Dane, have you actually read the judgment? It is all about the law of racial vilification. It is pretty much straight-forward statutory interpretation.

Whilst the Civil War reference to "carpet baggers" is interesting it breaks down somewhat when you consider that the Bolt plaintiffs live in the city and not in rural communities. After the US Civil War, carpet baggers were people who went to the South to get wealthy. I don't quite see how urban Australia could be compared to the South!

Also, I'm not sure how you can talk about "all of society" and then exclude the middle class. Australia is a middle class country.

I assume you also don't have a PhD. It requires a lot of work. Whether you like it or not the legal profession, the universities, middle Australia etc all work very hard and our lives are very real. We get that there are issues with Indigenous affairs. We are sorry about that. But, the Bolt decision was only tangential to those issues. The Bolt case only happened because Andrew Bolt wrote things that could be construed as racial vilification. Andrew Bolt is a grown man of some intelligence. He was definitely capable of expressing all the points that he wanted to make without engaging in racial vilification. He didn't and the judge just did his job.

You said earlier that you teach Indigenous kids. It actually worries me that somebody who has your attitudes to universities is teaching severely disadvantaged children. I wonder what atitudes and resentments they are developing. Bad attitudes can hold people back.

David, if you ever moved out of the latte set, you would realise most of the public place academics just a little lower than car sales men.

Just a little further & you will equal the judiciary, & journalists at the ABC.

If you ever get out for a breath of air, come & look me up. I'm quite prepared to show you what hard work really is, just for your reference.

Abuse isn't a substitute for reason.

If people don't value academia then why do so many people try so hard to get into university? Education opens the door to the middle and upper middle classes.

Those of us who aren't blue collar or who don't live in remote communities also work hard. If you can't accept that, then thats your problem. Not mine.

david,

My understanding is that the phrase 'carpet baggers' is used in modern American political parlance to mean someone who is an outsider pushing themselves in on another group. It's usually used when someone is foistered on an unwilling constituency like Hillary Clinton was in NY (for her senate seat). Happily, things have worked out for Hillary.

But thankyou for the etiology of the phrase anyway. It is much appreciated, even if a little dated. After all the American civil war was some time ago. Maybe you should get out more?

Can I suggest consulting a fellow PhD Kylie Minogue. She does just swimmingly in the 'getting out' stakes.

Thankyou for also pointing out the phrase is tangential to Bolt's loss and the likes of Clarke winning. Can't put anything past you academics.

hasbeen,

david is obviously used to publishing in peer reviewed journals. You know the type: the ones where everyone agrees with everyone else (I know - I read Henderson's MWD).
Academics aren't used to people acutually disagreeing with them. You'll have to be gentle.

With respect Dane, you used the phrase without understanding its historical context. I just assumed that you understood it.

You can make snide remarks about PhDs, academics and about whether I should get out more (how would you know?) but it doesn't add anything to your arguments. If anything, it just reduces your credibility.

My point was that the 'politics' of Indigenous affairs was tangential at best to the legal issue in the Bolt case.

Again, it does worry me that somebody who does not respect academics or universities is teaching Indigenous children. Can I ask how many of your students make it through to university? Let me remind you that if you do indeed 'teach' children in remote communities then your salary is paid for by the taxpayer and we have a right to expect results.