Anglo Australians (by proxy) again..and again..and again... and then AGAIN... and still not satisfied the other 'brave' bloke with the iron bar.. just HAD to have a whack at him so hard that it bent the bar...

SELF DEFENCE tips... for those who might encounter such a thing themselves.

1/ RUN like hell while yelling for help, but..if cornered....

2/ Try to take the first attacker out with a hard punch to the throat, upward thrusting palm to the nose, (or groinkick) then CLING to him and drag him into any corner situation where u can use his (hopefully) limp body as a shield between you and the rest of the crazed animals until police arrive.(in our dreams)

3/ If a running attack, move to meet the first with a flying scissor kick to the groin or upper body. (Practice this at home, both legs, and do stretches (like touch toes) to loosen up tendons on the upper inner thigh which restrict leg movement during kicks)

4/ A hard crunching downward kick on the knee of an attacker should hold them up for a while.

5/ a) If attacked with a bat or bar.. move quickly INTO the attacker while he is swinging, reducing the swing power. Then, throat or nose or goin attack.
OR
5/ b) If u can step back while he swings, then after the weapon passes you, step in and use his momentum to throw or unbalance and put down. (followed by throat punch)
6/ "1-2" practice a hard straight Jab followed by a crunching right to the jaw.

tubley

Great analogy. The world is a set of scales, I agree, and a most unbalanced one at that.

Pericles

Not only do the rich increase their wealth directly at the expense and on the back of the poor, as pointed out by tubley, but also at the expense of the environment. Economic growth, whilst having many benefits, never occurs without an associated cost.

You ask of tubley, "How do you suppose that it is possible for China, the fourth-largest economy in the world, to grow at 9% p.a., if it can only be at the expense of another country? Just that growth itself - in your fantasy one-wins, another-loses scenario - would wipe out the total GDP of a dozen small countries. Ask yourself, why hasn't this occurred?"

Actually, this is exactly what is occurring. While the West and Asia have become richer, over 50 countries in the world - mainly in sub-Saharan Africa and the former Soviet states - have seen a decline in average income levels and an increase in the numbers of people living on less than a dollar a day.

Within China, the rapid economic growth is also costing dearly. Millions of farmers have been forced to leave their farms and move into the cities where most of them struggle to find work and end up living in abject poverty. China’s air quality, soil contamination, and water pollution are now amongst the worst in the world and its levels of waste generation have now surpassed that of the United States.

World GDP might be increasing for now but the correlating negatives of environmental damage and resource depletion will eventually slow it to a halt. That is, if the shrinking of our currently plentiful supply of cheap labour, on which high growth rates are dependent, hasn't done so first.

tubley & bronwyn -- your knowledge of economics is sadly lacking. Economics teaches that trade brings gains to both people. A simple example... I have spare food, you have spare clothes, we exchange my spare food for your spear clothes and we are both better off. Trade is a positive-sum game... when one side wins, the other wins also. Simple economics.

Around the world, countries with good institutions have been growing well (in wealth, life expectancy, education, health outcomes etc). This is true in Africa too. Their outcome has nothing to do with whether they have resources or were colonized... it has to do with the policies that those countries put in place.

Bronwyn actually says (presumably as a silly joke) that over 50 countries of the world have seen a decline in living standards. Simply untrue as any passing look at statistics and reality will show. I don't know whether to laugh or cry at such ignorance.

In China people are choosing to move into the cities because they have higher incomes in there, not being forced. Indeed, the government it trying to get them to stay in the countryside! It seems bronwyn takes ignorance as a virtue to be shown with pride.

Then she goes on to say that economic growth is caused by cheap labour. I give up. Simply untrue as a point of fact... but what's the point with these people?

John et al.,

I don't feel that you listened to a word of what Bronwyn said. You refer to Bronywn and I as 'these people' as though we are some kind of moronic breed of sub-humans. I therefore find your arrogance as laughable as you find my alleged ignorance.

I just want you to do one thing for me - look around your home, and tell me how many material possessions you can find that were made in third world nations.

It is a fact that the people given the task of making these things work in conditions highly comparable to slave labour. And you somehow believe that these people benefit as we do. You are wrong. I will again point out that my analogy was inclusive of, but not exclusive to, monetary gain.

Tell me this, have you ever been to Calcutta?

Anyone who wishes to discuss this with me, in the kind of detail that this 350 word limit forum won't allow, may email me at:

tubley@yahoo.com

OR

Phone me at:
0439 451 397

OR

Chat with me on msn messenger at:
tubley@hotmail.com

John Humphreys, Agree with your post John.

As for Bronwyn and tubley, lack of insight or understanding has never been an encumberment to their ignorant misrepresentations in the past. so I doubt such considerations will effect them today.

Their creed presumes philanthropy is practiced by no one except Marxist socialist governments and anyone who remembers the Berlin Wall will recall how East Germans expressed their feelings on that matter.

If you want strong economies, you have to have markets to service and sell to. It is very difficult for any nation to practice xenophobic of trade protectionism whilst actively seeking market expansion for those products it does produce competitively and has a natural economic advantage with.

Rather than going to Calcutta (tubleys question) I would suggest try visiting Silicon Valley – if you want to learn about something it is always better to learn first how it “should be done” rather than how it “should not be done.”

As for off site discussions with tubley - Ha that would be fun now…. Oh how I am tempted.

Joh Humphries, Old Collywaffle, Economics is a reletively easy science. It is interesting that some seek to confuse economics for their own selfish ends.

tubley & Bronwyn, always enjoy your posts, I do not have indept knowledge on this particular subject, so will refrain from comment, as some others might have done.

tubley & Bronwyn, if either of you would like to discuss on email any topic my address is: shonganewman@bigpond.com I also have hotmail, but won't adversise it here, all the best to you both, Scout, you also are most welcome to contact if you would like,

Regards,Shaun

Leo,

Did you know that Gandhi didn't like the blacks of South Africa?

COLONIALISM /GREED/ HUMAN NATURE

How different things might have been, if the British took a different approach to China,India and Africa.

Colonialism itself is not a bad or evil thing. The idea of bringing a wider sense of commonality, language,structure and Security to volatile places is quite noble. History teaches us clearly and unambiguously that Nation A will either Rule Nation B or be ruled by it. This is based on the mutual understanding of family/tribal/city/national aspiration which seldom ends with a status quo of ‘equality’ which in international relations is rather nebulous and meaningless. Instead, nations/tribes are held at bay from each other by self interest, treaties, natural obstacles etc and alliances and balances of power.

The problem with colonialism was the greed which drove much of it. Imagine India without the exploitation which intruded into EVERY manufacturing process, owned by English to the complete exclusion of the Indians. Imagine China without the Opium trade,
Imagine Africa without the Slave trade.

Imagine New Zealand without the deceptive Treaty of Waitangi written in Maori and English, but saying slightly different but crucial things.

So the problems with Colonialism are more with the people who ran it. The greedy monarchs etc.
Yet, in some senses, Colonialist expansion was inevitable in the interests of survival. England or France or Spain or Holland alone could not withstand the accumulated military and economic power of any one of them to which a large colonial commonwealth was added.

Treaties are as important today as they were in early Arabia. Our Anzus treaty involves mutual obligation. Ours to support the USA in its protection of interests, they to protect us. Their protection is vital, we could not withstand a concerted attack by a vastly numerically superior enemy hell bent on subdueing us. A scary thought given nearly 200 million Muslims are on our northern doorstep.

Yes, complex, not perfect, but we are free. I am free to proclaim the Gospel of Christ, no special branch police will visit me after reading this. Hearers are free to accept or reject. Such freedom is worth preserving.

There is one serious flaw in your thinking tubley.

"It is a fact that the people given the task of making these things work in conditions highly comparable to slave labour"

If the conditions in which these people worked was in Auburn or Darebin, you would be fully justified in your attitude. However, they live in communities for whom work of any kind is manna from heaven, and work for above-average wages is absolute bliss.

You might like to consider a couple of alternatives.

Nike (or whoever) refuses to build factories in third world countries, because they would be "exploiting" the local population. Result: no injection of capital, wages, knowhow etc., and the local economy bumps along as before at starvation levels.

Nike (or whoever) refuses to build factories in third world countries, because they would be asked to pay the same wages as in any other location, thus making it uneconomic (that is, not worth doing).

China Shoe Corporation (or whoever) is in the same position. If they were to pay "world rates" - whatever they might be - to their staff, their product simply wouldn't be affordable (inside China) or attractive to overseas markets, because the price is too high.

Your approach would actually chain these people to their poverty. At the same time, we would be paying twice or three times (at least) the amount for locally produced footwear, which would have a very damaging effect on the poorest people in our own community.

Is this starting to make sense now?

Pericles, whilst I do acknowledge the message of your post, I find your acceptance of virtual slave labour mildly troubling. It is another example of comparing extremities and then deciding ‘it’s all too hard’, whilst ignoring any possibility of compromise.

As you may or may not know, pairs of Nike shoes are estimated to cost around $16.75 US with Indonesians who actually make them earning an average of $786 a year (although this figure could have risen slightly as it is only current to 2000). Now is this acceptable? Your argument appears to be that it is, since these people are getting employment and miraculously ‘lifting’ themselves from poverty by earning 15 bucks a week (I shudder to think the amount of hours that are actually worked in one week).

I do not deny that foreign investment can have its benefits, and that any employment is better than nothing. Nor do I totally blame the corporations – they are profit-making institutions accountable to their shareholders, how else could you expect them to act? But contrary to popular opinion, I do not find it ‘OK’ or normal that a human being can be paid barely poverty line wage rates so that a shareholder in a different country can receive an ‘extra tasty’ dividend that quarter and therefore afford to buy the latest plasma 456ft television.

Plainly, I do not see any problem with arguing for an increase in 3rd world wage rates. I’m relatively certain Nike and their shareholders have the financial capacity to absorb at least a doubling of current levels. Unlike pericles, I do not think that it would lead to a doubling or tripling of shoe cost. I can provide you a direct example of sneakers that are produced at elevated wage rates in Indonesia. Yet are actually cheaper than most other sneakers: http://www.newint.com.au/catalog/sneakers.htm?gclid=COnD7ayo34ICFQpNDgodZSygjA .

As I think with most of these matters, given the human importance of such issues, the question is not why, but why not? Manufacturing surely isn’t “uneconomic” just because labour costs are more than 3 dollars per day a worker

jkenno, I know that your heart is in the right place, but I find it troubling that you employ such emotive phrases as "virtual slave labour".

Even the shining example you provide in the form of "Certified sweatshop-free!" (their exclamation point) gives the lie to this description. "The wage figure for the lowest-paid worker at the union shop that produces No Sweat sneakers is 20% higher than the regional minimum wage, even before the considerable rice allowance is added"

20% above slave-labour levels? Is this statistically significant? I have no doubt it is an improvement, but it incremental at best, and certainly cannot be realistically trumpeted as fundamentally different from "slave labour".

There are a few further dimensions, one of them is volume. The puff piece on the sweat-free sneakers does not give any indication how many are employed. Nike employ 200,000 in China alone, 84,000 in Vietnam etc. Is it worse to pay a handful of people 20% over the odds, or employ vast numbers, at better rates than they can get by not working for Nike?

Ultimately, whether we like it or not, the market will be the mechanism whereby these people are lifted from their present economic state. This is true for Africa as well - which is where this discussion began - and no amount of do-gooding around the edges can possibly change this.

'The market, oh the glorious free market; it will save us all'. What crap. The only thing that is certain about the market is that the rich benefit at the expense of the poor. It has been like that for the last hundred years and it will be like it for the next hundred if we sit idly by and think things will magically improve.

If you are going to quote my source, at least do so in mild completeness: "All workers receive extra money to purchase rice, which is based upon family size. All employees also receive 100% health insurance (and 80% for family members), travel allowances, maternity and other benefits not calculated into the wage figure. In addition to these benefits, after 25 years, workers receive a pension worth 10% of their lifetime earnings". This is not immaterial to me, and it certainly would not be immaterial to the workers themselves. So yes, it is “statistically significant”.

I guess you missed the point. I provided a clear example of how wage rates and conditions of workers can be drastically improved without it affecting the price of the product, which countered your claim in a previous post. That aside, I guess we have different opinions fundamentally because I believe, what you call ‘do-gooding around the edges’ has the inherent potential solve any situation. People working together to make a difference is responsible for the vast majority of anything the human race has achieved, not the ‘market’. To say that nothing can be done is, in my opinion, untrue. When you expose under-developed economies to the rigours of the international market it is hardly surprising that their weaknesses are exploited by the strong. But to think that this exploitation and inequality that the 3rd world has suffered under capitalism will suddenly dissolve via the market is utopian and impossible to justify. Your defeatist attitude, unfortunately one held by a majority of those in the 1st world, that basically we can’t do anything to help is thoroughly disheartening

If you get the time watch Race: The Power Of An Illusion
The Difference Between Us tonite at 8:35pm Monday, January 23, 2006.

http://www.abc.net.au/

Shonga “Economics is a reletively easy science.”

Actually, “economics” is a relatively “complex” “art”.

Whilst “economics” might be described as one of the branches of “social science”, the simple observation that if you want two conflicting opinions, ask two economists or the same economist on different days, suggests “art” is the appropriate classification.

John Maynard Keynes almost needed a licensed plumber to put together the water flow models he used to demonstrate his theory of the “Paradox of Thrift”.
Unfortunately he also espoused the facile idea that encouraged government to be more active in “the economy”, instead of limiting itself to performing what it should do as “moderator”, leading to the institutionalisation of national industries and the moribund influence that strategy had over time.

Whilst understanding simple principles of supply and demand or how balanced government budgets alleviating inflation whilst increasing public debt induces inflation; the full and subtle consequences of say, forgiving international debt or export subsidies are far less understood even by the “experts”.

From your comment regarding “economic as a “reletively easy science”, it is a certainty to conclude, your comprehension to what economics really is, leaves you unsuitably qualified to comment on its significance, complexity or influence.

Pericles – agree with your observations regarding China.
It is duplicitous, ignorant and patronising for anyone in Australia to assume the TCF sweat shops of Shanghai are a worse “career” option to the grinding poverty and zero opportunity presented by Chinese peasant farming.

“the market will be the mechanism whereby these people are lifted from their present economic state.”

Agree absolutely and for proof, just as anyone from the People Paradises of the previous Warsaw pact countries.

