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



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Worrying and hoping about Australia's future > Comments

Worrying and hoping about Australia's future : Comments

By Andrew Jakubowicz, published 22/4/2010

Will a cultural diversity statement move us forward or maintain the status quo?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 11
  7. 12
  8. 13
  9. All
This bloke is again stirring the pot on totally boring, unnecessary and divisive multiculturalism and the tiresome question: ‘is Australia a racist country’.

We are a multi-racial society; we are not a multicultural society, and never will be, unless governments continue to allow us to be over-run by non-English speaking, non-white immigrants: if this happens, most people living in Australia will be those who already hate our culture, and they will soon initiate their own cultures and practices.

This author wants us to “engage with (our) racist past” because of a crazy document “Australia's Cultural Diversity Statement”, which nobody but a few Lefties and ethnics have probably corroborated on. What a damn cheek! Collusion and humbug by people trying to bring down the Anglo Saxon heritage of Australia is not going to change by one iota what Australians do or think. Australians today have no obligation or need to contemplate the early days of settlement, particularly the false past portrayed by lying Left historians and people of non-Anglo Saxon backgrounds like this author. I have nothing against those with a non-Anglo Saxon background, but it is interesting that it is those people who seem to be most involved in perpetrating and defending multiculturalism and the racist slurs against Australia. One of the chief architects of multiculturalism was a Polish immigrant. How can anyone be surprised that Australians take umbrage at the nonsense that is said about them and their country? By ‘anyone’, I don’t mean the politically driven and those who make a living out of creating division.

It also seems that Andrew Jakubowicz wants to increase his chances of punishing Australians by bringing even more non-Anglos to Australia – note his sneer at Bob Carr’s “small is beautiful” in relation to population size.

.......
Posted by Leigh, Thursday, 22 April 2010 3:28:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
.......
It also seems that Andrew Jakubowicz wants to increase his chances of punishing Australians by bringing even more non-Anglos to Australia – note his sneer at Bob Carr’s “small is beautiful” in relation to population size.

Let’s face it, the people wanting to come to Australia are now non-white, non-English speaking, with cultures totally different from our own. When you feel like criticising the endemic people of Fiji for moving against the Indians and Chinese; or the feelings of the Malays in Singapore against the Chinese, and the Malays in Malaysia with the Indians and Chinese – just give a thought to the future of Australia, with it’s leaders and the ‘ethnic lobby’ pushing for more and more non-Anglo immigration because nobody else wants to come here.

Andrew Jakubowicz and those of his ilk, helped by weak, cowardly governments, are hell bent on changing the face of a country which took them in. Australia was built on modified British mores and ethics that have kept it in good stead for over 200 years. People say that we have always been an immigrant country. Yes, but immigrants in the past have respected our culture and become part of it. That is no longer the case: immigrants are now telling us what THEY want Australia to be. If they are allowed to continue in the vein Andrew Jakubowicz suggests, Australia has a very poor, violent future ahead of it.
Posted by Leigh, Thursday, 22 April 2010 3:30:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The term 'racist country' is really relative,Australia is not as racist as Japan for example and not as racist as some of the nations immigrants come from or many wouldn't be here in the first place. Since liberal democratic societies are intrinsically multi-cultural why is a government policy necessary in order to support 'multi-culturalism'? How wide do we set the 'multi-cultural' parameters before our society resembles the Ottoman Empire? Hopefully multi-culturalism will also address the racism and sense of cultural and religious superiority of recent and not so recent immigrants.Canada's much vaunted multicuturalism grew from a need to placate Quebec separatists,so they made a virtue from necessity.Of course racial discrimination should be eliminated from our society,however multiculturalism is not the answer,it simply encourages tribalism and cultural relativism. What's wrong with Anglo-Celtic society,is the author prejudiced?
History is story of invasion and dispossession,what's done is done.
Posted by mac, Thursday, 22 April 2010 5:14:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Leigh: << We are a multi-racial society; we are not a multicultural society, and never will be, unless governments continue to allow us to be over-run by non-English speaking, non-white immigrants >>

Australia may not be a racist country, but anybody who believes the hateful crap written above is certainly a racist - and there's plenty of them infesting OLO.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Thursday, 22 April 2010 7:08:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
You mean yourself and David CJ.
You say you are anti Racist, what you are is Anti White.
Some truths are self evident and it's not a sin to discuss them.
The only sin is to say nothing, to say nothing is to work against one's own interests and the interests of of the country.
Anyone who abandons their people, who won't stand and fight for their birthright is a Traitor,as they say, the Rats are the first to leave a sinking ship
99.99% of third worlders like living where they are, they like being Indians or Chinese, they love their culture and their Race and wouldn't change it for the world.
A tiny number of Third world migrants come here for one reason and one reason only, "To make a better life for MYSELF AND MY CHILDREN"
NOT to make a better life for Jay of Melbourne, or CJ and David, they do it for their own benefit and only theirs.
They are so centered on their own interests they'll sometimes sacrifice their children's legacy, of Third world culture, Language, History and sometimes even Race to achieve what they want for themselves.
So Andrew Jakubovicz,David and CJ are centered on facilitating the selfish drive to personal enrichment of Migrants while denigrating and denying the needs and desire for a better life of their own White European Racial Brothers and Sisters.
What kind of a White person says "I claim nothing for myself and my children, I'll help you succeed at my own expense and I'll never question anything you do, even if it's detrimental to myself and my children, what's more I'll even betray my Race, work towards silencing and neutering them so that you may prosper at their expenses also"
It's called treason silly, it happens all the time.
No other race has so many Traitors working against their own interests and the interests of other Whites, it's a peculiarly White Mental Disease.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Thursday, 22 April 2010 10:03:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
To think that this author's trash is written at taxpayers expense. He continually pumps out the "I hate Anglo Australia and everything it stands for" week after week, all the while filling his pockets with an Australian taxpayer funded salary.
For anyone not familiar with the author have a peak at his website he runs for the education of Australian students "making multicultural australia" or something very close to that. Have a good look around it. Hilter would have been proud of such a hateful biased piece of work. Nowhere will you find anything good said about Anglo Australia. Its just amazing that in 2010 this guy can get away with it, and paid for by us.
And he's still harping on with his racist rants about the Indians being mugged. Does he have any proof these were racist muggings, especially when the police don't record the ethnicity of the attackers.
Posted by ozzie, Thursday, 22 April 2010 10:41:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear old OLO!! Stay as sweet as you are...

It IS indeed infested CJ, but you can't blame Leigh, he was born like that.
Posted by Ginx, Thursday, 22 April 2010 11:26:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
You've hit the nail on the head Ozzie.
He's paid to do what he does, he's one of thousands of such people in this country who make a living out of the denigration of White People, promotion of White Genocide by Racial assimilation and deconstructing the old form of pan European Multiculturalism we worked so hard to develop between the 1940's and 1980's.
Name one person in this country who makes a living arguing the opposite position.
There are none.
If someone were to speak openly and publicly about their love of the White Race, their desire to avoid Genocide by assimilation with millions of non Whites pouring into White countries and only White countries they'd be ignored, then ridiculed, then attacked.
Your comparison to the Nazis or more particularly the Soviets is appropriate.
One regime.
One race.
One set of opinions.
A perfect state,FOREVER.
Death to anyone who disagrees with the Eternal Reich of Political Correctness.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Friday, 23 April 2010 6:43:17 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay of Melbourne,

Yes. Self-hatred seems to be peculiar to white Australians. There are plenty of them on OLO. I am, of course assuming that the people calling white Australians racists are all white themselves. However, I recently winkled out an Australian-hating immigrant on OLO, who had been keeping her immigrant status a secret, so perhaps the likes of CJ Morgan and others who insist on calling others racist are non-whites themselves.

However, many Left white Australians do hate their fellow-Australians to the extent of preferring to see an Australia with anything but our traditional culture, even if it means allowing in to the country people who turn up on boats illegally, via criminals known as people-smugglers.

Ozzie,

The likes of Andrew Jakubowicz have plenty of assistance from the Australian self-haters mentioned above. He and his Australian quislings all live in their own little world, smugly feeling that everybody in the real world is going to accept their seditious nonsense
Posted by Leigh, Friday, 23 April 2010 9:58:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
CJ, Leigh, etc.,

I hope that OLO keeps getting infested by all manner of ratbags, racists, axe-grinders and perfectly sensible people such as myself. As Salman Rushdie wrote, somewhat defensively, the rights of freedom of speech and freedom of expression mean nothing if they do not include the right to offend. Just think of the alternative: ........

Yes, it would be a bland, but totalitarian, world where we were limited to saying only nice things - or nothing at all. Frankly, I WANT to know what crackpot ideas are festering away out there (hi, Jay, Ozzie), if only because occasionally they have a tiny grain of truth hidden in their piles of bullsh!t, and it's these that we have to seriously confront, sooner or later, whether we want to or not.

A confronting argument forces us to examine what we have hitherto taken for granted, and to understand and/or rebut it with better arguments. Getting angry and hurling ad hominems from one mountain top to another can be a lot of fun but they don't resolve anything, and hinting at banning discussion can be the first step on the long road to the gulags, or worse.

Joe Lane
Adelaide
Posted by Loudmouth, Friday, 23 April 2010 10:22:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Oh, Joe; I do wish I was 'sensible' like you:)

Your comment is right on the knocker, though - apart from your use of 'ad hominem'. It seems to be the only Latin known by posters, and it gets very tiring. Give me name calling any day.
Posted by Leigh, Friday, 23 April 2010 10:30:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Anybody who sees people primarily as "white" or "non-white" is a racist. QED.

Joe - I agree with most of what you say. I'm certainly not calling for "banning discussion" from the racist contingent, and I agree that we should keep it civil.

Ginx - come back, OLO needs you!
Posted by CJ Morgan, Friday, 23 April 2010 11:14:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Don't cha love how any change to what is clearly regressive social Ludditism is immediately interpreted as self hate!

Like wise I fail to see how acknowledging the truth about this country's antecedents abominable actions and dealing with them is harmful to my self image. In fact showing empathy for the victims and those who are suffering today as a consequence of those actions is bad. In fact most people would say it shows maturity and understanding.

Whereby the opposite approach is simply perpetuating a grievous series of wrongs. Logic dictates that we as individuals should suffer as a result of these wrongs. But equity (fairness) suggests we acknowledge the wrongs and *fix what we can*.

Common sense suggests that the Germans should not as individuals who were born after WW2 should feel personal shame. Equally denial and indifference is not appropriate either. Restitution has been paid now their *responsibility* is to ensure it doesn't happen again.

In that way we in Australia have a similar responsibility. In our case it involved white supremacy and the decimation of all that was aboriginal. I fail to see that denying that responsibility to ensure it doesn't happen again is consistent with the refusal of refugees on the base of colour or ethnicity, celebrating the worst of the original colonists or fixing what we can.

Then again in depth reasoning and a fair go for ALL isn't the stock and trade of intellectually lazy and emotionally hyperactive posters on On OLO
Posted by examinator, Friday, 23 April 2010 11:58:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
True tolerance of cultural diversity can only be achieved with tolerance for equality between the
primary components of culture, women and men.
Equality between women and men can only be achieved with governance conducted by agreement
between women's and men's legislatures and committees.
The process is simple, a referendum will suffice, the outcome certain.
Posted by whistler, Friday, 23 April 2010 12:03:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
CJ In YOUR opinion I'm a Racist, because you don't agree with me.
Aboriginals are starting to talk about Black and White in both a positive and negative light.
I'm talking about Black and White in both a positive and negative light.
Self Hating Leftists only speak of Black in a positive way and White in a negative way, this is the only way they can see things because their whole mindset is based on Hatred.
Do you remember what the Communist fanatics of the African National Congress used to do to their fellow blacks who collaborated with the Whites and worked against the interests of Black people?
What happened to the Afghans who collaborated with the Russians and worked against the interests of their fellow Afghans?
No other society outside the White countries tolerates people who work against their own interests and the interests of their community.
CJ your view is held by a few thousand people across the country, no more than that, you won't listen to anyone with a different point of view, you shut your eyes,repeat over and over "They're just a bunch of Jackbooted Thugs" and pretend that everyone else on the planet agrees with you.
Nationalism and Ethnocentrism is the way of the future,it's the next step in the developing world, all over the world people are rejecting globalism and Communism and all the other "Wordisms".
Kids in Mongolia are spraying Swastikas on walls alongside the words "Shoot The Chinese", Baathism, the Pan Arabic movement inspired by National Socialism is rebuilding,in Hungary the socialists have collapsed, the Greens are collapsing here...it's over, time to move to the real next phase of our social evolution.
There will be an African Hitler in our lifetime, I'm sure of it.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Friday, 23 April 2010 12:06:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Examinator, stop talking about WW2, it's none of your business.
You've just spent, what? Ten minutes or so writing that opinion piece, which is full of inconsistencies and misinformations and which is not even prefaced with "In my opinion"....
Ask yourself, What's in it for me?
What to you get out of a your "opinions"?
Will they give your children a better life?
Will flooding White countries and only White countries with millions of non Whites make your children richer and more powerful?
Are you going to set up your kids to be the Plantation owners or the Slaves?
Because that's what Non Whites want for their kids, Wealth, Prestige and Power, that's why they come here, the only reason.
You assume refugees are stupid, that they're victims and due to circumstances outside their control they are cast adrift in the world.
The fact that there are so few people roaming the world is remarkable don't you think?
Sri Lankan Tamils can got to Tamil Nadu in India and get state benefits, housing, rations and a small monthly stipend in a peaceful and stable environment, yet some choose to devote all their resources to breaking the law and migrating illegally
The Boat people aren't tragic, they're just ambitious,they're the smart ones who want money, Power and Prestige for their children and will stop at nothing to get it, just look at the Vietnamese and tell me I'm wrong.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Friday, 23 April 2010 12:27:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Perhaps some of you could stop being bitchy and consider the article?

