One thing that free speech protects is the ability to emotionally manipulate your listeners or readers by exaggeration, dramatisation, generalisation, trying to induce guilt when none is appropriate, and resorting to referencing situations long past as examples to support a present situation. If the author has valid arguments to support his case he should present them in a valid way. There is no need to try and emotionally manipulate unless you are very insecure about your position and this author sounds very insecure.

If citizens of this country are swayed by the opinions of Pauline Hanson, shock jocks, or writers from the 1880s then we have much bigger problems than the abuse of free speech. These people obviously cannot think for themselves and if they cannot think for themselves about issues of race then how many other things are they unable to see reasonably?

The tired old argument about Hitler and the Jews is rather simplistic. German people did not abuse the Jews because they had some inherit dislike for them they abused them and discriminated against them because they were afraid not to. Look what happened to any German caught supporting them. Hatred of the Jews was Hitler’s personal psychosis and he had the power to force everyone to help him carry out his desire to eliminate them. How many of us would not be up for a little vilification with a gun pointed at our heads?

I do not think that Australians are particularly stupid when it comes to problems of race but they are susceptible to emotional manipulation. People who rant and rave, exaggerate or dramatise have a power which they should not have. Celebrities have a power which they should not because many people do not have the emotional intelligence to see when they are being manipulated. Politicians who shout down reasoned arguments have a power over other politicians who do not resort to emotional manipulation.

Authors such as this one seek to change society not by presenting reasoned arguments but by trying to manipulate their readers.

'If citizens of this country are swayed by the opinions of Pauline Hanson, shock jocks, or writers from the 1880s then we have much bigger problems than the abuse of free speech '

Personally I would be more concerned with the ABC/Progressive/Obama narrative where every event in history has to fit their narrative (ie all white males are racist). The swallowers of this dogma seem to hide behind some pseudo intellectualism which is sickening and dishonest. No more evident of this is the recent taping of some old man's comments by a gold digger only to become part of one of Obama's favourite narratives. He ignores the simple fact that in a country with a minority of African Americans that he was elected President.

What the 'progressives' want silenced is a challenge to their small minded narrative (all whites are racist) which ignores true immorality (such as baby murder) and an old man dumping his wife to commit adultery with an African/American gold digger.

Oh how lovely to feel secure in your narrative. It make you feel so self righteous.

<One thing that free speech protects is the ability to emotionally manipulate your listeners or readers by exaggeration, dramatisation, generalisation, trying to induce guilt when none is appropriate, and resorting to referencing situations long past as examples to support a present situation.>

You're right, Phanto, the Greens suck.

This emotional ranting and historical distortion are evidence of how multiculturalism has failed. As a white Australian I am offended by your racist abuse, but I will not take action under 18C as I believe that ,however objectionable , you have the right to express your opinions.

Dear Chek LING...

I'm very sorry indeed to hear that you find Australia to be a country that harbours deep seated racism amongst it's population ? And for that, may I apologise to you most profoundly for any hurt or injury that may've been occasioned upon you personally, by these awful words ?

Actually the vast majority of Australians are a very broadminded group of individuals by and large, and any suggestion of racism, might I suggest is meant more in jest, than with any intent to inflict a moral hurt upon you or your sensibilities ?

In conclusion, I again sincerely hope you'll accept this apology as a simple token of our collective expressions of our abiding friendship. And our offer of infinite hospitality towards you and others of your particular ethnicity.

My regrets also, at the overt and thoughtless action of that imbecilic individual here on OLO, who seeks some form of notoriety by quoting S.18c of a statute, he'd barely be able to comprehend. Still, you're a much bigger individual Chek LING, to understand such people are both rare, and not very bright I'm afraid ?

Chek Ling

I read your post with dismay.

My Grandparents and my parents were the world's greatest white supremist racists.

That was in line with the nature of their society and beliefs.

I struggle greatly to shrug off their legacy to me. It is sometimes difficult. Times like these when they are subject to criticism they cannot answer are difficult. I loved and respected them all for the great many positives they introduced into my life.

One of those was to have an open and inquiring mind. Another was not to dwell in the past and to be positive about our future.

It is my greatest achievement that both my children carry the values of my parents and the things I have introduced into their lives.
,
While I have my faults which they have recognized and and discarded from their lives my parents and grandparents also had theirs. I have discarded many.

I am proudest that neither of my children have a racist bone in the their bodies.

Instead of carping back to the sins of the long dead past it would be better to say, gee Australia has really steeped forward. Isn't that a magnificent achievement.

Chek LING you came here at our invitation & expense, to study as a Colombo Plan student.

From memory that was a plan sponsored by the commonwealth to facilitate the education of many from the third world. I do remember the idea was for graduates to return to their country of origin, to help grow their economies, & improve living standards for those people.

Please advise how it came to pass, that you stayed here to benefit yourself, rather than return, with your free education, to your own country.

I'm afraid I have no interest in the opinion of someone so selfish, who does not honor their commitments.

What a load of hypocrisy. The Chinese are probably the most racist country on Earth, and they could teach the Nazis a thing or two about racism.

The Chinese are so racist that even though they believe in Evolution, they refuse to believe that the Chinese could be descended from Africans. All Chinese schools teach that the Chinese are a special race which evolved in China. The Chinese are historically so racist that they would only accept male African slaves who had been castrated. So paranoid are they of preserving the purity of their race that the it illegal for a Chinese female in China to have sexual relations with a black man.

Chinese racism and hostility towards Australians was displayed in the Chinese book "The Year The Dragon Came" in which the Chinese author recounted tales for his Chinese readers of stories from Chinese who had settled in Australia. Page two of the book has Australians referred to as "dogs" by the immigrants and their opinions did not improve after that. Australians are routinely referred to by Chinese immigrants as "devils" (guizi) or "foreign devils" (yang guizi) .

The racism of Chinese is easy to see in the fact that Chinese, unlike any other ethnicity, almost exclusively live within Chinese ghettoes. There are Chinatowns in every capitol city you care to name. The Chinese most definitely only want to live among themselves, and then this author pretends that it is totally wrong for Australians to want the same thing in their own country.

What is more, this author has the unmitigated gall to write his article in terms of outraged moral indignation, as if the only racists in this world are white people who discriminate against the oh, so ferking morally pure Chinese.

Bullshitt.

Freedom of speech is something that Australia has but China does not. If you Chinese prefer to live in a country which does not have, or even value, freedom of speech, could you please go back to where you don't have to live with us Guizi dogs, and you can censor yourselves forever.

Chek Ling "So given my observations, I cannot help but feel that it would be wise to safeguard our maturing society against a return of the days when a powerful few could readily incite the ordinary many, to revel in their intimidation of those people they took a dislike to. The Exposure Draft, regrettably, has the potential to embolden bigots and cultural warriors to do just that."

You are right to be concerned Chek Ling, and I have no problems with you bringing up Australia's racist past, unlike some other posters here.

I well remember the days of my own childhood, when anyone considered 'different' to the 'white majority' Australian was given a hard time both in schools and out on the streets.
I am not proud of those days, but I realise that the majority of Australians these days (well, the younger ones at least) are far more willing to take everyone on their individual merits rather than the colour of their skin, or their country of origin.

Please don't judge all Australians on the ignorant comments made by some posters before me.
I wish you the very best for the hopefully more tolerant future in Australia.

Cheers,
Suse.

I have spent the bulk of my life in a society where europeans are the minority & we have quite a chinese component. They're a decent people. It's the majority of mixed race & pseudo indigenous who represent racism.

O sung wu. Giving you the benefit of doubt, I take it that your contribution was an attempt at satire. If not , I challenge you to debate 18C and its restrictions on free speech.

Fire away LESLIE !

Susan don't you agree that every culture has it'skeletons. Sensible cultures expunge those practises they grow to understand are discriminatory.
Why can't you do that and celebrate the fact we have changed and acknowledge our decency in doing that.
Not to do so is discrimatory toward those of us who refuse to carry the guilt of previous generations.
If we had not changed and still carry on the behaviours we all now find abhorrent it would be the thing to do to remind us.

But that isn't the case so what you are doing is accepting the guilt for your parents and grandparents sins and expecting us to do the same. That is silly.
I suppose you still believe in Original Sin?

Chek Ling

I had no idea Sarawak was part of China! When did this occur?

FYI, it is ludicrous for a Chinese person to lable any other group of people as 'racist'. Chinese people are so imbued with their own superiority it simply never occurs to them that others view their assumptions about themselves as 'racist'. What a load of hocus pocus from you! Pauline Hanson was only pointing out the obvious in 1997, not engaging in any 'tirade'. If you don't like Australia, leave now!

How would Chinese people like it if their government were to start filling up their cities, towns and villages with foreigners? How would Chinese react if the Beijing governement told them that mass immigration would 'enrich them culturally'?

Got him right between the eyes with that one, Cody. Watch him squirm, prevaricate, and toss red herrings everywhere. He knows a s well as you and I do that the Chinese would riot en masse against their own government if their stupid government were to allow mass migration of "yang guizi's" onto the sacred soil of the Middle Kingdom.

The Chinese are so racist that they even hand back North Korean refugees to be tortured, raped and shot. The reason why "boat people" do not try to enter booming China is because they know what will happen to them if they tried it. To have the Chinese author of this article raving on in feigned outrage about Australia's response to the Tampa incident is so outrageous, that his piety and presumed noble intentions could only fool people like Susieonline.

To be lectured by the Chinese on racism is like being lectured by the Nazis on racism.

Asian people are extremely racist. The first thing the Vietnamese did when Saigon fell was to toss out every Chinese (about 15% of the population) out of Vietnam. Are the Vietnamese going to lecture us on racism too?

Japan has a grand total of 100 "refugees" in Japan and they are trying to figure out a way to get rid of them. Japan's most revered sumo wrestler, 'Rikidozan" had to hide the fact that he was a Korean. The popular racist Japanese name for white people in Japan is "gaijin" and nobody in Japan is going to be lectured about racism for saying that. Being more concerned about foreigners that your own people is a western pseudo intellectual fashion, not an Asian one. The Asians think that people like Susie are nuts for being unpatriotic and disloyal towards their own.

The idea of Asians lecturing Australians on racism should be resounded to with outright hilarity, or by the shaking of our collective heads in pitying wonder at their hypocrisy.

Imajulianutter, I never said I accept any guilt for my parents and grandparents behaviour. I accept how they behaved at times was wrong though.

We don't have to agree with everything ones ancestors did, do we?

Why are you bringing up original sin for?
I'm not religious at all.

You don't have to be holier than thou to behave civilly to our fellow man...no matter where they come from.

Lets all sit down like the monkeys we are, and share a box of bananas...chimps to the left and baboons to the right:)......and all others just find a sit where you can...:)

Kat

ORIGINS OF MAN,
It's not that simple because these monkeys have been trained in australian institutions plus you offered no peanuts.

Susan

when you say things like,

'the majority of Australians these days (well, the younger ones at least) are far more willing to take everyone on their individual merits rather than the colour of their skin, or their country of origin.'

'...for the hopefully more tolerant future in Australia.'

you imply we are still clinging to the attitudes of the past and haven't changed terribly much. You imply were are intolerant and unwilling to be non racist.

That is bringing your experience in the past into our present. It is an attempt to assign yesterdays sins to us today.

We have already changed from those attitudes and you haven't accepted that.

Either way,

How can any chinese come from Sarawak?

@Chek Ling,

<<He is sometimes aware that his views do not endear him to Chinese community leaders as a whole>> aint that a fact!

