Actually, redneck, I suspect that most reasonable and enlightened readers are aware of the inherent problems in trying to argue with fools - eventually it becomes hard for an external observer to distinguish the sage from the idiot. Personally, I just tend to read some of the stupid and hateful things that people like to post here, shake my head and think, 'why bother?' - but occasionally I respond, like now.

Most of the time it's probably best to just let the bigots talk quietly among themselves.

What's a 'race', by the way? :)

I have long been of the veiw that a contest of ideas is seldom "won" and rarely ever over; redneck seems to thnk this one is done and dusted. Once you reach that position you have surely lost.

I welcome being grouped with Savior, Kenny and Spendocrat - what a splendid bunch of dudes or dudesses.

But returning to red's spray: I have yet to see any examples of posters ( of the left that is )laying claim to intellectual superiority as alleged by redders.

And as for being unable to compete with "our" logic - lets not confuse unable with cant be bothered; I am on the record here as feeling free to opine or argue in any manner I choose once I meet the editors rules: this is not a pissing contest as many of those on the right would like it to be.

And furthermore ( I like the word furthermore nearly as much as I like the word snakewrandgler ) this is not Politcal Science 101 - again lining up a few examples and generalising from the particular is a bit like the Andrew Bolt or Peirs Ackerman school of logic - " all fish swim therefore all that swim must be a fish" - a few examples do not make a case. And I've yet to read much of sense from you red baby

And as for hit and run comments and sneery one liners - these posts for some are an interest and far from a lifes work - if I can make a point on the run I will; if I can craft a sneery one liner that makes me smile I will - thats what I do.

I am Sneeky and I am Peter

>>Has anybody else noted that those opposed to multiculturalism have decidely won this argument?<<

Only in your dreams, redneck.

>>On one side, the Good Guys (and Gals!) write lengthy articles consisting of reasoned arguments<<

Let's just check on that, shall we?

All- contributed early on:

>>I find it offencive and dissapointing just how many labotomized individuals are out there, But as some say ,I sigh, and relax in the notion, their time will come, and armed with the Ideology of Liberalism and Usful Idiot mantra, they will perish with time.<<

...then followed up with a beauty:

>>I gather most would despise Racial Apartheid in South Africa,When Mandella was locked up, just seems Ironic they are in favour in the lefti land Multi Culti anti Anglo Utopia, but Racial Apartheid is acceptable if it is Whites (Christian or Jew) being suppressed,Hay and cop this, By their own Blood, hay Good on you. Great job<<

...and supported ably by Amel:

>> what is wrong with a nation or culture wanting to preserve themselves? Try this on in China, Japan, Suadi Arabia, etc., and you would be against it. Why? Are you a white hater? A racist? The argument about aboriginals being here not so long ago is rediculous : two reasons I'm glad you made this point,The Chinese have always lived in china- The Japanese have always lived in Japan and the Saudis always lived in Saudi Arabia.White Australians on the other hand, are Older British immagrants. If they really wanted to perseve their culture,they should of stayed in Britian .<<

I have retained the original spelling. Unfortunately I haven't been able to duplicate the spittle marks on their screens and keyboards.

I have been sitting back for a week or so, reading. Work and real life are far too busy to spend the time responding every day on this site. However, from time to time, I am vexed, so I respond (Hey, Sneek, this is one of my favourites. Remember Commodus in Gladiator?).

What is ‘winning’ an argument? Is it convincing the opposition that your position is correct or better? Alternatively, is it driving the opposition into submission or silence? Either could be perceived as winning. Personally I think in this instance it is more the case that the reasonable see the ‘red’ in the rainbow and dispose of it as it should be – ignored to run out of steam.

The only sad reminder I get from these threads for me is that while slowly moving away from the trees, or race seem to be bending back over into the knuckle-dragging position again. That’s race as an all inclusive, as I do not think there actually is more than one. Really, that’s what science and study tells us. So, whatever you attribute to the ‘black’, ‘asian’ or ‘white man’ must be attributed to all.

(Now it’s time to go play in the abortion and music piracy debates. What a hoot they are!)

Its not so hard really, common sense and experience should tell us that social stability and cohesian depend on a core mass of homogenous people.
That, for Australia will mean White Anglo/Euro with a smattering of others of any color.
The last thing we should want is a racial diversity which sees 'almost the same numbers between different racial groups. e.g. Malaysia. I flew into Butterworth near Penang in 69 just as the Chinese/malay race riots broke out. It ain't a pretty piccy.

The national racial mix should never, in my opinion be based on concepts of superiority, but on security and harmony.

Well Perci, You arguments are a bit on the far side, Perhaps if you read the news paper or the listen to the news, your favoured Version of Ethnicity is enacting the racial removal of White’s in South Africa,Same as in Zimbabwie, I realise even some of the great intellectual minds such as your self find it hard to comprehend reality. It matters not what is mentioned in Publications or in any forum, the real people of Australia suffer the indignity of your Ilk's folly. As is true of Western Societies in general.

Most points in favour of the Argument were only met by spurious assertions and typical Mantra everyone comes to expect with a Post-modern aptitude, and Ethno interest Groups did stand out by the very nature of their argument, right down to the obvious ignorant, and needless to say Perci , Special interest groups.

Perhaps soon the public will hold a Plebiscite on the matter, rest assure you and others, you will not like the answer, nothing what so ever to do with Racism, just Fed up with the lie and the preponderance of supposed Academics and Politicians along with Apparatchiks,supposid Professional's self perpetuated employed and other interest groups hell bent on destroying Australia and Australians.Intentional or not.
Spelling, Well I was not writing a Journal, just relaxing after a few drinks, the mind does wander, You should see the spelling of a Vice Chancellor I have acquaintances with often, after a few drinks, so the attempted insult is brushed off, and I will take greater note. But thanks for the contempt or attempt.