And agree , the "model for success" (market capitalism) is transferable to every continent and nation and whilst some Latin American countries seem to currently think otherwise, ultimately their gullibility will cost them in both the medium and long term.
What is most lacking in Africa remains, I suspect, "attitude".

And not even Shonga could define the economic values of "Attitude"

hey jkenno - keep your hair on mate, you may remember you were hassling me about a statement relating to heritage, identity and revenge.

As lame as it may sound now, I only wrote that in jest and was actually harking back to an aussie film whose name i have been trying to recall or find on the Internet over the past few days (perhaps 'wogboy' or 'he died with a falafel in his hand' but I cant find the reference).

So yes, lame because I can't remember the title of the film and lame because it obviously wasn't funny to you. Sometimes I wonder whether I really am talking to Australians on this site because so many seem to have lost any sense of humour even when the joke is crap. Normally in this country I thought, we use humour only when things are really serious. (Perhaps each of us here needs to get out a bit into the bush so we lighten up and avoid coming down all grim like other countries:)

Anyway, by means of belated explanation - there is a guy in the film who wanders around violently most of the time (he's a personality not unlike the character Bobo in Fat Pizza) and at one point he says:

"My mother was Croation and my father was Serbian so every morning I wake up and I want to kill myself"

I was simply referring to the pursuit of retribution for historical reasons - how endless and futile it is and how sometimes those who so desperately want it are not sure who they are because of it.

Personally however, i think England went decidedly downhill after 1066 and the last millennium deserves an outright apology from the French. My father is very keen to demand reparations for the massacre of the Albigensians in the fourteenth century but that's just him.

JKENNO
that link about no sweat shoes is a very good one. Though my leather runners last HEAPS longer than canvas.

My point all along in regard to China and other low labor cost places has been this-

WE MUST PUT PRESSURE on them to RAISE the living standard and wages and benefits to reduce the wage disparity between cost of goods here and there. Such higher wages will also enable them more purchasing power for OUR goods or commodities.

CLEARLY the pressure and publicity has had an impact in this case.

While I do agree with Pericles and Cols analysis, I find they do not give enough weight to the fact that competing labor rates and market forces are all very true and valid factors in a closed system. But I suggest that they apply less in open systems. i.e. where the economic factors are not prone to external forces which are totally unpredictable and uncontrollable.

"Market forces" are very much like the date from hell.. she is hot.. desirable, sexy, and seductive..but she DUMPS you as soon as a 'hotter' prospect comes along. Yes.. that is economic reality, though in my experience, relationships do count more sometimes. So, i add that to the discussion.

Your post in my view supports what I've been saying.

Cols explaination of the demise of English Ship yards is helpful.. it showed exactly what I have said.. "Don't protect lazy or inneficient' industries, but DO protect efficient and innovative from unfair practices which are uncontrollable. i.e. exist in an open system with no feedback. The shipyards all failed because a government made the wrong decision, quite possibly as a result of UNION pressure to protect employment.

Col showed clearly the mistakes made at Goverment level on the Shipyards and Pericles showed clearly the 'non-mistakes' made by Korea etc.. so putting those things together, maybe we can see some light ?

Agreed,
But, for some reason, Taxation has not been mentioned, State and Federal, that is the killer of Ideas and buisiness in this land, and many others.
People forget to add that cost when calculating economics and it is the worst costing on anyone’s buisiness.
If we do collapse, that would be the reason.
You must take Issue with Jkenno, obviously a highly paid baurocrat comfortable in collecting your hard earn money for very little effort .That is where the do gooder attitudes come from. Destroy you free market, then where would Governments steal your money to pay people like that, almost tempting for me to just throw the towel in and go scrub, And perhaps if the 7 odd million people working said we have had enough of the Parasites, then where do you think the Elite Looters would source their wealth from then. Exactly. The Elites can move to Africa an enjoy their beloved Primitivism away from us. And no running shoes that would be Hypocrisy

Dear All,(and everyone else)

While I've some ideas I'd like some real clarification about who the "The Elites" are. I see this descriptor being thrown around without any definitive explanations about who they are.

Please explain?

I'm not being sarcastic, just want to know who you think they are.

For example are they people who make public statements, develop policy, are media people - and if they are elites what makes them elite as against ordinary people (like you and I)

David_BOAZ "Don't protect lazy or inefficient' industries, but DO protect efficient and innovative from unfair practices which are uncontrollable.”

It is a laudable notion to protect the efficient and innovative from unfair practices.

Unfortunately, it is also true to say the thing which turns the “efficient and innovative” into the “inefficient and stagnant” is the very protection which you suggest.

As for “uncontrollable”.
Everything the rest of the world does and much of what occurs in Australia is “uncontrollable” at government level.
The closest thing to bringing some measure of “control / predictability / regulation” to the trade game is to remove all the government prescribed impediments to free trade and open competition. This is what GATT and subsequent Free Trade imperatives have been about.
It is about the government doing what it should be doing, monitoring the playing field and in Bob Hawkes words "Keeping it level".