Yet he still has the gall to subtitle his rant:
<<Free speech, bigotry, from a Chinese Australian perspective>>

He should have said: from *one (individual) Chinese persons* perspective!

SPQR...I think the meaning of the words fits well with-in the given understandings of which all are exercising the boundaries of the individuality right, which one should exercise with extreme caution:)and I just love anthropology, hence the title I come up with, that reflex's a bendable fine line that we all ride on from time to time as evolution/God plays its cards however big or small it may seem.

Now, we are all playing in the same sand box, and by all means, think of the world as one......its not that far away.

Kat

<<we are all playing in the same sand box...>>

By "we" I take it you mean you and Chek Ling?

I rest my case...Thank you:)

Kat

Easy, Cody. The Chinese have lived in south east Asia for 500 years and they still consider themselves "Chinese." They speak and read Chinese (even though it is illegal in some countries) because they know they are Chinese.

Please not how it is perfectly OK for Chinese, Vietnamese, Japanese, and aborigines to identify themselves by their race, but not Australians. That looks like racism to me.

Yooo hooo Chek Ling, where arrrrre youuuuuu?

Damn, Cody. Looks like he did the runner. He knew you had him beat on the first exchange.

http://tinyurl.com/lo9cy3s poor things...would you like a box of bananas:)

Oh dear:)

As you were.

Kat

Chek Ling, O sung wu and Suseonline. If you are genuinely interested, see L. Maher article ONO, 6/5/14.

Good afternoon to you LESLIE...

Aren't we scheduled for a debate pursuant to S.18c ? I'm still eagerly awaiting both your polemics and/or riposte, in this matter of intellectual dissent ? Or do I take it that you're bereft of any logical argument in your absurdly prejudiced position ?

And given the writer's experience of what became Malaysia, he might also care to comment on Malaysia's race riots of the late 1960s?? And how the bumiputera policy is still so fair?

o sung wu. I repeat, first read the article by L. Maher on 18C in On Line Opinion 6/5/14, and if you can understand it, we will take the debate from there.

Hi there LESLIE...

I would prefer we had the debate ! Anyhow, I believe that you've more than adequately illustrated your position on this matter. Therefore I'll excuse myself, and hope to meet you again adversarially, on another appropriate topic LESLIE ?

Chek Ling –

This shows the selfishness and biased focus of many newer Australians and the left support it fully an believe it themselves – show me any society back a century or more in history that would not and did not act in an unfriendly, suspicious and often unfair and bigoted way to outsiders of all sorts.

In fact, show me JUST ONE non-western nation TODAY in “modern times” which is not STILL practising in this way towards foreigners and outsiders.

Further, considering that only western societies like Australia have been ever and at all in the entirety of history of people and civilization etc., to even think to begin to “TALK” and also to start to encode it in “LAW” etc. such notions like equality, anti-racism, anti-discrimination and basic human rights and decency etc., also laws preventing a certain outright abuse and misuse of power over any person [worker rights], that it was they and specifically the Anglo nations to first outlaw slavery and stop it and it is only western nations today who try to pressure other nations into adopting similar human rights standards . . .

. . . .why has this person [I believe that his Chinese identity makes this action much, much, much worse] felt ok to attack it as though the society he attacks exists in some vacuum, and as if the rest of the world much much worse than Australia in the regards of treatement of people etc. is non-existent.

Worse and more telling to me of the author's gravely selfish, bullying and even racist demeanour, is how he is speaking about so-called racism and mistreatment of Chinese Australians by white Aussies.

I wonder whether CHEK LING ever spares a thought for the extreme oppressions and slavery of the hundreds of millions of poor in China where he says he comes from, and for the extreme fear of "foreigners" and any "outsiders" that pervades all levels of Chinese society and culture and controls the government policy.

Matthew S

Of course CHEK LING does not think of any of those things. CHEK LING is not even from China, but is from Sarawak, but still calling himslf Chinese. He has probably never even been to China, whose population is legendary for their mistrust and suspicion of anyone 'foreign'. How much more racist can you get than that?