'Middle Australia has spoken. Why don’t we just move on? Have you ever been racially abused for the colour of your skin? No, but…He’s a flog! Do you know any indigenous people? No, but…he’s the racist for calling Australia ‘Invasion Day’. Oh okay. Does the Australian Flag represent you? Not really, but he is a privileged footballer who gets paid more than I do and therefore I can boo whoever I want damn it!

'The Australian Cricket team has about as much racial and ethnic diversity in its ranks as a Reclaim Australia rally. How is that relevant? Well because it represents Australia. Why are you being a sook? Melbourne is SO multicultural! Been to Brighton lately? That’s part of Melbourne, not much ethnic and racial diversity there. What about the Jews? Fair call. What are the chances of a mosque being built in Brighton? No, Warnie and Sam Newman would never allow it. Middle Australia has spoken.

'He’s a flog! Why can’t he just play footy and shut up about everything else? Does that make you feel uncomfortable? No, but…he’s an agitator. So we are just happy for indigenous players to perform like monkeys in a zoo? That’s rashist! You called the ape a monkey! No, the only monkeys I see are the ones that boo without thinking. Or are they sheep? There must be some correlation there. There’s safety and anonymity in numbers.

'Who are you to label me rashist ya flog?! My grandfather died in two world wars under that flag! Where’s the respect? Are you related to Ted Bullpit? Now you’re being a smart arse! No, I’m a wog on a blog trying to understand the true meaning of the word ‘flog’. Economical word that, like sook. Anything beyond one syllable just doesn’t get the message across. Bit like ‘Boo’ really. Is it primal or primitive?

'Look if ya don’t like it why don’t ya go back to where you came from? Golden Dawn Fraser said as much. Doesn’t she sit on a heap of prominent boards? Great Australian. You’re lucky Australia welcomed your parents back in the 50s. Really? Remember ‘Populate or Persish’? Maybe Australia just wanted cheap wog labour to make its already wealthy white population even wealthier? Ingrate, Wog Flog!

'Can you tell me why we haven’t had an indigenous coach at the highest level since Barry Cable and Polly Farmer back in the 70s and 80s? Well no, but it’s their own fault. If they acted more like white people they’d get into positions of power and influence. So that’s what it is? Still? That’s right! You can either fit in or f off! But he’s indigenous. They were here before us. That’s a myth! Didn’t they come from India or something? It’s not our fault that they brought a spear to a gunfight!! Why fight at all? Well how else were we supposed to settle the land? Negotiation might have been more effective. Compromise? Mutual respect? But they were savages! Who had the guns again?

'You’re nothing but a left wing lackey ya flog! You get your information from that Indian bloke Wally Ali. I think he has an Egyptian background actually and his name is Waleed Aly. Seems to make sense to me. Bloody Arabs stirring up trouble. Don’t you know they want Sharia Law in Australia. They’ll turn all our pubs into mosques if we don’t put our foot down! Do you know the difference between and Arab Muslims and Non-Arab Muslims?'

Flogs, Wogs, and Blogs
Phillip Dimitriadis

Dear Leo,

Historian Henry Reynolds had found himself being asked
questions by many people over many years, in all parts
of Australia. His acclaimed book, "Why Weren't We Told?"
is a frank account of his personal journey towards the
realisation that he, like generations of Australians,
grew up with a distorted and idealised version of the past.

I highly recommend this book to you. It's critical
reading on one of the most important debates in Australia
in the 21st century.

In order for a historian to study the past properly,
they have to go back
to what is called "primary sources" that is - the original
documents from which historians gather together the pieces
of information which they use to compile the truth about
the past.

Unfortunately, Keith Windschuttle's work is not based on
primary sources - it is based on
ideological blindness and inadequate research for which he
has been severely criticised.

Windschuttle's work is considered irrelevant by
reputable historians because unfortunately primary
sources are unknown to him - including -archival records,
books, theses, et al.

Anyway, before I go - I just want to add -
that using arguments about the booing of Adam Goodes like
"he's not being booed because of the colour of his skin"
but because he's on the opposing team is a disingenuous
misunderstanding of what's really going on. Age-old
catcalling the enemy is one thing, but this vilification is
the result of a dedicated, long-running campaign to focus
angry criticism upon this man. A thoughtful Indigenous
Leader, elegant player, and former Australian of the Year.
A campaign run in some of
the best-selling newspapers and most-read blogs in the
country. And its worked.

Heaps of Australians have read terrible criticism of Adam
Goodes by Andrew Bolt, Miranda Devine, and shock-jocks
on various radio programs.
Bolt has been at it since Goodes became
Australian of The Year and if you think the cumulative
effect of his columns is unrelated to this public attack,
then you simply don't understand the power of the mass
media.

Foxy, you have told an outright lie, or displayed abysmal ignorance:”Windschuttle's work is considered irrelevant by reputable historians because unfortunately primary sources are unknown to him - including -archival records,books, theses, et al.”
You know nothing about Windschuttle and his work, or you would not have made such a stupid assertion.
It was Windschuttle’s checking of primary sources which showed that Reynolds had misrepresented a quote
Henry Reynolds has admitted misquoting the colonial governor of Van Diemen's Land in a history of the Aboriginal-settler relations.
He also said of his books” "I presume in them there are no more mistakes because Keith would have found them ...

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/11/29/1038386313878.html
Reynolds obviously respects Windschuttle’s work. Who are the “reputable historians” who say his work is irrelevant. Obviously you do not class Reynolds as reputable, even though your distorted views on Australian history you say have come from him. Being a lefty, you would inevitably find a dishonest historian, like Reynolds. Windschuttle’s comment on being informed that Reynolds had corrected the “mistake” was "I don't think it's a mistake of course but a conclusion of a sustained argument rather than a throwaway line."
You object to Andrew Bolt and Miranda Devine telling the truth about Goodes, but their readers do not hate the truth the way you do, and they both have a huge following.

Fox, "Adam Goodes...this vilification is the result of a dedicated, long-running campaign to focus angry criticism upon this man"

That is a bald-faced untruth, mischief-making and as usual, an attempt at developing a victim narrative that if not immediately challenged can be flogged endlessly as a leftist factoid.

There are seventy-one declared indigenous players in the First Grade. It is only Goodes, who coincidentally is the 'grandfather' well past the age where players are put to pasture and is showing the effects of injuries, who has suddenly found a political theatre on the field. Goodes is no stranger to finding the cameras. The new slant is his choice it seems.

The 'why' must focus on those presenting facts, not on some leftist fiction and sorry troublemaking to suit the prevailing, extreme political correctness that is systemic in Australia.

Fox, you would be without doubt the forum's Number 1 fan and promoter of victimhood and victim status. However the guvvy handouts, public appointments and freebies that flow from PC-legitimised victimhood, the whole gravy train, are coming under increasing scrutiny. Because the gravy train is a crushing burden on taxpayers and particularly on YOUNG working couples who are trying to save for a mortgage and to some day have a family of their own.

While some migrants might like guvvy hand-out entitlement when it applies to themselves, the great majority certainly do NOT support handouts that they must pay for as taxpayers and taxes are going up not down.

It is NOT their cultural experience to be donating outside of their immediate family obligations anyhow and they will be voting often and for a lifetime.

Similarly many indigenous have put their efforts into education and employment, have moved into middle class urban life and have no truck with your patronising, self-limiting victimhood.

For AFL supporters there is always the option of the round ball game that also provides an evening indoor competition that has a lot of appeal to students and young workers who spend too much time behind desks.

Dear Leo,

You should not make assumptions about people you do not
know. You have no way of knowing what I know or do not know.
And you divide people into "Left" and "Right," and can't
seem to fathom that there are people who are neutral.

Those are simply ignorant tactics used by very narrow-minded
people - with set extreme views. You have attacked from the
very beginning in this discussion. That is an immature
and emotional way to argue.

I feel sorry for you but I can see that you are out of your
comfort zone. All I can suggest is that if you want to know
the truth about the calibre of Keith Windschuttle's work
all you have to do is Google the subject. You obviously
have set views however whether you like it or not -
there are other views out there and the
they are not "lies" simply because you don't agree with them.
That is a "Bandwagon fallacy." (look it up).

I could give you quite a few websites - but I can't be bothered
knowing full well that you will dismiss them as "Lefty egregious
crap."

You stick with your Miranda Devines and Andrew Bolts, and
Keith Windschuttles. To you they represent "the truth."

I'm happy for you.