Not that implementing such initiative is easy. Resistance from anarchists, socialists and even elected national governments abound. They all demand one thing – the recognition of their own “special case” and protection for their own vested interests, to the point that all the “special cases” end up cancelling each other out.

On the plus side. One of the limitations to innovation is finding the resources to implement new ideas and turn an idea into a marketable product, that being the capital, facilities, materials, processes and manpower.

Should Australia’s traditionally overprotected manufacturing sector sink into oblivion, it would pay to remember we are an innovative nation and new industries will spring up to replace the old. New entrepreneurs will harness our energy and resourcefulness, rent the factories and re-employ the skilled labour from among those freed-up from the old stagnant employers who could only function with handouts. That, in itself will reduce the tax burden on us all. It will also replace the moribund and insecure jobs with challenging new ones

Wow Col... you almost sound MESSIANIC :)

I do see ur point.. but I am thinking that we might not survive the social unrest which could arise if say 20% of our GDP currently produced by Manufacturing, (28% in real terms)is gutted in a short time.

Looking at the 'rate' of attrition of industries in just the past few months alone.. its rather scary.

I just hope that the discussions here do lead some bright individuals to launch out into the big beyond and go for it. Sadly, there are not many people who can do this, they need mentors and a 'framework' to grow in. If the framework is destroyed.. how could they make it ?

I am of the view that I myself am 'ok' in the sense that I can survive with my current assets, and land, on which I can grow my food, and catch eels at the retarding basin :) (I joke not) but those who have put their faith in 'the system' ... shudder... those who think 'life owes me a job'.. and there are so MANY of them.....

Of one thing I'm absolutely sure... survival can only be achieved by re-discovering our 'family' and kinship networks.. and maybe by smaller close knit communities.

Anyway, you seem to have a good handle on the many variables, am I right in assuming you are a 'Pan' Millenialist ? (ie.it will all pan out ok in the end) I'm not so sure.. I like to know all the details.

Let me leave you with one specific question: Given that the Chinese are increasingly broadening their product base and going hi-tech/value added also, where should 'we' go to earn a crust ? Some specific directions pls

cheers

Pericles,

My suggestion is to introduce a reasonable salary cap to the developed nations so that the wealth may become more evenly distributed. Bill gates owns countless billions of dollars, while giving away a small percentage of his income under the guise of looking charitable while in truth only aiming to improve his reputation for a hope of further return.

With his money alone we could fix world hunger. The top 2% of wealthy people in the world have more money than the bottom 98%.

My suggestion is to limit the expanse possibilities of multinational companies such as McDonalds, those who would sell their own grandmothers for a bob.

My suggestion is that those people who can spare a dollar a day, feel the obligation to sponsor children from highly disadvantaged communities so that we can give back something for our cheap shoes etc.

I am not a communist, I believe people should be able to gain wealth, but not excessive wealth. I believe that charity extends well beyond our own country. This is my belief.

Col, I think that economics is a social issue.

tubley, there is no question that you are a deeply compassionate person, and you deserve respect for that. But compassion is an emotion, and unfortunately the world turns every day on economic realities rather than warm-and-fuzzy wishful thinking.

You snarled at me "'The market, oh the glorious free market; it will save us all'. What crap"

I don't know who you were quoting, but it wasn't me, nor anyone else on this thread. So 'fess up, you introduced what is known in the trade as a "straw man", didn't you?

The fact remains that if the developed countries were honest in their trade dealings and withdrew the support they give to their own markets, there would be sufficient economic incentive for firms in those developed countries to dive in, invest, and grow the local economy to the benefit of the people. As has happened over the years in countless other countries.

Whether you like it or not, capitalism (mostly) works. The Guardian, a newspaper not renowned for its conservative leanings, commented in a November 2005 article on "[China's] extraordinary economic growth, titanic industrial expansion and pell-mell sprint towards capitalism which have lifted 400 million Chinese out of poverty in a generation."

>>My suggestion is to introduce a reasonable salary cap to the developed nations so that the wealth may become more evenly distributed.<<

And how would you justify this impertinent intervention into the affairs of another sovereign territory? How would you set it? In whose interests? Sorry, this is cloud-cuckoo-land.

>>Bill gates owns countless billions of dollars... With his money alone we could fix world hunger.<<

Bill's liquidity is around $50billion. There are 3 billion souls on the planet surviving on $2 a day. Giving it all away would support them for just over a week.

Economies grow as the result of a ton of factors, but one of those is incentive. How would you create the incentives necessary for people to invest their life in growing a business, if you are simply going to give the results away to someone else?

Has anyone considered the possibility that the Catholic Church is responsible for the disaster that is Africa? All that wealth in the Vatican. Surely they could afford to give generously. Why not Vatican Aid. It could be hosted by Yabby(if he could ever forgive those awful nuns).