Is anyone interested in defending(or offering a critque of) 'multiculturalism' as a government policy(which the author advocates) with its associated bureaucracy? Why do we need it? NB I'm not referring to multicultural societies but the institution of the idea through government agencies.
Perhaps someone could suggest a model society we could imitate.
Posted by mac, Friday, 23 April 2010 1:04:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A model society would be one that envisioned a final state, it's a fundamentalist point of view, socialists are fundamentalists in exactly the same was as Theologans.
Nationalism will be the next step for Australia, there's no way the Republicans will succeed unless they become Nationalists, nobody is going to fight for "Multiculturalism" or "Diversity", they will however fight for a Nation and a National identity.
Once we've got enough people consistently supporting one set of values we can start talking about tolerance of other value systems, as long as they don't damage the progress of society.
Multiculturalism is a dream, we're talking many decades, maybe a century or more before we can start considering a Multicultural society where all value systems are considered equal.
Furthermore society is only going to go backwards and slip further into pathological behavior such as what you people call "Racism" if the focus continues to be on suppressing Nationalism and both Indigenous and White ethnocentrism.
That brings up another point,we have to resolve the fundamental issues that arise from colonialism.
Colonialism is ongoing, we are still a British military occupation, hostilities toward the Indigenous Australians are ongoing.
Until we deal with this Black/White issue we can't move forward, until White Australians accept that very label "White" we're stalled.
watch this video, it'll give you a better understanding of what I'm on about.We'll discuss further.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6V82LD51UA
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Saturday, 24 April 2010 6:11:24 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay,

Interesting.
I agree with your comment in reference to values'...as long as they don't damage the progress of society.." however the statement "..Multicultural society where all values are considered equal" appears contradictory.How could we consider some of the barbarous practices of Islamic society,for example as equal? In my opinion this is the multicultural dilemma for democratic societies,ie to what extent do they allow "Multiculturalism" before the consensus that provides their cohesion is undermined.The advocates of multiculturalism don't seem to really consider this danger,some might be in favor of cultural ghettos. That's why a policy of multiculturalism is both unnecessary and inimicable to democratic societies.
I agree that we have to come to terms with the original inhabitants of Australia and I've long been in favor of a treaty, as mentioned in the video,without one,the Aboriginal people are in much the same position as the Palestinians.But,as I wrote earlier, 'what's done, is done',I will not accept some kind of collective 'racial' guilt for the actions of earlier generations.
Posted by mac, Saturday, 24 April 2010 11:01:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay Of Melbourne enough people in Australia already consistently support one set of values, that of
equality between women and men, the foundation of Aboriginal tradition as interpreted by Tom Calma
with the National Congress of Australia's First Peoples, to achieve the declaration of a Republic of
Australia should a referendum be held on equal rights governance this Saturday morning.

Equality between women and men conducted by agreement between women's and men's legislatures
and committees is the foundation from which true tolerance of cultural diversity proceeds
and the only genuine basis from which a treaty with the nation's First Peoples can be negotiated.
Posted by whistler, Saturday, 24 April 2010 11:13:02 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Whistler,

Wit hrespect, you do seem to be a one-trick pony. When are you going to realise how reactionary and sexist your proposal is ? Do you honestly think that women would tolerate some form of gender-Apartheid which dictates what are women's issues and what are men's issues ?

Here's a little job for you: list ten issues which a women's legislature would deal with, and ten which a men;s legislature would deal with. Now fit immigration, education, health, foreign affairs, economic issues and urbanisation into your framework.

All of those issues, I would maintain, are BOTH women's and men's issues - i.e. issues to be resolved together, without unnecessary distinction. Pope didn't write that 'the proper study of mankind is man, and the proper study of womankind is woman, and never the twain shall meet.'

Just as Nelson Mandela champions a non-racial and democratic society, so we should be championing a non-sexist, non-racial and democraticd society. Your proposal would take human affairs precisely in the wrong direction.

Mind you, many fundametalists, Muslim and otherwise, would go for it.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Saturday, 24 April 2010 12:55:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So does anyone agree with me?
You can politely disagree with me all you want but does anyone else think we just need a "do over", I mean it's only been 220 years, we really could just start all over again.
As the video says, this is one of the most meticulously documented periods in history, we know who did what and when, all this "equality" business and the refusal to actually BE White people is a denial of our part in it.
Anyone who won't accept their Whiteness can't possibly claim to have the best interests of the country at heart, they just can't, this is a Black and White issue, you can't hide behind "Multiculturalism", "Racism' or any of your other "WORDISMS" any more.
You all know what will happen if we start at an official level calling the treatment of Aboriginals a Genocide.
You know what will happen if we recognise the sovereignty of Aboriginal people and engage in a treaty with them.
The Right will never do anything, they're stagnant and Hogtied by Israel, you guys are similarly bound by the religion of Political Correctness.
So do you want a revolution or are you going to just stand there yelling as the cattle cars go by,doing nothing like Leftists always do?
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Saturday, 24 April 2010 1:26:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
To be fair, Andrew Jakubowicz did make one good point:
"3. freezing the refugee processing of asylum seekers"
seems reasonable, although I think he meant to say illegal immigrants.
Posted by Proxy, Saturday, 24 April 2010 2:34:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I’ve got a great idea!
Australia should formulate a population policy based on bringing people with as many disparate value systems as is possible, from all over the globe.
The genius of this idea is that when they get here, their very differences will be what unites them with us!
We’ll call it obtusity.
When they get here, we will strongly encourage them to retain their own value systems.
This will accelerate their integration into the community.
The only value we insist they adopt is the core Australian one of obtusity.
In return, we should also adopt their value systems:
We should put gender-segregated prayer rooms in our universities as a refreshing alternative to the secularism of the public sphere and as a sign of our commitment to obtusity.
We should actively promote the wearing of traditional tablecloths by their womenfolk as a pleasing contrast to the immodesty of Australian women and as a sign of liberation, and obtusity.
We should whitewash the histories of their ideologies so that we can feel better about ourselves, and so that they aren’t provoked to harm us.
In fact, we should make laws which criminalise anybody saying anything which might inflame the situation. Offence taken, not truth, should guide us in implementing these laws.
This is not to say that we should elevate all their values over ours.
For example, when they claim their ideology as justification for harming us, we should reject their proposition as absurd. We must make a principled stand somewhere. To admit to what they say would undermine the validity of our own ideology.
Those who disagree with our plan should be labelled haters and racists. Not only because they disagree with us, but because nobody wants to be labelled a hater or a racist so it is an effective way to stifle dissent.
Hang on.
Andrew Jakubowicz et al. already thought of it.
Posted by Proxy, Saturday, 24 April 2010 6:06:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Proxy.
When Andrew Jakubowicz runs out of things to say, annoys enough people or basically has a better offer he'll go over to the Right Wing, start tubthumping for the Settler Movement and become rampantly Islamophobic.
David Horowitz did it, now he criticises the PC Fascists which his generation and he personally were responsible for creating and backs sites like the Mossad run Jihadwatch.
It's a funny old world.
Don't be fooled into thinking Islam is a problem here, it's one of those issues, like the Holocaust where taking a position is not necessary, whichever side you choose results in your energy being sapped and your opinion being under someone else's control.
Always ask, "WHAT"S IN THIS FOR ME?" don't think about what you can gain by becoming a Pro Victim Leftist or a Pro Israel Respectable conservative only what you stand to lose.
No to Islam, No to Israel.
No platform, No comment.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Saturday, 24 April 2010 8:07:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay of Melbourne: << So does anyone agree with me? >>

Apparently not much - unless you count sockpuppet trolls.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Saturday, 24 April 2010 8:16:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There is just a grain of truth in what Proxy says:

"This is not to say that we should elevate all their values over ours.
For example, when they claim their ideology as justification for harming us, we should reject their proposition as absurd. We must make a principled stand somewhere. To admit to what they say would undermine the validity of our own ideology."

