Racism is not necessarily "terrible". and it certainly is not illogical.

The reason why intelligent people associate the amount of melanin in a person's skin with their success in life or their proneness to criminal behaviour, is because anyone not blinded by left wing bigotry can clearly see on the news every night that there is quite obviously a link. Ask any Townsville resident just who the police chase every night.

The idea that racism is absolutely wrong is easy to refute. "Affirmative Action" is a form of racism where certain crime prone races who lefties court as their new electorate get favoured treatment over the more law abiding and successful races, to supposedly correct the idea that the crime prone races are only that way because they are victims of the generally law abiding successful races. Even if that stupid idea was even true, the fact remains that lefties are advocating the idea that racism is OK when they do it because their intentions are good. Either racism is utterly bad or it is not. You can't have it both ways.

And you know what? I think that the lefty leadership is smart enough to know that. But all they want is power and they see that with ever increasing third world immigration into democracies that dividing democratic nations on racial grounds and always taking the side of non white people is the way to gain power through elections. Just look at the USA today with a Alzheimers victim who is a paid Chinese agent now the President. Goodbye Taiwan.

I am not surprised that this author is so crazy that he is actually advocating that the city of Darwin be renamed because Darwin held racist views. If a scientist of the stature of Darwin held racist views then that might stimulate some neuronal activity that perhaps racism is a scientifically valid concept? In any case, this is not the first time a bunch of fundamentalist bigots have suggested that the city of Darwin be renamed. Christian fundamentalist loonies have been carping on about the same thing for years

"Racism is a terrible thing". It is also a terrible obsession in some areas: the media, sporting codes, Leftist social engineers and proponents of identity politics, as well as vandals who tear down monuments to famous people, and nutters who want to change the names of cities.

The race obsessives are just another mob of lunatics trying to tear down Western society.

It's one thing to cease honouring historical figures because of racist actions. But surely doing so because of racist beliefs is overstepping the mark?

True LEGO-land

Racism, as you say, only belongs to the Left, and not White Nationalists that inhabit some OLO threads...

Yet - we here on Planet Epsilon have always wondered why mainland and Tassie aborigines never adopted the PNG/Indonesian bow and arrow. PNG tribesman, or more certainly Makassar sea-cucumber collecters visiting Northern Australia, would have brought bow-arrow technology. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makassar_people#Contact_with_Australia

Bows-arrows would have made killing kangaroos and emus much easier than the woomera-small spears technology used by aboriginal Earthlings!

White Male Being

LEGO,
Racism is necessarily terrible, as it always leads to injustice. And it is always illogical, as people are individuals.

Racism is absolutely wrong, and you haven't refuted it at all. If affirmative action is racist then it's being done wrong; real affirmative action means looking at the factors which are holding back people from different backgrounds, and taking steps to remedy them.

Your views on the current US President are delusional, but that's hardly surprising; delusional views seem to be the norm for racists.

Following the Coon cheese renaming, white economist, Peter Smith, has called for the re-naming of Cracker Barrel cheese, 'cracker' being a racist slur against poor white folk.

It would seem that evolutionary theory is inherently “racist”.

According to the theory groups of humanity have scattered around the planet and have been separated for tens of thousands of years living under very diverse physical conditions. How could it possibly be that under those circumstances each group/race has happened to evolve at exactly the same rate?

Of course they would not. Evolutionary theory depends on the notion that creatures evolve differentially due to differences in their living conditions. So it should hardly be surprising that Darwin wrote as he did.

What is surprising is that Darwinists of today don’t agree with him. (I guess it is thought better to be an inconsistent evolutionist than a racist.)

"ABORIGINAL PEOPLE WERE ULTRA CONSERVATIVE AND INCAPABLE OF CHANGE."?

On the subject of Mainland-Tassie aborigines never adopting Bows and Arrows my non-Racist research has taken me to:

1. http://austhrutime.com/weapons.htm

"The favoured weapon of the Aboriginal People was the spear and spear thrower. The fact that they never adopted the bow and arrow has been debated for a long time.

During post-glacial times the bow and arrow were being used in every inhabited part of the world except Australia.

A number of reasons for this have been put forward, one of which was that the Aboriginal People were ultra conservative and incapable of change.

This suggestion is now known to be wrong, they did adopt items such as the out-rigger canoe...

COMMENT

Well that canoe example was only one technology which still begs the "Aboriginal People were ultra conservative and incapable of change." question.

2. http://www.aboriginal-bark-paintings.com/aboriginal-weapons/ "The Torres Strait is the only part of Australia to have used a bow and arrow."

COMMENT

So bow-arrow technology was available to Mainland Aborigines even closer than PNG ie. just a 20km canoe trip between the Mainland and the Prince of Wales Island/Muralag Torres Strait island http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_of_Wales_Island_(Queensland)

ttbn,
Really?
I'd've thought if you asked people what race they associated with crackers, most would say Chinese!

In "The Descent of Man", Darwin fully approved of inter-marriage as providing, in his view, the benefits of 'hybrid vigour' (I think, around page 99?).

His reference to 'races' in 'Origin of Species' obviously referred to all of natural life, and in his examples, obviously meant plants and animals rather than humans.

Joe

Racism is neither right nor wrong because it is a natural phenomenon. What many opportunists on the Left describe as Racism is more often than not utterly unwarranted.
When I lived as a member of the minority in indigenous communities, the majority of racists were anything but white. Now that I'm in a white community the majority of racists are white.
I'm inclined not using the term racist, I just call such people morons or Labor voters !

One of the worst articles ever published on OLO. Darwin was not hoping that some races of people would be exterminated. He was applying the scientific logic of his times which suggested the less developed races - meaning those with lesser technologies - could be exterminated by more developed races. This was neither his hope nor an expression of racist views.

I'm not sure he was judging on skin colour alone? But customs and behaviour as well? Whatever it was, they were very different times and Darwin was like some of the aristocracy one encounters in the house of lords? Just have a gander at some of the public domain vids I've shared on thorium and the commentary it evoked from these "superior" people! For mine, they follow in Darwin's footsteps and make willful ignorance a virtue?

However, Mr Darwin is long dead and history cannot be changed! Moreover, very few connect the name with the man's racist opinion, which to be fair, lie buried with him!

That said, anything else you'd like changed so we can get on with it and end this on and on and on and on, eternal bellyaching about deeds that cannot be undone! And words that cannot be unspoken!

We had other wars with other people! The Germans, the Japanese! And there were atrocities on both sides that beggar belief! We all of us got over it and got on with life and peaceful coexistence!

We could divide the state and send all the eternal bellyachers up north, to enjoy the exclusive company of other semi-white bellyachers. And indeed, stand on your own two feet economically, almost as if you were a foreign country needing passports and visas to cross the new border?

Perhaps you'll be happy then? Run your own schools, hospitals. earn all your own income and support yourselves with money you alone earn?

And put your own names on the products you make from your own resources? Coonabarraburra Cheese anyone?

Sell off a couple of ports and an airfield to the Chinese? Just to make ends meet/keep the grog flowing? Grow your own baccy/dope? And be as happy as pigs in ....?
Alan B.

From the author's bio: “Andrew Kulikovsky is an independent writer and researcher with qualifications in computer and information science, law, and theology. He works as an engineer in the defence industry, but his real passions are law and theology.”

Andrew is also a contributor to http://answersingenesis.org/bios/andrew-kulikovsky/ delivering such deeply theological and scientific answers to questions such as “How Could Adam Have Named All the Animals in a Single Day?”.

We are truly honoured to have him writing for OLO and I look forward to him passing judgement on more of the supposed great men of science.

To Plantagenet.

Racism is common among the left and the right. One reason why I am a right winger is because I realised that the Left hated white people, my people. And they also appeared to hate the white European society they choose to live in. The funniest example of that was all the lefty celebrities in the USA who claimed that they were going to move to Canada if Trump won the 2016 election. It was pointed out at the time that if these celebs were so bloody non racist, why didn't they move to Mexico or Honduras instead of to another white country? Sneering at the society you choose to live in is just a fashionable act of virtue signaling from a bunch of narcissists who think they are better than everybody else. Most of these celebrated non racists live in the whitest areas of their cities behind gated communities and send their kids to private schools where nary a dark face is to be found.

You must be impressed by celebrities if you adopt their obviously hypocritical values. Keep sprouting lefty nonsense and you never know, Lady Gaga might give you her autograph.

The rest of your post involving something to do with bows and arrows and Tasmanians had a logic so convoluted I could not follow it at all. Did you take your medicine this morning?

There is something alarmingly wrong with the original article?
As well as inaccuracies, the whole thrust of it leads the reader away from truth?
Darwin contributed greatly to our understanding of how life changes as centuries roll by.
If someone saw fit to name a town after him because of his contribution; good.
Just because someone now disagrees with some of his observations, they suggest we undo recognition of him?
Now THAT is an idea which is utterly absurd.
Political Correctness is becoming a Forest Fire?
Is it also getting out of control?

When new theories are being developed, there are bound to be parts which are controversial.
That doesn't lessen the benefit to be gained from the theory as a whole.
I think that to understand Darwin's arguments properly, one needs to 'drill right down' to bedrock.
For example: understand that we instinctively reject those who look or act differently.
This instinct is part of our 'survival kit'.
At school, children who are 'different' are singled out and sometimes treated outrageously.
But in normal daily life, we use reason to make instincts work for us rather than against us.

Something mostly overlooked is that we live at least two lives.
A private life, and a public life.
In private, we can hold whatever view we like of those around us.
It is our own business what we think.
Our friends can be chosen consistent with this private view we have of life.
We can also avoid shopping where we find the 'atmosphere' less favourable.
But in a standard public or working life, we need to be mindful of the law.
So we use our reason to put aside personal preference, and engage, neutrally, with those around us.

A great concern I have is that those who bleat about how disadvantaged they are because of colour or race, are mostly being blatantly 'racist' in what they say.
To the extent that they appear foolish.
I hear 'I am a stranger in MY own country' far too often.

Darwin already has a large suburb (or small satellite city) named Palmerston, so changing the name Darwin to Palmerston would actually require two name changes. Larrakia would be a great choice and a much-needed nod to the long history of our First Nations people.

The question at this time though is can the nation bear another long, bitter and divisive debate around such a proposal, however worthy. Look how long it's taking us to change the date of Australia or Invasion Day. It's taking a repeat of the same acrimonious debate year after year to even inch us toward the inevitable change which will eventually take place.

This name-change proposal is a positive suggestion. I'm just not sure the nation is ready for it right at the moment.

LEGO,
A lot of the things you see as racist are nothing of the sort. Mexico and Honduras are spanish speaking poor countries, so it's no surprise that Americans would prefer to live in english speaking rich countries.

The left is not a homogenous block. There may be a few people there who hate white people, but what most of the left hate is racists.

To Aiden.

There are many definitions of racism. My favourite is "disagreeing with anything a left winger says."

But one thing I think we can agree on. If you treat one race differently from another, that is racism. The Left once demanded "equality", but now wants to treat different races differently. They once moaned about "equality of opportunities" which was supposedly going to see all races become equal. When that did not eventuate, (which suggested that their holy belief that all races were equal was obviously wrong) they instead began advocating for "equality of outcomes." To achieve equality of outcomes, they demand that certain races that the left seeks electoral support from, (the races who have high rates of welfare dependency and criminal behaviour) are given special treatment. That is racism, because you are treating different races differently. You are giving benefits to the people who vote for you special treatment, and making the people who do not vote for you pay for it.

The lefties justify their racism by being even more racist. They argue that they are rectifying some amorphous concept like "white privilege." To accuse white people of "white privilege" is racism, because you condemning an entire race of people with the negative connotation. That is, that whites are successful because they somehow hold the dysfunctional races down. Although, this "white privilege" does not seem to affect Asian people who do even better in white communities than the whites themselves. But the lefties refuse to recognise their own racism. And I accuse you of the same thing. You are so bigoted to the idea that only right wing people are racist that you can't see the racism the left espouses, even when it is right under your nose.

So if you hate racism Aiden, could you please address your own sides obvious hypocrisy first?

Would you like me to give you some youtube links to African/American people claiming that blacks can not be racist? That is a racist concept in itself

Aw c'mon LEGO

I'm actually supporting your right racist views by explaining that conservative aboriginal traditions (and probably lack of outside competition) blocked the innovation of bows and arrows, 250 years ago to 60,000 years ago.

You have the idea that anyone to the left (say) of you, Goebbels and Henry VIII are Leftwing.

Far from being the case.

My family heritage and my jobs were stoutly peopled by White-Anglo-Saxon-Protestants. Nery a Catholic need apply.

Such is my ightwing Potential I've been courted by US Rightwing Extremists online (direct emails, not on OLO) though in my case I refused or ignored their kind offers.

Cheers

Pete de la Puck

Of course we are racist, all of us, & those who claim not to be are probably the most racist of all.

In PNG you get a microcosm of this, with the jet black tall athletic people of Buka & northern Bouganville, the equally tall brown & athletic Tolai of new Britain, compared to the short heavily built Chimbu & Kooka Kooka people of the highlands, & light skinned slim people of the south coast & Moresby area.

A blood test will tell you they are all Melanesian, but they have developed so differently that you can tell them apart at a couple of 100 meters.

Tell me that people aren't naturally racist when you see half a dozen 6Ft tall Tolais change to the other side of the street when they see a 5Ft 3inch Chimbu a hundred meters away.