David_B “MESSIANIC” oh hardly, common sense more like.

This thread is going along a parallel course to the Greg Barnes Chinese Tsunami Article.

Re “survive the social unrest which could arise if say 20% of our GDP currently produced by Manufacturing, (28% in real terms)is gutted”

Now you see the point. Had government not been holding up incompetent and inefficient manufacturers, the attrition would have been spread more evenly along the time line instead of the “levy bank” breaking and the disaster happening all in one go.

The process of change is constant, making small almost continuous adjustments is easier than a huge shift, easier economically, socially and on just about every other parameter.

However, if the worst happens, we will survive it. Western economies survived the great depression, wars and the blimps of the past 40 years. The 1987 stock exchange crash, the dot.com blimp etc. Check what happened to the UK cities like Sheffield and Newcastle, 20+% unemployment for a decade or so. Then slowly, recovery. New industries, innovation, etc.

Now “I just hope that the discussions here do lead some bright individuals to launch out into the big beyond and go for it.”

Most effective economies have around 70% of all employment in smaller companies.

For the “life owes me a job” it will be tough, regardless.

For my part, I am investing heavily in a new "service" company, of which I own half the issued shares.

For you David, find the market for your eels and a unique way of marketing the benefits of eel meat. Of course distribution and packaging will require research being a perishable. If you want mentoring on it, leave a email address with Graham Young, he knows how to find me (sincerely).

The other things to remember are:
Reward increases because of risk.
Only the best deserve to win. The second best promote excuses for protectionism.
The market you do not service today is lost to tomorrow.

Tubley.. your idea “reasonable salary cap”. Tried and failed. That is why the Chinese are changing their economy. It is the “life owes me” attitude which David spoke of.

Next – Money. Forget all your ideas about “money”.
Whilst capital is needed it is of no use without innovation and the ability to see opportunity and exploit that opportunity. That is why Bill Gates is wealthy because he was an innovator (of sorts) he saw his opportunity (the Door IBM left open for him) and he exploited it.

I do not want a dollar diverted from Bill Gates.
I just want to live in the environment in which I get a chance to try to out perform Bill Gates and make all my friends millionaires in the process.

No one is “forced to eat a single McD burger, so any success they have is down to them. What would you achieve by limiting their enterprise and opportunity?
Where is the data on which you base your assertion that McD metaphorically “sell their grandmothers at a discount”?

Spare a dollar – sponsor a child – again proves my point. Philanthropy, patronage and compassion is only meaningful through private individuals and does not work when tried or imposed by government.

Re “gaining wealth but not excessive wealth”. Quantify “Excessive wealth”. My definition of “excessive” is different to yours, so whose definition should prevail?

Economics is a subjective art. It is paraded as a social science but has all the “scientific” attributes of voodoo.

Tubley, the point you miss is “wealth” is a sense of being, of purpose and self-worth. Wealth can exist almost entirely independent of “money”.

If you re-distributed the “monetary wealth” of the nation evenly across every member of the population, within 5 years the previously wealthy would be wealthy again and the previous poverty stricken, broke.

Why would that happen? Because of innate skill, attitude and unfortunately, for some, inherited stupidity. Check out how many tattslotto winners, who were busted-arse battlers, fail to hold on to their instant “wealth” and die in poverty.

Col, the idea of a reasonable salary cap may have been tried and failed in communist China but when I look at the status of our world, with most people living in poverty, I think the greatest human failure is that of selfish want and desire.

Life may not owe people as such but I sure feel like I owe a portion of the wealth of our own country to that of many others who still live in poverty. You mention exploitation as something that Mr Gates is particularly good a – again, a selfish view to use anything and everything to get what you want. I would think that any decent parent might encourage their children to be otherwise.

It is interesting that you live in an environment where you think you can outperform Mr Gates. Good luck to you. I feel I have already done so in my resolve that I am enough of a person without having to be rich. I never want to be a millionaire.

I therefore agree with your point, “Wealth can exist almost entirely independent of money" and “wealth is a sense of being, of purpose and self-worth”. I always agreed with you there.

No ‘adult’ is forced to eat MacDonalds but there is enough advertising around to show they are particularly fond of manipulating children to sell their rubbish. Children in turn put significant pressure on their parents to buy it. I consider the creative manipulation of children (and indeed using children in any advertising) as being particularly low.

As for my ‘data’, how much do you know about the McLibal case? I don’t think any multinationals become successful from being nice. In their annual reports they mention their vision of “global domination”. I dare say they would get a reasonable price for their grandmother.

www.mcspotlight.org

You are right about sponsoring children though. Governments cannot force it (although they can encourage it), so it is left to the good nature of people to help out. I personally feel pretty good about what I do.

Continuing my response to your comment, Col...

Excessive wealth is the guy who lives up on the hill in a 3 million dollar mansion and has a billion dollars in the bank. I personally see no need for such indulgences while people elsewhere are starving.

