>>Another Axiom of human relations, is that the 'racism' (as Redneck rightly points out) will usually NOT surface until there is a SHORTAGE of resources. Then, surivival mode kicks on, and blood IS thicker than political correctness.<<

So you reckon that were New Zealand to fall on hard times the Maori (non of whom is full-blooded today) would bear the brunt of such difficult times at the hands of the majority Pakeha?

Had England in her history fallen on very hard times would the Angles and the Saxons have turned on each other? What about today? Most of the Aristocracy in England descends from the Normans, which is why they are generally taller and with longer faces than the hoi polloi, who descend from the slightly squatter Angles and Saxons and Celts. Would we have trouble between these three different racial groups were Pommyland to fall on particularly hard times?

I have a French friend who proudly distinguishes herself from her Gallic countrymen. She's of Celtic descent, as are the people of her home region in Brittany, and she wears a Celtic ring. Next to them in Normandy the people are of Scandinavian descent and are thus taller and with longer faces than the rest of the French. Would France therefore descend into a bloodbath were the country to fall on hard times?

From how many different groups does the German nation of today derive? European nations were all previously multi-cultural nations that over time coalasced into a unified whole (even though Spain is old, it still has trouble with the Basque people). The only truly mono-cultural society that ever existed was the one that existed before the Tower of Babel. If people wanna return to a close approximation of time, then they ought to greet with relish the oncoming prospect of a global culture, which seems to be sweeping all these multi-differences aside. Just look at the number of langauges that keep disappearing every decade.

I'm for "soft" multiculturalism because it aims for ultimate mono-culturalism as opposed to the balkanisation of "hard" multiculturalism.

Brazuca and others....

Yes, on reflection, I should have thought more about that statement that racism only manifests during shortages. Its always there, but the 'violent' or 'aggressive/competitive' aspect is more noticable during shortages. Sorry for that slip.

There is a constant competition going on, where race is a factor.
Take the Italian concreter for example. The one I hired to lay a slab had only one non Italian worker who had the most horrible laboring work, all the other subbies were Italians. The bobcat driver, the concrete truck driver, all the other workers.

Personally, I prefer to have a good mix of across the board business relationships. Hence I have chinese (singapore), Indigenous (Borneo), and locals of all types. One reason I have the chinese as opposed to him sourcing the products I make from China is simple. Quality and f'ship.
and flexibility. It sure ain't price :)

Trinity

that inspiration did kick in very well, "carrier sparrow" :) pity it was not a 'positive up-building comment' rather than a personal tear down.

DAVO.. yeah, that was a bit crude mate.. consider yourself 'rebuked' :)

XENA... 'one brain cell'...good 1 at least I do try to stick to facts and issues :) but I admit, I ripped into the way your mind seems to work in another thread, and I stand by it in a clinical kinda way :)

BD

Instead of pontificating upon the faults (real or imagined) of other posters eg "Trinity .......... pity it was not a 'positive up-building comment' rather than a personal tear down.

Has it ever occurred to you to set an example? Clearly not since you spend copious amounts of time tearing shreds off many posters you disagree with. Granted at least you exhibit more thought and effort than Davo.

I have no doubt that Xena will set you straight in her next post - I read your other thread and you have completely missed the point - yet again.

As for this thread, all human beings have bias. We're not perfect. However, some of us are intelligent enough to know that we only have this little planet to sustain us and it will be better for us all if we try to get along. Unfortunately a number of 'aussie' (read W.A.S.P.s) posters have demonstrated the double standards posited by Chek. Give 'em enough rope....

Why bother thinking about this complex issue with intellectual honesty and integrity when you can just call people names, like... racist. That one in particular is a great bit of guilt tripping shame based therapy, a very useful way of telling someone to shut up without actually using those words.

l am not above such lazy intellectual dishonesty when the mood strikes me, so in that spirit Chek, you are rasict.

trade215, Read through the posts and you'll see this discussion has been rigorous, intellectual and far from lazy. What you propose is that we all discuss racism without giving it agency, ie, keep you comfortable, and don't dare rock the boat. Intellectual dishonesty is when you havn't investigated the evidence and just enter into it swinging punches. Puleeze! You'll have to do better than that chum.

To Trinity,Xena and others: We are all just too deadly! :)

rainer,

Thanks for telling me what l realy mean. Thanks for alerting me to what l am proposing. l can scarcely get thru the day without the interpretative wisdom of the brainiacs who can translate me.

Maybe you can interpret the following too... l regard intellectual dishonesty as the deliberate use of knowingly spurious logical fallacies, like using red herrings and name calling. The tag of 'rasict' is plainly name calling and it is a thinly veiled attack on one's credibility, therefore a logical fallacy, ergo intellectual dishonesty. A reference, take it or leave it, http://www.intrepidsoftware.com/fallacy/toc.php

It hardly matters how rigourously an attack on credibilty is framed, its still lazy. Of course u prolly already know that.

The tag of 'racist' serves no purpose in illucidating, expanding, nor advancing a discussion. As many of the posts in this thread illustrate, its a very useful way of getting stuck in the mud.

Frankly, l dont care for keeping people in their comfort zones, its weak. Maybe you could take your own advice and get out of that comfort zone that is arguementative obfuscation and be careful not to confuse a rocking boat for a boat that is actually making foward progress.

Anyway, from one chum to another, thats my bit of lazy, arguementative intellectual dishonesty.

ps. interpretative answer to this post is that it is egocentric, disrespectful, self indulgent,sarcastic sanctimoney. (when in rome...)