Throughout history there has always been social injustices black and white. My sister had her newborn child taken from her in the 60s because she was a single mother, (white) she had no choice, she has grieved all her life.
I am so sick of this black white thing.

Wierd... in Malaysia the hottest selling 'ubat' is 'skin whitener' and in Australia its probably sun tan lotion....... makes u wonder.
The brown/black want to be white and the white want to be at least brown.

Stephen, the sad situation you refer to is a natural outcome of fallen humanity at its worst.
I have no idea about the attitude of 'church' people across the board, but I do know one thing, when people are renewed in Christ, and transformed in their minds and hearts, skin color does not exist.

In Australia, there is probably a degree of defensiveness on the part of guilt ridden people. Why 'no blacks' ? probably because they were demonized and de humanized in the white media or conversations of those who had the most to lose by recognizing the humanity and dignity and value of Indigenous people.

Of one thing you can be a million percent sure, if the whites were black and the blacks were white, and the roles were reversed... do you seriously think it would be any differnt ?

Its not a 'white' problem its a human heart problem.

You are referring to the symptoms.. I diagnose the problem as 'Original sin' and suggest a visit to Dr Jesus for all of us to receive the cure.. forgiveness and renewal at an individual and collective level.

Where we see Christians straying and erring from Christ, by all means give them/us/me justified flack, but don't blame or criticize Jesus, he has given us the enabling, its ours as much as we want it.

Not that your article blames Christ, but continually re-diagnosing the human condition without looking for the only ultimate cure will be fruitless.

As I said in another thread, Rosa Parks of black civil rights fame, said of a group of white Christians she encountered in the Appalachain mountains "At last I've found some white people I can trust"

I'm sure most here could provide some 'been burnt by a Christian' story, including me, it doesn't change Christ.

Good comment Boaz,

Stephen,

In the suspended church and Mar Guirguis in Egypt early portraits of Jesus show a dark brown Jew in Palestine, with dark eyes and dark curley hair. These are the first and early pictures of Jesus: a typical middle eastern looking man.

Maybe it would have been a better cause for Dan Brown to break the myth of the 'blond blue eyed' which mysteriously appeared 5-6 centuries later.

Peace,

Fellow_Human...

Blonde? Blue-eyed?

Jesus Christ is certainly portrayed as a Westerner in traditional Western art, but almost always with brown hair, and usually brown eyes. Google Image Search will give you plenty of typical examples.

yes it does, but not like it used to be at all.

The glass can be half full, look how far we have come when we look at the atrocities of the last 200 years.

Racism is leaving us as the global village phenomenon becomes prevalent, and races intermix.

We used to hate eachother because of being catholic or protestant, now in Australia we dont give a S#$T.

My best mates are Koori and white, we are like peas in a pod, and we love our differences as we are an eclectic group.

it could be alot worse, thank god we somewhat exist in harmony even though there is alot of bad blood from the older Koori generations who lived through the sixties.

To be quite honest, I don't see how Jesus can solve the problem of racism. We need real solutions rather than turning to a mythical figure for answers. In fact, I think you'll find that Christians have made racism worse in this country with their patronising attitude towards 'coloured people'. I'm sure I don't have to remind anyone of the 'missionary work' Christians have done in the past (and continue to do in the present) to turn local 'savages' away from their 'pagan' religions and adopt Christ, with severe consequences for those that deny Him. Christianity is responsible for destroying so many native cultures and religions that a lot of our problems and attitudes can be traced back to it. The problem of racism is a difficult one to solve with no easy short term solutions.

Stephen always seems to spin an interesting yarn. I would hope that Australia's attitude to indigenous Australians has changed since his bowling club incident.

The road between Canberra Airport and the City has a sign that says "Welcome to Ngunnawal Country", which is perhaps a token reminder to all of the original inhabitants of the region. Many federal politicians make reference to the Ngunnawal people in their Maiden Speeches paying homage to the traditional inhabitants, so perhaps the road sign does more than provide a token.

Of course, nobody takes seriously any notion that Canberra is actually owned by the Ngunnawal - Canberra is actually owned by the Australian People and there is no free-hold land, all land is leased. But from time to time there is conflict reported between the Ngunnawal Community reprentatives and the Aboriginal Tent Embassy at Old Parliament House. The Ngunnawal people believe those at the Tent Embassy to be unwelcome invaders of their lands. Food for thought.

Narcissist, is the tent embassy still active? I was in Canberra over Easter and it looked abandoned. Remnants of a couple of tents standing, plenty of dead trees, rubbish and fire places but nothing that looked as though it was still in use. Rather the look of something that had been moved on from only taking the good stuff and leaving the rubbish behind.

R0bert

Hi Robert,

I was there a few weeks ago and saw the caravan things. I beleive it is still there. Wasn't someone on a push-bike attacked because they got too close to the fire a short while back?

I am so sick of this racist crap. Wake up Australia. The white people have to sit back, not say a word in fear it may discriminate against some poor bugger. It is the 'White' people whom are discriminated against, Not the Brown or Black anymore. We just shut up and tollerate it. So stop whining

Jane Doe tells us all she is " so sick of this racist crap....The white people have to sit back, not say a word in fear it may discriminate against some poor bugger."

Dear Jane, I will watch TV today and read the newspapers tomorrow with renewed interest...observing all the white people sitting back not saying a word. And I'll also have to have a closer look at Parliament. There's obviously been a black coup since I last looked and I missed it. So whites have been silenced. Has Andrew Bolt been informed?

I agree with Jane Doe. I have had enough too. Sick of hearing about more money needs to be pumped into housing. Why dont they stop smashing them and there will be more money to build instead of senseless maintenance. If I rented a house as a white person and smashed it and kept it rotten filthy I would be evicted. If they are not happy in their commmunities living on social security, either put something into their community or leave and find work elsewhere.

“One hundred and five years later, I am still not convinced that a lot has changed in the mindset of the average Australian when it comes to race relations.”

Mr. Hagan’s articles have always indicated that he will never be convinced of anything he does not want to believe. This one is no different. As always, it is the white man’s fault. The ‘lighter skinned’ aborigines he criticises are nowhere near as deserving of approbation as are the whiteys. He can’t wait to delve into the past – apart for an understandable swipe at Andrew Fraser – because that, it seems, is where he lives – in the past in relation to his own people. Dwelling in the past appears to be a real problem for indigenous Australians; one that keeps them hopelessly bogged down in poverty and violence.

He is short on argument if he has to keep raking up the past, trying to judge that time using today’s totally changed morals and laws.

Not satisfied with the problems of his own people, whom he could probably help – if he stopped the blame game - he now takes umbrage on behalf of another group of ‘blackfellas” supposedly discriminated against by wicked white Australians. There is no evidence in Mr. Hagan’s writing to suggest that he is interested in anything but keeping the black versus white pot boiling.

If Mr. Hagan is looking for racists, he need not look much further than where is sitting now.

Curious nom de plume Jane Doe - usually reserved for the fully dead unidentified woman - in this case it reflects a particular kind of cerebral death

This line of white people are those being discriminated against is rubbish - most of our kids dont have the life expectancy of a third world country - i could go on but rusted on prejudice is too hard to remove and I'd rather waste my time on other distractions

Stephen,
I believe Rainier picked it right in your last article. You put out the right bait and then reel them in.

What is it about you and Irfan. Are you having a competition? Do you get a prize for scoring a ton?

I’m sorry if I have offended anyone, but this is online “opinion” and this is mine. I don’t like how indigenous people live in the past and blame everyone for there problems. I worked in a car dealership and they ‘gave’ six brand new cars to the aborigine society (sure, the government reimbursed them) within max of two weeks five of those six cars where returned for new ones. You see, they didn’t have to pay for them with there “own” hard earned money, so they took these new cars swimming in salt water. The cars were an absolute write-off. The interiors were burnt out. Which leads me to, the nearest aboriginal community to me; it is a horrible place to drive past. There are approx 15 houses in this complex. I would guess only one is still standing. The rest have graffiti, burnt out windows, kicked in doors and are just ruined. Not to mention, burnt out cars, rubbish and hazards all around. A real nice place for school kids to walk past and get abused.
Also what is that crap with every form now? “If you are Torres Strait Islander or aboriginal, please move to question 20” No need to use your head and complete the form. We have white people for that.

Dear Jane Doe,

Of course you are entitled to your opinion; but some logical thought and reasoned argument using relevant facts would actually make for a better opinion. It also helps to engage with people whose opinions are different from your own. Have you ever talked to your Indigenous neighbours? I work professionally with a number of Indigenous Australians - and socialise with several - and each one I find stimulating, caring and compassionate about this country. I also know some white trash but I do not come to any general conclusions about white people based on what I see them do.

Dear Bic

You said:

[To be quite honest, I don't see how Jesus can solve the problem of racism]

Then you went on with an outline of the various 'sins' of the missionaries etc... I think I may have something to contribute on both those points.

1/ How can Jesus fix racism ?

a)Did you note my reference to Rosa Parks ?
b)Christ's disciples included Simon the 'insurgent' and Matthew the Tax collector.
c)Have a read of the last few verses of the 2nd chapter of Acts. "They were all as one" kind of tone.
d) Paul says "You, gentiles, once alienated and far off from Christ, have now been brought near in His blood"

Bottom line, being in Christ is to be a new person. "Be transformed by the renewal (brain washing if u like) of your mind etc " Romans 12:1-3

2/
As for Missionaries.. I was/am one. My wife is from a tribe in Borneo which was dying out, drunk over 100 days a year, starvation, disease, the government even STATED they are beyond hope, in official documents. But after some initial contact with missionaries prior to WW2, (who they invited to teach them about Christ) and their remarkable transformation without any missionary help during the war years, the government allowed more missionaries to serve among them.
Now they are a vibrant race, with members in every profession u can name and are prospering greatly.

Mistakes have been made by missionaries,and I'm probably more aware of them than you, having studied many cases in anthropology, and paternalism is terrible but I urge you not to just accept the Hollywood negativity and 60 minutes specials as gospel when it comes to such areas of life.

Walk in the Light, and we can see the way ahead. "I am the light of the world" (Jesus)

Stephen
The line "If your white etc" is from a song by Big Bill Broonsy, an American blues singer from the 30's through to the 50s. As a negro in that time he also suffered racial prejudice. He tells a story (cover notes on one of his records) of how he moved from the South up to Chicago where he made a reasonable living as a singer. On one occasion he decided to drive back to his old home town driving his new car. He forgot where he was and pulled into a service station to get petrol. The red neck attendant glared at him and demanded to know who owned the car. Quick as a flash Bill answered "the man I work for" so that enabled him to escape.
There are narrow minded racist bigots in every society unfortunately but I don't think we are as bad as the US south was certainly up to the 60s with the likes of the Ku Klux Klan, lynchings etc. Although the racism there is not so blatent now it it still exists and the Republican party panders to it. Just look at the political venom now being targeted at Hispanics.
The fact that we as a society are not as racist as others is no excuse for discrimination now and in the past against non-white fellow human beings.

It's kind of ironic that Realist should say how we are not racist anymore in Australia and refer to how the hatred between Chatolics and Protestants has desappeared... but, what about Muslims mate? How often have I read posts which expressed, if not hatred, certainly deep mistsrust and dislike of Muslims on this very website?

For centuries the Jews were persecuted all over the world, especially in Christian Europe, now we have made friends and Europeans talk of Judeo-Christian civilization, mainly to exclude Muslims, from what has suddenly become "our" European common roots, when only sixty years ago... I am sure I don't need to remind you!

We always find somebody new to exclude and hate. And look guys, of course black people can be racist, too, and sometime responsible for their own misfortunes, but it always seems supsect to me when people accused, with good evidence, of unsavoury behavior and attitudes istead of taking responsibilities for themselves and their own communities (face it, we can all do better!) instead point the finger and say "But look, they do it, they are bad, too" which makes me feel like saying, so what? you are responsible for your own behavior, you make sure you behave ethically as mush as you can and don't worry about other people. To be critical of others as a response to criticism made to us is never a good way to defend our position.

Boaz, isn't there a nice saying from the Bible about not judging the faults in your neighbour while not noticing yours? excuse my ignorance but I cannot remember the right phrase, maybe you can help me out.

Yes racists exist but my observation is that racists are just a bunch of scared and insecure losers. Once you have mixed with them and they discover how nice you are, they tend to 'like' you and at times even wanting to hang out with you more than their own kind. It's mainly ignorance that's all, implying we need to educate them more. The problem is that they are in the majority and education alone is going to take a long time. The young white Australians' mindsets are changing as they mix with other races in schools, uni, workplace, sports, etc and discover that actually what their grand rednecks told them was in fact a lie and so their fears disappear. Racism in this country is mainly to do with ignorance and 'clueless'. The populace in this country are easily manipulated by politicians and the media and they only travel to England and some parts of Asia. But once they have expanded on their travels and horizons some of their fears that bear racism in them disappear. I don't know about the indigenous aboriginals but my observation as an African black myslef is that some of the 'racists' who stare at me on a bus or train or the street are just curios, like they have never seen a black person before in their life; or so I think. As for racists who attack to cause bodily harm, these are just criminals or hardcore white supremacists. An 'average' racist doesn't attack you to cause bodily harm. Just my observation as a black person myself. The article was very interesting and articulate though. These are realities and denying and pretending like these things don't happen is dangerous. It's true fellow black people can even more racist to their fellow black brothers and sisters once they have an 'association' with white. I'm thinking because they feel insecure and inferior, they tend to feel superior once they have established that 'connection' with whites.

PEACE AND ONE LOVE!

Did you know that the definition also defines a racist to include those who call other people "Clueless","Ignorant","Redneck","Inferior","Loser"??

Suebdootwo,
Where did you get this definition from? I do not know your skin colour or race but it appears you definition might just include yourself.

"Did you know that the definition also defines a racist to include those who call other people "Clueless","Ignorant","Redneck","Inferior","Loser"??

http://www.tightrope.cc/forum/showthread.php?p=40616#post40616

Peoples, racism is not just persisting it is spreading like destructive cancer. Like a substance abuse in our youth its spreads and ruins good potentialities.