If he means that our values include respect for all humans, male and female, attention to equal rights, and freedom to do whatever we wish provided everybody else has the same freedom (i.e. not to do to others what we would not like them to do to us), then he might have a point. Not all sets of values are equal, just as not all 'cultures' are equal (cf. Nazi culture, Stalinist culture, the culture of the Catholic church of the Middle Ages, i.e. up to about 1970). So if our sets of values are not as good as those of some other group, these differences have to be teased out.

And vice versa.

Sit back and enjoy it, CJ.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Saturday, 24 April 2010 9:17:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@Joe.Finally!
Here everyone read this:
http://www.integralworld.net/beck2.html
There is a new way of looking at these issues, unfortunately people aren't going to be able to make billions from it straight away so like the electric car it's being ignored.
As they say "Cometh the time, cometh the thinking"
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Saturday, 24 April 2010 9:31:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Loudmouth if you were genuinely concerned about sexism and gender apartheid, not to mention equal rights, you would take umbrage at Australia's Constitution, an Act to which women were forbidden to speak, of a parliament from which women were forbidden to attend, which created men's legislatures in which women participate until a majority decides they should be removed forthwith and all women refused a vote.

But you don't; you give every indication of support for this brazen excursion into sexism and gender apartheid, albeit in a moderate incarnation but sexism and gender apartheid nonetheless, not the sexism and gender apartheid of your imagination, the real thing, which is the primary instrument of governance in Australia today.

A majority of the world’s democracies have a women's caucus to offer advice yet there has never been an outcry these caucuses are sexist or constitute gender apartheid. A women's legislature converts advice to authority.
Both women and men have a right to an opinion about any law including all the laws of your imaginary agenda yet only men have the final say over what should be law in Australia's parliament, if necessary by removing women altogether, that's the law.

A person with a mere rudimentary knowledge of social analysis, or of the english language for that matter, would know sexism and gender apartheid imply disadvantage to a sex or gender.
Neither women nor men are disadvantaged when distinguished with governance conducted by their agreement; it's actually called equality. Your assertions otherwise are disingenuous, inflammatory, poorly thought out and a nonsense.
What is it about governance conducted by agreement between women's and men's legislatures and committees you don't get? Does genuine equality with women perhaps assail your manhood? it shouldn't, if you're anything like the overwhelming majority of Australian men you're much too much of a man for that.
Posted by whistler, Saturday, 24 April 2010 11:13:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I admire your singularity, whistler.
Posted by Psychophant, Saturday, 24 April 2010 11:47:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Joe Loudmouth,
"For example, when they claim their ideology as justification for harming us, we should reject their proposition as absurd. We must make a principled stand somewhere. To admit to what they say would undermine the validity of our own ideology."
Expanding...
When they claim that their ideology justifies their actions,
we simply point out how they have misinterpreted their own ideology
and that our interpretation of their ideology is the correct one.
For example, if they kill their women for bringing shame to them
according to their interpretation of their own cultural practices,
we point out that their culture does not, in fact, permit this.
If they attempt to kill us because we don't believe in what they believe,
as dictated by their ideology, we make it clear that they are,
in fact, acting counter-culturally.
Not to do so, would undermine the entire edifice of our own ideology.
Posted by Proxy, Sunday, 25 April 2010 9:07:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Proxy,

An impressive summary of militant multiculturalism and the ideal society,however for this paradise to function correctly it's essential to convince people of European descent that they're the only racist 'ethnic' group.This technique is far more effective than simple labelling dissenters as 'racists'.
Posted by mac, Sunday, 25 April 2010 10:05:21 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Proxy,
But amongst the cultural beliefs of some groups, particularly those which don't hold a belief in gender equality, there may well be beliefs that women can be killed for committing actions, which men in their own practice may be excused for, i.e. intrinsic inequality.

Amongst other groups, there may well be a belief that non-believers are less than human, and/or in thrall to the devil, and thereby can be killed. Most sets of cultural practices do have elements which others in other groups might find offensive or intolerable, and which may in fact contravene human rights, i.e. intrinsic equality.

In fact, the very notion of toleration or tolerance may be absent from some groups, which are still 'tolerated' in a more equitable society. This raises the dilemma: how do we 'tolerate' the practices of groups which do not practice 'tolerance' themselves ?

So it makes little sense to talk about 'all cultures being equal', if the definition of a category of people within that group, specifically women, don't measure up to the definition embedded in notions of equal human rights
Posted by Loudmouth, Sunday, 25 April 2010 10:31:09 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Whistler: 'A person with a mere rudimentary knowledge of social analysis, or of the english language for that matter, would know sexism and gender apartheid imply disadvantage to a sex or gender.'

Exactly. How on earth would separate legislations overcome this disadvantage ? Can't you understand that this was the essence of Apartheid in South Africa, in relation to race ?
Posted by Loudmouth, Sunday, 25 April 2010 10:35:10 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"separate legislations", Loudmouth, what on earth are you talking about?
do the Senate and House of Representative enact separate legislations.
no they don't, they agree upon the same legislation.
separation does not conflate with segregation, please consult a dictionary.
i mean it, look up the words you're using in a dictionary.
neither does legislation conflate with a legislature, again, please consult a dictionary.
all you're doing by confusing discussion of women's disadvantage with the inflammatory misuse of language is entrenching male privilege.
albeit with best intention you're commentary is counterproductive.
i repeat, a majority of the world’s democracies have a women's caucus to offer advice yet there has never been an outcry these caucuses are sexist or constitute gender apartheid.
a women's legislature converts advice to authority.
Posted by whistler, Sunday, 25 April 2010 11:37:26 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Joe Loudmouth,
<<This raises the dilemma: how do we 'tolerate' the practices of groups which do not practice 'tolerance' themselves ?>>
That's easy.
If they are whites or Christians we condemn them, by calling them racists, homophobes, Islamophobes, haters, bigots, etc.
If they're multicultural, we ignore it. If it still comes to the fore, we claim that the perpetrators are in fact victims.
Furthermore, we point out that they are acting counter-culturally, because their culture preaches tolerance, unlike Christianity.
Posted by Proxy, Sunday, 25 April 2010 12:04:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sorry, Whistler, obviously I meant 'legislatures'.

You're right, separation does not equate with segregation, but it certainly CAN. Hence, Apartheid.