Half of the trouble at the Bouganville copper mine was because the management thought they could mix the "red skins" from the Port Moresby area in accommodation with the Bouganville people. Yes same race, same people, but not to them.

This world & Australia particularly would be a more peaceful place if we had recognised that it will take centuries of inter breeding now, if no more races are introduced, for us to become the one of the song, & kept the mixing down.

"The colour of one’s skin is determined by the amount of melanin—a naturally occurring pigment—a person has. Why would any sensible person think the amount of melanin in an individual’s genetic makeup has any effect on that individual’s intellectual capability or their moral character?"
No one is making that claim. However it is a racial marker and we can all plainly see that different races have different characteristics. Some of these are cultural and historical but others are genetic. We don't see too many white men in the Olympics 100m anymore. Likewise in the marathon. We don't see too many Chinese in the Basketball league but lots of Somalians. We don't see many Africans winning Nobel prizes in physics but lots of Jews do. If we really valued "diversity" we would celebrate these differences, not deny them. The Chinese are far more law abiding than both Blacks and Whites. The Indians are notorious for their hard work. Aboriginals not so much. But when it comes to playing footy the Aboriginals punch well above their weight.
Darwin was one of the greatest Englishmen who ever lived. I suspect that if he had been Aboriginal rather than English, and written the same things,this Author would not be calling for the city of Darwin to have its name changed.

When I look at people around the world, especially among my family members and friends who are in inter-racial marriages or relationships, I come to the conclusion that racism is based overwhelmingly on ignorance and the human propensity to be cautious about people or things that are 'different' to our life experiences. In other words, racism is a manifestation of the natural tendency of people to be wary - scared even - of people who they have not previously interacted with.
The best way to remove this ignorance or apprehension is for people to mix and interact socially. In my experience, it is extremely rare for a person to continue to hold racist views once they get to know people of different races.

Oh dear. The past is another country, they not only do things differently there, they think and know things differently.
Let me start, and probably end, with the article's first paragraph. Hardly anyone in Darwin's time knew anything about melanin, as it had just been discovered. The action of melanocytes in the skin only started to be worked out in the mid-twentieth century. You even use the term 'genetic makeup' which would've been pure gobbledegook in Darwin's time. The term 'savage' was used by every middle-class Englishman in Darwin's time, which was at the highest ascent of the British Empire, and it's a given of every economically powerful nation, going back to the ancient Egyptians and beyond, that they fall for the fallacy that economic and military power entails moral superiority. In those days the Brits were even calling the French 'savages'!

If you read Darwin's wonderful 'Voyage of the Beagle' you'll note how angry and disgusted he was at the way the colonialists (the Spanish in South America) treated the natives. But of course, as a person of his time, he wasn't able to see how those natives had adapted to a world incomparably different from the world of his own upbringing.

You constantly conflate different periods and worlds. Darwin's comments on the native Australians as he saw them in the 1830s have nothing whatever to do with today's Cathy Freemans and Warren Mundines. Context is everything, and your article is pretty well entirely context-free. The fact is, Darwin did a lot to create our modern world. His theory of natural selection from random variation set others on the task of discovering how random variation works, and so discovering the gene, which relates all living things together. It's about the best argument against discrimination that we have.

I drew a different conclusion, Bernie Masters.

Prior to the abolition of the White Australia Policy when almost everybody in Australia was European, it was very easy to convince Australians of the preposterous idea that all races were equal. After all, almost no Australians had any experience with Muslims, Somalis, Sudanese, Lebanese or Pacific Islanders.

It was only after the abolition of the White Australia Policy that Australians began to meet and live with people from different races, cultures and religions, and they began to realise that some of these ethnicities, religions, and cultures were nothing but trouble.

Now we have with Muslims alone...

Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews stating publically that "terrorism is part of contemporary Australia."

Australian citizens being shot down or knifed on streets and in coffee shops by "contemporary" Muslim terrorists.

"Diversity bollards" all over our cities to prevent Australian citizens from being mass murdered by "contemporary" Muslim terrorists.

70 Australian girls gang raped by Muslim race hate rape gangs in Sydney, at the time of the 2000 Sydney Olympics.

Machines in even regional airports which see right through passengers clothing in order to prevent Muslim terrorists with bombs in their underpants from blowing airliners out of the sky.

Australian soldiers, SES volunteers, ambulance personnel, and Fire Brigade officers advised to not wear their uniforms while not on duty, to minimise the risk of being attacked and even beheaded by "contemporary" Muslim terrorists.

Former Muslim Imam Sheik al Hilaly demanding "Muslim only" seats in the NSW state Parliament.

Armed guards outside of newspaper offices and Jewish schools. The fortification of every vital government department with steel gates, diversity bollards, and armed security guards.

Demands from the "moderate" Australian Islamic Council for Sharia Law and for exemptions for Muslims from voting, as democracy is "against Islam."

Demands by Muslims and their leaders for social exclusion in swimming pools, gender segregation in schools, and Muslim exemptions from the common law.

Specialist medical teams in Canterbury, Bankstown, and Fairfield hospitals to treat the consequences of female genital mutilation.

Child brides, forced marriages, and "honour" killings.

Attacks on churches and synagogues.

I understand where you're coming from, LEGO, but disagree with your concerns about Muslims. First, a Muslim is a person with particular religious views and people from any race can and do believe in Islam. Second, just as Europeans took some time to learn how to live in Australia post-1788, so many migrant groups need time to experience and understand their new country of Australia. In the 1930s, there were deadly clashes between Italians and Irish on the WA goldfields; they're now just Australians. Many Aboriginal people I know in SW WA are just Australians with Aboriginal ancestors. You simply need to give new Australians time to learn, understand and appreciate what Australian values are and, just like the Chinese and Japanese and many other racial groups, they will become great Aussies.

I couldn't agree more Bernie. However, As long as we continue to demonise the people who founded this country then there is little prospect of new comers coming to love Australia and it's "way of life".
We used to teach the history of this country with pride. That was essentially British history and the settlement and building of this nation. Now we talk about invasion, genocide, racism and white privilege. I can't see people from other countries wanting to be a part of that.

Tired of these drama queens, trying to make white Australia take a guilt trip for something other folks did centuries ago!

Bring on the referendum! Know how I'm going to vote now. And at least then these semi-white separationists, will have something real to whine, bitch and endlessly complain about.

And won't need to invent all the humbug they go on with ad nausium.
Alan B.

Some folk only claim to fame is how much they bitch and whine about the unchangeable past!

None of us own the past, just our own behaviour in this lifetime! Melinton is what the skin produces when exposed to sunlight! And that is all! All other differences are cultural!
Alan B.

Melinton is what the skin produces when exposed to sunlight.
Alan B,
And, what makes people squint ? ;-)

Dear Rhys Jones,

Mate, a lot of countries face up to their past and deal with it rather than keep colonisation fairy tails going.

We are getting there ourselves however there will people who seemingly will need to resist such reckoning and keep the lie going.

That's fine, but they shouldn't crack the sads when people see it for what it is.

I am inclined to the view that, at least in the short term, having different cultures living together is the cause of much unrest.
Instinct is front and centre here.
There is frequent intolerance of the other person's view?
And it is not only the culture itself, but what is embedded in it.
I don't want to be too specific about this: I might tread on toes.
Darwin didn't hesitate to call a spade a spade, but he didn't live with political correctness.
Shall I just say that I was 'brought up' in a religious household.
Then observation and cogitation made me aware of the natural truth around me.
Truth which is alive, and in abundance.
Religious thoughts disappeared like dead and dried up bushes in a strong wind.
My mental landscape became clear, smooth, and untroubled.
I was suddenly relaxed, and far more understanding and accepting of difference.
Even though I listen to other points of view, I leave plenty of room in my head for my own thoughts.
I don't want to live somebody else's life.
And by the way, we all discriminate every day, in a multitude of ways.
It is only when this causes unreasonable disadvantage to another person that we can say there is a problem.

"A Muslim", my dear Bernie Sanders, is not just a person with a particular religious belief, because Islam is not just a religion, it is a complete social, legal, and political system. This system's cultural values are diametrically opposed to, and incompatible with, that of a western liberal democracy. How could we have been so stupid as to import into Australia, one of the world's oldest democracies, a religion who's "moderate" clergy seek exemptions for Muslims from compulsory voting because democracy is "unislamic"? Or import into Australia a religion who's "moderate" clergy openly preach that apostates from Islam, and homosexuals, should be murdered?

Your premise that it is only a matter of time before Muslims integrate into Australian society is more a matter for hilarity than serious contemplation. Islam never integrates, it always seeks to dominate. If it can not dominate an entire country it will create local enclaves then drive out the infidels until all within are Muslims. Then it demands Sharia Law within this supposed "Muslim" area. This is already happening in Europe.

In the Muslim wish to never integrate, they are being aided by traitorous left wing governments who seek the Muslim vote while preaching Multiculturalism. Multiculturalism means, live in Australia but pretend that you are still living in some Muslim sheethole and keep the Muslim cultural values which made it a sheethole in the first place. Muslims are also aided in this behaviour by left wing governments who never tire of dumping on their own people and culture with all sorts of racist allegations (like the so called "stolen generations" propaganda) which depict the entire white race as genocidal land thieving baby stealers.

Even if your claim that it is only a matter of time before Muslims integrate was true, (which it is not), how many Australian lives and raped girls do you intend to sacrifice on the alter of multiculturalism in your quixotic quest to attain your supposed race blind utopia? A utopia where Mohammad and his four child brides live in perfect harmony with Nigel and Oscar, the homosexual couple who live next door?

First, a Muslim is a person with particular religious views and people from any race can and do believe in Islam.
Bernie Masters,
Sounds to me like you haven't the slightest clue or, you're a Muslim !

It's arguments such as this one that would warrant bringing in a 4"Idi Amin or Ghengis Khan !

What we have is yet another sanctimonious snowflake not contented at getting offended at people today spending his time trawling through history in search of something new to get outraged at.

Charles Darwin's epic formulation of the theory of evolution was a scientific endeavour that changed the world. That Darwin could compare the competition between species to that between peoples at the time would be entirely logical.

The point that Darwin never claimed that one set of people should destroy another, only that they probably would. That Darwin was entirely correct is probably the greatest source of annoyance to this pinhead.

The Christian Darwin suggesting that these people were savages based on some of their practices incl cannibalism, infanticide etc was pretty much standard in that era, as would, for example, any Maori killing and eating a rival today.

I would suggest that Andrew pull the stick out of his backside.

LEGO

Your irrational Islamophobia needs to be called out for what it is. Your views on Islam are based on intolerance and ignorance.

<< This system's cultural values are diametrically opposed to, and incompatible with, that of a western liberal democracy. >>
Yes, some of Islam's values are incompatible with ours, most are very similar to ours and a few are in some ways very arguably superior to ours. Much the same can be said of all cultures. The generous and intelligent approach is to look for our similarities and to avoid getting hung up on our differences. You should try it. You might actually find you become a much happier person!

<< Islam never integrates, it always seeks to dominate. >>
Many Muslims would regard this statement as a very sick joke. For decades now, most of them have lived with the consequences of Western imperialist invasion and military domination. Many still live with the daily threat of American drones and bombing raids. They've lost loved ones and had their lives ruined because of our desire to dominate their land and exploit their resources. And how many Westerners living in the Middle East bother to integrate? Just look at Iraq's Green Zone as a prime example of absolutely nil attempt to live with the locals.

<< ... how many Australian lives and raped girls do you intend to sacrifice on the alter of multiculturalism ... >>
And how many white Anglo males commit rape? Plenty! And how many are pedophiles? Plenty! And how many are Christian pedophiles and rapists? Plenty!

I'm no big fan of Islam. Nor am I a fan of Christianity. Or any other religion for that matter. In my view they're all as seriously flawed as each other. But I do live by the words of Christianity's figurehead which exhort Christians to "love thy neighbour as thyself". I'm guessing, LEGO, that you imagine yourself to be a pretty good Christian. Well, you certainly fail big time to live up to this very basic tenet of Christianity.

Dear shadowminister,

Not that you in any way need nor seek my approval on anything but I will remark I like the cut of your jib on this one.

Bronwyn, Spain, Bosnia, India/Pakistan, do I need to go further to prove that Islam & any reasonable, & particularly western culture are totally incomparable. It is shear idiocy to bring any Muslims into a western society. Even after centuries it blows up.

A few years ago now my son was walking home from the train station in Alawa Sydney, when a car with 4 Muslims pulled up & attacked him. This was another area they wanted to cleanse for themselves exclusively.

His head was fractured in 3 places, & if a couple of cars had not stopped & people from put these curs to flight, he would have definitely been maimed.

I can see absolutely no reason why we should ever help these types of people, or allow them to remain in our country. They are total garbage & fit only to lick the boots of real people.

Back to the original suggestion. Very little is known about the shadowy figure of Lord Palmerston, so I having done the "research" on Palmy, and unfortunately Palmy fails to pass the pub test..., not even after my tenth schooner for the night did Palmy pass! Aided by my drinking mates Bluey and Dave O', using the google search, we uncovered the fact that Lord Palmerston's only claim to fame is, he was the inventor of "Palmerston Cheese", yes that smelly obnoxious, pathetic excuse for a cheese Italians like to put on their Spag Balls and Spaghetti. In 1935 Palmy tried to have his lousy cheese renamed "Coon" without success! Due to the fact Australia was a racially free and politically correct country in 1935. I ask, who wants Australia's finest city named after a racists smelly cheese maker?