For those who are on dial up (its slow) here's racism the racist-denial mob deny. Sounds like the holocaust, stolen children, global warming deniers are in a constant state of denial.

"...
Schoolchildren have been taught that Australia's settlement started with the arrival of the First Fleet in 1788.

But log onto a government website and our white ancestors are practically listed as the enemy. NSW opposition leader Peter Debnam was furious to see that the fleet's landing 218 years ago was being hailed as the day 'Australia was invaded'...

The National Parks and Wildlife website claims the invasion of Australia "lasted for a long time and took many forms".

The First Fleet is only one of many events and things which have fallen foul of our obsession with not offending. Even the Bible is in the firing line, banned from hospital bedside cupboards because it may upset non-Christians.

This is the most open and dangerous attack the Jew has lauched in Australia, by removing the Bible from public places because it may offend some of these sh*tskin immagrants that should have been shot before they even had a chance to taint our golden shores with their filth is discraceful. And they have the hide to say that the Aryan invaded this great southern land. We as Aryans settled this land, those creatures the Left would have us call Aboriginies are nothing more than flora and fauna.
__________________
John8:44 - Jesus said unto the Jews:
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. "
ENDS
Jesus was talking to people like Nazi's and others that ignore the Commandments. Jesus was no racist.

FranGol says:
"Of course you are entitled to your opinion; but some logical thought and reasoned argument using relevant facts would actually make for a better opinion. It also helps to engage with people whose opinions are different from your own. Have you ever talked to your Indigenous neighbours? I work professionally with a number of Indigenous Australians - and socialise with several - and each one I find stimulating, caring and compassionate about this country. I also know some white trash but I do not come to any general conclusions about white people based on what I see them do."

Agreed. Very wise. However I am not sure I agree with your last sentence.
In my neighbourhood we are regarded as "white trash". I have been told by the local Catholic community that they hate us and want us to "piss off". I drive an old car, voice opinions that they don't like, have family who have waste-length purple hair (male - into Glam metal) and "mowhawks" (female-old-school punk, am regarded as lefty, don't go to church and don't fit the mold of that nice obedient "Christian". Questioning CC decisions and behaviour is paramount to questioning God's word - not their opinions. Cultural supremacists at their worst. However, these people are not representative of all Catholics.

I also have Indigenous neighbours next door. They are quiet folk. We've had a cuppa tea and many a chat. One of them is involved in cultural heritage of their people. They are, like us, a fair bit different to the rest of the neighbourhood in some aspects. If Australian's used them to draw general conclusions about Indigenous folk and non-whites, then maybe the cultural supremacists and racists would be seen as illogical fools.

My other next door neighbours are retirees and Catholics. If that family (their kid's and grandkids visit often), with their non-judgemental and always helpful and kind, without being patronising, ways, were representative of Catholics then the only conclusion possible would be that true Catholics truly get the gist of what it is to be Christian.

Stephen Hagen's article is fair reporting of his life story.
He points out, rightly, Australia's historic obsession with white supremacy, and its intolerance of beings who are different to "the norm".
We showed it with the White Australia Policy, when we stopped Chinese entry.
We typified that attitude in Arthur Caldwell's statement:"Two Wongs don't make a white".

Shock...horror! Australia has actually discovered that as well as fuzzy wuzzies being OK at Kokoda, some Asians actually have skills that Aussies do not.
We can go down to the Chinks for a feed, but stay right away from them boongs!

With our racist intolerance, why did we go to war with Hitler?
He put racial differences into perspective; Aryan purity reigns supreme.
Come on Aussie, come on (except youse blacks).

@Jigga
" It's true fellow black people can even more racist to their fellow black brothers and sisters once they have an 'association' with white. I'm thinking because they feel insecure and inferior, they tend to feel superior once they have established that 'connection' with whites".

I relate well with (blks)African-Americans,Afro-brits and Afro latinos,Black South Africans , because they tend to understand whats really going on in the world.When I speak about such things around whites ect ,they tend to think three things, you have something against other groups(envy,hate),you're a disfuntional minority,Or thats just the way those people act.I know some africans do such things, but some races take it to the extreme.

Many of these people hold whites to far higher standard than themselves or anyone else.So that makes more barriers not 1 or 2. These people are close enough to their so-call European superiors people like Japanese,Indians, Chinese,Arabs,Maoris ect are sometimes worst,but poverty other things covers it up.

Total White World Population percentage is 12 to 15%

I posted these articles questioning racism tendencies in this country by politicians like Peter Costello and so called academics, aka Ass/Prof Drew Fraser... enjoy the read:

Who is an Australian Citizen?
[Link: http://opus.org.au/node/129?PHPSESSID=c80bbe2013f2ac96d2878019a87799fb ]

Peter Costello's comments about deporting Australian citizens who don't adopt 'Australian values' shocked many, including myself, especially because the comments are coming from someone who claims to be a Christian. Just when you think intolerance and racism are vices associated with only an insecure selected few, you are taken aback by the caustic remarks of a very senior federal government official.

The federal treasurer's comments just confirmed what I have long suspected: that there are Australians who regard themselves as being 'more Australians' than others. You can be an Australian citizen by birth or have become a legal citizen through a citizenship ceremony but if you don't have blonde hair, blue eyes and beach burnt white skin (probably with a little protruding tummy), you will always be regarded as a 2nd, 3rd or 4th class citizen who is 'less Australian' than 'them'. But just how can an Australian citizen 'deport' another Australian citizen – to where? How can this be possible? Is being an Australian citizen defined by your beliefs? If you are a Muslim who believes in 'Sharia Law', then you aren't an Australian citizen. Ok fine! What if you are a lesbian, gay, non-Christian and don't drink and don't go to the beach? Are you an Aussie citizen then?

What are 'Australian values' anyway?

Is Costello being honest by trying to tell us that all Australians believe in the same values? Can honourable Peter Costello tell us that the homosexual next door believes in the same 'Christian values' that he believes in?

Is Costello trying to tell Muslims to start being homosexuals; go to the pub and drink beer and start swearing in front of their parents? Is Costello trying to ask Muslim teenage girls to start moving

And another: Please BOYCOTT MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GreenLeft_discussion/message/20549?viscount=100 ; http://www.furl.net/item.jsp?id=3985358 ];

Check your online "Wikipedia".

The definition of the word "racist" can be found more as a descriptive word in the Thesaurous.

The dictionary defines Racism as:

The belief that race accounts for DIFFERENCES in human CHARACTER or ABILITY. And that a race or more SUPERIOR to others.

My reference and comments were to the previous post in which he clearly underline his opinion on the DIFFERENCES, CHARACTER, ABILITY of a certain race. He then continues to suggest that one race was superior to his own, and his own race thought they were superior to him when they came into contact with a certain race.

This in my view has racist undertones and puts down other races against their own. And incites another civil racist undertones by putting down their own race.

This is only divisive

Suebdootwo,
Does your dictionary defines 'racist' as a descriptive adjective identifying socially objectionable behaviours toward a race identified by their genetic similarities or a group identified by skin colour?

1. Do people of certain genetic similarities excell in some area of human behaviour or expertise? eg survival in the Australian desert, or some Africa tribes as long distance runners, or some make better leaders of human resourses.
2. Do some nationalities identify by their outward expression of emotions in loud raucus behaviour?
3. Do some with genetic similarities frequently go walkabout?

There are traits of character or behaviour bred or developed in family environments that have advantages or disadvantages in human relationships. People from starving families have no concept of manners as we expect in educated societies. This is both character and ability training. To be disgusted by such animal behaviours we can accept that we have a superior culture or race. I think we can feel some pride or superiority of character in our culture.

I talked to a Doctor yesterday who served in Timor during the setting up of its nationhood and he made the comment that most of these people are not much more advanced than animals, they have little community pride or conscience. Is he racist?

The true racist is one who would exclude or cause damage or injury or injustice to persons identified by skin colour, genetic similarities, or nationality of birth.

Though not to be racist we would not treat differently persons of a different philisophy, or world view, religion in a community setting. However maintaining the purity of those idiologies we would exclude persons from holding office within those organisations. If we are breeding poodles we would not use a bitzer as the father.

Quote, "The belief that race accounts for DIFFERENCES in human CHARACTER or ABILITY. And that a race or more SUPERIOR to others."

Jigga,
Could I suggest that you actually check on what a person said BEFORE you start mouthing off about them.

From my recollection, Peter Costello said nothing about deporting anyone let alone Australian citizens.

You should not have any trouble in finding his speech, or does that not matter to you? If you have the high morals as you imply you will no doubt apologise.

No, I don't vote Liberal.

Suebdootwo,
Yes that's how I describe racists: 'They are a bunch of insecure losers,..... etc'. I'm afraid I don't have any 'better' words to use to describe them that would please you. If I were racist then I would fit my own description and if you were one yourself then you very much fit my description. You are at liberty to use your own description of a racist. But the last debate I would engage in is somebody to school me on the meaning of racist. My short description of a racist is someone who descrimnates the other based on race PERIOD(.) We all know what racists are like and what damage they are capable of doing to society. Please note that my description above doesn't include all people but only limited to racists themselves in whatever form and colour they come. And yes I believe it's the 'superioty' complex thing that is causing all this racism scourge. As for my reference to the 'blacks hating on fellow blacks' I was merely responding to the article by Stephen which is the centre of this discussion. And I was agreeing with him because I have seen these things with my own eyes. You seem to have lost track of the whole discussion. Please go back and read Steve's article and come back and post your opinion of what you think about it.

PEACE AND ONE LOVE!

This is what Peter Costello said in his address to the Sydney Institute on 23 February 2006 (http://www.treasurer.gov.au/tsr/content/speeches/2006/004.asp) :

"Before entering a mosque visitors are asked to take off their shoes. This is a sign of respect. If you have a strong objection to walking in your socks don't enter the mosque. Before becoming an Australian you will be asked to subscribe to certain values. If you have strong objections to those values don't come to Australia.

"We need to be very clear on these issues. There are some beliefs, some values, so core to the nature of our society that those who refuse to accept them refuse to accept the nature of our society.

"If someone cannot honestly make the citizenship pledge, they cannot honestly take out citizenship. If they have taken it out already they should not be able to keep it where they have citizenship in some other country."

The Treasurer was dog-whistling with his mosque analogy. (We all know the sort of person who should be deported, don't we?) But, always the shrewdy, he undertood that in practical terms you can only deport from Australia people who are not yet Australian citizens or people who hold dual citizenship. What country would accept our deportees who only hold Australian citizenship?

Well said Frank !

Golly Jigga .. you said

["Just when you think intolerance and racism are vices associated with only an insecure selected few, you are taken aback by the caustic remarks of a very senior federal government official.]

I see...its racist to get rid of the RACIST individuals who come here and wish to impose THEIR racial/cultural ideas on us....but its not CULTURAL RACISM to come here and expect us to adapt to OUTSIDERS ways ?

Well, now that I understand both sides of the coin, can you tell me what this has at all to do with Christianity and Peter Costello's being one ?

I suggest that Peter C is BEING 'Christian' by suggesting those who don't wish to adopt our values should be stipped of citizenship and deported. Its a great idea. Romans 13 states that the Emperor (Christian or non) holds the SWORD as a deterrent to the evildoer.

To me, one of the greatest evils is to steal the cultural identity of a group you begin to dwell amongst. (and yes, this DOES apply to the white intrusion into indigenous Australia) What arrogance it is to come to Australia and expect to be treated specially in accordance with YOUR culture which may be in direct conflict with ours...

And you call this iNTOLERANT ? Well I call coming to Australia and not being willing to tolerate OUR ways is the pot calling the kettle black. Only those with a vested interest in diluting/destroying our culture whine and moan about 'Intolerance' on our part.

Will we tolerate cultural genocide against us ? Not in a million years ! The indigenous should have slaughtered every foreigner who came here. They didn't..and look at the result for them.

Do you think this lesson is lost on us ? Fortunately, we can use 'policy' rather than weapons in looking after ourselves.

@Jigga

Can't you see Australia's like 'Animal Farm'some aren't as equal as others?Theres only 2 kinds of true Australians,don't be fooled by lips.
If you don't fit into Click 1 or click 2 or both, then you're foreign ,citizenship or not.Its just apart of Australian society.Why worry about that? Just as long as people are not being violent towards you. People who are insecure &cowardly always need to be apart of the crowd :)

Banjo,
Nice one! I can't believe you missed that one... You sound as though you went away on vacation to planet Mars or your 'recollection' failed you lamentably. Here are the the links to the story you want, especially watch the video news clips from chennel 9 and/or ABC. Then you can come back here and probably 'apologise' for putting my principles into question. Why would i lie about such a high profile political figure. Infact i sent that piece to him and he didn't ask me to apologise to him because he said those things. Anyway here you go:
· http://ninemsn.video.msn.com/v/en-au/v.htm?g=2de8468e-351c-4ff4-9919-f2ff8b8436b6&f=&fg=copy
· http://ninemsn.video.msn.com/v/en-au/v.htm?g=b5d1ac33-5256-4233-bf5d-002b08dadf69&f=&fg=copy
· http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200602/s1577530.htm
· http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=15&entry_id=3167
· http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/love-australia-or-leave-it-costello/2006/02/23/1140670205134.html
· http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/needlessly-confronting-foray/2006/02/23/1140670207651.html
· http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/costello-ruse-echoes-white-australia-policy/2006/03/02/1141191789281.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
· http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006\02\24\story_24-2-2006_pg4_11
· http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2005/08/radical_muslims.php

Philo, I will help you. Lets put JIGGA's opinions on the other foot.

"Yes racists exist but my observation is that racists are just a bunch of scared and insecure losers".

"Once you have mixed with them and they discover how nice you are, they tend to 'like' you and at times even wanting to hang out with you more than their own kind".

"It's mainly ignorance that's all, implying we need to educate them more".

"The problem is that they are in the majority and education alone is going to take a long time".

"The young black mindsets are changing as they mix with other races in schools, uni, workplace, sports, etc and discover that actually what their grand Buwanas told them was in fact a lie and so their fears disappear".

"Racism in this country is mainly to do with ignorance and 'clueless".

"The populace in this country are easily manipulated by politicians and the media and they only travel to Africa and some parts of Middle East".

"But once they have expanded on their travels and horizons some of their fears that bear racism in them disappear".

"I don't know about the indigenous aboriginals but my observation as an Australian is that some of the 'racists' who stare at me on a bus or train or the street are just curios, like they have never seen a white person before in their life; or so I think".

"As for racists who attack to cause bodily harm, these are just criminals or hardcore black supremacists. An 'average' racist doesn't attack you to cause bodily harm".

"Just my observation as a white person myself".

"The article was very interesting and articulate though. These are realities and denying and pretending like these things don't happen is dangerous".

It's true fellow white people can even more racist to their fellow white brothers and sisters once they have an 'association' with black.

I'm thinking because they feel insecure and inferior, they tend to feel superior once they have established that 'connection' with blacks.

PEACE AND ONE LOVE! mmm!

BOAZ_David,
What are “OUR” values? I mean what are Australian values?
Christians are known to be tolerant and embrace those with ‘values’ and beliefs different from them – whether pagans or other religions and that’s what Christ teaches us. I’m a Christian myself and Costello’s hardline on Muslims is unchristian. “Values” – not all Australians are Christians and according to Costello, the implication is that non-Christians should never live in this country. Being GAY is not a Christian value but it could be an Australian value – do you get my line of thought here?

Suebdootwo,
Substituting “white” for “black” in my posting wouldn’t change the meaning or the message of the post…. In fact it adds more value to it and solidifies the message. In this case it would apply to a racist country dominated by blacks that have discriminatory tendencies towards minority whites. I really don’t get what your argument is here…. May be you can explain it in your own words rather than re-posting my post with only the word black replaced by white. Are you trying to say that if white was in place of black then the message inferred would all be different?

PEACE N ONE LOVE!

Jigga,
You claim that Peter Costello made comments about deporting Australian citizens. Further you implied that what he said was racist.

I'll go further than my previous advice. I believe that you deliberately used your own words to describe the Treasurers comments to push your own ideology. No where in his speech or in the links, you provided, did he say anything about deporting Australian citizens or anything that a reasonable person could possibly interpret as racist.

You did not simply draw a long bow, you have deliberately misquoted him.

According to the links you previously provided, you are a mag editor and a born again Christen. So there is no excuse for your hypocracy.

Your standards of journalism would not suit any mag I wish to read and any Christen faith, that I know of, would be ashamed to have you in their congregation. I don't expect you to apologise as your standards are too low.

Dear Jigga

The issue of 'Australian Values' and their relation to the Christian faith is quite a deep and broad topic.

We must remember also, that here in this forum, we are touching on things such as 'National Policy' in areas which are quite outside the scope of our Christian doctrine. E.g. 'Migration Policy'.

That said, 2 more things must be added:

1/ Romans 13 clearly shows that the Emporer/Governing Authorities are to make decisions for the well being of the society as a whole.
This will be based on common sense and life experience.

2/ Many of our values reflect Christian fundamentals, but, they exist because of our Judao Christian heritage, and a time when most of us had a Church connection.

Tolerance must never be 'Stupidity' and a casual glance at the events in E.Timor will demonstrate clearly which is prevailing there.
I hard line marxist prime minister (with a Muslim name I note also)
with a background in Mozamique, is trampling on ethnic sensitivities and now u see the result.

So, I think our prime need is 'wisdom' to know the difference between Tolerance and Stupidity. Pray that I will be blessed with this :)
Jesus did not tolerate the Pharisees or the Saducees, or the Lawyers...he had choice words for them :)

BOAZ_David Why do you continually persist to ram this biblical crap down people’s throat?

Rainier said that the total white world population is 12 to 15%. How strange that such a small percentage should be entirely responsible for medical research, the discovery of electricity,communications, transport on sea, air and land [no camels or horses please] humanitarian help . Not to mention all the everyday things we take for granted that have had their beginnings in a white imagination.Without the input from all those dumb,racist redneck whiteys, the rest of the 75% of the world would still be grubbing for two sticks to rub together.
Get real.

Mickijo claims that whites are "entirely responsible for medical research, the discovery of electricity,communications, transport on sea, air and land... humanitarian help. Not to mention all the everyday things we take for granted that have had their beginnings in a white imagination. Without the input from all those... whiteys, the rest of the 75% of the world would still be grubbing for two sticks to rub together."

Perhaps Mickijo is scientifically colour blind. While early white society was "rubbing two sticks together", the Chinese were researching herbal medicines and acupuncture - techniques still used today. We owe the Chinese for papermaking (about 2nd Century BC), printmaking, and the magnetic compass. Gunpowder is a Chinese invention that we might wish they'd not given to the world. The Chinese invented the chain pump in the first century AD. It’s still used in irrigation and civil engineering. They produced the first planetarium, and in 132 A.D the earliest known seismoscope for earthquake detection. By the 4th century they used blast furnaces to obtain cast iron from iron ore. This was 1200 years before the first blast furnace in Europe. The Chinese had developed a process of refining iron into steel in the second century BC long before Bessemer. The suspension bridge, invented by the Chinese in the first century AD, is still the bridge of choice when you need to span a great distance. Read Robert Temple's "The Genius of China: 3000 Years of Science, Discovery, and Invention"

Away from China, petroleum was used thousands of years ago by Kemetians (in Africa) in bitumen and combustibles. Petroleum was found in Egyptian mummies. The extraction and production of oil required sophisticated knowledge of geology, mathematics and chemistry...and we're talking 3000-4000 BC.

If you think whites are exclusively responsible for modern technology and science, look at http://inventors.about.com/od/blackinventors/ where you will learn something about e.g. Black American Otis Boykin (1920–1982) who invented electronic control devices for guided missiles, IBM computers, and the pacemaker; or Dr. Patricia Bath (1949–) who invented a method of eye surgery that has enabled many blind people to regain vision.

BOAZ_David

How can one expect to see one's influence or religion grow if their is so much negativity surrounding it? besides the fact that missionaries were first given that name because of the sexual position that they took on the fellow natives-if god is love,which he is, what would make a nonbeliever want to become one if these "people of love" are killing off his family? and the sad thing is this is fact. the funny thing is the concept of christianity was taken from several "pagan" religions in northern afrika and brought back to them as some kind of manafactured product.ok. If your dad is part of a religion and you see him beat your mom up and rape her and eventually kill her would you want to be a part of that religion?

THA_KONFEDERATION,
I feel extremely sorry for you and what happened to your mother. Obviously your father wasn't practising the teachings and attitudes of Christ Jesus.

BANJO...
"Your standards of journalism would not suit any mag I wish to read and any Christen faith, that I know of, would be ashamed to have you in their congregation" its funny dat u say dat cuz a christian faith should not b ashamed of anyone-unless they have no sin themselves. u mind as well b the person who was gonna cast the first stone at the adulterer....but thats exactly wats wrong with christianity today. to many ego's n the way....

and mickijo.....hehe. ur funny. w/out white people we wouldnt have as much good point. but then Native Americans would still control North America and wouldnt have 2 worry about a people who would come and spread disease like a virus and in afrika their would still b kings and queens who sat on their thrones of gold and diamonds and also im sure the genetically annihilated tazmanians(by the great white man!) would still like to b on this earth... but only w/out white people. do you know why caucasians(keyword search:Caucasus Mountains) have long tailbones, super arches in their feet, longer torsos and shorter legs than colored(not just black) people? while afrikans were studying the stars in egypt and Native Americans were making the perfect calendar, guess who were n caves carving on the walls beating each other over the heads? Caucas-ians;Caucas-us... come on. colored people(not jus blacks)catch Europeans up on technology and it backfires....Pilgrims were taught corn and how to farm-Native Americans were given death. Moors(northern afrika) gave spaniards gunpowder-Moors were given death. Honestly wat lighter colored people dont always feel the need 2 conquer darker peoples? damn 4real? and racism is the thought that ones race is superior to another. formula is power+ prejudice=racism. Europeans make up 10% of world population yet own around 90% of the world's power economically speaking. colored people can be prejudice by saying a derogative term like cracker or honky but not racist. Since when have colored(not just blacks) people thought of themselves as the superior race? during the jim crow laws? or how about when we were 3/5's a man?

THA_Konfederation

May I ask if you are an Aboriginal person ? I appreciate your presence here, and your input. It would be nice to know your actual background. You refer to colored people as 'we'... so please fill in the blanks.

As for you dad doing what I assume you meant to your mum. Please think about this. If he was a member of a religion or a circus, it makes no difference to the fact that he committed this act by his own choice. It certainly was not Gods fault. If we have clear teaching "Don't do this or that" and we go against that teaching, its not the fault of the teacher is it ?

Its up to you to see the better way to live and avoid such attitudes or thoughts which produced this act.

As for your White people 10% controlling 90% of world resources, you may be right or wrong, I don't know, but the color of the skin could easily have been Yellow or black.. its just coincidence that its white in this case. Watch China and India ..they have the people and are gaining power.. and things might turn around..but it makes no difference, the issue is 'people' not skin color.

As u can see in East Timur at the moment.. its dark skinned from Western East Timor fighting against rival ethnic groups from the Eastern area..etc.. same color.

If you are aboriginal, please learn from the tremendous example of people like Noel Pearson, the many footballers, Hayden Wridgway etc... all who show its quite possible for Aboriginal people to do well in a white managed country. There is no reason why Aboriginal people cannot reach the highest positions, as long as they have 'Australia' the nation at heart.

Sorry I did not include the Chinese inventions ,I get so tired of "whitey bashing'by people who avail themselves of every convenience they can get their hands on then, through some poisonous kind of envy, abuse those who have provided that convenience.
I love the bit about African kings,Mugabe would be a shining example wouldn't he?
There is no doubt that western nations colonized various countries and treated the natives quite badly but it seems to me that when they withdrew, they left behind cities and hospitals,schools, universities etc that would never have been built without them. And post colonization, many of the inhabitants were treated worse by their own leaders.
So next time you get into your car, switch on the electricity,log on to your computer,remember who is responsible for the origin of them and if you have such a strong loathing of the whiteys, do not soil your hands with the things they have made.

Mickijo, I thought you were just dazzled by the colour white but I realize you are also historically ignorant. Who cares about the skin colour of inventors and cultural innovators?

Why do you dredge up old furphies about pre-colonial and post-colonial culture? What are you trying to prove? Open your eyes and mind and you might appreciate the contribution of multiple heritages to the civilized world. You tell us that colonial powers brought amenities like cities and universities to their colonies. Next time you are on the internet look up ancient Universities. They are not a western legacy: universities established in China (Nanjing in 258 AD), India (Nandala 5th century), Turkey (Constantinople 9th century) and Egypt (Al-Azahar 998) predate the first European universities: Italy (Bologna 11th century), England (Oxford around 1160 and Cambridge 1209).

The Royal Library of Alexandria in Egypt, founded at the beginning of the 3rd century BC, was once the largest library in the world with over half a million hand-written papyrus scrolls. Scholars like Archimedes visited from around the world and spent time at the Temple of the Muses (the Musaion or Museum). He was interested not in the colour of Egyptian skin but the content of their minds.

And for every Mugabe you could cite a Stalin or a Hitler or even a Bush. Good and evil don't come in black and white - they are multi-coloured.

[Deleted for being completely off-topic - not even vaguely related.]

No im not aboriginal but i am a black man with a hint of filipino in me. but i think anyone that has felt the effects of Europeans brutal ways can know what the other race is feeling to an extent. No matter how much melanin is in their skin. Im sure a Native American can somewhat associate with what an Aztec thinks and feels as well as Afrikans and Aboriginals. I'm not saying that white people are dumb or that we could live without what they have done. I am thankful for the things that they have brought us up on. However before we get to mushy...lets bring out the facts. Im not a white person basher-amor vincit omnia. i just realize that our lighter counterparts have had a lot more time to come up with their inventions and doings than their darker skinned fellows. i mean we werent allowed to read or write for quite some time and we all know the native Americans were done unjustly in terms of education as well as a nation. Thats why their are so many organizations that are aimed at helping the colored(not just black) people because they were held back for so long while a white skin guaranteed them an undisputable education-if they wanted it.

Banjo,
No i'm not a magazine editor... in fact i'm a computer systems engineer doing systems engineering with some defence company. Sorry that i upset you but i don't engage in personal attacks - i discuss 'issues'. And yeah Costello said those things in those links i gave you. And yeah i'm a christian, proud one that is. Christ dined with 'pagans' tax collectors and hang around with prostitutes. What i'm saying that Christ from whose name 'CHRISTIAN' religin comes from was the man of tolerance and he wouldn't have a problem living side by side with Muslims in this country.
As for someone who talked about stupidity and values: what about gays and lesbians of this country. Apparently Christianity wouldn't think their 'values' are alright. So where are they going to be 'cast' and 'deported'?

mickijo,
It's sad that you understand civilisation in terms of tall buildings and technology. Here is www.dictionary.com 's definition of 'civilisation':

.....the social process whereby societies achieve civilization [syn: civilization] 2: a particular society at a particular time and place; "early Mayan civilization" [syn: culture, civilization] 3: a society in an advanced state of social development (e.g., with complex legal and political and religious organizations); "the people slowly progressed from barbarism to civilization" [syn: civilization] 4: the quality of excellence in thought and manners and taste; "a man of intellectual refinement"; "he is remembered for his generosity and civilization" [syn: refinement, civilization]

For your own info, when a white man went to Africa, they already had social structures intact. The people had traditional and customary courts to try criminals; they had Kings; they had democratic structures; they song songs of praise to their heroes; they loved each other and lived in harmoney; they could hunt animals and collected wild fruits to feed themselves; kids converged around the fire to learn from elders; they had initiation ceremonies; they didn't have money but they exchanged good for goods; they had a moon calender; they grazed their cattles; they treated diseases using herbal medicine; ABOVE ALL THEY WERE A HAPPY PEOPLE! All this is 'civilisation'.
Then came a white man who set up police structures and schools and built buildings and all of a sudden a brother would never come to a brother's funeral because he was busy going to work for the high commissioner. Kings and Chiefs were manipulated. In exchange of guns, diamonds and gold were taken out of Africa to build the Europe of today. Slaves were taken out to build America we have today. After colonisation, the money that Europe realised from the gold and diamond of Africa was 'lent' back to Africa in debt so they can 'fight' another brother. Please don't talk about things you don't know very well. Despite all the money and buildings my observation after living in the west for SO long is that people here aren't still happy after all.

PEACE!
Jigga

Jigga,
You have not posted any evidence that Peter Costello nade comments about deporting Australian citizens, as you claimed. The reason for this is that you cannot. The Treasurer made no such comments. You wilfully misrepresented his comments and this raises the question of the validity of anything else you say.

You now say you are not an editor, but the first link you provided connected to a mag column which was written by 'Opus editor'. the article was an extended version of what you posted on OLO, which you claimed to have written, and the name under the article was Muyoyeta Simasiku. Not you?

Question. Is the magizine wrong and you did write the article OR was it written by the editor and you plaglarized it, claiming it as yours because it fitted your warped ideology?

I do not claim to be christen, but I do know that Christ would not misrepresent or misquote anyone as you have. I have no particular liking for Peter Costello and would say the same if Bob Hawke of Bob Brown was wilfully misquoted.

You should be ashamed to call yourself christen. You have a long way to go to reach that goal.

jigga, why live in the west when you so passionately hate everything the white man has done. Why not live in Africa if it is so good. Why does the non white world seem so hell bent on living in western civilisations when they are so disdainful of it. Is it a wee bit hypocritical to do so?
You state, 'we had more time to do things[inventions]'. If you read the history of the western world, you would learn that the people fought and struggled to get where they are. Schooling was for the rich, the poor were kept down . Our whole history is one of fighting to achieve some kind of equality .
I do not care what your opinion is, I think you have a closed mind with huge prejudices. Your'e welcome to them. But put blame where blame honestly belongs.Unless it gives you comfort to blame whitey then carry on.

I nearly fell off my chair when I read michjio saying to another correspondent, "I do not care what your opinion is, I think you have a closed mind with huge prejudices."

If it were anyone else, I'd trot out the cliche about the pot calling the kettle black; but seeing it's mijio, I'd better be whiter than white in my comments.

There is good and bad in every race. We should all remember that.
Vote 1 Labor.......

jigga good lookin on the history T.I.P. its a trip how other people can think that when people bring out the facts accusations are made-thats saying something.
but just as their are 2 sides to every story,mickijo you do have a good point but there is a second side. instead of jigga hating everything the white man has dunn he(like i)realize everything that has befallen the darker peoples. other people can deny this and deny that but at the end of the day its history that will tell the true story. White people bashing? Naw. Hate white people? Naw. My gf is white. however just as i tell her-people have dunn some f-ed up shizzit. Everybody is like well then why do u want to live in western civilizations? well if everybody went back to where there from respectively(such as i back to afrika) would there be a western civilization? western civilizations were founded upon the civilizations that were already here. afrika is beautiful. it looks f-ed up cuz every country in europe decided that they needed to imperialize their ignorant darker brothers to the south. but its beautiful. You have rain forests you have desert. you have exotic animals that you can find no where else. Gold Silver diamonds(which europeans are still importing from afrika) rubies. beautiful women. 7 foot peoples. 4 foot peoples. light dark,dark dark. This being said im not a fool. I know that this is one of the best countries in the world. but just because this is a great country i should shut up and be a good little boy? everybody expects us to shut up and look forward. well you cant get 2 the future if you dont know ur past

" If you read the history of the western world, you would learn that the people fought and struggled to get where they are"-thats true. Native Americans fought to get to the reservations and almost didnt get that.Blacks died fighting trying to become more than 3/5 a man. that must be what your talking about because the other fighting i think of is how the english butchered(aka fighting)the native americans.
"Our whole history is one of fighting to achieve some kind of equality". this is true mickijo. whether it be the upper and lower classes fighting to be equal, racial injustices, or whatever this country has had a problem with that issue and it could be our downfall. However this does not change the fact that while some whites could or should i rather say most whites(poor) couldnt afford skool blacks were not allowed to. there is a difference. also dont get it twisted. Not all struggled.Thw wealthy did not struggle. everybody seems to ask why we keep bringing up the past-but they dont understand that all these injustices still happen today. '92 Rodney King. Can anyone say that he honestly deserved all of that? I dare anyone to say so. but he was....not guilty. proof that we need work as a country....

but this "I do not care what your opinion is, I think you have a closed mind with huge prejudices....."was funny. people hate what they see n themselves...

Tha,
If someone who is 50% white & 50% black is treated badly.
Which race suffers the injustice?
What about someone who is 80% white & 20% black.
Which side can legitimately claim it has suffered the abuse?

Banjo,
I don’t know what sort of a browser you are using but I think I’ll leave this issue to the members on this page for them to determine whether Costello made comments about deporting Australian citizens who don’t adopt Australian values. Here is an extract of what he said in the video links I gave you earlier:
“…. They should be refused citizenship if they apply for it…. where they have it, they should be stripped of it….”

Here we go again:
· http://ninemsn.video.msn.com/v/en-au/v.htm?g=2de8468e-351c-4ff4-9919-f2ff8b8436b6&f=&fg=copy
· http://ninemsn.video.msn.com/v/en-au/v.htm?g=b5d1ac33-5256-4233-bf5d-002b08dadf69&f=&fg=copy
· http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200602/s1577530.htm

As per whether I plagiarized my own piece of writing or whether I’m an editor, the answer is yes it’s my own writing and no I’m not an editor, again. The website/magazine editor that I don’t even know POSTED the article but I, Muyoyeta Simasiku, wrote it. I sent that article in e-mail to Peter Costello himself and some discrimination organizations and I have no idea how it ended up on that website but I found it when I Googled my name. Obviously you seem to be so fascinated by the quality of my writing and how articulate it is that you can’t believe a nobody dude like me can write to such high levels… well you better believe! You can Google my name and see some of my writings.

Mickijo,
It’s increasing becoming difficult to ‘debate’ with you because you seem to be discussing many issues and you change every time someone gives a reasonable response to your views. To answer you I’m here to try and get back the Gold and Diamond that was stolen from my fore-fathers and to try and convince people like you that I’m just as capable a human being as you and so you should quit your racism behaviour.

By the way Frankgol and Konfederation have been spitting some real stuff here and still don’t get it why you guys can’t get it!

Jigga,
There is nothing wrong with my browser, or my reccollection. You are now saying that the Treasurers comments relating to refusing citizenship to some, and stripping citizenship from some, who have bad characteristics and give false oaths of allegence, is advocating the deportation of Australian citizens. There is no way saying the first is advocating the second and I am sure you know that.

The word deport means 'To remove forcibly from a country'. But you already know that. You should apologise for the deliberate misrepresentation of the Treasurers comments.

Your writings do not facinate me, they disgust me. No, I will not google up your other writings. I have seen more than enough and I am glad you are not a citizen.

Banjo,
I don’t know how clever or smart you are. So you can’t see a direct relationship between stripping someone’s citizenship and deportation huh? For you to say he only said that he would cancel citizenship of Australians “who have bad characteristics and give false oaths of allegiance” but didn’t say abything deporting them is very strange on your part. What kind of thinking is this? So tell me what happens to someone whose citizenship or residence is cancelled by a government of a country – may be they are killed, or are they deported? You answer that. Man we don’t just argue to ‘win’ at all costs; rather we debate issues constructively so we can educate each other. To help you out, go to this link below and hold your ‘Ctrl’ and ‘F” keyboard buttons and then type ‘DEPORT’ in the dialog window that pops up and keep clicking on ‘Find’ until you find a sentence that has ‘Costello’ and ‘deportation’ in it, OK: http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/costello-ruse-echoes-white-australia-policy/2006/03/02/1141191789281.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

At least we are getting there. For the first time I’m happy that you have stopped insinuating that I’m an editor of a magazine or that I plagiarised my own work. See you have accused me of many derogatory things that you haven’t even apologised. You keep ‘forcing’ me to apologise to Costello when he himself, a recipient of my article hasn’t asked me to. But that’s OK because it appears that’s your style. As to whether you won’t Google my writings or whether you are happy I’m not an Australian citizen, that’s cool because it doesn’t bother me at all and I don’t want to be an Australian citizen either. I’m here purely on professional grounds and I miss my home everyday and look forward to going back to my happy people soon!

As a schoolboy, I was indoctrinated with the concept that “all men are equal.” But this is a concept I no longer believe in.

My first reassessment of this concept came in my teens, when I realized that this ideal was a cornerstone of Communist ideology. The commos believed that the concept of class was an illusion. To their way of thinking, a Cheapside flower girl was no different to a Piccadilly princess, other than their different manner of speaking and their differences in clothing. I think today, most people would concede that the proportion of intelligent people living in Mosman is much higher than the proportion of intelligent people living in Macquarie Fields, or Moe.

So, if most people taday concede that the concept that intelligence is not shared equally within classes, then why is it a sin to conclude that intelligence is not shared equally between races, or other breeds of men?

Societies run by black people are invariably social disasters. It has been common to explain this phenomenon by blaming the whites, but I would point out the racism in that idea. The bottom line is, that wherever black people congregate there are serious, often intractable social problems. Which, of course, the whites end up having the honour of solving. This usually entails throwing lots of money at black people. Pick up the newspaper, and white soldiers everywhere are keeping the locals from mass murdering themselves. And now newspapers are demanding Australian soldiers restore order in aboriginal communities. We in Australia have enough trouble with our own aboriginal people without importing more welfare and crime prone black people into this country.

Scientific research in this country is now almost non existent now that the CSIRO have effectively declared bankruptcy. We as a nation can no longer afford to import social problems in the name of a failed humanitarian ideology.

Redneck,
It's hard for you to see realities with your independent mind because you already point out from the start that you don't believe in the idea of "all men are equal". You forgot to mention the causes of social problems existing in black communities - it's "UNequality" among humans that contribute to those problems. Sad you even believe that rich people living in Mosman are 'better humans', 'more inteligent' than those in Macquarie field. To you material acquisition defines "superiority", or intelligence. May be a black rich woman like Oprah Winfield is more 'superior' and 'more intelligent' than most white women, probably all Australian white women? Is she exceptional or 'white' inside? I'm trying to explain this the best way. But even using your own analogy of Mosmon and Macquarie field, the fact you point whites living in the former are 'smarter' or 'better humans' than those whites living in the later, won't you agree then that intelligence could be an individual issue rather than a racial issue - I mean the fact that even among whites there are more intelligent people than the others. I'm black and I beat squarely a lot of my white friends in my university subjects; am I white or an exceptional? Talking about how inequality can be a consequence of many issues, why is it that a kid born in Macquarie field would find it very difficult to live in Mosman no matter how they tried and yet a kid born in Mosman will most likely continue living there when they grew up? Yes helping in war-torn countries is just a human responsibility after all whites contributed to those wars. And don't be that naive you - it's not true that its only blacks who are fighting in the world. Don't look at the present misfortunes to justify your own redneck ideologies. Look at history. Look at the World Wars; look at former Yugoslavia, Kosovo, your own Hitler; etc or were these people black inside? I suggest you visit your local library, better still enrol in a history class at your local school!

Jigga,
You are now trying to wriggle out of the problem you got yourself in by misrepresentation, and you are getting deeper.

You bet I'm saying there is NO direct relationship between denying/withdrawing citizenship from a person and deportation. In the first instance the person remains/reverts to the status held before citizenship. In the second instance the person is forcibly removed from the country. Red does not equate to green or ten does not mean a hundred. Peter Costello was deliberate in what he said and if he had meant deportation, he would have said that. He did not mention deportation of Australian citizens in any maner, shape or form, which you claimed he said.

It is all in being truthfull and accurate when a person is quoted.

There are thousands of people here legitimately, that are not citizens and are under no threat of deportation.

It is fair enough to disagree with what a person has stated, but an exremely low act to deliberately and wilfilly misquote and change what a person has said because you think it to be to your advantage.

Which is what you did.

You were picked up on that and you are making it worse by trying to justify the lie you told. You claim to be christen, well as I said before Christ would not do that and the Christians I know would disown you.

For my part, your actions are unforgivable, I only forgive those wrongdoers who genuunely show remorse. Happy to see you have no desire to be a citizen here and hope you are truthfull in that.

To Mr Jigga

I once believed in the concept that ‘all men are equal” but I am daily confronted by the fact that they are not. All human societies above 200 people have “classes” of people which more or less conforms to the level of intellectual acumen most common amongst each classes members. Upper class people are usually very smart while disadvantaged class people are not normally noted for their high intellect.

That is not to say that there are no dumb rich people or no smart poor people, but smart people are usually upwardly mobile while dumb people usually go in the other direction. Nor am I implying that all black people are stupid while all whites are smart. But if he proportions of smart people to dumb people in the upper classes is greater than for the bottom class, then the same logic can be used figure out that the same can be said of the black and white races. The only aboriginal people who appear to me to have any brains, are those who have had a dose of white genes injected into their mothers wombs.

If you say that you are “black” and that you are going to university, I will wager that you are not a full blooded aborigine, are you?

My own opinion is that aboriginal leaders are using the concept of white guilt as an emotional lever to get more money for “their” own people, because they know that full blooded aboriginal people are mentally unable to become productive members of advanced societies. The leaders know that tribal aboriginal people will never be able to stand on their own two feet without the whites paying the bills for them.

I know that men of all races engage in wars, but the fact remains that black societies, even those ensconced within prosperous white societies, are noted for their extremely high homicide and crime rates. Criminologists ruefully admit today that there is indeed a genetic factor in criminal behaviour, and that criminal behaviour is most commonly linked to low intelligence.

Two and two makes four.

By the way, Redneck, two and two make four only some of the time. For example, if you add two drops of water to two drops of water you have....? Or if you add two drops of blood from a white man to two drops of blood from a black woman you have....

@Redneck

You could never explain the reason for high crimes and poverty in place like Russia.Is it genetic?

poverty
http://www.worldfoodprize.org/Youthinstitute/2005%20YI/05proceedings/Hoover%20High%20School.pdf

http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/8383-4.cfm
crime
http://www.mapreport.com/subtopics/c/countries/russia.html#Top
http://www.aegis.com/NEWS/AFP/2002/AF020131.html

Redneck proclaimed: "The only aboriginal people who appear to me to have any brains, are those who have had a dose of white genes injected into their mothers wombs".