So now we are talking about a women's caucus ? No problems, provided that women also have full rights to be involved with a common legislature. But surely, if a 'legislature' barred women as members but allowed for some input by way of the decisions of an (external) caucus), then yes, we are talking about segregation, and unequal rights of men and women.

Are you proposing a men's legislature, a women's legislature, AND some over-arching legislature that pulls it all together ? i.e. a superior one which finally decides on legislation, and to which the other two are actually caucuses which 'advise' it ? Nationally, and in each State and territory ? So 27 legislatures around the country ?

Good luck !
Posted by Loudmouth, Sunday, 25 April 2010 1:45:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Same people, same discussion.

Lets face it, people like Leigh, Jay, Ozzie and Proxy feel threatened by outsiders. What that reflects is their insecurity. It doesn't reflect on anybody else. From what I've seen in Oz people of many different races can get along perfectly fine. There's just some people that want to turn everything into a race issue because it suits their persecution complex. The difference is that these days those people are white. These people are bacically saying, "The big scary ethnics are out to get me, they want me to convert to their religion, marry them and give them my job ... oh and houses are now too expensive." Whinge, whinge, whinge .. etc. The only problem is that 99% of the ethnics just want to live in peace and aren't doing anything to the whinger group. But of course, the whingers won't believe that.

And on multiculturalism, accommodation is one thing, but submission is another. Any practice that entails inequality shouldn't be accommodated. But people can be free to believe what they want.
Posted by jjplug, Sunday, 25 April 2010 4:50:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
thanks Loudmouth, it's women who are talking about a women's caucus, in a majority of the world’s democracies.
i have no experience in parliament and would expect those who have to nut out the details but i would anticipate a model for the parliament of an equal rights republic to rebadge the Senate as a women's legislature to which women elect representatives and the House of Representatives as a men's legislature to which men elect representatives, each with exactly the same rights to initiate, review, amend, accept or reject legislation enacted with passage through both.
a cabinet of equal numbers of women and men responsible exclusively to the members of their legislature would reconcile the business of the parliament and provide the republic with leadership.
sovereignty would reside with a council of governors-general comprised of equal numbers of distinguished senior women and men and the courts would recognise women's and men's jurisdictions.
state and territory legislatures would follow suit, a second legislature would be reprised in Queensland, their stake in the federation maintained through women's and men's lines of communication.
cultural values from wherever in the world which violate the standard of equality set by parliament would be unwelcome, all else would be received universally with equity and tolerance, again to the standard of the parliament.
if an equal rights referendum was held last Saturday the results would already be in.
Posted by whistler, Monday, 26 April 2010 12:25:47 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
.....aaaaahhhhhhh! A breath of fresh air!!

Thanks jjplug!
Posted by Ginx, Monday, 26 April 2010 1:30:09 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
jjjplug. I'm threatened by other White people, White Race Traitors want to silence me and throw me in jail for my views, non Whites are in the main tolerant and accepting of Ethnocentric views, I dare you to prove me wrong.
Read my lips "All my enemies are White". You are the threat, you are the problem, you support a Genocide of White people, I've never heard a non White migrant gloating or mocking us on our low birthrate and falling populations but you and those like you seem to think this is all so funny.
I again point out the fact that non White people have little to no capacity to, nor even interest in influencing the future of White Australia. Apart from demographics,they are simply not capable of changing the face of this country without help from Self Hating/Self Serving White people. Just as they have had little to no influence in shaping the past, beyond those small contributions facilitated by Whites they have no part to play in shaping our future.
It doesn't matter if there's one million Whites and 34 million not, we'll still be running the country, they'll be even poorer and we'll be even richer.The only way to ensure a progressive,ethical and just society based on the current model is to keep it majority White, a White minority is a bad thing in a non White country, we don't co- exist with non whites we enslave them because as a group we're smarter and more innovative than they are, this is just racial reality, it's a self evident statement backed by history, if you need further proof.
Ask yourself, why would you want the White population to gradually disappear? What do you and your descendants gain from that scenario?
What's in it for your grandchildren?
Do you really want them to go back to the barbarity, slavery and corruption that has characterised our past or do you want something better?
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Monday, 26 April 2010 9:07:32 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay of Melbourne: << The only way to ensure a progressive,ethical and just society based on the current model is to keep it majority White, a White minority is a bad thing in a non White country, we don't co- exist with non whites we enslave them because as a group we're smarter and more innovative than they are, this is just racial reality, it's a self evident statement backed by history, if you need further proof. >>

Jay, that's a classically racist statement, yet you claim not to be a racist. In the interest of dispelling confusion, would you mind articulating exactly what you understand to be racism?

