Bruce, you said, amongst many other dubious comments, the "Former Prime Minister John Howard used racism for political ends while denying its existence. It was nudge and wink racism in public, encouraged more blatantly behind closed doors. It went hand in glove with the secrecy that Howard fostered in response to the fear he sought to engender and use in response to what he termed international terrorism".

I find such comments truly astounding, simplistic, and inaccurate.

I would have thought that your experience in South Africa would have given you greater insight into problems with race. I know one African PhD student who would argue the exact opposite to you, as she notes the difficulty of achieving cultural integration and recognising the cultural rights of people from different ethnic backgrounds.

Surely, if you think hard enough, you would also find aspects of Australia to celebrate about our ability to move on and learn from cultural interaction

I agree Chris this article is rubbish.
Putting aside the question about South African 'racism' against refugees implying that they're both black and can't *possibly* be different races (as opposed to white people to be differentiated from), would actually have suggested an actual answer that Bruce doesn't want to acknowledge- that maybe the issue is more complicated than "racists" and "taking jobs"?

And I don't get why people think it was some big secret about the refugee issue over the past decade- most voters didn't want it, Howard leaped on it, Rudd later followed suit. Maybe they wouldn't have had to be so "sneaky" if they wouldn't be crucified for saying their thoughts? Somehow I don't think that would be acceptable to Bruce either.

Anyway, I assume most people have an aversion to some of the refugees based not on their race, or not quite their religion per-se, but on their perceived mindsets and basing it off less-than-successful cases in Sydney's West, and particularly some around the UK.

Sadly, no such debate will ever happen when people keep arguing a binary of "Let refugees in" or "No"- especially when one side feels like their arguments are going to be instantly disqualified if they cite personal safety from fundamentalists and instead keep parroting rubbish about "people smugglers".
The issue does not transcend public/social concerns- it's precisely IS those things, and until some people learn to be a little more open to those interests, they will remain stuck in a minority of whingers who must write the occasional smear article to feel better.

Oh bollocks.

This habit of labelling anyone who has a different opinion on certain matters a "racist" is getting tiresome.

Personally I think the concerns about a few thousand boat people are overdone. But I don't think that everyone who has a different opinion is a "racist".

Are there racists in Australia?

Absolutely.

Is Australia a racist country?

Absolutely not. As someone who grew up in a genuinely racist country I can assure posters Australia is not a racist country. It is simply a country that has some racists.

Is everyone who tells a racist joke a racist?

I suspect many racist jokes are a reaction to political correctness - and to nonsense pieces like this one.

King Hazza, I know a lot of people who are concerned about Australia's refugee policies, and I don't know a single one who unequivocally "argues a binary" of "let refugees in". We are realistic enough to know that you have to detain people for a while to do the necessary ID, health and security checks, and we say there will inevitably be some who are trying it on, will therefore fail the Convention test, and should be immediately deported.

Racism is not our priority - any country will have a few, but they are not the issue in the refugee debate. We simply ask for Australians to open their minds and abandon a few myths, e.g.: Stop calling them "illegals" (the boats which bring them are illegal, but seeking asylum is not). Stop banging on about border security (when was the last time a boat tried to sneak in undetected?). Stop calling them potential terrorists (sure, get ASIO to do the security checks, but when was the last time they actually found a terrorist?). Stop claiming that millions of them are about to turn up (in which year did more than a few thousand arrive by boat, regardless of Australian govt policies and regardless of alarmist predictions?). Stop banging on about queue-jumping, and admit the so-called queue either doesn't exist, or is so dysfunctional nobody could seriously be expected to wait in it. And finally, to both major political parties, stop using the issue as a political football, show some leadership, and cooperate to develop a bipartisan position to the problem of displaced people, concentrating on durable solutions.

Is all of that really so hard for a rich liberal democracy with a rosy self-image based on mateship and the fair go?

Chris Page were you out of the country for the "Tampa election" when John Howard wouldn't allow close up shots of any of the people on the boat for fear we Aussies might think they were people just like us only a lot less fortunate?

And did you not see the campaign poster that proclaimed "We decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come" ?

see John Howard Campaign Launch, 28 October 2001

And there you have it! Able demonstration of why it will continue!

Denial.

This is for me the definitive article on racism in Australia. It does not surprise me that the usual attacks will occur,-and there will be more!

I assume such attacks are based on the believe that there is NO racism in Australia? Hum?

Howard did precisely what Bruce Haigh has said,...and for the record I don't believe for a moment that our so-called Labor Party-whoever is at the helm-will do substantially different