>>Actually that's a rhetorical question, the Holocaust is supposed to intimidate me and make me think of the consequences of "Hate speech", ie it's meant to shut me up.<<

Fail. The Warsaw Ghetto example is supposed to demonstrate that there is an error somewhere in this statement:

>>Racial segregation is only a negative from an Anti Racist point of view and Anti Racists are a tiny minority of the population.<<

If you ask nearly anybody who is familiar with the history of the Warsaw ghetto for their views on the subject they will tell you that it was a terrible thing. So either:

a) They're all Anti Racists: everybody who thinks that the Warsaw ghetto was evil, which is just about everyone who knows about the Warsaw ghetto, is an Anti Racist. But somehow Anti Racists are only a tiny minority of the population. Something seems to be wrong with your maths there. Could you please show all your working?

Or more likely:

b) They're not all Anti Racists: people who don't really think about racism enough to bother Capitalising their views on the subject still recognise the Warsaw ghetto for the abomination it was. Even though they are not Anti Racist they can see the negative side of racial segregation and you're wrong that it is only Anti Racists who take this view.

Cheers,

Tony

For Aka
“I have said that racism is real and that it has a negative effect on Indigenous Australians”
So again, please substantiate this claim that the racism causes these effects you continually go on about.

“FYI the working together book is on Indigenous mental health by some significant authors. Researching mental health I would assume you would know the book. Very odd indeed.”
Aka, will you ever think for yourself? Or will you just rely on “well they are very significant authors so what they say must be true.” It would seem that everybody that holds a popular opinion (even if unfounded) is considered “significant”. Very odd (and pathetic) indeed.

“You fool yourself if you think that racism is an excuse. It is a part of the problem facing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and it contributes to the poor health outcomes.”
Again, you are unable to support what you say. So I am supposed to believe it (racism) is “a part of the problem facing ...” because Aka and other people who agree with her say so?

“With your closed mind, rejecting the literature on research, it is very concerning that you are researching Indigenous health and well-being, and mental health.”
I am open, but tend to mostly hear people who say “Other people say so, so it must be true.” Aka, with your closed and gullible mind in readily accepting something as true simply because it is in “the literature”, it is very concerning that you are interested in Indigenous health and well-being, and mental health. There are many out there like you. I guess that is one of the reasons why Aboriginal people in this country remained the most disadvantaged group of people.

Hi Aka,

I don't think I'm misquoting you (forgive me if you think I have):

" .... racism is real and that it has a negative effect on Indigenous Australians .... while others have achieved simply because they worked hard, found ways to overcome or deal with difficulties (like racism), and some saw a break and grasped onto it, worked hard etc."

Yes, as I understand it, Anthony would agree with you, that racism exists and it can drag people down if they let it, but other people have prevailed against it, such as yourself, and forged fulfilling lives.

Rainier has praised Anthony's father as an example of this.

So you, Rainier, Anthony and I all agree that racism does not have to hold anybody back - that nobody HAS to be a victim.

Just as there are sexist forces at play in the work-force of probably every working woman in Australia, that doesn't mean that any woman should be cowed by it, or that they should have to put up with it, or let it hold them back.

Discrimination seems to be a very common feature of almost every society, and it probably has been forever. But who wins if people play the victim role ? The perpetrators.

And who wins if people DON'T play the victim role ? The people.

And it's wonderful that we all agree on that :)

Cheers,

Joe

Anthony,
I have given you examples I have witnessed.

I have undertaken rigorous and original research where racism came up as an fact of life for the many people who shared their knowledge with me. It was not the point of the research but people spoke of its effects on their and their family's lives. This is not out of books. Do you expect me to assume that all of the people I interviewed told me lies? Do you question the things I have witnessed? This is simply outrageous.

When I first read your work, I thought you had some interesting and positive ideas - if a little Euro-centric based - and that as you progressed in your studies you would progress to have a more open mind. I think you have restricted your initial potential by pandering to the neo-cons like the Bennelong society and Bolt etc. Your mind remains firmly closed - welded shut.

In your previous work you favour international feel-good sources and make nebulous links, with only the rare flash of insight.

I seriously question your ability to conduct research in your specified area as you do not appear prepared to talk to and listen to people with views other than your own.

In no way have you reflected that your mind is open, you ridicule any literature that differs from your view but provide no evidence of why. By ridiculing and dismissing seminal works in your field, you set yourself up to fail. The irony of it is that your problems stem from racism - you total refusal to consider it an issue.

Anthony, this conversation is at an end. You have proven that you are incapable of accepting any other view than your own. You belittle Indigenous people, academics, researchers, and research participants, you ridicule non-indigenous researchers and academics, under a misguided belief that you alone know the answer.

I suspect Rainier has something in their earlier post "3. This man is either suffering from a mental illness or is on the verge of a breakdown - and is clearly in denial about it."

Anthony, Your OWN father, an ex policeman called it racism, named it as racism, fought against it and survived and prospered. So have I doing my more that 50 years on this world. BUT COL (and I) have no hesitation in calling it RACISM when we feel its required. Theorising it away (as you do) does not make it simply disapear. Your motive here dishonours the words and actions of your father, your uncles, your cousins etcetera. Now, I'm sure they don't get up every morning and say ' I'm going to find some racism and fight it but this is exactly how you pathologise anyone who declares racism as a negative variable in their own personal experience or in analysing a situation for someone else. Its clear to me that you have are not well read on the literature of critical race theory and your attempt here at compensating for this lack of scholarship falls flat on its face. Do the hard yards Anthony, don't be lazy.

Joe (Loudmouth),
you logic is flawed.

First, I have been told by parents (even though I find this really disturbing) that they deliberately cal their kids racially profane names in order to immunise them - to try to stop them firing up if they are called these names by others. It shocks me, but many parents told me of this practice. As one person put it, his sons were unlikely to fire up if they were called a n*#$ or a b*^#g etc, if those words were used as endearments by their parents. (I am not sure this applies in your stories). This is done to try to keep the young people from ending up in fights and in jail. It is a truly tragic tactic to overcome the effects of racism.

Second, Sure it is not good for people to erroneously play victim, as it the non-Indigenous person claiming to be hard done by compared to Indigenous Australians. Nor is it good for people to cry wolf and pretend there is an issue when there is not.

However, your logic stumbles regarding people not playing the victim so the perpetrator does not win. Now I am not a victim, I tend to stand and fight, but I know how to run if needs be.

Your scenario lacks the concept of justice.
If you put the perpetrator as a bully/thief/murderer then surely the victim is not expected to turn the other cheek, or ignore the behavior, or meekly submit.

Why shouldn't racism, and racist acts and legislation, be challenged with an expectation of justice being achieved.

Challenging racism and racist acts is not victimhood, it is a quest for justice