I'm reading and writing in English in this forum. What language are you using?
Posted by CJ Morgan, Monday, 26 April 2010 9:53:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
CJ, prove me wrong, prove that a White minority in a non White country is a good thing.
Aboriginals were the majority in this country, a tiny White minority came, enslaved,murdered and assimilated them to the point of extinction.
Only when WE became the majority were the rights of Aboriginals even considered.
It's never an equal contest between Whites and non Whites, your whole "Anti Racist" ideology is based on this inequality yet you'll both confirm and deny it in the same breath.
You're like the forensic scientist who'll use genetics to identify the Race of a decayed corpse to solve a crime knowing all along that according to geneticists Race doesn't even exist.
What you call Racism is just an opinion, you don't like to be contradicted by facts, your words and your Wordism are more important than any historical or in any way realistic perspective.
Whites conquer, enslave and wipe out non Whites when they arrive in their living space, the only time non Whites can exist in reasonable safety and dignity our society is as a minority.
These are incontrovertible facts.
This is Racial Reality.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Monday, 26 April 2010 10:40:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
CJ
It's not his English that is unintelligible his meaning is clear, it's his logic that is that is inhuman and needs a health warning.
Posted by examinator, Monday, 26 April 2010 11:16:08 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Furthermore, putting pressure on White people, in the way that Andrew Jakubowicz and the other "Anti-Racists"are doing is a stupid idea.
What happens when we're put under any sort of pressure?
We Snap and lash out at minorities.
Every time.
White people will not live peacefully in proportions less than 80% of a community, studies in the U.S have proven this.(I'm not going looking for the link again, if you're interested try amren.com)
African Americans and Latinos prefer to live in communities of 50-100% their own race.
White people will not live with more than 20% "diversity" before they either start to leave or some other negative consequences come into play.
We're at 8-10% non White now, that's why things are working out for the most part, the U.S is heading toward 40% and there's a very real chance of severe civil unrest, the Obama government certainly seem concerned enough about that possibility that they're training 80,000 troops in crowd/riot control.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Monday, 26 April 2010 11:36:24 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay of Melbourne,
The issue seems peculiarly black and white to you. Perhaps you should begin by defining these designations?
your so-called "incontrovertible facts" are 'factitious' nonsense and pernicious racism that the bulk of human history certainly does not back up--or did history only begin for you with the era of modern Western imperialism?
Nor is there any 'scientific' basis upon which to support your preposterous polemic. The burden is on you to present evidence for your 'opinions'.
Try reading Stephen Jay Gould's book "The Mismeasure of Man", in which he confronts the pseudo-science of biological determinism. Racism is as old as the hills, but there's still no evidence that it is anything more than that--racism. The burden of Gould's argument is that historical presumptions about racial superiority/inferiority are yet another example of solipsistic empiricism (human hubris). Racism has of course been the refrain down through the ages, and not just white on black; even venerably scientific minds like Darwin accept the premise of racial hierarchy, uncritically, but it's nonsense. Gould suggests that the 'scientific' argument for racism, beginning with craniometry, inductively legitimated old prejudices without interrogating the contrary evidence. Racism is a division of tendentious thought. What we call 'reason'.
Posted by Squeers, Monday, 26 April 2010 11:53:10 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
No Examinator, that's just another opinion, I'm contradicting your opinion and you don't like it.
I'm pointing out that you contradict yourselves and you don't like it.
I'm pointing out that all you have is opinions instead of facts, that every time the evidence begins to stack up against you you pull out another "ISM", become abusive or threatening.
You have nothing, I have everything, I'm smart, well read and educated in both an academic and a real world sense, you're brainwashed by other people's self serving doctrine and ignorant of even the most basic facts about society, history and race.
People who will not accept Racial Realities have no business speaking on the subject.
Remember I said World War Two was none of your business when you opined on that subject?
Race is none of your business either if all you have is opinions to back your case.
Opinions are not facts, only facts count.
Come back to me with facts that prove that Racial Assimilation is of benefit to White people and I'll listen to you.
I can prove my case, in fact it proves itself, we live with Racial Reality every day, it's there for all to see in our past and present.
If you can't accept these self evident truths what hope do you have of a better future?
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Monday, 26 April 2010 11:58:02 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So, Jay - are you going to tell us what you understand by the term "racism" or not?
Posted by CJ Morgan, Monday, 26 April 2010 1:52:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
analysis in support of racial inequality relies exclusively on evidence of male privilege.
not a single fact is ever obtained from a situation of women's empowerment.
but male privilege is all washed up, all that's now required is to update the instruments of governance.
racial inequality is irrelevant, a concern without a scintilla of merit in the modern world.
protagonists could make a better contribution than as museum exhibits in the hall of permutations of patriarchy.
women's rights and racial equality are celebrations not a cause to turn with shame to the past.
embrace diversity don't be its dishrag.
Posted by whistler, Monday, 26 April 2010 5:19:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
CJ, I use the same definition of racism that everyone else does,ie a destructive Mental disease affecting White people and only White people, a pathology that clouds the mind and colours people's judgement to the extent that it threatens to destroy our society. So when I call you an Anti White Racist and state over and over again that "All my enemies are White" and that "We have a treason problem, not a race problem' well...you can see where I'm, coming from now.
Squeers, Stepehen Jay Gould was a giant in his field, our understanding of the way Molluscs have evolved was altered by his expertise in the area, there was nothing about snails that he couldn't tell you and people were willing to pay to hear or read his thoughts.
He also thought a lot on civil rights, the arts and Race/human relations and was by all reports a fine singer, though I doubt he made much money from it.
I also have a field of expertise, House Painting, what I don't know about the trade probably isn't worth knowing anyway, lots of people agree with my thoughts on the subject and are willing to pay me for my work, just like Gould and his Snails.
I also think a lot about Race, human relations, the Arts and civil rights, when I write posts on other websites I find that thousands of people have the same ideas and agree with me, it's even been suggested that I could write for money if I wanted to, though there's not much money in it.
Anyway Stephen Jay Gould must have inspired millions in the Third world, I mean surely it wasn't just other Jewish academics who, as is common to that race, were able to expand on his ideas.
There must be literally thousands of Indigenous African scientists enlarging on his theories and really pushing the boundaries, ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL.
Who would you say, Squeers is the African equivalent of Mr Gould?
Which African has done so much in so many diverse fields to further your understanding of the world?
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Tuesday, 27 April 2010 1:02:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanks, Jay.

<< I use the same definition of racism that everyone else does,ie a destructive Mental disease affecting White people and only White people, a pathology that clouds the mind and colours people's judgement to the extent that it threatens to destroy our society. >>

Funny, I'm pretty well acquainted with the various definitions of racism in English, and absolutely none of them say anything about diseases, pathology or "White" people. I've never heard the term used colloquially in that sense, either.

Some dictionary definitions:

Macquarie Dictionary

<< the belief that human races have distinctive characteristics which determine their respective cultures, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule or dominate others >>

Oxford English Dictionary

<< the theory that distinctive human characteristics and abilities are determined by race >>

Dictionary.com

<< a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others. >>

The Free Dictionary

<< a belief that human races have distinctive characteristics that determine their respective cultures, usually involving the idea that one’s race is superior and has the right to control others. >>

Merriam-Webster Dictionary

<< a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race >>

YourDictionary.com

<< belief in or doctrine asserting racial differences in character, intelligence, etc. and the superiority of one race over another or others: racist doctrine also, typically, seeks to maintain the supposed purity of a race or the races >>

Note that under any of those accepted English definitions, the claptrap that you post here would be considered racist. You can't claim not to be racist simply by altering the accepted definition of the word to suit your hateful agenda.

Who's this "everybody else" that you claim to use your idiosyncratic defintion of racism, anyway?
Posted by CJ Morgan, Tuesday, 27 April 2010 1:59:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So CJ, you don't think you're a "Better Type Of White" than I am?
I say I'm White and that race is real and it matters,
You actually deny that your Whiteness matters which means that you find it an inferior concept, White people who believe that race matters to you are inferior, you wouldn't throw away something you thought was good would you?
I thought I was regarded as, "incoherent", "Racist","Scum", etc on this board,if you denigrate someone you are by definition taking a superior position.
You define a Racist in exactly the same way as I do and everyone else who takes an interest, you're painting me as a Genocidal Supremacist and I'm painting you and all the other Traitors as Genocidal Supremacists.
Race IS real and it DOES matter.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Tuesday, 27 April 2010 3:14:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay of Melbourne,
you're a legend in your own mind, mate; yet your claptrap is no doubt appealing to many (though surely not for it's literary merit?).
I've always felt that there's a large racist cohort in this country, and certainly PC is but a thin veneer over a lot of hateful undercurrents. Yet you are deluded if you think the non-racists you despise are only a few thousand, just as you're deluded if you think you're ever going to be guru to more than a small handful of ignorant extremists.
Most racists in this country, I suspect, have a very mild case of it, a hangover from more primitive times, that's easily whipped up into fear and loathing but lacks real malice. In the end reason and compassion would prevail over your kind of vitriol, which after all is patent rubbish.
But I won't waste more words on you, except to advise you to read on the subject--and I don't mean 'Mein Kampf'.
Posted by Squeers, Tuesday, 27 April 2010 3:23:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Tut tut..when you insult and Denigrate me it means I WIN,
Gandhi was really onto something wasn't he?
Squeers, The African Stephen Jay Gould Equivalent..chop-chop, focus please!
Any African Genius of note will do, maybe an Indigenous African who has invented something we use every day.
I'll make it easier, find an Indigenous Asian born Equivalent of a Genius polymath like Stephen Jay Gould who has altered the way you view Race, biology and culture.
I am of course just stirring, I don't seriously expect you to come up with names, it's completely unrealistic goal and I apologise for making you look silly.
So, Jay three, everyone else Nil.
Cya on the next "Bash Whitey" thread :)
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Tuesday, 27 April 2010 5:46:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay's propaganda is downright embarrassing. Its littered with assertions and inaccuracies and he never offers any evidence to back up his arguments.