You learn so much from Mr Google.

Paul1405,
If you don't approve of racism why not simply stop practicing It ?

Andrew, you don't treat or value other races equally, so perhaps you could start your sanctimonious lecture by wiping out your own irrational brainwashed racist bigotry and hate speech?

Post PROOF that you have given equal attention to all races.

In case you haven't noticed, the leftards complaint is precisely that the Caucasians did exterminate the native Australians, who need special consideration in billions of dollars of one-way donations from the Caucasians for the Aborigines, to even hope to be equal, and even then complain it doesn't work. Why do you think they're perpetually moaning, and fretting, and carping and pewking about "invasion" and "genocide"?

You're saying that the Aborigines had equal technology to that of the Europeans, and the only difference was "melanin"? Or you're saying your garbled theory is wrong and you don't understand what you're talking about?

Which?

Look in the mirror to see that you are the racist you're moaning about.

Dear Cumberland,

You shat on to the page this gem: "Why do you think they're perpetually moaning, and fretting, and carping and pewking about "invasion" and "genocide"?"

Maybe mate because it was an invasion and it was genocidal.

Why do you think it was anything less?

As to "donations" there have been nothing of the sort. 4 in every 5 dollars do not hit the ground in Aboriginal communities as the bulk of it is taken up by paying bureaucrats who are mainly white anglo-saxon types.

"Pakistan, do I need to go further to prove that Islam & any reasonable, & particularly western culture are totally incomparable."

Nah Hassy, not since you suggested on the Forum that we nuk 200 million innocent men women and children in Pakistan on the pretext that we should get them before they get us. You are so civilized.

Bronwyn, well said, LEGO can be relied upon, chapter and verse, to follow the party line. Claims to be a liberal democrat while peddling far right racists views, but its all based on "science".

plantagenet,

"My family heritage and my jobs were stoutly peopled by White-Anglo-Saxon-Protestants. Nery a Catholic need apply."

The Plantagenets were Catholic and French.

Nah Hassy, not since you suggested on the Forum that we nuk 200 million innocent men women and children in Pakistan
Paul1405,
But if Muslims suggest to clear the world of non-believers, that's ok with you !

"But if Muslims suggest to clear the world of non-believers, that's ok with you !" No, I've never said that, and do not agree, a contemptible idea. Indy how about you give us your past history before migrating to Australia. It could be an eye opener into what kind of person you really are. You once said you were able to dodge National Service, now as an old fart, you want to bung every young person into it. Does hypocrite spring to mind?

Nah Indy, unlike Hassy, who if he's honest, will admit he did make the Nuk Pakistan suggestion. He's never withdrawn it. so I assume its still part of his thinking.

Brave Sir Issy

You be a bold commoner to question the authoritah of your betters.

Indeed (the Royal "We") Plantagenets were Catholics, there being no Protestant alternative in the period we held the throne. We mainly spoke French, came from the lands of Anjou in France, but still lorded it over the English.

We held the English throne from 1154, with the accession of Henry II at the end of The Anarchy crises, until 1485, when (my Daddy-o) Richard III died in battle. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Plantagenet

Before he died Dick III, on losing his horse at the Battle of Bosworth Field, shouted "My Kingdom for a horse". But to no avail - recorded in wee Willy Bill Shakespeare's "Richard III" Act V.

That Shakespeare pipsqueak may prove a half decent scribbler, if he takes on all that I taught him!

Your Good Lord

Prince Pete de la Puck

Incorrect Bronwyn, my views on Islam are based upon historical research, plain pure logic, and direct observation.

I would love for you to enlighten all of us as to exactly what Islamic cultural values are superior to ours? Do you support wife beating? The idea that females are in effect just minors and the property of men? That raped women should be punished? C'mon girl. You can't just come out with a completely preposterous statement claiming that Islam is in any way superior to the west and then not tell us what these so called "superior" cultural values are. One suspects you don't have a clue yourself. You are making ridiculous statements because you just assume that western and Muslim cultures must somehow be equal, so they must have some superior cultural values, even though you don't have a clue what they could be.

For over a thousands yrears it was the Europeans who had to put up with endless attempts by the Muslims to conquer Europe. The Muslims invaded Spain, France, Malta, Sicily, The Balkans, Italy, Greece, and twice got to the gates of Vienna. They preyed as pirates on European shipping in the Mediterranean for a thousand years and made slaves of a million Europeans. When Muslim pirates attacked US ships, the US President at the time, (Jefferson) sent a formal letter to the Libyan Muslim leader asking why his ships were attacking US ships when the US had never done the Muslims any injury. The Libyan leader replied that it was OK for a Muslim to do anything they wanted to infidels.

So don't give me that "poor Islam is a victim of the awful western imperialists" crap.

I have no idea where you got this insane attitude that Christianity and Islam "are as bad as each other." Just in case you have not noticed, Muslims are fleeing Muslim countries to live in Christian lands, not the other way around. And one thing you can definitely say about Islam is, that the more Islamic a country is, the more of a sheethole it is.

To Paul1407

For you to suggest that "individual" should reveal his family ethnicity in order for you to judge why he holds his contrary opinions, is racist. You are suggesting that different races and ethnicities hold certain views because of their race and ethnicity. Not that I disagree with your racist implication, mind you. But I am supposed to be the racist while you are claiming to be an anti racist. If you don't believe in racism then don't practice it yourself.

As for statue removing, name cleansing, and cleansing history of politically incorrect types such as Darwin, Palmerston, and Cook, why don't you go the whole hog and demand that the Egyptians tear down the pyramids because the ancient Egyptians had slaves?

I am not surprised that you scoff at my declaration that I am a believe in democracy and not right wing socialist totalitarianism. But and your ilk, any person who believes in democracy but who holds right wing views is automatically a Nazi.

Back on topic.

Racism has many definitions but essentially it grades different races as being superior or inferior. The Nazis believed that racial superiority was hierarchical with blacks being the lowest and blue eyed, blond haired white people being the highest. That is malarky. But any reasonable person (even Paul1407) with even high school level science can understand that races can not be equal, because each race evolved separately over tens of thousands of years to give themselves an advantage within the particular environments they evolved in. And those environments differed wildly.

If all races are equal, then perhaps Paul1407 and Bronwyn could do something about the "black privilege" that is causing black people to dominate any sport involving long distance running?

Hiya LEGO

The WHITE NATIONALIST "White race threatened by just about everybody: including Muslims, LGBTQI, etc" views

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Australian_white_nationalists

you espouse on OLO are well identified by "The Runnymede report" (UK 2019)

http://www.runnymedetrust.org/uploads/publications/pdfs/islamophobia.pdf
_______________

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamophobia#Contrasting_views_on_Islam

That Report stated that the following "closed" views are equated with Islamophobia:

1. Islam is seen as a monolithic bloc, static and unresponsive to change.

2. It is seen as separate and "other". It does not have values in common with other cultures, is not affected by them and does not influence them.

3. It is seen as inferior to the West. It is seen as barbaric, irrational, primitive, and sexist.

4. It is seen as violent, aggressive, threatening, supportive of terrorism, and engaged in a clash of civilizations.

5. It is seen as a political ideology, used for political or military advantage.

6. Criticisms made of "the West" by Muslims are rejected out of hand.

7. Hostility towards Islam is used to justify discriminatory practices towards Muslims and exclusion of Muslims from mainstream society.

8. Anti-Muslim hostility is seen as natural and normal."
______________________

White Nationalists ignore the worst Terrorist act committed in our (maybe not your?) region: TARRANT in Christchurch.

Regards

LEGO,

You might be right about groups evolving in their own environments at different rates. Europeans were amongst the last people on the Eurasian-African super-continent to abandon the savage life of hunting and gathering and be forced (moatly by inter-marriage with farming populations, ultimately from western Asia) into farming, towns, literacy, wearing decent clothes, etc. - barely a couple of thousand years ago. Much less in some parts of Britain: Scots were still foraging in the glens and on the shores barely a century ago.

Africans, of course, have been farming for perhaps ten thousand years in the west and perhaps took the concept to Egypt as the Sahara dried out, certainly not the other way around. They have been smelting iron for perhaps four thousand years - when Britons were still Stone Age savages, covering themselves with mud against the cold.

Joe

TARRANT in Christchurch.
plantagenet,
You make it sound like he did you a favour because without him you wouldn't have any argument to so desperately latch onto !
Tarrant's deeds are not condoned by other Australians, unlike Muslim terrorism which we have seen celebrated by people dancing in the streets on the news.

Hiya individual

So you use Tarrant's act as ammo in your attack on thinking people?!

You Islamaphobics presumably applaud Communist China's treatment of China's Muslim minority.

CHINA: A RAPE OF MUSLIMS COUNTRY

This week, the BBC released a series of accounts from witnesses of systematic rape

inside the re-education camp system in CHINA'S Xinjiang province, where more than 1 million Uighurs

and other Muslim ethnic minorities are imprisoned.

Refugees have previously recounted sexual abuse in the camps, but the BBC report gathers several key witnesses, including some women who were raped.

These accounts track with the scale of the camps, recorded both through satellite data and on Chinese government websites—and with the government’s own sexualized rhetoric.

But it remains unclear whether officials use rape as a deliberate weapon of genocide

or whether it reflects systemic abuse and contempt for minority rights.

For example, one witness describes Han Chinese men paying for access to imprisoned women in Xinjiang. That could be a sanctioned policy—or it could be the kind of ground-level corruption and abuse that pervades authoritarian systems.

The Chinese government has a long history of sexualizing Muslim Uighur women in official texts.

In ISLAMAPHOBIC thinking, Muslime Uighur men are portrayed as primitive, while the women are

portrayed as hidden beauties that Han Chinese men can save.

The CHINESE government actually prohibited intermarriage in Xinjiang until 1979, leading to a pervasive myth that marrying Uighur women was still forbidden.

Now authorities promote intermarriage, including coerced unions. The Big Brother program,

in which over 1 million Han Chinese have been assigned to Uighur homes to monitor everyday life, is also reportedly an opportunity for sexual assault and abuse, especially in households where the Uighur men have been imprisoned. Forcible sterilization has also been widely deployed to reduce the Uighur birth rate.

The new revelations will likely stir further demands for action in the West. Democratic Western politicians have already demanded further inquiry into China’s “genocidal” actions in Xinjiang—a step that could, under new laws, scupper any potential trade agreement between the countries."

Prince de la Puck,

Roturier?

Moi?

Ce n’est pas si!!

I too am descended from Henry II and fourteen other English Kings as well as three Kings of Scotland, the Irish High King Brian Boruma, six French Kings and a further five Kings in the rest of Europe.

You mere princeling.

your attack on thinking people?
plantagenet,
No, I'm only corresponding with you here !

Hi LEGO,

"I am not surprised that you (Paul) scoff at my declaration that I am a believe(r) in democracy" So was Hitler, he stood as a candidate in democratic elections, he loved democracy.

"If all races are equal, then perhaps Paul1407 and Bronwyn could do something about the "black privilege" that is causing black people to dominate any sport involving long distance running?"

Maybe you can explain why African Americans were no good at tennis and golf until Serena Williams and Tiger Woods, and others since, came along. Nothing to do with the past racists white attitudes whereby Serena and Tiger wouldn't get a look in on a white snobby tennis court or golf course. Oh yes, there would be Serena the ball girl and Tiger the caddie.

Same as the so called IQ test to determine whose the bright boys. The test is European, designed by Europeans, for Europeans and you swear by it as an indicator of intelligence, how dumb. How about we test you in the Cantonese language to see how smart you are. Lets put your survival skills up against and outback aboriginal's skills in the Australia desert. Who would you be, Burke or Wills.

Hiya yourself, Plantagenet. I read your post that you directed at me, and the point you were trying to make was...?

Since I have no idea what you wanted to say, I thought I would comment upon the post you directed at "individual," at least you gave some him indication of what point you were trying to make.

It is poetic justice that the Chinese are doing to the Muslims, exactly what the Muslims have been doing to everybody else who is not a Muslim for the last 1400 years. As for Chinese stealing Muslim women, I am all for it. To begin with, the Muslim women are probably quite happy to get away from their wife beating Muslim husbands and fathers, and marry a man who will probably treat them decently.

It is now impossible for an unaccompanied young Saudi woman to get on a plane in Riyadh, too many of them were fleeing to the west.

I remember when Sheik Hilaly's daughter praised him in "The Australian" newspaper and said that when adjudicating marital disputes between Muslim men and their wives, the Sheik always took the woman's side "because he knows what Muslim men are like." She said it, Plantagenet, the grand Muslim poo bahs daughter, not me.

The Muslim religion encourages it's jihadis to keeel the eenfidels and take their wives and daughters as sex slaves. ISIS did it all the time because they said that Allah and Mohammed approved of it. And they were absolutely right. So why you are complaining when somebody returns the compliment to Muslims is beyond me.

And please note how the Chinese are dealing with their Muslim insurgency? Muslims know that the key to eventually dominating any non Muslim society is through high birth rates and immigration. So the smart Chinese have turned the tables on them and using the same tactics. They are encouraging Han Chinese to immigrate to Uigarland and breed the suckers out. Of course, the smart Chinese are doing the same thing to Australia but you can't see that because you can't see past your multicultural blinkers.

