Right on, CJ. The fiction of 'race' was demolished long ago.

Bigos,

Don't confuse difference with segregation: some Australians are religious, some are atheist, but can you talk about segregation of the two, just because one can differentiate between them ? On a more trivial level, some barrack for AFL teams, some for NRL teams, some for Union, some for Soccer - can you talk about segregation of supporters ? Some vote Labour, some Liberal, some Greens - is that segregation ?

And how on earth can you eliminate people's ancestry ? Australians are descended from people from a multitude of countries - how can they drop their ancestry and become what you would like them to be, and thus avoid 'segregation', i.e. difference.

Or are you defining 'segregation' to mean 'people behaving differently' ? Bit of a long bow ....

Racist societies have almost invariably been segregationist - those who could not be assimilated were to be segregated (Aboriginal people) or kept out altogether (non-'whites'). Of course, the next step in the most racist societies was extermination.

Thankfully, Australian society is neither assimilationist nor segregationist - it is equal-opportunity integrationist, if you like, and that's fine with me.

Joe

Bigos: << Everything you quoted agrees with everything I have said? >>

Er, no. Since you're new here, I'll assume that you're genuine and spell it out for you. You said:

<< We're comfortable around our own kind, that's why after 40000 years of homo-sapience we have different races and not a single race of people >>

I've provided evidence of why that is a scientifically false statement. What you seem to be talking about is ethnocentrism, i.e. the universal human characteristic of feeling more in common with others of similar descent, language and culture - in other words shared ethnicity. Racism and ethnocentrism aren't the same thing.

"Race" persists as an outmoded culturally defined social category, but it has no biological basis with respect to humans. However, many people still treat others as if the outmoded "racial" categories demarcate significant essential differences between human groups, usually with the purpose and effect of inferiorising those groups of which they are not a member. That's called "racism".

One of Aslan's salient points in the article is that the way that some bigots regard and treat Muslims is structurally similar to the way that racists treat others whom they classify as belonging to different "races" than their own, which is why she calls it "cultural racism".

I hope this helps.

P.S. Thanks to Joe and o sung wu, whose contributions I always enjoy too :)

Pelly

you said:

"You cannot fear something if you live among it, get to know it and make friends with it."

Glad to see you have hopped onto the assimilation love boat :)
because what you desribed there was certainly not 'multiculturalism'

cheers

Oh.. CJ.. while you are clearing things up for people.. please contact the Attourney General and advise him that the terminology '

"Racial" Discrimination Act.. is incorrect and should be 'Ethnicity" discrimination act.

Better tell him also that only 'racists' use such terms.

I'm sure he will be most grateful for your wise insights and pedantism :) After all.. not all of us can be as brilliant wise and modest as you.

You can add to your list of people to clear up

"Racial" and Religious Tolerance Act..and bring them up to speed on how they should change all the words from RACE to 'ethnicity'

For the RDA

(1) It is unlawful for a person to do any act involving a distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on RACE, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin.

Welllll. what a pack of dumbo's we have in parliament... they clearly need a dose of CJ MORGAN wielding a verbal rubber hose of 'correct terminology'to put them right.

What a privilege we have here.. to have a genuine 'oracle of truth' in CJ.

Al Gore, are you into cricket ? Your attack on CJ comes from 'silly point': a racist is someone who tries to load the term 'race' with more than is warranted - so 'racial discrimination' is discriminatory treatment against someone on the spurious grounds of their 'race'. Clear enough ?

Your definition of assimilation is also way-off: just because someone gets on with people from other ethnic backgrounds, has nothing really to do with assimilation. My wife Maria was Aboriginal, but in our 42 years together, I didn't become Aboriginal and she didn't become Anglo-Celtic: in fact, I don't know how one could change like that.

My left-field definition of assimilation is something else: a person supports assimilation if he refuses to associate with anyone unless they become/act/behave/think as he/she does - otherwise, he/she will ignore or exclude or despise or (if he/she has the power) mistreat those 'others'. So an assimilationist and an exclusionist (or segregationist) are, to me, very much the same animal, we're just looking at different sides of the same coin.

I welcome your views, as always :)

Joe