I still think that economics is a social issue as it affects the lifestyles of so many people.

I agree with your comment about stupidity though – stupidity is everywhere. If not for the stupid and easily influenced then multinationals would have no chance. No doubt you think that I am one of the many stupid among us. Incidentally I do not think the same of you. I think you’re a worthwhile contributor to this forum like everyone else is, even despite your rude and abrupt mannerisms.

It’s just a guess but I even suspect you may work (on some level) for the forum since you have a way of moving the controversy along so well and as you seem to have some kind of symbiotic relationship with Graham Young. You also post an awful lot, too... 536 posts to date. I have to give credit to you there.

I am very skeptical however, of your ethics – through your opinion on stupid people you forget one thing – even the stupid need a fair chance.

Tubley,

The nature of life is sinister if you are looking at it from idealistic eyes. Therefore it’s disheartening.

Basically money/business seem to dictate how and what lives/dies via warfare modes including cultural propaganda/colonisation, financial-domination and mass-murder.

But accepting this for what it actually is, I like knowing that I or other inspired and talented Aussies have the choice to make and sway the power of millions.

You and I share a wish to see all Animals treated decently.

If we escape idealism by embracing brutal reality, we too could create a multi-national vego/humanly grown/killed meats fast-food. We know there’s a market. I.e. the wealthy Body-Shop chain, basic cosmetics selling on nothing more than they are not tested on Animals.

I can’t help wonder if the huge PETA following and therefore financial market, had offered to promote Aussie killed sheep meat over live-export, what may have happened. Growth of humane farming? Fewer exports? More industry/jobs? Good PR?

Knowing the world will never become vegetarian, I’d rather lend our massive market as INCENTIVE to a humane farmer than righteously beat improbable vegetarianism. We’d set benchmarks way above RSPCA pace eggs etc.

Untypical thoughts in our shared Animal concerns I know, I think at worst vulnerable to mixes of practical improvement and natural corruption,

Practically idealism at it's best is a good market.(and it's a renewable free resource)

Seeya on the other thread for vego recipes and as you said a “grinding” over your support of Keysar Trad.

tubley, I missed responding to one of your sillier posts, very remiss of me.

>>The bloke next door owns a house and rents to another - one loses, one gains<<

How does that work? Who is the winner and who is the loser here? Are you saying that no-one should be allowed to rent property? Have you any idea how many people would be homeless as a result? Wow!

>>do you mean the initial white colonisation of what is now the USA? Or did you mean the American cultural imperialism...<<

Neither. You stated "the worst places on earth are those that England has been the longest." The Pilgrim Fathers settled in the US in the early seventeenth century. That's a pretty long time, and not even you can claim the outcome was equivalent to that of African states.

Actually, tubs, it is difficult not to feel a little sorry for you.

Nowhere in the history of the world as we know it will you find the sort of everybody-gets-equal-shares society that you obviously dream about.

On the contrary, throughout history we have seen constant battles between haves and have-nots, between religions, between countries and between next-door-neighbours. It may have something to do with human evolution, the instinct to survive and the instinct to protect.

There is an inevitability, though, that what is successful today will be less successful tomorrow, and what is struggling for survival today will blossom and grow in the future. Think of the rise and fall of empires - Greek, Roman, Spanish, Microsoft - and take consolation that at some point in the future even the Irish might become successful at something.

Nevertheless, your grasp of the economics of the world is weak, and trying to wish it away with idealistic dreaming is not a good look for adult human beings, even junior school teachers. Kids enjoy the hand-wringing bit - it might even be an essential part of their social awareness education - but it wears badly with age.

Tubley
“I think the greatest human failure is that of selfish want and desire”

“wealth of our own country to that of many others who still live in poverty”

“I personally see no need for such indulgences”

That is a bunch of woosie motherhood statements and weasel words strung together with the sickly sweetness of socialist faux-sincerity and pseudo-compassion.

Your entire post is drizzled in the self-righteous twaddle and sanctimony of the self-conscious under-achievers who hide their jealous natures and personal shortcomings behind the façade of pretending that -

those than can and do should not be allowed to benefit for their own efforts more than those who cannot and don’t.

As for “I am very skeptical however, of your ethics”

I rely on those I have personal and professional dealings with to assess my “ethics” and have no scepticism regarding yours, you have none, just platitudes.

Oh “exploitation” of an idea – it is common expression for implementing the idea. Just more of your infantile wordplay.

Pericles agree your post. I wonder if tubby could tell us, from the following example

I want to live in a house, not sure whether a particular suburb will suit so do not want to buy one, you have a vacant property in that suburb and would like to find a suitable tenant. You end up renting it to me on a 6 month lease, at a rate we agree.

Who loses and who gains?

You rent out your property at a rate acceptable to you and I have a house to live in, without making a huge financial commitment, at a rate I am prepared to pay.
In my book, we both win.