Who are you naming here? Or is this just your subjective observation? If race is a biological given, show me the scientific proof for this assertion

There are some good decent aboriginals in this country.
The alcohol is there biggest problem because they cant handle it, you all should be more worried about John Howards new Industrial Relations laws.

The aptly self-styled Redneck pontificates on some links he alleges exist between equality, class (by which he seems to mean occupation, dress and accent), geographical location and race or "other breeds of men". And by some mystical process, and without a shred of hard evidence, he is able to conclude not only "that the proportion of intelligent people living in Mosman is much higher than the proportion of intelligent people living in Macquarie Fields, or Moe" but also that "most people would concede that proposition".

If he would just tell us what job he does, where he lives, what he wears, how he speaks and what his breeding is we will be able to assess his intelligence. On the other hand, why should we bother with other evidence when he already demonstrates his giant intellect in his own words?

Redneck,
"....All human societies above 200 people have “classes” of people....." and from this point you continue shooting yourself in your foot by contradicting your own statement.
You seem to be misled by your own fears and shadows that if i'm able to afford an ipod and moving around with it, then i'm 'smarter' than my friends on the streets who can only afford a walkman. How sad this type of thinking this is? Material success is not intelligence at all. I know a lot of people in my village in Africa who didn't have an opportunity to go to university or even school but they are heaps smarter than most people I interract with in this country. Actually this whole intelligence thing is relative because if someone from my village is put in the bush without tax from the government and HECS and all that, they will be able to aply their own skills to survive by hunting animals and collect wild fruits to feed themselves. The fact they can't operate a computer or a remote control of a TV doesn't make them 'dumb' or lower IQ.
Talking about homicide in terms of numbers, last time I talked to a lawyer I was told 'whites' lead in numbers in terms of homicide crime rate. Listening to you, one would think there's no need to build jails in white societies. You are forgetting that this whole nation and the white people who occupy it are all sons and daughters of hardcore crimal convicts. And yes I'm 100% pure black, it doesn't get any 'blacker' than me and i can assure you i performed much better than my white folks in uni classes. And world wars killed many people than any war in any era of humanity and my black people never started it.
Look man what we are trying to tell you is that they are beautiful/ugly; dumb/smart; criminals - thieves, murderers, etc in any race or society. Please get over what your redneck grandparents told you!

I rarely bother responding to the likes of Redneck however, I couldn’t let his latest piece of denigration go unchallenged.

He desperately attempted to link his statement: “Criminologists ruefully (sic) admit today that there is indeed a genetic factor in criminal behaviour, and that criminal behaviour is most commonly linked to low intelligence” to race.

There is no evidence that any particular race exhibits more criminal behaviour or is less intelligent than another.

The link below discusses and defines criminal behaviour. There is no “rueful” admission here, just reported studies of inherited traits within some FAMILIES.

Criminal behaviour crosses all societies and races and is not racially linked.

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi2/tandi263t.html

Given that there is evidence for inherited anti-social traits within families it is reasonable to posit that Redneck comes from a family of racists.


We have no choice over whether we are born white or black. We do have choice over our interaction with others. And we can choose to disregard the vile intent of posters like Redneck as, no doubt, many do.

Scout, Sadly, these are the types that are considered to be 'Typically Australian".

Sadder still is that they want new (and old) Australians to assimilate into this kind of thinking.

I've had a few complaints about Redneck's post above, and another he's made on another thread. When you run a free-speech site like this one you often find yourself in a bit of a bind. Redneck's post is wrong on the subject of race. (On the social demographic issues there is some correlation between social demographic indicia and school results, although I think most would put this down to nurture rather than nature.) Worse than that, he expresses himself objectionably. But free speech means nothing if you censor someone like Redneck for merely stating a view. That doesn't make it any the less depressing.

However, when I read the posts responding to Redneck, it gives me heart, because that is how the system is supposed to work. An unreasonable post gets reasonable responses which are reasonably persuasive.

The test is how a reasonable person, with an open mind, might view the exchange, not how I do. So, I'm going to do an experiment and get my younger daughter to read this thread and then tell me what she thinks about the various participants and the issues. My bet is that Redneck will have conclusively lost the argument, personally as well as argumentatively. I'd also be interested in any feedback from others who might be prepared to try the same experiment.

To Mr Amel

I will guarantee that 95-97% of the inmates of Russian prisons are males. This is a factor which repeats itself in every society around the world. That factor alone is just one compelling indicator that crime and genetics are linked.

But the primary factor in criminal behaviour is not genetics, but culture. Those societies that possess poor social cohesion (usually through multiculturalism), that have low respect for authority, which possess paternalistic males codes of honour that are medieval in concept, that have a culture where where females exist in only three states, (virgins, mothers and whores) and where criminal behaviour is openly glamourised (heard any rap music lately?) , have unacceptably high rates of serious criminal behaviour.

Such cultures are common in pre industrial, third world societies. I would point out that this is where Australia is presently recruiting its immigrants, and it is the primary reason why Australian rates of violent criminal behaviour are skyrocketing.

You imply that poverty is the primary factor. But serious criminal behaviour is spiraling upwards in the Western world during a period of unprecedented prosperity, and very poor societies exist with very low rates of criminal behaviour.

To Mr Jigga

Smart people in Western societies are usually upwardly mobile while dumb ones usually go in the other direction or else they never get out of the disadvantaged class. The differences in attitudes, values and behaviours in people from rich and poor areas can be profound. Nobody with any brains at all in the city of Sydney would want to live in a welfare dependent suburb like Claymore, which is notorious for its high levels of serious criminal behaviour. The inhabitants of Claymore are not noted for their academic success, high IQ’s or pro social values.

Your claim that whites have the highest homicide rate is complete and utter BS. Washington DC is a city which is almost 100% black (the whites fled long ago) where the crime and homicide rate got so out of control that in 1993, the mayor (Sharon Kelly) asked President Clinton to mobilise the US National Guard because the Washington Police had lost control of the streets. Chicago USA (80% black) has the highest murder rate in the USA. Black women in the USA are 7 times more likely to be murdered by their spouses than their black sisters. Here in Australia, there are 1278 prisoners in jail for murder, 198 of them are aboriginal (15.5%), even though “aboriginal” people are only 4-5% of the population, and aboriginal men are far less likely to be charged with murder if they bash their wife to death. One judge recently gave an aboriginal man a month in jail for anally raping a 14 year old girl. He accepted as a mitigating circumstance that such behaviour was condoned by aboriginal culture.

You say that you are smarter than your white student peers and I accept that you are telling the truth. I do not deny that some black people are smart. One only has to look at Condoleeza Rice and Colin Powell to see that. But the proportion of smart people to dumb people does not seem to me to be equal in all races, cultures or ethnicities.

REDNECK,
u were lied to as a young man, just as i was.they told you that all men are equal....they lied. colored people are only 3/5 a man. and for your great observation i applaud you. most black peoples societies are social disasters....well ok. so i'm lying. and laughing. social disasters? friend-if i may indeed call you that-social disasters? may i ask you wat ur talking about? u are obviously not well versed n afrikan cultures before ur superior race came in and raped and still rapes afrika. im sorry...AKABULAN;the name of afrika before ur superior race came n and changed the name while making everything better. thanx! all the souls of the afrikans who were slaughtered 4 ur superior race thanx you...before ur superior race came in and tore mothers from their young broke families up and made people wish their were an afterlife so that they wouldnt have 2 go thru this hell hole-i met paradise-dat ur superior race put us thru. ur funny. not hehe haha but wow....he really doesnt know. u kno wat black wall street was? Tulsa oklahoma where black businesses thrived without a trace of white people. black carpenters, doctors, lawyers, managers owners the whole 9 nine yards. wat happened? o the usual. a white woman got "raped" by who other than a black man. so whites came in and burned the whole town 2 tha ground while the police looked on. oh yea mr REDneck. and its the only american city that was bombed by its own government. Rosewood the movie? wit Ving Rhames? same thing... except it didnt get bombed. dogg. step ur game up. get on a respectable level. rascist? no. i love white people. but just like my brother i love him but if he's wrong he's wrong.and i'm gonna break him down.

Captain REDNECK
you said" Pick up the newspaper, and white soldiers everywhere are keeping the locals from mass murdering themselves" is that really wat u think? sad.

you also said.."The bottom line is, that wherever black people congregate there are serious, often intractable social problems. Which, of course, the whites end up having the honour of solving"
may i ask how? ohhhh. by having the govt. bring in crack and cocaine from south america huh? yea thats it. especially bill clinton when he was governor in arkansas...you probably think that the bloods and the crips started off as some kind of gangster shizzit huh? yea they were positive groups that were aimed at helping blacks through unity guess you dont know that the government brought guns to them from south america huh?....."stop blaming the white people"... how the f did black people get guns from south america? ohhhh on their slave ships huh? i kno ur education was from BYU(Back-Yard University) but seriously. step ur game up.
AKABULAN aka Afrika had many societies that had stable social structures, governments, cultures and economics. we were the richest continent on this earth. which would explain why ur superior race came in raped our land as well as our women and yet all us black people do is blame white people? really? is that really how it goes? no. thats not how it goes. shame on you. you know better than that. "never folly with jokers because they drag you down to their level and beat you at their expertise"...so i wont foly wit cha... and its funny because how much have ur superior race really solved? make things worse? yea. im sorry for dismantling ur whole mindset...so back to the drawing board huh? hey how about you start with this...all menn r kwee-ate-ed eek-wal huh? try dat. name one time where ur "superior" race has came in and helped a black people besides the man made HIV virus....

Tha Konfederationm, you say "all menn r kwee-ate-ed eek-wal huh? try dat. name one time where ur "superior" race has came in and helped a black people besides the man made HIV virus" I ask...Who started this man made virus? and don't you have freedom of speech?

And ohhhhh sorry, you come over here to tell us about you and how white people have ruined your AfriKa well take it home with you. I for one am not interested. As I said you have freedom of speech, you also have the freedom to leave.

There are good and bad in all races. Treat people as they treat you directly. If you are a racist person, grow up. There is more important things to clog you minds with like renewable energy and Work choices..

Dear Mr Tha Konfederation.

I would like to express my eternal gratitude for your timely and insightful contribution, which greatly assisted me in proving my point that black people in general are not real bright.

Now I know that FrankGol, Jigga, Rainier and Scout are all wincing and rolling their eyes with despair at your article, but personally, I liked it. Especially, the bit about President Bill Clinton being a drug pusher, and the implication that white people genetically engineered the AIDS virus to get rid of black people. Of course, the dreamy idealists will claim that your views are untypical of Africans, but I dunno about that.

Your opinion cross connects to a Time magazine article about AIDS in Africa in which it stated that all over Africa, billboards display the image of the French Canadian airline steward who was the first person diagnosed with AIDS, under the caption “This is the white man who brought AIDS to Africa.” The article also stated that one reason why AIDS was spreading so rapidly in Africa, was because African men refused to wear condoms. Time stated that African men believed that white people only wanted them to use condoms to stop the Black Africans from breeding. Real smart, huh?

It is interesting what GrahamY’s daughter will make of that perceptive African analysis.

Ladies and gentleman, forty years ago, Asian nations like Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore and Malaya were impoverished nations. But the forces which were responsible for these countries becoming prosperous powerhouses was due to two factors, the Asian work ethic and the fact that Asians in general are smart. I put to you the premise that Africa, despite squillions in aid from generous western donors will remain forever an economic basket case, is because the same will never be said of black people.

But we can rest assured that comical black Afican Presidents for Life and aboriginal activists in Australia on the public payroll will continue to find favour with their own people by telling them that nothing is ever their fault, blaming the white fella for anything and everything.

To Mr Scout

Your previous broadside at me was so full of factual errors that I could not leave your misconceptions unchallenged.

Behavioral scientists today have compelling evidence that crime is linked to genetics. Even the Australian Institute of Criminology’s own white paper (Trends and Issues, “Is There a Genetic Susceptibility to Criminal Acts”, October 2003) admits that this is so. One does not need to be a mensa from the local Audobon society to figure out the implications of that.

Confirmation that geneticists agree with behavioural scientists on that analysis came to me from a surprising source. I read a book by Peter R. Breggin, (The War Against Children) who vehemently denies that genetics and crime are linked. But the best thing about reading books by people that you disagree with, is that the author tends to be a bit indiscreet. This is because they presume that people who hold opposing views would not bother to read their book anyway.

Mr Breggin brags in his book how he and the US NAACP successfully lobbied the US Congress to withdraw federal funding from any scientist who dared to publish any article linking crime to genetics or ethnicity. They were so successful, that when the American scientists responsible for the historic Human Genome Mapping Project tried to set up a scientific conference entitled “Genetics and Crime”, they were so terrified of losing their government research sinecures, that the conference was hastily dropped. The conference was subsequently held in London, with the press and the public excluded.

Any reasonable person would draw two conclusions from this. First, is that there is obviously something which the scientists want to say, which is social and political dynamite. Second, they are being intimidated by pressure groups exerting political influence into keeping their collective mouths shut.

Ok Redneck, how about this for a proposition. You write a fully blown opinion piece for OLO on this topic (using the usual academic/scientific conventions) and I'll write one responding to it. It will of course mean outing yourself in public. C'mon, how about it mate?

And you'll have to out yourself too Rainier. I'm open to the suggestion, providing the contributions come up to standard, and seeing I've become a participant in this debate I would leave that decision to Susan Prior who is the editor.

Redneck,

"......Ladies and gentleman, forty years ago, Asian nations like Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore and Malaya were impoverished nations. But the forces which were responsible for these countries becoming prosperous powerhouses was due to two factors, the Asian work ethic and the fact that Asians in general are smart......". Why you continue shooting yourself in the foot i got no idea. Sometimes 'smart' people aren't all that smart after all, especially if ideologies used are based on hatred. OK in that sentence/paragrah you fail to explain why ASIA was poor in the first place. You continue linking poverty and riches to being smart, to high IQ levels. So does this mean ASIANS were genetically 'dumb' before they became rich, then somehow their genetic smartness changed and sky-rocketted and all of a sudden they became rich, huh? Mr. Redneck please explain this discrepancy in your own ideas to me in black and white - i mean in plain language.

As for criminology having direct link to genetics, the simple question I continue asking that I don't get right answers for is this: If its true that crime is genetically imbedded and can be genetically inheritated, then is it safe to say that ALL white Australians living today who have ancestral link to the early settlers ARE ALL CRIMINALS? If the answer is a categorically NO, then is this genetic inheritage of crime only susceptible to a black race? Please answer me right again. You see these are simple basic questions that we fail to ask ourselves when we allow ourselves to sink so low by thinking with our emotions instead of our heads!

peace,
Jigga man

Pearls of Wisdom

"The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do."

- Samuel P. Huntington

WOW! What a phrase Human Interest! Who is this guy Samuel, never heard of him before? Well never really studied social sciences/arts/political science/or whatever you call them so probably why i never heard of him. But that phrase got me thinking man - i mean it's true, look at history itself! Redneck?

Human Interest,
If what Samuel Thingamejig said is correct.
The west should have been overthrown years ago.
Since many countries/cultures of the world have well and truly outclassed us in terms of organised violence.

Samuel P. Huntington is the author of "The Clash Of Civilizations"

see

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_P._Huntington

hmmm, well, some of us are part Aboriginal and part old colonial, so does that make us criminal?
My only regret of the demise of the Australian Democrats is that we lost our only Aboriginal member of Parliament. Even if I didn't always like what he said. I even forgot his name. I forgot it with three letters: GST.
We need more diversity in representation running this country with various constructive ideas to bring us all together, and not just call Australians criminals. Who mentioned homosexuality? Lets stick to the topic and stop finger pointing at other minority groups.
We need more leaders like the Islamic Mayor of the Moreland City Council: Cr Anthony Helou JP, who has made a stand against all racism and terrorism. Blessed be the peacemakers.
And indeed we are blessed in NSW to have Dr Bashir as Governor who only fits one category: your Excellency.
There are good people here, there always have been, its just that we get blamed for all the bigots. I am not even going to tell you what colour I am, as I don't see the relevance.

Horus, you're forgetting Desert Storm and Shock and Awe aren't you? Western cultures are still the best when it comes to overwhelming force. But of course that doesn't entirely explain the spread of western thought and ideologies to cultures that have never been subjugated by force, and it doesn't explain why some cultures that have been subjugated take it up at different rates and in different ways.

To Ms Redneck

Your post to me has left me rather bemused. My previous post provided a link to a government report detailing that criminal tendencies had been observed within some individual families; in other words genetics were involved. I have not disagreed with you there. You are the one making the link between criminal tendencies and race. It is there that you are wrong.

There is no evidence linking criminal behaviour to such a broad spectrum as race. Criminality is a human characteristic. As previously stated, some individual families exhibit criminal tendencies, however there is no hard rule on this and many eminent citizens emerge from very dysfunctional families. Again, this is not specific to race.

You seem to have become caught on the idea of the role that genetics may play in anti-social behaviour and applying it to race. There is no evidence of this. Socio-economic factors continue to play the most significant factor in criminal behaviour.

Now as for what you described as my “broadside” at you. All I can say is that your posts are continually denigrating of non-caucasians. This leads me to conclude that you are racist. As I have previously shown, anti-social tendencies can be an inherent factor in some families, therefore one may posit that you are from a family of racists. If this is not true, then I apologise to your family and can only conclude that you are an aberration

Well.. I guess I better join the 'rip into Redneck' club :)

Sorry Reddy.. no offense. What u say about the genetic predisposition to crime seems at odds with common sense. For goodness sake..'crime' is always relevant to the prevailing legal/social system, and you would expect completely black communities to be much more prone to crime, but what u see in Africa is TRIBAL old son.... not an outcome of genes.

It may be possible to show crime stats which 'suggest' that black people are more prone to crime, but the problem is, its not in any way genetic. It could only ever be in the culture, of which there are many.

I still reckon you are wasting time pushing that barrow. As you know, I married into an indigenous race, and the experience demonstrated overwhelmingly that they are just as bright and dumb as we are. Not that I doubted that before, but to see it confirmed so firmly was good.

I honestly don't know where u are coming from in this. Do you want to rid Australia of black people ? I think there is more crime coming from the Middle Eastern group than the black.

Indigenous crime in Australia must not be viewed in the same way as crime in general, because the historical reasons also contribute to this.

I'm all for supremacy of one ethnic group in Australia (us :) but I would never base that idea on a concept of 'superiority' in the genetic racial sense which you seem to be suggesting.

For the record, we already have an 'Anglo Supremacist' government, and all our branches of government reflect this.

The reason this is workable, is due to a mixed ethno/historical/philosophical background and a much more open and tolerant outlook. We just live for the 'country' rather than our specific ethnicity. All other passengers can enjoy the ride and share the fruit. Just don't try to make us all talk Italian, Greek, Arabic or whatever :)

To Mr Jigga.

Why Asian culture did not become pre eminent before western culture is a mystery to me. But I predict that Asian nations will become the pre eminent powers on this Earth in future, because of their intelligence, work ethic and exemplary social cohesion. They will not have a bar of multiculturalism, and one former Japanese Prime Minister (Nakasone) is on record as once saying that the USA is stuffed, because it has too many undesirable minorities wrecking the country. China even passed a law making it illegal for Chinese girls to have relationships with black student doctors who were undergoing training in a university in Peking.

Your second question reveals that you are still having trouble understanding the link between genetics, behaviour and crime. I will give you two more examples that most people can relate too.

Homosexuality was once a criminal offence in many western countries. Homosexuality was legalised in this country in response to the public’s realisation that this activity was not a lifestyle choice that could be prevented through making it illegal. Homosexuals can no more change their sexual orientation than they can change their eye colour. Their sexual orientation is intrinsic and innate. It is programmed into their DNA. Whether any society considers this genetically programmed behaviour as criminal, depends upon the social and religious cultural values of the individual societies.

My second example is a famous trial in Italy in the late 19th Century, where an Italian woman was acquitted of a charge of attempted murder. Her family ( including her stabbed husband) testified at court that the woman was of exemplary character, but that the family knew that with the onset of her menstual cycle, she turned into a violent and abusive person that was totally out of character with her usual self. The enlightened court concluded that genetically induced hormonal imbalances during mensus was the sole cause of her erratic behaviour. Some women reading this post may be able to relate to that.

To Mr Scout.

I congratulate you on your perpacicity in admitting that genetics and criminal behaviour are linked.

I therefore find it amazing that your mind is so petrified in ideological amber that you can not see an obvious connection. If genetics is a factor in criminal behaviour, and if different races and ethnicities are so genetically different in appearance that most people can be identified by their race, and if several ethnic groups are notorious for their exceedingly high rates of serious criminal behaviour, then would it not be a reasonable assumption to conclude that some ethnicities are more prone to criminal behaviour than others?

I agree that I have no scientific evidence linking race to crime, but I have already stated that one opponent of this idea was bragging in his own book at their success of minority groups in shutting the scientific community up. I am in a very happy position. Time is on my side, because scientific data can only be suppressed with great difficulty. Sooner or later, my dear Mr Scout, you and your friends will be eating a very unpalatable piece of crow.

I agree that social conditions can have far greater bearing upon criminal behaviour, but I will not agree that economic conditions are very important at all. Your premise seems to be that poverty causes crime. It does not. I can give you numerous examples of very poor societies that are very law abiding. What does have a huge bearing on criminal behaviour is culture. And if any peaceful country is foolish enough to import unassimilatable people from hostile or violence approving cultures then that is a recipe for social disaster.

The unassimilatable minority group will simply keep their own culture, which the host country might find to be very objectionable. Black “musicians” in the USA are notorious for broadcasting “music” that endorses violent criminal behaviour, illegal drug abuse, disrespect and violence towards women, hatred of authority and hatred towards white people. Bearing in mind the totally dysfunctional black ghettoes in the USA, go figure why Americans coined the term “white flight.”

Racism is breed from ignorance.....

GrahamY,
No, I well aware of desert storm (in a tea cup).
But I'm also aware of Chairman Mao, Comrade Stalin,Pol Pot, Rwanda, The Turkish massacre of Armenians, Sudan,etc,etc,etc...
I think matched against such high calibre competition, the west would finish a poor second or third.

Sly,
“Racism is breed from ignorance.....”
Would it be possible that there could be two races (or two cultures) whose value systems/activities are so antagonistic. That their mere knowing/meeting each other would lead to mutual antipathy?

Must racism be always on ignorance -perhaps it sometimes results from standing in each others space?

redneck

"I can give you numerous examples of very poor societies that are very law abiding."

I would be interested to know of which societies you speak.

@Redneck:

People like Connie Rice first American women Secerarty General, white or black.
Colin Powell,Oprah Winfrey,Bob Johnson ect, are not apart of your blind ghetto stereotype.You also fail to mention R&B,Jazz,Funk music that appeal to everyone an its not violent.

redneck,
"Black “musicians” in the USA are notorious for broadcasting “music” that endorses violent criminal behaviour, illegal drug abuse, disrespect and violence towards women, hatred of authority and hatred towards white people."

Now why do you think that they would feel this way?
Nothing to do with the systemic and historic inequality and social injustice they suffer at the hand of the dominant white, male, hetero society. A society which has, for hundreds of years, created and maintained the very laws you talk of, to advantage themselves and create bias against the poor, minority groups and other races.

redneck, I've always been horrified by the violence in "What a Wonderful World" whenever I hear it. Obviously just another example of the black passion for violence.

If only they could all be like Marilyn Manson and other more lightly tinted singers.

R0bert

Well Mr Human Interest, of course you do not believe that black culture should be blamed for the unbelievably high rates of serious criminal behaviour in black communities. If black men murder their spouses at a rate seven times higher than white people do, you don’t think it could have anything to do with a black male culture where songs like “Smack My Bitch Up” not only endorse violence against women, they clearly display the women debasing attitudes which appear to be a black male cultural universal. To you, it is the fault of white people.

And if black songs endorse and promote illegal drug abuse, then this could have no connection with the rampant substance abuse common in black communities. Nup, blame the whites for that too. If black role model pop stars brag to black children about their criminal skills, then that is also the white races fault. When black cultural values are reflected in their songs displaying hatred of whites, encouraging the rape of white women and the murder of police officers, then to you, the blame must go to the usual suspects.

It is interesting to speculate on your reaction if Country and Western singers wrote songs about the pleasures of hating and killing blacks. One presumes that it would have you hopping around in red faced apoplexy screaming that this was proof positive how racist white people are. But with black culture, a different standard applies.

According to SMH journalist Paul Sheehan quoting US Justice Department figures, (May 20, 1995.) the average white American is 50 times more likely to get robbed, raped, murdered or mugged by a black American than a black American has of being attacked by a white American. Excuse me, Mr HI, just which race is the racist one again?

I submit that Mr Amel’s “blame the white fella for everything” mindset is self evidently racist and indicative of a person suffering from doublethink. Mr HI, I would like to remind you that I am OLO’s resident racist, and I object to you making a grab for my coveted title.

To Human Interest again.

There are “numerous” rural communities scattered throughout Australia that are impoverished and very law abiding. While imported immigrants routinely help themselves to Australia’s social security system in our cities at whim, Australian farmers were denied access to unemployment benefits until a wave of rural suicides finally drove home to the Australian government that Australian farmers were broke and desperate. But the crime rates in their communities was practically non existent. Despite the widespread presence of firearms and endemic poverty, many of Australia’s rural communities have never suffered an armed robbery in their entire history.

Australia is a unique country in that it is one of the very few where generally reliable and detailed crime statistics have been kept for around 150 years. These statistics tell an interesting story. The entire Commonwealth of Australia was at its most law abiding during the days of the Great Depression when we were at our poorest, and many people were desperate and hungry. The surge in criminal behaviour began during the 60’s, and really took of in the 80’s when prosperity abounded, and less-than-desirable immigrants were being imported. To rub that in, 55% of the handgun murders in the entire state of NSW occur within two notorious ethnic ghettoes.

The US experience is similar. Inner city Washington DC suffers from chronic poverty and in 1993 the National Guard was almost called in to restore order. D.C. leads the nation in just about every category of crime including murder, robbery, aggravated assault, and vehicle theft. D.C. also has the country's strictest gun control, highest police costs per capita, highest ration of police and correctional officers per citizen, and highest rate of incarceration. Its permanent population is almost 100% Black.

West Virginia, which has the nation's lowest crime rate, suffers from chronic poverty and has the highest unemployment in the U.S. It also has the fewest police per capita. The difference is that West Virginia is over 96% White.

Has the penny dropped yet?

Your failure to explain why Asia was poor before Singapore started to become a stonger economy powerhouses recently shows you have failed lamentably to successfully argue your link of poverty, riches and intelligence to race - why is it a mystery to you when you can link everything through genetics Mr. Intelligesia? And your example of a menstrual Italian woman's legal acquittal to try and answer me as to why white Australians of today are not criminals shows that you 'have' lost at your own game. Your recent article addressed to me was pretty shallow and lacks any merit in it even for a suspected racist of your calibre and stature. You have definately run out of ideas and with this I rest my case. Unless you can come up with better explanations to my two questions above: Why Asia was poor before and whether Australians living today are all criminals, then I got nothing left to continue talking to you and I'll move on to try and 'educate' other people of your kind elsewhere!

I'm out, PEACE and One Love!

Jigga

redneck,
I think a penny must have dropped on your head at an early age, causing brain damage. This must have affected your IQ and predisposed you to racial intolerance and racial stereotyping.

From:

http://skepdic.com/comments/iqracecom.html

17 Dec 2000

“The claim of advocates of IQ testing is that IQ measures innate ability. Actually, it measures (in part) the opportunities that the person has had to learn over his lifetime. Poor children get second-rate educational opportunities, and this is reflected in their achievement on all sorts of tests, including IQ tests.

Viewed in this way, the gap in IQ scores between blacks and whites is an indictment of the lack of opportunities to learn that blacks "enjoy". Having been systematically oppressed and deprived of the opportunities of acquiring those characteristics that society uses to measure success, blacks are undeniably inferior, as measured in a number of ways: Income, education, housing, and IQ as well. The claim that this gap arises from "inherent" inferiority is a pseudo-scientific way of justifying the existing lopsided distribution of wealth and power, which is widely believed because it flatters whites and the sense of racial superiority. In fact, the IQ gap, like the income gap, is really a measure of racism, not genetics”

redneck

“Ask the average American to describe the typical drug user or dealer and they’ll say he’s a black male, even though blacks make up only thirteen percent of drug users and sixteen percent of dealers. Most dealers and 76 percent of users are white, according to federal data.

Ask the average American to describe the typical violent criminal, and likewise they’ll say he’s a black male, although the Justice Department’s annual Victimization Survey indicates that African Americans commit only 26 percent of all violent crimes in a given year. Non-Hispanic whites commit the majority of such offenses, and thus, are the “typical” violent criminals.

That public perceptions are so far from reality cannot owe to genuine individual experience.

This is especially true for whites, who most often stereotype criminals as black, despite the fact that we are four times more likely to be assaulted by another white person, and less than four-tenths of one percent of us will be violently victimized by a black person each year. So what explains the common racial stereotypes with which we are all familiar?

For those struggling for an answer, one need look no further than the news media, which over hypes crime news generally --coverage has exploded in recent years even as crime has been plummeting--and especially crimes in cities committed by people of color.”

from:

Coloring Crime: Violence, Deviance, And Media Manipulation

By Tim Wise, 2003

http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2003-06/01wise.cfm

…then your other bias:

Farmers have helped themselves to more taxpayer funded subsidies than any other Australian group. They might claim to be poor but no one else can place their farm, second house and assets in a family trust to hide income, ensuring that they get more taxpayer funded welfare. They get to send their kids off to private schools under taxpayer funded rural subsidy schemes. They always have the biggest, best and latest model 4WD at home. If business owners can’t cut it in their trade or can’t make a profit, they must fold up and/or face bankruptcy.
Farming is the only business allowed to socialise their losses, yet privatise their profits.

Jigga and Human Interest excellent work.

Ms redneck has failed to prove any link between criminal behaviour and race. All she can do is cite a series of skewed views and biased opinions, nothing that holds up on close inspection.

Farewell to all who have participated on this thread, it has been very worthwhile and entertaining.

Peace to all.

Dianne

Redneck ,I never spoke of "hating" whites,(Stop setting up straw men to knock down).
Your whole act is to create and spread more negative images of blks& thats because you're a sick racist low life.
You want everyone to agree with what you've been taught most of your life.Just because you're a LOW LIFE klan member doesn't mean what you say and think is true.

To Human Interest.

Who’s side are you on?

I have never even mentioned that the most common IQ for black Americans is 85 while for white Americans it is 103. (Asians are 106) But thank you for bringing the subject up. The biggest causal factor in criminal behaviour is low intelligence, not “racism” or poverty.

I read your article by Time Wise, where he actually claims that white people are more criminal than blacks. Of course, such an opinion is racist, but you could not see that, could you? For liberal trendoids such as yourself, racism directed at whites is so normal it gets right under your scepticism circuit's radar. But racism by whites against minorities, even when it is justified by the minority’s outrageous behaviour, is PC verboten.

That is the contradiction that motivates my efforts. Quite frankly, I am fed up of trendoids blaming my people for burning down the Reichstag, and I am tossing your arguments right back in your faces. So far, your replies have been feeble. Most replies to me are simply sneery one liners, pathetic “hit and runs”, or they resort to calling me nasty names.

Some "intellectuals."

If redneck racists are so "ignorant", why is your "intelligent" side getting so obviously angry and emotional, and fleeing the arena?

Your triumphant article by Tim Wise is quite plainly a pack of lies that is unsupported by any verifiable link. If you want the real figures, then here is the US Department of Justices own statistics which plainly demolish Mr Wise’s dishonest fabrications.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/prisons.htm

Please note, the incarceration rate in 2004 for blacks was 3,218 per 100,000 population, for Hispanics it was 1,220 and for whites it was 463. The figures are more damning when it is remembered that blacks make up only 16% of the US population. If Australia wants black immigrants, we had better start building a lot more prisons now.

These figures are confirmed by Wikipedia, which also displays that Asians are even more law abiding than whites.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime

and here is a couple of more links just for luck

http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/pipermail/hrnetnews/2002-February/003752.html

http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2006/05/incarceration_r.html

FEEDBACK REQUESTED.

It is a factual situation that the vast majority of Australians are decended from English/Irish/Scottish/Welsh ethnic stock. This would account for approximately 70% of our population based on the 2001 census.

a few decades prior to this, the percentage would have been higher, specially prior to World War II, after which large numbers of migrants were invited to come.

Does it seem reasonable to those of a different background, (Tha Konfederation, Jigga ?) that we of such a background regard 'Australian Cultural Identity' as reflecting this historical and demographic reality ?

We speak English, not Dutch or Spanish. We shake hands when we meet, rather than rub noses etc. Things we do at births, marraiges and deaths all reflect core cultural factors.

For those who are not of the 'Australian' Identity I mentioned above,
-do YOU have a culture ?
-Is it important to you ?
-Are you comfortable for your Australian born descendants to identify with the English flavor of Australian culture, or, would you prefer it changed to be more like your own ?

I would appreciate serious answers to these questions and if possible with some reasons for agreeing or disagreeing.
Cheers all

human interest,
To give a genuine comparison could you give % of Black population compared to % white population upon which you quote the following or compare crimes per 100,000 head of the ethenic group etc.


Quote, "blacks make up only thirteen percent of drug users and sixteen percent of dealers. Most dealers and 76 percent of users are white, according to federal data.

Ask the average American to describe the typical violent criminal, and likewise they’ll say he’s a black male, although the Justice Department’s annual Victimization Survey indicates that African Americans commit only 26 percent of all violent crimes in a given year. Non-Hispanic whites commit the majority of such offenses, and thus, are the “typical” violent criminals.

To Mr Boaz.

I regret that I was unable to respond to your recent reasonable post, but parrying multiple opponents is difficult under the rules of this site.

I am kicking the ants nest because I am fed up of Steven Hagan’s customary “blame the white fella for everything” mindset. He cries about racial discrimination when it comes to being excluded on the basis of his race from a nightclub, yet he knows full well that white people are racially discriminated against in regards to paying fishing licenses, access to “aboriginal” land, property rights, access to education scholarships, access to scarce medical and dental facilities in remote areas, and even justice before the law. I don’t see him crying over that. To people with Hagan’s mindset, racism is only bad when directed at black people, not vice versa.

Steven Hagan was excluded from the nightclub for exactly the same reason why you and I would be excluded from the next black tie function at the Sydney Yacht Club. People prefer to socialize within their own cultural and intellectual group where they can rely upon the other socialites having similar intellectual abilities and very similar cultural values that they have. They prefer to keep their distance from people who have opposing social views and who they have reason to consider possess lower intellect. Put simply, human beings are not equal. Some people are smart and some are dumb. Some are smart in some areas (talents) and dumb in other areas. The natural layering of every society has always reflected this.

It may be impolite and even illegal to say that a race of humans is not as smart as another, but it appears to be “common sense” to me that this is true. And if the people who are the apologists for black dysfunction all around the globe can only rationalize black failure by constantly blaming my white race for it, then the time for being polite is over.

Redneck just won’t give up!

‘Some people are smart and some are dumb,’ she asserts without a trace of irony in her self-assessment. ‘The natural layering of every society has always reflected this [inequality].’ Words like ‘natural’ work like magic for rednecks the world over. They drop them into the conversation and presto! No need for any thinking, evidence or argument.

‘It may be impolite and even illegal to say that a race of humans is not as smart as another,’ Our Redneck continues, ‘…but it appears to be “common sense” to me that this is true.’ The problem with so-called “common sense” is that it’s a commodity you recognize in yourself but not in those who disagree with you. It was once “common sense” to assert that the earth was flat and those who disagreed were vilified and persecuted. Totalitarians thrive on their “common sense” view of the world and don’t tolerate those who have a different “common sense”.

So “common sense” tells Redneck that ‘…white people are racially discriminated against in regards to paying fishing licenses, access to “aboriginal” land, property rights, access to education scholarships, access to scarce medical and dental facilities in remote areas, and even justice before the law.’

Redneck, I know you don’t like dealing with facts but an objective report on the extent of discrimination for Indigenous Australians in housing, education, health and other essentials can be found in the 2004 Report from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS 4714.0) http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4714.0Main+Features12002?OpenDocument

Can I suggest, Redneck, that you quit now? You're giving the rest of us 'whities' a bad name.

redneck

You tried to skew the facts to support your bias.

I find it easy to believe that you are a fully fledged member of a white supremacist organisation, your propaganda and pseudo-science arguments are the same as that espoused by them.

see: http://www.hirhome.com/rr/rrchap6.htm

"Resurrecting Racism: The modern attack on black people using phony science"

"...black people in the US did relatively poorly in IQ tests because they had little access to educational opportunities, and these tests were designed to measure how much of the culture of upper-class white society a person had acquired. Blacks were barely exposed to this culture, so naturally they had not acquired it. The claim that they were innately stupid because they had done poorly on IQ tests was therefore obviously nonsense,..."

Your figures suggesting that blacks being imprisoned at higher rates than whites as your proof of criminality and lower IQ, are once more, another racist furphy. It has more to do with the bias and prejudice of the US judicial system.

"Racial profiling -- the police practice of stopping, questioning, and searching potential criminal suspects in vehicles or on the street based solely on their racial appearance -- has also contributed to racially disproportionate drug arrests, although there are no reliable estimates of the number. In many locales, black drivers are disproportionately stopped for minor traffic offenses and then searched. Similarly, blacks and other minorities have been disproportionately targeted in "stop and frisk" operations in which police temporarily detain, question, and pat down pedestrians suspected of criminal activity. In New York City, for example, between January 1998 and March 1999, police officers made far more stop and frisks in minority neighborhoods; even within neighborhoods with primarily white populations, the majority of the people stopped were black or Hispanic."

from:
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2000/usa/Rcedrg00-04.htm#TopOfPage
-Punishment and Prejudice: Racial Disparities in the War on Drugs

"If all nonviolent offenses (property, drugs, public order, etc) are combined, 73 percent of all blacks sent to prison were sentenced for nonviolent crimes. Seventy-three percent of whites admitted to prison were also sentenced for nonviolent offenses"

see
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2000/usa/Rcedrg00-05.htm#TopOfPage
and
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2000/usa/Rcedrg00-01.htm#TopOfPage
and
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2000/usa/Rcedrg00.htm#TopOfPage

Philo, your info

http://www.isteve.com/crime_imprisonment_data_by_state_by_race.htm

redneck

"white people are racially discriminated against in regards to paying fishing licenses, access to “aboriginal” land, property rights, access to education scholarships, access to scarce medical and dental facilities in remote areas, and even justice before the law."

Oh, the fact that Aboriginal people are, by all available measures, the poorest and most disadvantages group of people in Australia, doesn't stop you from whinging about a few land rights and social justice remedies. You're not content that the white majority has oppressed and discriminated against Aborigines since the invasion and stealing of their land. You just fume at the few remedies that they have to address their land rights issues.

Yes, you do have to ask for permission to enter Aboriginal land (not often denied) as a courtesy, same as I have to knock and ask permission to enter your home. Poor Australians have the same social security pension access to dental and medical services that Aboriginal Australians have, unfortunately in remote areas those facilities are not available, so Aboriginals are discriminated against even further.

from: The fight against racism: Principles of non-discrimination and equality.

http://www.hreoc.gov.au/social_justice/nt_issues/fight.html#nondisc

"This passage identifies the salient features of the two legal models of equality - namely, formal and substantive equality.

A formal equality approach relies on the notion that all people should be treated identically regardless of such differences. However, an approach "which relies on the notion that all people should be treated the same, denies the differences which exist between individuals and promotes the idea that the state is a neutral entity free from systemic discrimination. In reality '[t]he fact that… Aborigines… have been subjected to appalling inequalities demonstrates that formal equality is compatible with the grossest injustice."

A substantive equality model, such as that adopted by Judge Tanaka, takes into account 'individual, concrete circumstances'. It acknowledges that racially specific aspects of discrimination such as cultural difference, socio-economic disadvantage and historical subordination must be taken into account in order to redress inequality in fact."

FEEDBACK PLEASE jdrmot@tpg.com.au if u don't want to waste a post.

Thanx Redneck for addressing my question...

Others.. I haven't seen any actual response to my serious questions about identity.. I've even said I'm a 'White supremacist' :) in a sense that I've qualified of course... but still no flack.. I'm doing abit of what redneck is doing..kicking the ants nest... to try to generate a bit deeper thinking on these issues.

I heard yesterday from a lady who attends the gym I goto, that at the Uni she attends, there are SEPARATE TOILETS for Muslim women ! x 100
This is clearly 'apartied' and stinks.

This kind of thing with toilets is not 'tolerance' it is actually apartied. Non Muslims would NOT be allowed to use these loos, and that is of course direct discrimination on the basis of religion.

I'll find out more as soon as I can, and let you all know the outcome.

White=right ? not if it involves issues of fundamental injustice. But no situation is a simple 2+2=4 our current situation is based on complex history and social events. Whites are not more or less 'right' than they would be if they happened to be 'black' when they came to Australia. (or yellow)

To Human Interest.

I am not opposed to aboriginal people given preferential treatment according to their race. I can appreciate that it makes sense. But that is racism, and you are supposed to be opposed to racism. If you constantly imply that racism is an evil moral absolute, then please explain to me your obvious contradiction when you justify racism on behalf of aborigines? Because if you now claim that racism can be justified for rational reasons, then you have just crossed the Rubicon. You are just as big a racist as I am, because I also believe that racism is not a moral absolute, and I also think it can be justified for rational reasons.