LEGO,

Interesting logic: because Muslim men have treated other people badly, it's okay to mistreat Muslim women. As if people were a single entity with a single brain and a single will. The essence of a racist approach, actually.

And those Han Chinese men are not 'marrying' those Uighur women. Your 'birth control solution' against Uighur women isn't all that far from a more infamous 'Final Solution'.

Furthermore, it's usually been the Han Chinese who have oppressed groups in central Asia, as an integral part of their imperialism. The Uighurs have been in that part of the world for perhaps a thousand years.

Joe

To Paul1408

"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions."

Adolf Hitler
Speech of May 1, 1927

"We were dying by our millions to destroy a system of government that was almost identical to our own"

Guy Sajer. German soldier on the Russian Front. From his book "The Forgotten Soldier."

I know it is hard for you to accept, Paul, but right wing socialism (fascism, Nazism) and left wing socialism (communism) are two sides of the same totalitarian coin. The only difference is, which classes within society support which form of socialism.

You obviously disagree with my premise that certain races have particular evolved natural aptitudes and properties in certain areas, including sports. You are on a loser there, Paul. You are so obviously wrong it boggles my mind why you would be so silly as to even bring the subject up? If I am wrong and all races are equal, Paul, then you have to argue that white and black skin have equal degrees of sun protection. Most people except spoiled narcissistic rich kid graduates would laugh at you.

Serena Williams and Tiger Woods excel at what was previously "white" sports because historically, black African people were either discriminated against and prevented from competing (like women in the Marathon), or because their past economic circumstances prevented them from competing.

That is not the case today. All sports promoters want today is performance. Professional US football players and basketball players are very disproportionately black because black Africans (and black Australians) excel at running. They evolved on the open sun lit plains to chase down game in hot climates and their bodies evolved to accommodate that fact. But they can't swim for sheet. Black people do not even bother competing in swimming events because their unique physiology is against them

LEGO,

"We were dying by our millions to destroy a system of government that was almost identical to our own"

Guy Sajer. German soldier on the Russian Front. From his book "The Forgotten Soldier."

Reminds me of the elderly Polish woman who was asked what was the difference between living under Fascism and Communism, she replied,
"The flags and the songs".

LEGO

Your paranoid views on Islam might be based as you say on research, logic and observation, but it’s obviously very selective.

Islam is not monolithic. As with Christianity, there are myriad different denominations and sects. Most Muslims are moderate or non-practising, as are most Christians. And yes, there are some extremists, but Christian countries have those too. And yes, there are some abhorrent punishments, like stoning and beheading, rarely used. But there are Christian countries that condone capital punishment and torture, which are just as barbaric.

Islam sets out some very fair principles when it comes to finance. When a loan is made, no interest is to be charged. Money is to be invested in real assets, not speculation. And investment in armaments is not allowed. Not sure how widely these principles are adopted, but we would certainly have a much safer and fairer world if they were a more widespread practice.

Yes, there are some long past examples and a few more recent ones of Muslim invasions, but they pale in comparison to what has been done to Muslim countries by Europeans in the last hundred years. Britain, France, Belgium and the US have invaded and plundered nearly every Muslim country there is in the Middle East and Africa. They’ve colonised and occupied countries which presented no threat at all. They’ve stolen and exploited resources. They’ve arbitrarily imposed borders and created endless sectarian unrest and mayhem. Their drone and bombing raids have killed, displaced and alienated millions. There's barely a Muslim anywhere who is untouched by Western imperialism. You can call it ‘crap’ all you like, but unfortunately it is the very sad truth.

And yes, people are fleeing Muslim countries ... for the very reasons I’ve outlined above. And for the vast majority, it’s a heartbreaking decision ... they don’t want to leave their homeland. And BTW, they look for a safe country, not a Western country.

To Loudmouth2

I love it.

By claiming that attributing negative characteristics to an entire group of people is "typical of racists", you were doing the same thing yourself. But you could not see that, could you? You guys think entirely in slogans, but you never even bother to think about what those slogans actually mean.

It is perfectly rational and normal for any person, who, upon hearing that a person, or a group of people he either does not like (or who he considers an enemy), meets with some misfortune, to be quite happy about it. This is especially so, if the person or group of people that he doe not like becomes the victims of the sort of behaviour that they are notorious for dishing out to other people. If a car thief gets his car stolen, you are not going to feel sorry for him. If a person, or group of people making bombs blow themselves up, you are going to be quite happy with that outcome.

Muslims have been the world's premier ethnic cleansers for 1400 years. The reason why Islam spread so fast was because upon conquering a country, the inhabitants were given a choice. Either become a Muslim or be killed. Or maybe, you will just have your property taken, your wife and daughters kidnapped, and if you stay in the country, the Muslims will make your life miserable. You will pay exorbitant taxes, you will not be allowed to ride a horse or carry a sword, and must give way on roads and footpaths to Muslims.

The Chinese are doing to the Muslims what the Muslims have done to everybody else for the last 1400 years, so I think it is funny that Muslims are now getting the same medicine that they always dish out to everybody else. It is my opinion that Muslims are worse than Nazis, at least Nazis did not advocate that women were just property, for child brides or female circumcision, or for murdering people just because they were not Nazis.

Bronwyn.

I think it is safe to say that you really don't like Nazis or extreme right wingers? You don't go around saying that there are different types of Nazis, Fascists, Deplorables, Proud Boys, Trump voters, or One Nation supporters? Or that most Nazis and extreme right wingers are really nice guys and it is just the extremists that give them all a bad name? Nor do you excuse Nazis by saying that many of them were non practicing?

You despise all Nazis because as a person who needs to believe that you are smarter and more moral than the hoi polloi, you have been conditioned to think that superior people like yourself know without question that that all Nazis and extreme right wingers are just racists, and all racists are beyond the pale.

Then you come on here and accuse me with a practiced air of superiority of doing something that you do yourself. You are attributing negative characteristics to an entire group of people you don't like.

You claimed that Islam had superior principles to the West but after scratching your head for yonks you could only come up with one of them. You claim that giving interest on loaned money is somehow evil. Well, Bronwyn, because the stupid Muslims still think that way that is why their economies are in a mess and why they all want to live in the west. There are no stock exchanges in Muslim countries or investment capitol. That is hardly a superior principle. It is a recipe for economic suicide.

Islam was invented by a warlord to justify his imperialism and to make his warriors invincible in battle by promising all sorts of material and sexual rewards if they get killed. It is a religion which justifies rape, punishes raped women, and considers all females as just the property of men. As a liberal you should be condemning this evil religion to hell and back. But you don't, because you have been conditioned to think that superior people like yourself always support minorities, and Muslims in western societies are considered minorities.

And BTW, they look for a safe country, not a Western country.
Bronwyn,
Interesting ! Which non western countries are taking in the most Muslim refugees & what percentage of the refugees remain in those countries to build a new life ?

Nearly 3 hours since my post & nothing. I'd have thought the usual suspects would have inundated the thread with links of evidence by now !

Hi Individual,

Probably because it was too dumb-dumb to respond to.

For example, you're obviously confusing immigrants with refugees.

Currently, Bangla Desh would be taking in vastly more Muslim refugees, Rohingya, than any Western country. And before you make any racist remarks about Rohingya, just remember that their parents and grandparents fought against the Japanese (and against Japan's Buddhist Burmese toadies) during the War, when their part of Burma was known as Arakan.

Then you ask an impossible question: "What percentage of the refugees remain in those countries to build a new life ?" How could any survey find that out - presuming you do actually mean 'refugees' and not 'immigrants'. After what period of time do you mean by 'remain' before they go somewhere else, if that's what you mean? Where else might they go ? And what would you interpret as 'a new life' ?

It might pay to turn your brain on for once.

Joe

loudmouth2,
since you're so up to speed with Muslim Refugees/migrants, you might want to answer this as well,
How many refugees from Muslim countries are genuine refugees rather than silent invaders ? I'm asking you because I came across an article from the Telegraaf some time ago in the Netherlands which stated this; Let's be clear: Going on holiday in the country you fled ' because you are threatened with death ' is fraud and therefore not possible in our country!! Share this if you agree that they but have to stay in their country!
Have you witnessed this happening in Australia ?
Also, think that refugees are mainly the result of people with similar to your mentality infiltrating politics !

Individual,

Again, dumb-arse, you ask impossible questions: how on earth would anybody know ?

As they say, a fool can ask questions that nobody can answer. You've proven that in spades.

First, you would have to differentiate 'refugees' from 'immigrants'.

Then you would have to differentiate refugees from, say, South Sudan, where life is pretty dangerous if you're in the wrong 'tribe' - from refugees from, say, Lebanon where life is bloody grim but not necessarily life-threatening in the same way.

Then you would have to interview them all, perhaps put them on a 'truth drug' first, to get their genine motivations for coming here. Good luck with that.

Certainly, in those publicised cases in which 'refugees' go back to their home-country for holidays, there should be - and probably is - prompt review of their situation. I should hope so.

Joe

Hi Bronwyn,

Have you not heard of "The Good Nazi" Albert Speer? Well, for years Speer was portrayed by some as the good bloke among Hitler's inner circle. I supposed when compared to say Heinrich Himmler, Speer might appear in a rather favourable light. The only crime Speer was reasonable for was the brutal deaths of tens of thousands of people in forced labour. See there are "good" Nazi's as LEGO will tell you.

ask questions that nobody can answer.
loudmouth2,
Your reply warrants my favourite saying that "those with no retort resort to ridicule & insult".
What happened to the Link-providing brigade ? Lost for explanations ? Typical !

To individual.

if "the usual suspects" have not bothered to respond to your post, perhaps it was because it was not worth responding too?

Try writing 350 words beginning with "The reason why I think that all races are equal is because..."

SR,

Thanks for your comment.

However, I believe that the use of "invasion" and "genocide" for the colonisation of Aus is hyperbole much like the boats under labor was an invasion or pregnancy termination is genocide.

Try writing 350 words beginning with "The reason why I think that all races are equal is because..."
loudmouth2,
No need because for starters you & your ilk don't consider us infidels as equal ! So, explain to us where YOU think the equality is in that ?

I note that the commentary here is incredibly overheated, which as principally a science blogger I'm not much used to, so I'll largely ignore it. I agree though with one commentator that this is a rather silly piece, though perhaps not the silliest ever written on this site. I can't judge that.
I pointed out why before - that the past is another country, and if you're going to accuse Darwin of a lack of recognition of the value of native Australians, Americans and other indigenes, and remove their place-names, then you need also to include James Cook, Arthur Phillip, Matthew Flinders and just about every other Britisher who encountered the first Australians of the early nineteenth century, with their spears and dilly bags, and lack of 'decent' clothing, and concluded that they weren't 'civilised'. They would have had no idea of how these people had managed to thrive for tens of thousands of years in such an unpromising environment.
Even those who only heard stories of these people, back home in Britain, would've used the term 'savage'. It was standard. Using this author's logic, such places as Adelaide, Melbourne, Brisbane, Sydney and Hobart, to name just a few, would have to be changed, to remove the stain of British racist arrogance. And to assert our smug superiority over those outdated ignoramuses.

Individual,

Oh god. Again you ask stupid questions that really can't be answered - on top of an assertion that, as an infidel, i.e. an atheist, I don't agree with anyway.

Try to think through your 'brilliant' ideas before you sic them onto unsuspecting passers-by.

Joe

Thank you individual , I knew you would squib it. Like so many virtue signaling anti racists you do not even know why you believe that all races must be equal. It is just an article of faith to you. It is just like asking a religious fundamentalist to explain how he thinks that the universe was created ion six days? They don't think they even have to. All they tell me to do is to do BELIEVE, BELIEVE, BELIEVE.

The problem for you is that I don't have any problem at all discussing this subject. I actually get amused by the fact that so many of my anti racist opponents get so emotional and angry over an opinion that they are convinced must be correct, but which they can not even write 350 words to explain.

My opinion is that anti racism has been taught to you for so long, that just like a person born in a deeply religious household, you accept without question and don't even want to think that your sacred ideology might be wrong.

Hi Bronwyn. Have you not heard about "the good Nazi" John Rabe? Recently, the Germans even made a German language movie about him called 'The Good Nazi."

John Rabe was a Nazi Party member who owned an industrial complex in Nanking, China. When the Japanese army attacked Nanking and began raping and murdering hundreds of thousands of Chinese, Rabe surrounded his fenced off industrial complex with swastika flags and herded as many Chinese inside the fence as he could. The Japanese did not know what to do as Nazi Germany was their ally, so they did not enter the complex and continue raping and killing.

The number of lives John rabe saved is not known. Estimates range from 30,000 to 200,000.

Anyhoo, after the war, Rabe and his family were back in Germany. Because he had ben a Nazi party member, the allied ocupation commission refused him permission to work. John Rabe and his family were reduced to eating grass seeds to stop themselves starving to death.

Somehow, the Chinese government of Chiang kai Shek learned of the Rabe family's plight and they made a generous cash donation to John Rabe the Nazi for saving so many Chinese lives.

Lego & loudmouth2,
Many people of all Races are equal & many more aren't !

Individual,

Really, do you ever think about what you are writing ? What on earth do you mean by that silly comment ?

Of course, all groups are equal in terms of abilities, but often culture, economics, history, etc. get in the way.

Joe

Look on the bright side, loudmouth2. If that is the best that the "anti racists" can come up with, you know you are on the winning side. It is no good asking "individual" what he meant by his last sneery one liner, he doesn't even know himself. He has all the characteristics of an indoctrinated person who has been brainwashed into believing complete nonsense for so long, he does not even need to think about it. What is worse, he lives in a bubble where every person he knows and respects also accepts this "all races are equal" BS to the extend that he takes it for granted that it has to be right.

And then one day somebody asks him to justify his illogical opinion and he is flabbergasted. He has never even contemplated ever having to think about or reason out why he believes what he does. I guess that is why I like trying to make them do what they never ever dreamed they would have to do. Justify the opinions that they have accepted and internalised for so long that they are convinced that it must be the absolute truth.

LEGO, not all Nazi's were true Nazi's. About 10% of adult Germans at the time joined the party, you'll know the exact percentage. They probably purchased a copy of' Mein Kampf' as well, not for reading, but to display on the living room table, to show they were loyal Germans. Many joined the party, as public servants or because of their employment, it was a must for any thought of promotion, or as business people it was seen as advantageous to be a party member, good business sense, some simply joined because it was the thing to do.

Today its different, the people I oppose, are the far right ideologue who believe in authoritarianism and violence. People who believe the end justifies the means, people who perpetrate violence in an attempt to enforce their will on others at all cost. Extremists of all persuasions are by nature dangerous people operating outside of the normal democratic process. Where are you LEGO?
,

LEGO & loudmouth2,
You prove Darwin right, both the man & town !

Thanks for some sanity, Paul :)

Cheers,

Joe

Paul,

And only 10% of Russians were communists, the majority weren't even socialists.

HI SM,

Yes, and I'm hoping that a similar situation exists - and has existed for decades - in China: that the great majority keep their heads down, some join the ruling thuggery, but most, in their hearts, plot and plan for what to do after the Great Thuggery is over, OR how to get the hell out of the country, to some decent, vaguely democratic place where they can be left alone.

Strange that LEGO hasn't mention Schindler, or the special place in Israel where hundreds (or thousands?) of such people are honoured. But then, Schindler saved Jews, didn't he ?

Joe

I have already answered that, Paul1408. I believe in democracy, but from my point of view it is the left at this point in time who are the most ardent fans of totalitarianism. They are using Tammany Hall politics to undermine democracy using immigration to import their voters. Here in Australia it is the left who are doing their utmost to prevent free speech using 18C to curry favour with their imported electorate and with the minorities they claim to be the protectors of. Even what I am writing right now could see me hauled up before a Human Rights and Equal Opportunities star chamber and be prosecuted for speaking the truth. Just like those university students from the University if Queensland who got kicked out of that "aboriginal only" study room and who pointed out online that having such a race specific only room was racist. The UQ should have had a sign over the door saying "nyet blancs".

In the USA I see an elected president who, like Labor's Gough Whitlam before him, was prevented from governing by a howling mob who tried every dirty trick in the book to have him sacked, and is now doing the utmost to prevent him for standing for office again. The same mob of leftard morons who encouraged BLM and Cancel Culture to riot and burn now pretend that they are the upholders of law and order, when the people who's President they did everything in their power to sack returned the complement and did to the US Congress what they had been encouraging their own supporters to do.

Back on topic. The principle I am trying to impart into your impervious brain is that if you claim it is utterly wrong for me to negatively stereotype and entire group of people (Muslims) because of their shared belief system, then exactly the same principle applies to you and Nazis. You can not have it one way, your way. The principle must apply to all groups of people, even the ones you don't like. To do otherwise is called "hypocrisy."

LEGO,
Well said apart from suggesting the Goaf could have actually managed.

Hi LEGO,

Sometimes its unwise to label people because of their political opinions, particularly left and right, but that's seems to be what is commonly used to describe a person politically. Was Hitler extreme right and Stalin extreme left, or were they both simply a couple of extremists with more in common than what set them apart.

In the Australian context, all representatives in federal parliament today are moderates, I include the minor parties like One Nation in that category. Why I say that is because as far as I am aware all want to work within the established political order to effect change from within. Okay, some like One Nation might have a more radical view in certain areas, such as immigration, but they don't seek to establish a new political order to effect that chance. They are happy to try and effect change through the ballot box.

In the case of our old mate Hitler, he made it abundantly clear his aim was to obtain power through the overthrow of the established order. The fact he obtained it, sort of, through the democratic process was more or less good luck on his part. Once obtaining power Hitler set about removing the established old political order, and imposing his own new order of Nazism.

When you say "I believe in democracy" that's a very broad brush, so did the East Germans, they even had it in their name 'The German Democratic Republic' gee, can't get more democratic than that. Some in a one party state believe they are being democratic. The logic is the party philosophy is the only true system of government, so there is no need for any alternate system. The people can vote democratically for various candidates, all party members, whose only difference is the emphasis they place on the implementation of the party philosophy, vote for the party moderates or the hard liners.

cont

cont

The USA is a one party state, similar to the above, all political opinion is within the confines of Capitalism. The one party is divided into the moderates, broadly the Democrats, and the hard liners, mostly Republicans. What binds the Democrats and the Republicans together is far grater than what sets them apart.

All I can say about Trump is he lost office for no other reason than he was a bad President, one of the worse ever, all the conspiracy theories are bunk. As for a 'Aboriginal only room' I'll agree its a racists concept.

SHARED TACTICS FAN FLAMES FOR JIHADISTS AND WHITE SUPREMACISTS

Hiya LEGO

Here's one for your kind.

http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Shared_tactics_fan_flames_for_jihadists_and_white_supremacists_999.html of Feb 5, 2021:

Despite their opposing ideologies and goals, far-right supremacists and jihadists are borrowing from

a common toolkit of communication strategies to recruit and radicalise members across the world.

Both movements tap into a toxic mix of resentment triggered by perceived societal decline, hatred of Jews

...and use social media to build up their brands.

"They have common interests, if only in the wish to plunge society into chaos, a racial war...

Increased violence from neo-fascists like the Proud Boys, the Base or the Atomwaffen Division

which Canada this week placed on its terrorist list of banned organisations

...The attacker who massacred dozens at mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, in 2019 broadcast his attack on Facebook Live.

A few months later an anti-Semitic attack in the German city of Halle was streamed on Twitch.

"There is clearly an admiration of supremacists for jihadists.

They even use the term 'white jihad'

...Some white supremacists have even urged tactical alliances with Islamist forces...

[an especial fit to WHITE SUPREMICIST PROPAGANDA ON OLO]

...When they are not trying to enlist help from jihadists directly, supremacists are copying their efforts to expand internationally to find recruits, raise money and test the waters for cooperation among far-right factions.

Analysts warn that such efforts will increase once Covid travel restrictions ease, as operatives try to meet in person to avoid digital surveillance.

'Viral-minded'

...For SITE's director Rita Katz, this cross-pollination of extremist strategies highlights the common push to attract a wide range of individuals to the most appealing terrorist "brands."

Just as IS drew from hard-core fundamentalists to criminals to impressionable teenagers

"today's far right is its own hodgepodge of extremist communities: militias, neo-Nazis,

white nationalists, neo-fascist street groups, and conspiracy theory movements like QAnon," she told AFP.

"Rigid extremist ideologies are being replaced by viral-minded, hive-like extremist movements,"

and "movements that are successful are the ones that create the most vast and active online infrastructures."

Very good, paul1405.

You last post was wrong but well reasoned.

The United States and the USA are democracies because the electorate may vote for Communist or Nazi parties if they wish. But communism and Nazism are discredited because they are unashamedly totalitarian, and most of the are electorate do not want a totalitarian government. However, this appears to be changing. One report in "The Australian" newspaper claimed that around 50% of "Australian" high school students in said that think that totalitarianism is better than democracy. It did not say which form of totalitarianism these so called "Australian" students preferred.

To what extent western adults prefer totalitarian regimes I do not know. But at this point in time it is people from the left side of politics who have worked out how to win absolute power by corrupting the democratic process. They are using the power of division by claiming that "diversity" is wonderful, and then dividing the electorate into immigrants and minorities on one hand, and white people on the other.

The trick is to always press any cause which benefits immigrants and minorities while attacking and slandering white people and their white traditions and institutions. Examples are the constant leftist attacks upon Australia Day, ANZAC day, the Australian flag, and our national anthem. Almost any white tradition can be portrayed as not being "inclusive" of the left's new found electorate. Then there is slandering white people with total fabrications such as the so called "stolen generations" which in it's original form was a reasonable proposal of the Australian Communist Party. And labelling white people with racist names such as "bogan" and "deplorable".

In addition, policies are pursued (some of them outright racist) which benefit immigrant communities and minorities, and disadvantage whites. Special laws benefiting indigenous minorities are enacted giving indigenous races more rights than whites. Laws are enacted preventing media criticism of the left's new electorate. Illegal immigration is supported. The deportation of foreign born criminals is attacked.

In such a scenario it is hardly surprising that white people are organising for the defence of their own civilisation.

Hiya Plantagenet.

You should try thinking for yourself instead of simply regurgitating leftist media articles. If you really knew your topic, you could cross connect lines of thought and find connections. But of course if you could think straight you would not be a lefty in the first place.

The Communist Party of Australia and the Australian Nazi Party are defunct, as far as I know. Nobody would vote for them. The once large CPA survived by using the "false flag" approach and infiltrating the unions, the Labor Party, and especially The Greens. To what extent the minuscule Nazis did the same to right wing parties I do not know. But I am sure that whatever remains of this miniscule party are trying the same tactic, because the climate is right.

White democratic, largely Christian, free market civilization, which just so happens to be the most superior civilization ever invented, is under attack from mainly leftist forces who are using unrestricted third world immigration and the electoral support of supposedly victimised indigenous minorities to undermine and destroy it. They are also gathering support for their cause by recruiting spoiled and pampered rich white kids who are being programmed to think that their civilisation is evil, and attacking their own civilisation is what "smart" and "progressive" young people do.

In such a scenario, it is hardly surprising that mature, smart white people are fighting back. The leftists then label all white people defending their own civilisation as "the far right". Most people would associate "the far right" with Nazis. One of the funniest manifestation of such idiocy can be seen on youtube videos. After the mass sexual attacks upon white German women at Cologne Railway Station by thousands of recently imported African and Muslim "refugee" men, thousands of German people demonstrated against the idiotic policies of the Merkel government, which had created the problem. The leftist media labelled them all "far right" protesters, when any idiot could see that they were just ordinary mum, dad, and kids, who were angry about leftist "refugee policies", and it's inevitable consequences upon German women

Hi LEGO,

Myself a long time member of the Greens, for you to say, Communists are infiltrating, especially the Greens, is simply untrue, can you provide evidence. That has not been my experience at all, most Green members from my 20 years of membership, to me are somewhat passionate on environmental issues, progressive on social justice matters and even conservative when it comes to the economy. Overall I would say most are nothing more than reformists content to work within the established political structure to effect social and economic change. Outcomes most Greens support, such as investment in renewable energy, believing in action on climate change, demanding more social housing, better outcomes in health and education, supporting public transport, the list goes on indicate a socialist leaning, but certainly is not Communism. Support for a certain outcome on issues, does not indicate support for a communist philosophy at all. If the Greens were advocating the nationalisation of the means of production, or the collectivisation of agriculture then yes you could brand them Communist, but if your principle is wanting to protect the environment that cannot be construed as a Communism.

You say; "the USA are democracies because the electorate may vote for Communist or Nazi parties" Not so, the US Communist party was banned by Eisenhower on 24 August 1954 under the Communist Control Act, making it a criminal offence to be a member. The American Nazi party did not suffer the same fate, even though about 300,000 Americans died in the fight against Nazism and Imperialism, goes to show the preservation of Capitalism is more important than peoples lives.

Just on Trump, he would still be President, if the pandemic hadn't struck and Trump hadn't responded as badly as he did.

Hiya LEGO

I'm interested in your motivation for being a Far Right Extremist who Hates Muslims.

1. Have Muslims hurt YOU personally in the past?

2. Or do you feel that society belongs to old white males like YOU? and

3. Do non-Christian-white "races" have any permanently Equal places in your world?

4. Basically LEGO - are you just getting old, bitter and twisted?

Cheers

To paul1405

I knew that the communist party was banned in the USA but not in Australia, but I lumped them both together for brevity because I was (as usual) over the 350 word limit.

I can't remember the name of the old lady who was a former CPA leading light and who became a Greens luminaire. She was such a red ragger that I think even the Greens got sick of her and they may have even gotten rid of her. The joke about the Greens is that they are "watermelons". Green on the outside and red on the inside.

"Working within the established political structure" is just another way of saying "lets corrupt the voting system by importing our voters from overseas and always support them over white Australians." The Greens are even sucking up to the Muslim vote. Islam represents everything that a true liberal sociol progressives and feminists should be by attacking. But in an amazing display of double standards, the Greens and feminists support the very religion that hates everything they stand for.

Ama-a-a-a-zing.

If Greens are concerned about the economy, could you remind your members that coal and iron ore account for more than half of Australia foreign currency earning? Without coal and iron ore (making steel from coking coal) the Australian dollar would be worth as much as a Bolivian Bolivar. Methinks that the Greens and the left are primarily public servants who know that their secure government jobs will always insulate them from the effects of economic problems. It is hardly surprising that Canberra with it's multitudes of public servants is practically a soviet state.

People seeking who have a compulsive need to display their virtue can get very passionate about causes that will never affect them personally.

Hiya Plantagenet.

Anyone who opposes left wing socialism and the importing of crime and welfare prone unassimilatable immigrants and "refugees" is "far right" to you.

1. I am interested in how you can actually consider yourself a progressive liberal when you defend a religion which opposes everything a real social progressive liberal should stand for? But I know how you think. You just think (bing) "Muslims are minorities." And then (bing) "A socially progressive person always defends minorities." (bing) 'Don't think about their values and attitudes."

So you defend a religion that thinks that women are chattels and minors. Women who do not follow the strictest dictates of Muslim modesty (which means "being the slaves of men") deserve to be raped, and if they are raped it is their own fault. A religion created by a warlord to justify Muslim imperialism. And for the life of you, you can't see anything wrong with that?

2. Have Nazis ever hurt you personally in the past?

3. Do you think that the liberal values and attitudes, and the prosperity of white western nations will still be the same when white western people are a minority in their own countries? Look at California. Once almost totally white, republican, and prosperous, now flooded with third world immigrants and democrat, and steadily becoming a bankrupt third world state with human faeces all over the streets of San Francisco and Los Angeles.

4. White and non white people can be equal in white societies provided that they accept the primacy of white culture. That is called "assimilation." But when the imports band together as a separate and hostile ethnic group against the host population, attack the flag, the national anthem, demand that their own language be a second language, then they will not be accepted.

What is so hard to understand about that? If you belonged to an anti racist club, would you accept Nazis as members who told you point blank that they intended to change everything your club stood for? Would you accept Nazis in your club because not accepting them is "discrimination?"

Hiya again LEGO

Und your answers 1. to 4. be?

Vee in Oslo

vood vreally like to know.

tusen takk lego blokk

To Plantagenet.

This is an opinion site, not an Inquisition site. I think u should answer my questions first.

Vee haf veys to make you talk.

I asked you first me Afrikaner matey.

Not in this one hopes? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afrikaner_Weerstandsbeweging

Cheers

Workers of the world unite!

Against the socialist socialite set!

You have nothing to fear but your smashed avocados!

Didn't dream you were such a socialist LEGO :)

I'm a Conservative, right of centre, meself.

But views depend on issues.

eg. Trump remains too far in dangerous Demagogue dipsh!t land.
________________________

You've been so very very good LEGO, I'll answer part of your questions. Tomorrow.

ie. how my Grandpa's well marked Hospital was shelled by dreaded Muslims (religion wise) some time back.

Cheers

Now lets see if I can figure you out Plantagenet?

You call yourself right wing, but you think that any right wing person who is racist "far right" (which is another name for Nazi). Yet you are racially prejudiced against old white men yourself?

And you support Islam and Muslims?

Yeah, that makes sense.

Get over it LEGO.

I'm Conservative, right of centre, not "rightwing".

While you are sadly a far-right, racist, extremist.
_________________

The many groups who are religiously Muslim are not the monolith, you try to preach. They very from:

- blond blue-eyed Europeans (from Bosnia to Caucuses)

- east Asian (from China to Indonesia)

- Iran-Persia

- to the Middle East (the last you try, and fail, to typify as ALL Muslims).
_________________

I recognise hate justifies your existence. But that's just Your personal failing.

Be more positive. Get out of your "We-White-Minority-Are-Threatened" hate-hole.
______________________

Remember White, conservative dominated, US and very religious conservative Christian Russia, collectively own 95% of the world's Nuclear Weapons.
______________________

I delay my Grandpa's fight in WWI with Turks at Gallipoli. These Turks just happened to be Muslim defending their own country,

They did shell Granpa's Stationery Fieldhis Hospital (becaue it was hiding ammunition and because the Aussies knew the Turks knew)

and the Turkish shells fired at some Hospital tents caused tell-tale ammunition secondary explosions - which the Turks noticed.

until you become a civil OLO commenter.

Cheers

You sure are a mixed up boy, Plantagenet.

Another name for "right wing" is "conservatives." Left wingers are "progressives." (Actually, "regressives.")

Yes, I am a right wing racist, but so are you. You claim to be "conservative" but you are racially prejudiced against white men. I notice you dodged replying to that charge when I brought up your obvious contradiction.

Was it because you said to yourself "Holy sheet, he is right, I just said something racist! I just dropped a clanger. Uh oh, I will just pretend that I did not negatively stereotype old white men, or imply that they should be seen and not heard. I better watch my mouth."

You asked me why I am "far right"? Well, I used to be an anti apartheid demonstrator but then I realised that people like you who claim to be anti racist are just anti white. I doubt if you really think you are anti white. I doubt if you think much at all. You just swim with the current of "progressive" opinion and never think objectively about race. You stay within your comfortable PC bubble, and within that bubble the idea of racial equality is a done deal. No need to think about it or wonder if you have been had. You are so used yapping at heels of the PC crowd that you think attacking your own race as a fashionable bit of virtue signalling. You never even realised you were doing it. Well boy, now you know.

And I see you are at it again sneering at the white race because we have 95% of the world's nuclear weapons. That is hardly surprising since he white race invented nearly everything that makes the modern world. I suppose that you are happy that nutter in North Korea and those crazy medieval mullahs in Iran are catching up? I am sure that your friend Biden will do his best to help them

Thankyou Mr LEGO

Your responses have proven really valuable for the:

INQUIRY INTO EXTREMIST MOVEMENTS AND RADICALISM IN AUSTRALIA

see http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Intelligence_and_Security/ExtremistMovements

"The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS) has commenced an Inquiry into extremist movements and radicalism in Australia with terms of reference from the Minister for Home Affairs.

Submissions are requested by Friday, 12 February 2021.

TERMS OF REFERENCE

http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Intelligence_and_Security/ExtremistMovements/Terms_of_Reference

...matters relating to extremist movements and radicalism in Australia...

1) the nature and extent of, and threat posed by, extremist movements and persons holding extremist views in Australia, with a particular focus on:

a) the motivations, objectives and capacity for violence of extremist groups including, but not limited to, lslamist and far right-wing extremist groups...

b) the risk to the community of high risk terrorist offenders;

2) the geographic spread of these extremist movements and persons in Australia, and their links to international extremist organisations;

3) without limiting the other matters that the Committee may consider, issues for specific inquiry are:

a) changes that could be made to the Commonwealth's terrorist organisation listing laws...and provide a barrier to those who may seek to promote an extremist ideology in Australia;

b) changes that could be made to Australia's Counter-Terrorism Strategy in relation to preventing radicalisation to extremist views... governments;

c) the role and influence of radical and extremist groups, which currently fall short of the legislative threshold for proscription, in fostering disharmony in Australia and as a conduit to persons on a pathway to extremism;

d) further steps that the Commonwealth could take to disrupt and deter

hate speech [tailor-made for you Mr LEGO]

e) further steps the Commonwealth could take to reinforce social cohesion, counter violent extremism and address the growing diversification of extremist ideology in Australia;

f) the role of social media, encrypted communications platforms and the dark web in allowing extremists to communicate and organise;...
________________

Again a big thankyou Mr LEGO.

LEGO,

There are many variations on 'conservatism'.

There are many variations on 'progressivism'.

There are even cross-overs, people who believe that:

* human societies have built up systems of value which should not be set aside lightly, especially those of the Enlightenment, and that such values are under violent threat from the dumb-arse (and strangely anarchist or at least nihilist) right at least as much as from the 'left' -

and who also believe that

* where change is necessary for the welfare and happiness and therefore opportunities of people, especially of suppressed/oppressed groups, then those changes should be carefully planned, introduced, monitored and modified as required,

and I also suspect that that pathway is too easily impatiently junked by the most idiotic of the 'left' in favour of overthrowing the entire system, and starting from scratch.

Both can end up in fascist dictatorship, by whatever name.

So I am hostile to both extremes, as not all that different from each other - hence people could easily confuse Proud Boys with Antifa in the recent attempt to overthrow the US government and install a Trumpf dictatorship.

So to my surprise, I find myself a progressive conservative. Quite likely, most people take vaguely similar stances.

Small children believe in either-or. Try to learn, LEGO, from older children.

Joe

To Plantagenet.

I would agree with your assertion that terms such as left, right, progressive and conservative can be misleading. But they are still in circulation and their current meanings are generally accurate enough. In Britain, the Left is Labour and the Right is Conservative. So if you call yourself a conservative then most people would regard you are right wing.

You say that you are hostile to both extremes. Well, that should mean that you and I think alike and we should be allies. But you seem to regard right wing people who are racist as "far right". Yet strangely you do not include yourself in your own definition, even though, from your own statement which was clearly racially prejudiced against old white men, you are as racist as I am. Or is it that you are not racist towards just old white men, you are prejudiced towards all old men regardless of their race?

That would make you sexist and ageist, but not racist.

Could you please clarify exactly what you are?

I believe in female equality up to a point, but men and women are just not equal. The spread of sporting performance between men and women within all Olympic level sports has shown a consistent 10% difference for many years. Only around 12-15% of male soldiers can kill the enemy at visual distances and not turn into psychiatric cases. For women, who are much less violent than men, it would be significantly less. As for women soldiers killing enemy women soldiers, forget it.

When it comes to ageism, unlike yourself I was properly brought up and taught to respect my elders. So I would regard myself as morally superior to you. I think it is funny that you think you are morally superior to me.

The Canadian identified neo-fascists terrorist organisation 'The Proud Boys' Australian chapter member Jarrad Searby has been filmed making threats at the workplace and home of a man in Wodonga Victoria. Searby and three other men went to both the mans workplace and home to make threats, because Searby believed the man had made negative comments about him on social media. The videos of these acts of intimidation against so called "anti-fascists" were posted online. The man was not at his workplace at the time, so Searby yelled at staff; “There’s three of us here today, next time there will be 10 [and] after that 20, we’re gonna start protesting out the front until he’s removed. It’s not acceptable … [we] expect something to happen.” When Searby and two other men turned up at the home of the man, no one answered the door, Searby is filmed yelling; "We'll come back later!" This action in Australia by Proud Boys has drawn praise from the organisations American leadership.

Does this remind you of the intimidation tactics used in the past by fascists?

Dear LEGO

Good on ya. Your views are recognized.

1. Thanks for your help to the Inquiry.

2. Life is complex, like Joe said http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=21295&page=0#376143

3. In the words of Donald: "We love you. Go home in Peace."

To Paul 1405.

At last 9 Australians that I can remember have been murdered overseas by Muslims doing exactly what their God and holy books tell them to do.

At least 3 Australians have been murdered in Australia and hundreds more narrowly missed being murdered in Australia in thwarted terrorist plots by Muslims doing exactly as their god and holy books instructed.

No Australians wither within or without Australia have been murdered by "far right" Australians. There is no central official organization ordering so called "far right" (meaning anyone who opposes multiculturalism and Muslim immigration) giving official instruction to so called "far right" people ordering them to kill anybody.

Yet you obsess over "far right" people being violent and avert your eyes at Muslims killing on the official written instructions of their God.

Hi LEGO,

Thanks for highlighting the dangers of Muslim extremism for Australians. Mate, you're forgetting the 88 Australians, of the 202 people murdered in Bali by Muslim extremist in a most reprehensible act of violence, we must never forget that Any kind of violent extremism, be it religious, political, sectarian, what ever, is to be condemned by all who respect peace and human life.

You will not find one word of defence from me of the Islamic religion, or Muslim extremism, which is a danger not only to us, but the whole world in general. Just as I don't condemn billions of Christians for the actions of radical minority, I don't condemn billions of Muslim for what a minority do in the name of their religion.

Just an observation, I have a good friend, a Turkish Muslim, known him for years, My mate and his family are just as Australian as you and I. Gee, when his kids were little he would put up the Xmas tree, presents the lot, he would say; "In Australia do as the Australians do, besides I don't want my kids missing out." We would go over and have Xmas drinks together, my friend enjoyed a good scotch, his wife liked a white wine, always put on a great spread of yummy food. As my friend would say concerning alcohol; "What Allah don't see, doesn't hurt. I once pulled him up for eating cabanossi sausage at my place. "Mate, that cabanossi contains pork, didn't you know. His reply; "No it don't, its chicken, from a four legged chook." My mate is a rather flexible Muslim.

To Paul1405.

I think I am making some progress with you. I pointed out previously on this topic that while lefties defend Muslims by saying that most Muslims are good people, and it is just the minority who give the majority a bad name, they don't apply the same standard to Nazis. To lefties, all Nazis are bad. And you said as much on page 12 when you made a sarcastic aside to Bronwyn about the "good Nazi" Albert Speer. Your implication was self evident, you thought that the idea of a good Nazi was preposterous.

Then on page 14 you said that all Nazis were not really true Nazis. Did the penny drop? And you realised that implying that all Nazis were bad was indefensible? So you retreated to a more defensible position?

I agree that there are good Muslims. And good Germans. And good Japanese. And good Russians. But when these good people are the subjects of a totalitarian regime which preaches war against my people, and they as an identifiable group either support or at least never criticise this totalitarian regime, only a fool would not regard all of them as your people's enemies.