My greater concern is he might be brainwashing primary school kids with this twaddle too. No wonder private schools are so popular, you get to see who is teaching your kids and choosing whether to let them on not

You've really crossed the line now Col. How dare you profess to telling me how you think I do my job. I teach only what I am required to teach by law.

My phone number is 0439 451 397 should you wish to discuss anything further with me as I refuse to be publicly insulted by you anymore. Any more offensive posts from you will be duely reported.

Incidentally I do teach in a private school. This time I shall keep my promise in not responding to you on this forum - the only reason I recommenced replying to your posts is that I gave you the benefit of the doubt that you could actually contribute something without the need to insult people. It's an opinion - I always respect people who provide a viewpoint different from mine without having to insult them.

Meredith,

I totally agree with you. But I do not support Trad. I just said that I will receive my grinding just as he will. Please feel free to email me at tubley@yahoo.com as I would love to hear more about your ideas.

Pericles

No need to feel sorry for me in the least. I never expected total economic equality to be a reality among all individuals and nations on this planet. All I suggested was a narrowing of the gap between extreme wealth and extreme poverty. Unfortunately there are a lot more people suffering the latter. Save your sorrow for those who need it – there are plenty who do.

tubley, you have decined to defend any of your wild assertions about winners and losers, I can only assume you regret having exposed your ignorance in such a fashion.

Mandating "equality" can never be an answer. In order to create economic value, there needs to be some form of incentive in the form of reward, if you are in a capitalist society, or punishment for failure if you are in a totalitarian state. Neither system is perfect, but there has been a general understanding in the developed world that exchanging value in the form of trade is a more intelligent way in which to proceed.

There can never be an incentive for people to share everything on a global basis, it simply is not a realistic ambition. In fact, if you were able to "share the wealth" equally across all people in all countries, we would all be living in poverty anyway.

Just think for a moment, if you can, how you would arrange such a world in terms of i) what work would people perform, ii) who would pay them, and iii) how you would prevent the whole system from collapsing.

Spend a few moments in the real world, and you might understand why people who actually think about these things can get cross with your wishy-washy meanderings.

Sorry Tubley,

I misread your comma, yup you didnt align with Keyser Trad. Thanks for your email addy, i sent you a note.

Tubley “You've really crossed the line now Col. How dare you profess to telling me how you think I do my job.….” Blah blah.

Trust me tubley, I dare, I always dare, it is who I am and why I get paid for what I do (reward is the return for risk, socially as well as economically).

Tubley, I spend some time as a corporate strategist, both for my own direct interests and for other companies. I have some exposure to matters economic. You have repeatedly “crossed the line” by “professing to telling me how you think I do my job” with your inane and incompetent criticisms of real world economic facts and their substitution with your emotionally contrived motherhood statements.

You like to throw your bullying attitude around but cannot handle it when someone stands up to you and you get fair and square in the nuts.

Report all the offensive posts you want, your petulant stand and posturing countenance neither impresses nor intimidates me, school yard bullies abound and are easily smacked down.

Pericles
I agree entirely with your post. When the horizon is defined by the fence of the school yard, a distorted perception of real-world matters is likely. Whilst most in such a situation know their limits, some, the less gifted, continue out of school to display their profound ignorance by pronouncing their own unsustainable and half baked pet theories as reasoned argument and expected social objectives.

Slapping down these half baked theories is almost a full time posting job.

Khmer, Economics is a complex art, don't flatter yourself old mate, you would be surprised what the general population knows about economics, which is why "financial advisors" are mistrusted nearly as much as used car salesmen. You can crow stupidity as much as you like about tubley and co, do you have a degree in anything apart from bombastic stupidity, which you would have passed with flying colours, if so lets have it if not, cease and desist! Put up or shut up. Oh no, that's telling you what to do.....

Our truth is answered by myth, our reason is answered by hysteria, our politeness is responded to with rudeness, how can we have any respect for this poor old buggar, who is obviously suffering from a deep sense of failing, Mental Illness is sometimes easity treated however one must admitt that one has it and seek treatment, Perculis could go along as a companion, as people living on their own don't communicate well what it is they are feeling....that is of course if they have the capacity for feelings/emotion etc....

Meredith,

I checked, but didn't get an email off you sorry.

tubley@yahoo.com if you want to try to re-send.

Shonga,

Thanks for your support mate but having a degree is not something that makes me a better person. We are no more or less worthy than anyone else simply because of our level of education. Besides, education is becoming more of a priveliged entity anyway thanks to Howard and his crew.

No, I think the true judge of a person's character is how we go about looking after those less fortunate than ourselves on a day to day basis.

As for your comment on mental illness - diagnosis and subsequent therapy has indeed helped me to overcome several bouts of depression I have suffered. Everyone is encouraged to get a regular physical check-up from time to time, but sadly our mental health is largely undiagnosed and untreated.