Most of the racists in this country are weak, inconsequential people. They are not the majority even though they like to pretend that they are.
Posted by David Jennings, Tuesday, 27 April 2010 5:49:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blchappelle.htm
Emmett Chappelle

Lloyd Hall
http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bll_a_hall.htm

Daniel Williams
http://inventors.about.com/od/blackinventors/p/Daniel_Williams.htm

Good People: 3
Racist Jay: 0 (or negative infinity...)

Asian geniuses? Just stroll into any Australian university Jay....
Posted by David Jennings, Tuesday, 27 April 2010 5:54:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
its an incontrovertible fact that blokes pedaling racial inequality have been floundering and flopping for the past fifty years and more. if a bloke was fair dinkum about racial inequality he'd be piggybacking on the petticoats of women in the mould of Pauline Hansen and Sarah Palin, if you'll pardon the pun. its the last best shot to stem the tidal wave of equality engulfing humanity as women all over the world gain equal status with men, from which everything else
follows, but even then its all circus and no cigar.
Posted by whistler, Tuesday, 27 April 2010 11:03:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David,
I asked a specific question, find me an Indigenous African or Asian whose achievements across the fields of endeavour engaged by Stephen Jay Gould could reasonably be described as comparable.
If Gould was right in his assumptions about Race then Squeers could have come straight back with an answer, in the end all I got was abuse,so I win again.Since no answer has been forthcoming then I must conclude that Gould himself was a contradiction of his own objections to sociobiology and determinism.
These lists of "Black Inventors" need to be understood for what they are,a few African Americans hold patents, some of them hold a number of patents.Holding a patent does not mean that they "invented" something, it means in most cases that they altered or improved some technology that already existed. http://guywhite.wordpress.com/2009/07/15/black-invention-myths/
http://inventors.about.com/od/blackinventors/a/black_myths.htm
G.W, Carver's many "inventions" for example were mostly useless and impractical modifications of other people's patents.
Furthermore why is it that my posts contain more actual quotes and information from Black people and Black perspectives than anyone else's?
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Tuesday, 27 April 2010 11:23:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
whistler,
What on earth has Sarah Palin got to do with all this?
Why do you drag her into a bun fight over racism?
Do you hate her because she didn't kill her Down Syndrome child?
Posted by Proxy, Tuesday, 27 April 2010 11:28:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Proxy if you looked up a site referred to on this thread you may have come across this:
http://www.amren.com/ar/2008/11/index.html#cover
"Sarah Palin as running mate actually gives race realists someone they can vote for instead of just sitting out the election".
"Even the fact that Sarah Palin’s youngest child has Down Syndrome carries a pro-white message — it reminds careerist white women in their 30s that once they are in their 40s, the chances of having a Down Syndrome baby rises rapidly. It’s best to get moving if they want a healthy family."
Sarah Palin is the darling of racial inequality, the final shot in the barrel, and again, plenty circus no cigar.
Posted by whistler, Wednesday, 28 April 2010 1:09:13 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Whistler AMREN isn't the best source of information on these matters.
Not that I'm saying they're totally wrong but they're just not the BEST at the Racial Realist game, they veer to far to the Right for my tastes, they're too objective and they engage a lot in what's called "Wordism".
Sarah Palin belongs in the White Traitor/Media Gadfly/Backstabbing Moderate pen with her boss McCain,Nick Griffin Geert Wilders, Pauline Hanson, APP etc, she's no friend of White people.
You're either unconditionally Pro White or Pro White Genocide, Sarah Palin will never take a stand on what really matters, she'll never say the "G Word" so that makes her even worse than the Loony Left.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Wednesday, 28 April 2010 4:34:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
whistler,
I guess you're right after all.
Sarah Palin must be like Obama's grandmother, a "typical white person".
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5188753
Fortunately, 96% of black Americans cast racism aside and voted for Obama.
Their vote, based solely on merit, helped ensure that that white racist Palin never made it into the White House.
Hang on, "White" House, that sounds like racism to me.
Posted by Proxy, Wednesday, 28 April 2010 4:43:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
whistler,
Can you link me to any reliable sources where Sarah Palin said something racist?
Like say "typical black person"?
Posted by Proxy, Wednesday, 28 April 2010 5:07:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay have you actually read and understood Stephen Jay Gould's Mismeasure of Man? He does not support your point of view. In fact he would think that you are a crackpot. A view that is no doubt shared by many people on this thread.