My uncle Charlie was in Bomber Command in WW2, and he was part of a crew which dropped tons of bombs on mainly German women, children and old people. The German men were at the front. He and his crew members did not differentiate between "good" Germans and "bad" Germans. When you realise that an entire group of people, to one extent or another, support a hostile regime which really does want to exterminate your people, then all of them are your enemies.

Islam can not reform itself. For one thing, Mohammad claimed that this misogynist, war mongering religion was perfect and it could never change. The other reason is, because of people like your good self, who make excuses for Muslims, the same Muslims who either accept the violent behaviour directed at non Muslims by Muslims, or at least never criticise those they see as fighting for their religion

Hi LEGO,

"while lefties defend Muslims by saying that most Muslims are good people, and it is just the minority who give the majority a bad name".
Of the approximate 2 billion Muslims in the world I find it hard to believe that a significant number are inherently bad. What evidence can you provide that shows a significant number, say 100 million, 5%, of Muslims are actively behaving in a manner outside what you accept as reasonable.

I referred to Albert Speer as the "Good Nazi", a description given to the man by others, non Nazi's, not me. It was accepted for years as a true characterisation of Speer, believed to be an exception among Hitler's Nazi elite, until the evidence exposed Speer to be as evil as ALL the others of Hitler's inner circle. Today active far right extremists show themselves by their words and actions that they to are as bad as any Nazi from past history.

Hi Paul,

Wasn't Speer in charge of labour supply and production ? In that capacity, he drove perhaps millions of people to early deaths through over-work and poor feeding. I recall a mine, maybe a salt-mine, down which many thousands of slave labour were sent, and nobody ever came out alive.

Yes, there may have been people like Schindler who took on the guise of a Nazi and, under that guise, saved many lives. There is quite rightly a garden in (?) Tel Aviv dedicated to their efforts, courage and memory.

Yes, as you say, with 2 billion Muslims in the world, with 99 %, like Christians, paying lip service to their holy book which most would not have read, since it is put up in the highest point in the house - if we totalled up Al-Shabab, Boko Haram, ISIS, Trump's close friends the Taliban and the Saudi Wahabis, and all of the crack-pot mini-groups around the world, it may total a couple of hundred thousand, or about 1 % of 1 % of all Muslims.

I wonder why some people find it so vitally necessary to hate entire groups because of their 1 % of 1 %. I'm sure you and I don't particularly hate Germans just because the Nazis were mostly German - and remembering the many millions of WILLING Nazis. We probably agree that evil is not 'in the blood' or passed down through the DNA - through culture, very likely, but not some inevitable feature of any group.

Do some people get a kick out of identifying some subordinate group to bash ? To put all of the problems of society onto ? Like in the Middle Ages ? If not Jews, then Gypsies; if not them, nowadays, then Muslims.

Joe

Hi Joe,

I think prejudice is a strong emotion, often based on an underlying irrational fear, and a general mistrust of easily identifiable minority groups within society. The minority is often stereotyped as having negative characteristics, such as undesirable ambitions, suspect social practices and beliefs, considered not in keeping with those of the majority. With an established negative bias existing against the minority, a smart orator, like a Hitler, given the right unstable social environment these people can exploit those pre-existing prejudices and anxieties of the mainstream in society to the detriment of the minority. Extremists as a minority themselves need these target groups to stigmatize if they are to gain traction within the broader community, they all do it, Hitler, Trump etc and etc.

To paul1405.

The principle still remains that if you or any other ideologue insist that an entire group of people can never be prejudged negatively as a group, then that principle applies even to those groups of people that the ideologues do not like. To do otherwise is hypocrisy and discrimination.

Your second statement clearly displays that you are being hypocritical and discriminatory. You are trying to rationalise around this principle by using selective language and you are failing miserably. It is clear from your statement that you are applying a different standard to "Nazis from past history" than you apply to all Muslims. You are clearly saying that all Nazis, and there were millions of them, "from fast history" can be judged as being all bad. Then you say that all "far right" groups are as bad" as the Nazis. But you don't apply the same principle to Muslims because there are "billions" of them.

That is clearly a double standard. And if you refuse to recognise it, it just goes to show how ideologues of every stripe have this amazing ability to demand that the principles they insist are utterly sacred do not have to apply to themselves. Psychologists call this odd phenomenon "cognitive dissonance". If you fail to recognise that you are violating your own principle, other readers on this site most certainly can see it, and they know you are potty. You are not thinking straight. You are illogical and irrational.

You are destroying your own credibility by your own clear double standard.

Not that it worries me, mind you, so please keep it up This is how over the years I have educated many young idealistic lefties into realising that the entire left wing ideology is based upon double standards, contradictions, and the refusal to look reality in the face. The young lefties look at the replies of other left wing contributors like yourself and see that their arguments are insupportable by logic. The smart ones begin to reassess their own opinions. This is why I am banned from New Matilda and Public Debate

Hi LEGO,

Resorting to school boyish like nonsense; "other readers on this site most certainly can see it, and they know you are potty." When one has doubts, one seeks comfort in the belief that "others" are on their side. About the last 20 posts have exclusively been made by yourself, Joe, Pete and myself, I see nothing in Joe's or Pete's postings that would indicate they hold a belief that I am potty. Unless of course you are a part of some extremist group, whose fellow members monitor our discussions, can you show evidence of these mysterious other readers who will say I am potty? BTW; my daddy is bigger than your daddy and my daddy is a policeman, and my daddy will come and take your daddy away, and you will never see your daddy again....how do you like that! And everyone in grade five agrees with me!

Where did I say "All Nazi members were bad", I did say many Germans joined the party in the 1930's and 40's as it was in their interest to do so. I gave reasons why, and if you like you can go back and read them. Religions are worse, the vast majority of new members are children even babies, joined up without their consent. One reason for that is if given a free choice later in life, the vast majority would most likely not bother to join. There's no doubt the Nazi's enjoyed a high degree of popular home support during their economically successful years, as they did in the early part of WWII, victories brought popularity.

The KKK-in-America is another extremist organisation which enjoyed popular support amongst moderate southern-whites, many joining as it was the community thing to do, basically agreeing with the underlying anti black racists principles of the Klan. A minority of Klansmen were able to insight mob violence, lynching's of blacks. Many Klan members didn't agree, but feared retribution should they speak out, ratinalisation; "well afterall he was only a n!gger!". With better opportunities for poor-whites, KKK lost much appeal as a fear peddling organisation.

Paul,

All active Nazis actively supported the most abhorrent activities against Jews, Gypsies, leftists, etc. and knew that those policies were directly leading to the deaths of very many people. So, in response to this childish argument of LEGO's, yes, they were indeed bad - as a group.

When any Muslims or any other group perform criminal acts, they should be punished with the full force of the law. Until then, they are innocent - they can wear whatever they like, pray however they like, eat and drink whatever they like.

As you say, people with their minds still 'in the olden days' when any strangers were to be feared, as if they simply shouldn't BE, certainly not in white Australia - remember attitudes to 'Balts', Eyetalians, Greeks, let alone Indians and Filipinos and Vietnamese.

We are still having to deal with some very backward people who really do take white privilege - male white privilege too - for granted as god-given. People who Clinton quite rightly called 'deplorables'. People who may see their monopoly on eternal power being shaken and coming quickly to an end.

Joe

To paul1405

Unless you have the wit to understand that your present position, which is that you think it is wrong for your opponents to negatively judge entire groups of people like Muslims, and OK for you to do it with the groups of people that you don't like, then you have an attitude that is a clear double standard. And you will continue to push this double standard every time you and I cross swords on a similar topic on OLO. And you can bet I am going to throw it right back in your face, every time.

My advice to you is to put your thinking cap on and realise that you can't win this one. You position is illogical and irrational. It is also hypocritical. Your attitude has developed that way because you have started with the assumption that your position is unquestionably right and moral, so you never bothered to question it. And you never bothered to think about it objectively.

So when you presented an argument that was self evidently contradictory, you could not even see it. You were so used to thinking that negatively prejudging Muslims was absolutely wrong, and negatively prejudging Nazis, "far right" or anybody else the left does not like is perfectly OK, that you could not see the clear contradiction. You were unable to understand that the high moral principle you advocated applied to you too.

The problem with thinking that you are more moral than everybody else is that it is imperative that you, yourself, have to live up the high moral principles you demand from everybody else. If you do not, you are revealed as a hypocrite and a pompous figure of fun.

You can not condemn an entire group of people like the KKK and then say it is wrong for me to condemn an entire group of people called "Muslims." That is a double standard

To Loudmouth.

Gotcha!

By accusing white people of "white privilege", you just made a negative prejudgement of the entire white race, which is racist.

You are a racist.

LEGO,

I'm white, as far as I can tell. I do believe that yes, us whites have taken it for granted, with little conscious thought perhaps, that we are the natural rulers: other races - an archaic and useless term - are lesser. I think that idea's in our bones, quite unconsciously perhaps. So any challenge to that eternal rule is a bit of a shock, like the Universe has been knocked off it equilibrium.

For Trumpf and his thugs, the idea's fairly open. And any challenge to it scares them. They can see the day when the US has a non-white majority, perhaps five or ten years away. Since I believe that all humans are, on ''racial', ethnic, cultural, linguistic, etc., grounds are more or less equal, with corresponding equal rights - with similar spreads of intelligence, compassion and decency - then that is not the slightest worry to me.

In fact, I'm excited about a possible Indian/Afro-American female President :).

Joe

Hi Joe,

If you can I would like very much for you to do some reading on the person linked below; Constance Couronne. From slave with an honorary title of "countess" thanks to her governor grandfather, to someone convicted of attempted murder as an 8 year old, escaping the gallows because of her tender age, to child convict transported for life, eventually a wealthy "grazier" landowner, in 19th century New South Wales.

http://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Couronne-4

http://www.eoe.convictwomenspress.com.au/index.php/biographical-dictionary/12-c/41-couronne-constance

Thanks paul,

That's a beautiful history. I have a fantasy that I'm descended from a West Indian from Dominica, by way of Bermuda: he and a bloke from Bedminster, Bristol came out at roughly the same time as convicts, around 1844. Of course I have a preference ;)

There were very many Africans, Mauritians, African-Americans in Australia from the early days. Here in SA, there were certainly a dozen at least by 1850. This is weird but supposedly, one was born in Adelaide around 1850 and married the 'last Kaurna woman', Everitji, a distant relation of my wife's. Another African-American, Campbell, tried to set up a fishing business on Lake Alexandrina: his name is common amongst Aboriginal people there. Another South African bloke tried to make out he was a returned ancestor but the missionary advised him to piss off and keep his head. Others lived up the Murray, at Point Pearce Mission.

Constance lived and worked within cooee of where my mum was later raised, between Dubbo and Wellington, and not that far from where my other grandparents were raised, at Orange-Mudgee-Gulgong.

I hope she had a full and happy life, and that her many descendants remember her. Sounds like a real Aussie battler, the sort of people who built this country ;)

Joe

To Loudmouth.

You have given the opinion that white people have taken it for granted that they are the natural rulers of lesser races. Like so many racist statements, it does not matter whether if it is true or not, it is still a racist statement. You have prejudged a negative characteristic on an entire race of people. That, my dear loudmouth, is racism. Get it through your head that you are a racist like me. Welcome to the club.

Now you can understand why I went from being an anti apartheid demonstrator to a racist. I realised that those who claim to be anti racist, are racist towards white people. They are so convinced that they are morally superior and totally non racist that they can not even see their own racism, or recognise a racist argument given by other people who claim that they are non racist.

If there is only one race, the human race, then you and paul1405 should be demanding that ATSIC should be disbanded because "Aboriginal" and Torres Straight" races do not exist. But you won't because lefties want to be the champions of dysfunctional races, by claiming that these races are the victims of the white race. They claim races exist when it is convenient, and then they claim they do not exist when it is convenient. It is just another example of how leftist ideology depends upon concepts that are contradictions, arid the sure knowledge that their own supporters are either too dumb or too brainwashed to recognise them.

You are not the only one who is happy at the thought of nations having powerless white minorities. All of Africa once demanded "Uhuru" (freedom from the white man) and now they are either starving to death, begging white countries for more and more aid, or scheming on how to barge into a white country and get the smart whites to support them with their welfare.

Hi LEGO,

So your unsubstantiated claim that; "other readers on this site most certainly can see it, and they know you (Paul1405) are potty" So that was nothing more than an attempt to PUFF YOURSELF UP. A clear demonstration of you stretching the truth.

Just back on the "Good Nazi" theme, lets not talk about dead people, like the far rights pin up boy Heinrich Himmler. Is there any person(s) from the far right leadership in Australia currently alive, who you would consider a "Good Nazi" type. "Good Nazi" is not to be take literally to mean a Nazi Party member, but as a general term to cover those with kindred beliefs befitting Nazism.

To paul1405

Nice bit of red herring tossing Paul, but you can't keep me away from discussing the central issue that you need to keep me away from.

Everybody, including puffed up, narcissistic, trendy lefties, who have a compulsive need to think that they are morally superior to everybody else, identifies groups of people they don't like. The dislike can be based upon a multitude of things, their appearance, their educational attainments, their race, their generation, their culture, their nationality, their political opinions, even the vehicles they drive. Once identified, the outgroup is always given a disparaging name.

Examples are niggger, cracker, bogan, deplorable, shark bait, clubbers, krauts, sluts, poofters, yanks, bikies, banana benders, wetbacks, white van drivers, dune coons, and names too numerous to mention.

