The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The Bolt saga detracts from RDA reform > Comments

The Bolt saga detracts from RDA reform : Comments

By Dilan Thampapillai, published 20/3/2014

Bolt wanted an apology from Marcia Langton, and got one. The plaintiffs in Eatock v Bolt wanted one, but had to sue to get it.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All
...If they show no signs of being hurt the attacker may try some other avenue by drawing attention to other aspects of their appearance that you may be insecure about.

Aggressors attack by drawing attention to skin colour for the same reason. It may well be the only point of difference they perceive so they use that to try and put an aboriginal person down. It is an act of aggression – it is not an act of racism. They attack people because they are different and difference can be a cause of insecurity. Those girls may well have attacked others that day but by focusing on other differences.

It only inflames the situation when such behaviour is described as racist. People who need to verbally abuse others do so because they are very insecure in their own identity. They do not discriminate about who they hurt – they want to hurt everyone. They know what insecurity feels like and they know how to hurt others who may feel insecure for some reason. A secure person will not be hurt by their abuse but not everyone faces their insecurities and takes responsibility for how they react to such attacks.

We have laws to deal with violence because violence hurts even those who cannot be hurt by words. It does not mean that without legislation we are helpless in the face of those who aim to hurt by words. Bus companies have codes of conduct that allow them to call security or police whenever someone is acting in such a way that threatens the peace of anyone on a bus. Peer pressure from other passengers, phone cameras and security cameras all contribute to making a bus safer from violence. Changing legislation to curtail speech is never going to be valid unless it protects every citizen and at what cost?
Posted by phanto, Thursday, 20 March 2014 10:51:04 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The author writes, "Whether this would also capture Holocaust denial speech and other similar instances of non-direct hate speech is debatable. At the very least Holocaust denial speech should be proscribed even if other forms of non-direct racism are comparatively less regulated."
Why is Holocaust denial speech more of a crime than other forms of non-direct racist speech?
In fact, why is Holocaust denial speech a crime at all?
We all know the Holocaust happened. There is ample evidence to put that fact beyond doubt and/or debate. Could it be a fear of that horrific event being air-brushed out of our collective consciousness, as is happening with the equally horrific events in which we as a nation have, and still are, participating in the Anglo-Zionist attempt to establish a unipolar world?
Posted by halduell, Thursday, 20 March 2014 11:42:07 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ok maybe the holocaust did happen but there is no doubt Hiroshima and Nagasaki happened. We have had a 1001 holocaust blockbuster movies but not a single Movie on Hiroshima. We have holocaust studies in universities but no similar courses on the plight of gypsies in the holocaust,Hiroshima or Palestinians today.

Is this not also a form of denial? Thus until these other crimes receive equal recognition I say there was no holocaust.
Posted by YEBIGA, Thursday, 20 March 2014 12:14:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It's off the topic, but in a real current crisis it is worth mentioning:More people [3.3 million] died in the Russian POW camps than were killed in the extermination camps such as Treblinka and Auschwitz [2.6 - 3.2 million].
In Summer 1941, Germany launched Operation Barbarossa, the invasion of the Soviet Union. In the following months they won a series of battles of encirclement-Kiev 452,000 POWs.
Posted by Leslie, Thursday, 20 March 2014 12:48:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Authoritarianism disguises itself as left thinking in present day Australia.

This is what real lefties would believe,

"If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don’t like. Goebbels was in favor of freedom of speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you’re in favor of freedom of speech, that means you’re in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise."
Noam Chomsky
Posted by onthebeach, Thursday, 20 March 2014 1:28:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Onthebeach
What you say is true about the left but it is equally true of the right - both sides twist a narrative which is entirely self delusional.
Posted by YEBIGA, Thursday, 20 March 2014 2:29:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy