George Orwell coined the word “doublethink” to describe the inability of young Idealists like Katsuhiro from comprehending the contradictions in their own ideology.

Now Katsuhiro does not like racism. But he has just made a serious racist accusation himself. Unable to claim that white people burned down the Reichstag, because Adolph Hitler has already claimed that honour for the Jews, Katsuhiro has gone one better. He claims that racism was invented by white people during the period of European colonial expansion.

I would advise you Katsuhiro, to re think and change your tactics. Because even some of your quicker minded supporters are probably looking askance at you for that one. Some of them must have the wit to comprehend that an unsubstantiated allegation, based upon either wishful thinking or sheer fabrication, that inferred negative attributes upon a clearly identifiable racial group, is clearly an act of outright racism.

Katsuhiro compounded his mistake by claiming that only white people think up hurtful racist names, while the rest of humanity are just too polite to stoop to the low level of white people. Well, if you think that, Katsuhiro, you are not thinking very hard.

Try “redneck”, “gringo”,” honkey”, plus the Chinese “guizi”, and of course, Katsuhiro-san, you would be very familiar with the Japanese, “gaijin.” Of course, Muslims are more polite, they do not invent differing racist names, they simply refer to lesser breeds as all “Infidels”. If Muslims need to differentiate, they call others, “The cow worshippers” (Hindu’s), “The dog eaters” (Asians), and “the pig eaters”. (Anyone not a Hindu or an Asian.)

But in the intellectually challenged minds of moral posturing, white hating racists like Katsuhiro, the only racists in this world are, of course, those utterly detestable white people.

It is very interesting Katsuhiro that you of Japanese origin are lecturing Anglos on racism when the Japanese culture see their racial integrety as paramount and frown upon inter-racial marriage.

How many different cultures has Japan invited into their country?We a nation of Anglos have invited hundreds of nationalities to join us and you have the audacity to lecture us on racism?

What is your agenda Katsuhiro and Rainer?No your won't beat us into submission with your racist stick.People will come to our country on our terms and we will not buckle to self interest groups with their pet agendas.Japan still refuses to offically acknowledge or apologise for it's wartime atrocities offically or in it's history books.Your country still lives in denial.

The Anglos have been very tolerant and accepting of other cultures,yet you single out Anglos as the sole perpetrators?

Katsuhiro and Garra, two great posts.

Yes Robert this page is looking a bit more tidy - am wondering just how far it is to the bottom.

Great points made by redneck and arjay. I am starting to get suspicious about Katsuhiro's motivations, and I suspect that he is much like Chek. He points out other people's faults in an attempt to make himself look good (I assume your a man). Dig a little deeper, as Redneck and Arjay have done, and you will find an inadvertant, racist soul. Redneck is a racist term.

Rainier is much the same. Imagine if we asked him(her) to brush off his aboriginality?

Davo, I've been asked to brush off my Aboriginality - to assimilate - all my life. Government policy tried to force it on me through removal from my family, schools and teachers tried, they got no-where [I’m proud to say]. So your question is a bit redundant to this discussion.

Arjay, in other posts you've been quite supportive and knowledgeable of Aboriginal people and history (from my perspective) so I'm surprised that you should take on this Anglos have nothing to answer approach. Perhaps you're just shadowing redneck, who knows. I don’t think you really mean everything you say here.

To you both, I don't think all white people are racist (how ridiculous that would be) I do however believe that whiteness is a dominant discourse and pervasive ideology in how Australia and Australians define themselves and Others. (As Chek has identified)

I have to think about my ethnicity and how other people receive me. I spend my life second guessing what they might think about me. I walk into a shop, catch a cab, pay my bills with this in mind. In my professional life its no different, only more formal. Most white Australians do not know Aboriginal people at all - but they do know the stereotypes, myths, that they learn from friends, family or the media. This fear of the Other is something I witness all the time.

So if you’re following my train of thought here, consider this question.

What does it mean to be white?

I’ve read your reference to this many times - but no real explanation about what it really means? You’ve defended it heaps of time, but not really got down to explaining what white means? (besides never having to explain it)

That you may find this difficult to answer should be profound to you but apparently not. Is this because you've lived a life where this question was never at the forefront of your mind every day and regulated and controlled your every thought and social interaction?

If so, this means something!

*
Hi :) Trinity! (love your posts too)

Yes, good post Garra.

You correctly maintain that ethnocentrism is a cultural universal but you have not actually admitted that racism is to,

Ethnocentrism is most commonly exhibited by insular cultures who arrogantly maintain that their culture is superior to all others, but who rarely engage in the tiresome task of actually making an objective comparison between the merits of their particular social values, and others. The prime example being the Muslim culture which stagnated, because it took the view that no Infidel culture could match the excellence of it's own. It was so insular, it refused to even allow Muslim ambassadors to reside in Infidel countries until well into the 19th century. It was with great surprise that Muslims discovered that their civilisation had been well and truly eclipsed.

The tradition of European tolerance almost certainly had it's beginnings in European colonialisation. Europeans were the first people to really come into close contact with multiple cultures and these make vital comparisons. They were no less ethnocentric than the Muslims, but they began to understand that there was much to be admired in other people's cultural values. The discovery that other people did things much better than they, caused a renaisance in European thinking which prompted thought on beneficial social change in their own societies.

The fact that white Europeans are probably the most tolerant people on this planet can be sen by the direction of current immigration. It is almost entirely from unsuccessful cultures towards the countries of the White Protestant Europeans. That the successful European societies have absorbed so many people from so many other cultures so quickly, without (until now) bloodshed, is a credit to their now traditional values of tolerance.

But tolerance, like charity, has it's limits. No people on this planet has ever rejoiced in becoming a minority in their own country. Immigration levels have now reached the limits of tolerance and this will result in increased levels of racism.