Everybody does it, and you and your lefty friends are no exception, however much you strut and preen and pretend that you are different.

Everybody prejudges the outgroups they do not like and attributes negative characteristics to them as a stereotype. Most people can and do understand that within the outgroup, there are exceptions to the stereotype and most people can concede that there may be members of the outgroup they respect and like.

But everybody still condemns the outgroup as a group. Your irrational and illogical position is that you think that when your opponents do it to the groups you either like, or think that you are the protector of, it is utterly reprehensible. But when you do it to the groups of people that you don't like, it is perfectly reasonable.

That is your double standard. That is the contradiction in your ideology.

The oddest thing about it is that you are unable to even see the contradiction. You have been brainwashed for so long to think that your opponents are all disgusting and that your own ingroup is the font of all that is good and holy, that the self evident contradiction goes WHOOSH, right over your head.

I think that the penny is starting to drop and you do not want to go there. Hence the red herring tossing.

Hi LEGO,

You can't be all bad, you finally got me to laugh, something both Adolf and Heinrich failed miserably to do. I was reading your above list of undesirables, at the end was DUNE COONS, what on earth is a Dune Coon? Please tell me so I can decide if I should hate them or not. There is no group that I hate, with the possible exception of the St George footy team when they are playing my beloved Bunnies!

Was the question about naming a loveable Aussie nut job from the far right too hard? Seriously, the below link is a bit old, but it sums up the situation we find ourselves in today rather well.

http://the-southern-cross.com/dealing-with-right-wing-nut-jobs/

Paul,

A poll of Muslims in the UK (mostly born in the UK) indicated that 52% felt that homosexuality should be illegal. A similar poll was done in France that indicated that a large No favoured the death penalty for homosexuality.

Pauliar,

The communists were also deeply racist, Lenin happily murdered about 1m Kulaks, and the Jews were subjected to persecution.

SM,

Kulaks - the class of prosperous landowners and 'rich peasants'. How is that any sort of ethnic group or 'race' ?

Yes, Lenin used their murders as a short-cut to divvying out land to poorer peasants, to keep them on-side. More than likely, the more prosperous peasants and landowners were probably the most innovative, forward-looking and technologically-advanced of the rural classes. So in a sense, Lenin beheaded that entire, vital sector of the economy.

Hence the chronic famines then and later.

Joe

Y,

The Kulaks were Ukrainian peasants that had been essentially freed and allowed to receive the rewards of their own labour and thus became "rich" i.e. had disposable income made them the enemy of the people because they produced more than collectives and wouldn't give it away for free. That the Russians considered them inferior didn't help either.

However, since the Soviet socialists had no qualms in murdering millions of their own, they could be considered equal opportunity murderers.

SM,

I'm not so sure that kulaks were all or mostly, or even predominantly, Ukrainians - who would not comprise a different 'race' from Russians, merely people living in a different part of that world. In fact they used to be called 'little Russians' and the name 'Ukraine means simply 'southern lands' in Russian.

It's awkward that Kiev, the current capital of the Ukraine, was one of the very first Viking-Rus trading centres, 1200-odd years ago, and is now by the tyranny of geography, outside of Mother Russia itself.

On the deliberate dreadful famines across the Ukraine in the thirties, Nicolas Rothwell's wonderful book 'Belomor' is well worth a read. Sholokhov's plagiarised novels also touch on it, they made his fortune.

Joe

To paul1407

Okay Paul. I give up trying to talk sense to you. Keep up the double standards and contradictions, it helps my position no end for you to keep tripping over your keyboard.

But whenever you come on OLO and sprout the nonsense that it is wrong for right wingers to attribute negative characteristics to an entire group of people, while doing it yourself, you can bet I am going to delight in coming down on you like a ton of bricks.

Oh. And you have probably noticed that loudmouth has made two racist statements about white people on this topic. The first, was to denigrate "old white, males", and the second, to make the assertion that a lot of white people think that they are superior to other races.

Now, as a card carrying anti racist, I expect you to go for loudmouths throat. Sic 'em, Fang.

LM,

Kulaks were originally from Ukraine, it was only after the communist genocide that the term Kulak was used generically.

As for Kulaks being a "race", probably "ethnic minority" would be more appropriate, but often racism is used as a catch all.

Lego,

Yes, a sense of superiority may be so taken-for-granted that it's unconscious. It is revealed when something happens to upset those deep assumptions: say, if a woman elected a prime minister, there may be a sense that, hmmm, something's not quite right.

And I should imagine that Kamala Harris's assumption of the office of vice-president in the US is a massive example of this: a woman, Black, Asian. There's a lot there to be uneasy about: white women worried that's she's Black and Asian; white men, of course, worried that she's 'nothing like them, how come she was allowed to vote ? Remember the good ol' days'.

I would expect a lot of those taken-for-granted assumptions about the rightful position of white male ascendancy in the world, is undergoing some analysis, or at least uneasy discussion, in Dirty Neck, Montana.

Other little examples of power-assumptions: the Japanese PM resigning over his comments that 'women talk too much' may indicate that rock-solid assumption of eternal male dominance. I think you might get the drift.

Joe

The topic begins: "The City of Darwin: honouring a blatant racist"

I'm sure there are plenty of places worldwide named after people who have undertaken questionable or simply appalling behavior and have been honoured during a time for something, which today many people would be disgusted with. There is one thing to consider though when looking at this matter:

"History is not there for you to like or dislike. It is there for you to learn from it. And if it offends you even better, as you are less likely to repeat it. It is not yours to erase. It belongs to all of us!"

There are some who feel that by removing certain things from a public realm, they can reduce the impacts on others from previous eras inflicted that were terrible, say against Aboriginal people, but this not possible. The impacts will always be there for these people on generations past and present and they cannot be reduced, limited or minimised.

There is a case for reviewing things being memorialised today, from past eras. One example is the avenue of Prime Ministers in Ballarat. These busts are put in out of tradition, not merit and honour Prime Ministers including those who implemented policies that were simply appalling.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-09/julia-gillard-unveils-her-sculpture-in-ballarat/5802838

What? The same Julia Gillard who:

Reopened detention centres? http ://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/aug/13/australia-asylum-seekers-pacific-islands

Cut payments to single mothers? http://www.sbs.com.au/news/gillard-defends-welfare-cuts-to-mums

If anyone wants to erase the past, I will not stand for it. It is not right and should not become part of society. If naming Darwin honours a racist, I want people to know about it!

To loudmouth.

And your point is....?

Hi LEGO,

Been away for a few days, up the mountain in the rain forest, what's left of it. A nice bit of R'n'R. On my return I expected to see a long list of "Good Nazi's", the living Aussie variety, put up by your good self as I requested. I take it you can't name ONE not ONE! Well blow me down, you can't even name one person from the extreme right in Australia you consider GOOD, are they all BAD? What about Blair Cottrell, wants a pic of Hitler in every school classroom, Jim Saleam, likes to wear a swastika on his arm, and a blast from the past Ross "The Skull" May loves all things Nazi does Ross. Do any of those names motivate you to create a list?

As for Joe and your perception that he is racists on mass against old men. Nah! like me, he's puts up nothing that would suggest racism on his part. Unlike you and your long list of those you despise, including, but not limited to; niggger, cracker, bogan, deplorable, shark bait, clubbers, krauts, sluts, poofters, yanks, bikies, banana benders, wetbacks, white van drivers, dune coons, and names too numerous to mention. I suppose with a 350 word posting limit you can't put up your complete list.

Pauliar,

Are you a good Nazi or a bad Nazi? Coming from the Aus National socialist party AKA the greens.

Hi paul1408

Been moving house and it is a big job.

Sorry, I don't know any Australian Nazis at all and I would be surprised if the Australian Nazi Party even exists today. I have not heard of any news reports on the ANP since ASIO bugged their headquarters 50 years ago and recorded then murdering one of their own members who they believed was a police informer.

As for the "far right", I have no knowledge of such people even existing. Although you probably consider anybody to be "far right" who is anywhere to the right of Bernie Sanders. That is a very broad demographic.

The principle is still the same. You can not claim it is wrong for me to caste aspersions upon an entire group of people that I don't like, if you do the same thing to another group of people that you don't like.

Hi LEGO,

That "Good Nazi" title is not to be taken literally as only those within the Nazi Party, but is more broader in referring to anyone on the far right of Australian politics you might consider doing good works for the cause. I though Blair Cottrell and his desire to have the Fuhrer's picture in every classroom in Australia might have struck a cord with you and you may have considered Blair to be a "Good Nazi". No hummmm, oh well. Your thoughts?

"been moving house", I do hope LEGO no family of Dune Coons from you knows where, had moved in next door to you, worse still a family of Shake Bait forcing a move to further to the right in the street by you. Hopefully you are now next door to a good bogan family of rednecks Aussies, Wayne and Donna, or better still a wholesome family of god fearing Deplorable's, Dazza and Charleen, little Dazza and their mongrel dog, the rhotwheeler X pit bull, "Spike", which ripped the arse out of Dazza's stubbies, well that's another john dory in itself.

paul1409

I enjoy being politically aware, but I had no idea who Blair Cottrell was until you prompted me to look him up on wiki. It appears he is some extreme right winger who nobody has ever heard of, except for those like your good self who obsess over whatever right wing extremists I presume do exist, somewhere?

Oh, and I finally remembered the name of that ex Communist Party of Australia woman who became a Greens senator, it was Lee Rhiannon. This indicates to me that the extreme left simply joined the Greens when they realised that nobody was ever going to vote for them. I think intelligence agencies call such tactics "false flags." According to wiki, this ex Greens senator is now head of some commie organisation "which is the "legal successor of the old CPA."

You seem to be terrified of an almost unknown ordinary citizen who apparently holds extremist right wing views, but you and your Greens Party elected as a senator a person who had extremist left wing views. As I have pointed out repeatedly, communism and fascism are both manifestations of the same socialist totalitarian ideal. The difference between them, is which demographics within a society support totalitarian rule, and doctrinal differences over economic policy. The communists have been very successful in portraying themselves as the polar opposite of fascism to gullible people like yourself, but they don't fool me.

Back on point. Everybody identifies groups of people they do not like, and they call them nasty names, and they attribute negative characteristics to them as a group. I would have thought you were smart enough to figure that out for yourself? But then again, you are still a doe eyed left winger, so that explains a lot to me.

The principle is, that you can not negatively stereotype the groups of people that you don't like, and then stand up on your pulpit, and there among a chorus of singing angels, claim it is unspeakably wrong for me to do exactly the same thing to the groups of people that I don't like.

Hi LEGO,

I've had my amusement for the day, I hope your house move went well. I'm surprised you're not familiar with Blair Cottrell, in recent years Cottrell has appeared on national television and in the mainstream media with his far right views, and also for more criminal matters as well. I thought you would be up with these sorts of things.

Lee Rhiannon, I'm sure you would have a better insight than me. When I was active in Green politics in NSW, our paths crossed on several occasions. I found Lee a knowledgeable and hard working member of the party, but I was not a supporter, finding Mehreen Faruqi a better choice for the Senate than Lee. Now Mehreen would not be your cup of tea, a woman, a feminists and dare I say it, a Muslim woman at that, hardly fitting your stereotyping of Muslims.

Its hard to identify prominent people of the extreme, particularly those holding similar views to yourself. Such people with crazy held opinions hardly gain traction with the general voting public, they are the irrelevant half a percent mob in Aussie politics. It maybe you see Pauline Hanson as a beacon for the cause, but she seems to be content to work within the established political framework, so hardly making her a radical demanding substantive political change. Then maybe in the Australian context she is. Acting outside of mainstream politics, like Islamic extremists, these radicals often refereed to as the far right do pose a threat to national security as identified by ASIO and other government organisations.

P/s; This Bernie Sanders seems to be some kind of boogeyman for you. I though he was Colonel Sanders older brother, what relevance is he?

I don't watch TV at all, so I am not up on whatever fake news is influencing you to the point of obsession with ordinary Australian citizens, who just happen to hold different political views to you.

As usual, you miss the point.

Lee Rhiannon was a card carrying official with the CPA who infiltrated the Greens and actually became a Greens senator. Yet this extreme lefty does not bother you at all. But this Blair Cottrell, who is apparently just an ordinary citizen who has zero influence with anybody other than sensation seeking journalists from the left wing press, has you looking under your bed every night worried about a Nazi takeover.

Just in case you have not noticed, it is the left today which is the new establishment. And just like the right in my day, they are the ones who are the new oppressors. From a new McCarthyism in Hollywood sacking stars who hold right wing views, to trying to legally enforce Orwell's "newspeak" with gender neutral pronouns, to prosecuting people who hold contrary views, or who make fun of their causes, or heroes, the Left is getting ever more power drunk and out of control. Even the right, when they were the establishment, never went after cartoon commentators like Bill Leak, who the Left hounded to death.

The Right are the new punks making fun of, or kicking back at, an increasingly arrogant and oppressive left wing establishment. I have always been a bit of a rebel, and I know who's side I am on when it comes to fighting those who would demand that I must conform to their worldview, or else.

On the subject of stereotyping, everybody does it. A stereotype is a sweeping generalisation which is never entirely accurate because it does not need to be. It is just accurate enough to form a concept in people's minds so that people can think. But you can not make sweeping generalisations about Nazis, and then say that I an not do the same thing to Muslims. or any other group I do not like.