Your attempt to deny the Black inventors is pathetic. But I guess you aren't bothered by the facts. Liar.
Posted by jjplug, Wednesday, 28 April 2010 6:12:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
jjplug. Being a person with an interest in Race I've read a fair bit of Gould's work, he was only one voice among many speaking on race, some people say he's right some people say he isn't, he was just another "Expert" pushing a political point of view.
An "Expert" is just someone who asks for money before giving their opinion, he made his living from his opinions.
I don't really have an opinion on him one way or the other, he actually didn't try to discredit Sociobiology, he more or less said that it could be dangerous in the wrong hands but wished them well in their endeavours if they used it as a tool for good.
He probably did White people a favour, imagine if some Genocidal Anti White Maniac like Noel Ignatiev or the pyschopaths running Israel had it at their disposal
Scientific Racism is only used against White people these days anyway, hence the popularity and undue level of attention given to allegations of"Racist" behaviour.
Eugenics is old hat, it's too much work for the Anti white Racists, they're lazy and none too bright anyway, so much easier to use History, you can write anything you want about the past (or the future for that matter) and people will believe it.
BTW I'm not trying to explode any myths myself, I just use other people's research, thoughts and scholarship, just like all the other people on this board, this is the internet, every "Fact" or opinion has a rebuttal a few mouse clicks away, it's up to us what we choose to believe.
At the end of the day you're trying to stop me having my say, I've responded to every dumb,ugly and fraudulent post you guys have thrown at me with dignity and intelligent riposte, it's just a pity you guys can't rise above petty name calling and challenge anything I say.
Opinion on Race is not one sided, it's divided, until such time as a true consensus is reached Multiculturalism and Communism are just cults propped up by Neo Fascist thuggery.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Wednesday, 28 April 2010 8:22:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It's also pretty sad that the words "denier' and 'denial' keep cropping up, it's such a crude, hateful and desperate trick that it doesn't surprise me that Anti White Racists use it.
Only one group of people who lived through a very brief window of time can claim legitimate usage of the word "Denier" in race based debates, so let's leave it out of our little talks shall we?
When you spew hatred at me for talking about My Race, the White Race the 14 words "We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White children" I take your words at face value, you hate me because your whole world view is based on hate and genocidal thoughts.
You're nothing but Wordists, all you have are words.Wordism depends entirely on one’s current opinion. A Wordist loves or hates according to his current feeling about a group from one set of words against another set of words. He HATES Evil, as he defines Evil according to his Wordist outlook.
So whoever he is currently criticizing, best of all if it has the virtue of being his own group, he currently Hates, because they are Evil on the only scale he knows.
The Wordist assumes the same motivation in others. To him, Hate is the basic motivation.
Loyalty is the most natural motivation for any animal above the level of a cockroach. Meer Kats hate other groups of Meer Kats during the period they are competing with them. Over tens of millions of years of years of evolution, there has never been a social animal who judged all others of his species objectively.
Wordists are very unnatural animals. What passes for loyalty in them is whether a group represents Good or Evil. Someone who is wrong is not just wrong, it is Hate of all things that are Good. No healthy minded person can think that way. He loves his family and knows what is right and wrong about them. The loyalty does not vary.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Wednesday, 28 April 2010 8:36:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
OLO has certainly been a learning experience.
For example, I’ve learnt that:
Anybody who doesn’t uncritically accept multiculturalism is a racist;
Anybody who doesn’t uncritically accept open door immigration is a racist;
Anybody who believes that there are inherent racial traits is a racist;
Criticising Islam is racism;
Sexual orientation is analogous to race;
Only whites can be racist;
Etc, etc, etc.
These left-wing truisms lead to some interesting dilemmas.
If criticising Islam is racism, then Muslims must constitute a racial type.
Clearly then, Judaism must be a race and Christianity must be a race.
Criticising Christianity is therefore racism.
If only whites can be racist then racism must be a racial trait BUT anybody who believes that there are inherent racial traits is a racist THEREFORE saying that only whites can be racist is racism.
If sexual orientation is analogous to race then the 70% of blacks who voted for Proposition 8 (in favour of normal marriage) in California in Dec 2008 must be racist.
But only whites can be racist THEREFORE 70% of blacks are white.
The Japanese don’t have a multicultural policy THEREFORE they must be racist THEREFORE 100% of Japanese are white.
The Chinese don’t have an open door immigration policy THEREFORE 100% of Chinese must be white.
Islam unequivocally condemns homosexuality, which as we’ve already noted is analogous to race, THEREFORE Muslims must be racist and THEREFORE 100% of Muslims are white.
But if everyone is white, where will we find enough victims (apart from the 50% or so who are female of course) to satisfy the lefts insatiable thirst?
Furthermore, who wants to let all those racist whites into this country?
Are they mad?
Posted by Proxy, Wednesday, 28 April 2010 9:16:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
OLO has taught me that racists are complete imbeciles.
Posted by jjplug, Wednesday, 28 April 2010 9:43:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Wordism"?

Never having heard of this ideology before encountering the delightful Jay, I did a quick Google search and lo and behold, I found Stormfront!

<< FYI Wordism is the opposite of Racism. We "Racists" are loyal to our people, while "Wordists" make religions out of ideas. Examples of Wordists: Communist, Marxist, Environmentalist, etc. >>

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t699066/

It's fascinating to observe the lunatic fringe in action. Indeed, it's one of the reasons I come to OLO so often.

Speaking of whom, Proxy should look back up the thread to discover what constitutes racism, rather than babbling incoherently. I provided a range of concise and consistent English definitions of what is generally considered racism - not that our sockpuppet troll would comprehend them.

jjplug - In my experience racists are not always completely stupid. Some of them are even able to paint houses or change aliases regularly in OLO forums.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Wednesday, 28 April 2010 11:35:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Wow... I mean like .. Wow!! So a certain person is actually not of Melbourne? Interesting link CJ. I'm not sure what to say. I mean I get that we were wasting our time with him but I thought that he was here in Oz.
Posted by jjplug, Thursday, 29 April 2010 1:33:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
CJ,
Yes, but how many racists does it take to change a light bulb?
Posted by Proxy, Thursday, 29 April 2010 10:41:48 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well look at you guys promoting Stormfront!
No I'm not "Truck Roy" if that's what you're thinking.
Here is one of his podcasts, featuring "Horus", do a search for "Riding Shotgun With Truck Roy". here:http://whiterabbitradio.net/audio/ridingshotun5.mp3

Proxy, you've taken the White pill,there's no going back now, come on over to: http://www.whitenewsnow.com/ start an account under the same username post an introduction and we'll work on fine tuning your debating skills. Believe me there is so much you are missing out on, our side dwarfs the PC side, Stormfront alone has something like 180,000 members from all over the world, we are the counter culture now, they're on the wane and mostly work for the establishment..
All the best peeps, CJ, Squeers, keep promoting Stormfront and remember that you guys, you Anti-White Whites are the biggest sales pitch for the White Movement, one of you is worth ten of us, the more you carry on the easier it is to convince people that loyalty to one's race is a better option than being a traitor.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Thursday, 29 April 2010 1:40:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Speaking of Stormfront, I think we should be calling Jay "RoadTrain".

And to think he's claimed here that he doesn't participate much at that 'white supremacist' hate site. Who would've thought that he's so economical with the truth?
Posted by CJ Morgan, Thursday, 29 April 2010 7:00:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Personally, I'm shocked :-0
Posted by jjplug, Thursday, 29 April 2010 8:10:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
CJ you're not playing the game right, you NEVER create propaganda for the people you disagree with, No Pasaran! No Platform!
There is a ban on linking to Anti Fascist groups on Stormfront.
What you are doing is leaving more and more traces over the Web for a group of people you hate.
It doesn't work like that this is a propaganda war, any means necessary under the law but not breaking the law.
I you want to create a whole new drama go right ahead, I'm not giving up so you can keep promoting Stormfront or deal with the here and now of OLO.
If you look back in my posts here you'll see that I said "I'm not INVOLVED" in Stormfront"not that it makes any difference, if I was I'd be linking to posts there anyway and promoting the site simply because it's such a fantastic resource for White people.
There are BETTER sites in my opinion but Stormfront is a good first stop because it allows people like you to have their say as well, most of the others don't http://www.stormfront.org/forum/f14/
If you want to go play NKVD Agent through thousands of posts on other forums to find some "Incriminating" evidence on other people go ahead, I've already said umpteen times that people like you are traitors and would have fit right in with Hitler's Gestapo or Stalin's murderers, knock yourself out
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Thursday, 29 April 2010 8:13:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So the "Crazy Document" comes out tomorrow, wonder what it'll say?
It's probably a mistake, having put it out in an election year with both sides having run out of ideas and reverted to using Bin Laden and Boat People to sell their Snake Oil.
I'm betting we won't see "Cultural Diversity Impact"statements required for every act or piece of legislation.
We probably won't see "Diversity Police" and extended powers for the Race Discrimination Commissioner.
People hate councils and tribunals,look at the hatred for the ABCC, VCAT, Local councils, Liquor licensing etc.
"All Power To The Soviets" was a load of bollocks in the 20th century and it's bollocks now.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Thursday, 29 April 2010 9:32:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 11
  7. 12
  8. 13
  9. All

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