It is obviously illogical for you to climb on top of the high moral ground, wrap yourself in a white cloak of moral sanctity, and there amid a chorus of singing angels proclaim that you are crusading to preserve the holiness of equality and non discrimination, and then disregard these very same concepts whenever you feel that it is convenient.

The article that you submitted deriding IQ tests as unreliable indicators of cognitive abilities was a popular theory from 1913 to the 1970’s, amongst devotees of BF Skinners Behaviourist School of Psychology. This school insisted that all human and animal behaviour was learned, while genetically induced behaviour did not exist. This theory sat well with left leaning academics who used this concept to argue that all human beings, whatever their social position, or race, were genetically identical in every possible way except skin colour and physical appearance. They claimed that whatever differences in “intelligence” manifested themselves between classes and races, were entirely due to environmental factors.

But “Behaviourism” theory is now regarded as an embarrassment today by psychologists who know that the concept that behaviour and intelligence can be inherited is an experimentally provable premise. Whatever the detractors of IQ testing or SAT testing say, these tests are still considered very reliable indicators of potential personal success. Most people equate personal success with intelligence. Most black people have low IQ scores.

Join the dots.

Redneck and other white supremacists, here are two scientific facts for you to consider:

1. Race has no genetic basis. No single genetic characteristic and no gene distinguishes all the members of one 'race' from all the members of another 'race'.

2. Skin color is just that - skin deep. The genes influencing skin color have nothing to do with the genes influencing blood type, musical talent, athletic ability, forms of intelligence or moral worth. Knowing someone's skin color doesn't enable you to predict anything else about that person.

Give me the scientific facts that rebut my claims. (Science, not rhetoric please.)

And here's an historical proposition:

As the idea of 'race' evolved from the sixteenth century (it was hardly known before) white superiority became 'common sense' in western nations. 'Race' became a powerful social idea that justifies people 'deserving' different access to opportunities and resources. In western societies, social systems and institutions now disproportionately channel wealth, power, and resources to white people. There is no morally defensible argument for socio-economic discrimination based on 'race'.

If you disagree, please give me a decent argument based on fact and reasoning.

WOW! Redneck is really persistent - you try to quit, he says you are 'fleeing' and running away.

OK let's appraoch this from another angle. Redneck tell me something: What's the solution then to all this black race problem of criminality and low IQ? I mean to every problem there must be a solution, right. So what are we gon' do about it? Get rid of all blacks in the world, kill all of 'em so that there's low crime and higher IQ? Or may be cross-breed 'em so that eventually there is no black race? I mean this is a genetic issue according to you and I cannot change to white today for me to have higher IQ and not be a criminal. I'm really curios to know what racists normally think of what "solution" is to the "problem" of having blacks in the world? Do the 'modern' racists still want to commit atrocities like those of the KKK or the Hitler's camps? Please Redneck, let me know!
peace!
Jigga

To FrankGol.

The concept that human beings are one species is correct, and one definition of the word “race” is used to describe that. But the word “race” is also used in the context of sub categorization of different clearly identifiable human genotypes

Dogs are all of one species, but different breeds of dogs exist with very different levels of intelligence and very different temperaments. That sub catagories of mammals can have very different levels of intelligence and temperament is taken for granted by the public who see nothing wrong with animal breeders listing different sub categories of dogs, cats, horses, etc according to their known behavioral traits in their sales catalogues.

It is a reasonable assumption to assume that sub categories of human beings have just as wide a difference in behaviour as those within species sub categories of other mammals. Observable reality appears to confirm this premise, while the hard evidence in the form of genetic science is being ruthlessly suppressed by ideologues who are openly bragging of their success in shutting the scientists up.

The idea that “race” was an invention of white men in the 19th century to justify colonial expansion is a typical example of left wing airbrushing of history to conform to ideological theory. The propagation of this particular propaganda relies heavily upon the sure conviction that those most likely to repeat it are the same ones most unlikely to bother to verify it.

The Roman historian Plutarch wrote about different races inhabiting different parts of the known world and he commented on how the mixing of the races at the borders of their respective territories produced interesting sub groups. The racist Roman term for British people was “Britanculi” (wretched little Brits!”) and racist jokes about Roman soldiers were found chiseled into the foundations of a Roman temple in Libya.

FrankGol.

I suggest you read the prelude to the Hammarabbi Code [1800 BC], where praise is given to the gods for their victory over the northern white race. Racial conflict has been a problem since Cain and Abel continued by the youngest son of Noah, Cannan and his descendants who were subjected to the tribe of Shem as slaves, and diverse tribal culture and languages began.

Quote, "As the idea of 'race' evolved from the sixteenth century (it was hardly known before) white superiority became 'common sense' in western nations."

My my... what does a bloke have to do to get attention :) and feedback...

*I've just joined the KKK* ? Nah.. haven't done that. But I do hope some of you will give opinions about Aussie identity.

POWER POWER POWER....
But this morning I had a most interesting conversation in person with one of the 2 blokes who hold the balance of power in the NSW upper house, Rev Dr Gordon Moyes, who happened to come to my Church as guest speaker.

He related an interesting incident concerning Redfern and 'The Block'.

He was appointed chair of some committee to deal with Poverty etc and in this capacity aimed his focus on 'The Block'.
Garbage had not been collected, piling up.. Sanitation dept are too scared to send vehicles in.


LIBERAL APPROACH
-'Bulldoze the place and send them to places like Burke etc'

LABOR APPROACH "We are considering our position" ( and has been thus for the past 7 labor governments)

THE CHRISTIAN APPROACH. Gordon challenged the relevant Labor Minister to front up on a saturday in crappy clothes, with a shovel, and he and Dr Moyes would both shovel garbage into wheely bins, and remove it. The minister explained that Saturday was 'inconvenient' and could not attend. Prior to the event, Health dept sent 'sharp disposal' containers to assist. Then the Sanitation dept suddenly found new bravery and sent in trucks to clean up before the event.

... and Jesus took a towel and began washing his disciples feet.

Welcome back, Jigga.

The first thing I would point out is that with the singular exception of Human Interest, all of my opponents are so bereft of ideas that all that they can do is to ask me sneery questions, thereby making me do all the work.

But that is OK in a way, Jigga. To any impartial observer, it is clear who has the knowledge and who is hiding their weakness by attacking everything and defending nothing. But in future, please limit yourself to one question per post because of the 350 word limit. You asked me five questions in your last post and that is not reasonable. This is a debate, not an Inquisition.

I will not bother to solve the problem of black / white cultural incompatibility in what is left of my 350 words. The rules of this forum do not allow for detailed examination of complex problems.

As for “getting rid of the blacks”, the blacks appear to be doing a very good job of doing that themselves. Australia’s sainted doctor, Fred Hollows, warned aboriginal leaders that if “certain practices” (culturally accepted sexual abuse of children) did not stop immediately, “there will soon be no aborigines.” Recent news reports indicate that aboriginal leaders are not heeding that warning.

I would also submit a recent statement by the Agriculture Minister of “Zimbabwe”, who announced at a press conference recently that it would be a “good thing” if 3 or 4 million Zimbabweans starved to death because “there are too many Zimbabweans.” (Real bright, huh?)

Then there is Somalia, a Mad Max country where wild eyed crazies with Kalashnikovs hare around in cut down Toyotas routinely murdering the AID workers who are trying to stop them all from starving to death.

Finally I would submit the continued pandemic of AIDS in Africa which the Africans, after blaming the whites for inventing a human pathogen, refuse to modify their cultural values in order to combat it.

Whats the use in asking someone whos blinded.Theres noway people like 'Redneck' will see good things in black people .We call people like him racist,rednecks for a reason, total waste of time.

Amel
you could struggle a bit harder to understand Rednecks position.

He is basing a lot of what he says on observations.

I personally think he is missing a point that you could have taken the trouble to highlight, and that is the tribalism causing a lot of the trouble. In africa this is certainly partly the case, and it would be the same trouble if the people were 'white' and the encroachers had been black instead of white.

You could have tackled him on the 'reading the symptom' rather than the actual disease, and you could have demonstrated that the sad situation of Australian indigenous people is related to many factors, historical and cultural, but it seems most of Rednecks critics just take the lazy easy path and call him a racist.

I do note that one poster mentioned about the lack of genetic basis for 'race' which would lead naturally into a discussion of CULTURE and it could have then discussed how Redneck is (to me) confusing 'culture' with inherrent genetic racial characteristics.

That is a most important point in any discussion like this.

Importantly, its worth pointing out that in Christ, the racial and cultural issues become secondary to the primary goal of knowing,loving and serving God. No, they don't dissappear completely, but in Him we have the equipment, spiritually and morally to deal effectively and amicably with issues such as these if and when they arise.

So it’s all a conspiracy, Redneck: “…the hard evidence in the form of genetic science is being ruthlessly suppressed by ideologues who are openly bragging of their success in shutting the scientists up.” Where's the evidence? How does the suppression conspiracy work? Who’s responsible? Which scientists? Do you too feel suppressed?

Are thesuppressed scientists the same scientists who argue - as Redneck does - that because different breeds of dogs exist it’s somehow OK to discriminate against sub-groups of humans?

Meanwhile, Redneck is happy to twist my statement that “the idea of 'race' evolved from the sixteenth century (it was hardly known before) to become in her post: “The idea that “race” was an invention of white men in the 19th century to justify colonial expansion is a typical example of left wing airbrushing of history to conform to ideological theory.”

To find earlier examples of alleged racism as both Redneck and Philo claim does not weaken my two propositions: (1) “Race has no genetic basis because no single genetic characteristic and no gene distinguishes all the members of one 'race' from all the members of another 'race'”; and (2) “Skin color is just that - skin deep because the genes influencing skin color have nothing to do with the genes influencing blood type, musical talent, athletic ability, forms of intelligence or moral worth."

I repeat: knowing someone's skin color doesn't enable you to predict anything else about that person especialy their moral worth.

Finding historic examples of racism, Redneck and Philo, doesn’t justify contemporary racism, just as historic slavery or forced prostitution wouldn’t justify those barbaric practices today.

Redneck,

So that's your "Solution" to the "Black Problem"? It's like using problems to try and solve problems.... Apparently I asked you only one question in my last thread (what is the solution to the 'black problem'?), wording it differently for you. Personally I don't even know what you are talking about now or the purpose altogether. You seem to have made up your mind, refusing to consider others' opinions. I can't continue discussing with you over merit.... coz' you just seem to be talking the talk just for the sake of it. But with 'freedom of speech' working in this country, you are entitled to your own opinion. I don't agree with what you say but I respect your right to say it. Just know one thing: Black people were there from the beginning, are here, and will be there until the end of time.... Please pass this information over to your generations to come to see if it can be proved wrong in future!
I'M OUT,
Jigga

To-FrankGol

I always know when I am winning a debate because my opponents resort to chucking numerous questions at me. They are desperately trying to hide their lack of knowledge while trying to keep the initiative.

You claimed that racism was a social construct of white people in the 16th Century. I pointed out that the propaganda that you have swallowed unquestioningly is obviously wrong and gave examples. Here is another one. The English word “barbarian” is actually a 2500 year old Greek word. The ancient Greeks did not think much of the Scythians and Dacians who lived to their north and North West. They noted that these people spoke in a tongue which made them appear to the Greeks as saying continuously “babababa”. So the Greeks coined the racist word “barbarian” to describe them.

I see that you are still chanting the mantra that race “has no genetic basis.” I stand by my previous submission to you on that premise. The readers can consider their verdict on who has the better explanation.

If race has no bearing on athletic ability, why are black people renowned for their running abilities, but so poorly represented in swimming related sports?

A race of black people were discovered by Australian Army soldiers during WW2, living in the rugged Finisterre ranges behind Japanese held Lae in PNG. These mountains are so steep that it is the only place in the world that ships can see snow capped mountains on the equator. The people who lived in these mountains had developed an amazing genetic adaptation to their environment. They had normal sized body trunks but very short, powerful legs to cope with the terrain where there was practically no flat land at all.

Would you deduce that these people would run as fast as the very long legged Masai people in Africa? If not, would you consider that genetics does indeed affect athletic ability?

The evidence I have that scientific evidence is being withheld was mentioned in an earlier post on this thread. Could you please read back and save me a lot of typing?

Hey Frank
I think I need to address you directly on this one..
You mention that 'racism' in the past does not justify racism in the present.. agreed, but lets look more closely at this.

Do you agree that Chinese people are different to European ? They are the same in pretty much every aspect except culture and language.

That is really the issue. Have you read the history of Lambing flat ?
It's worth a read. The issue there was a cultural clash, and the 'race' thing was incidental. You seem to want to deny racial differences, ok.. no real problem with that, but do you also deny 'cultural' differences ? and the impact that one group holding a culture diametrically opposed to another will without question seek to influence that which is different from itself ? Specially in the area of language.

If, for example the miners had not done some 'ethnic cleansing' Australia would probably have similar problems today as are in East Timor and Palestine/Isreal. We would have 2 competing races but the trend which caused the Lambing flat rebellion was the fear of such an influx of Chinese as to swamp the emerging European Australian identity.

From what I can gather, Australian identity at that time, was something far from the minds of the British crown, who had treaties with China and did not wish to dishonor them. Can't think why, the treaty of Nanjing was forced on the Chinese anyway.

So by your view, the Chinese should have been free to come here in as many numbers as they desired, and in the end to make this a Chinese cultured country, where the European inhabitants would be the 2nd class or fringe class at best ?

If you don't think this would have happened, read up on the Boxer Rebellion in China.

Looking foward to hear/read your thoughts

I wouldn't argue with Redneck that particular populations may exhibit particular characteristics, including higher or lower IQ. Redneck raises the issue of breeds of dog. I acknowledge that different breeds of dogs have different characteristics. I should also acknowledge that they are often characteristics that they mirror from their owners. However, in general, particular breeds do have particular tendencies.

The issue I have with Redneck's generalisations is that by talking about the "black race" he is using a term as vague and as incapable of providing behavioural guidance as "black dog". We don't define dogs just by their fur colour, because this is pretty useless in terms of predicting their character. A black dog could be a Great Dane, a Labrador or an Affenpinscher.

Redneck bases his assessments on degree of tan. I think that's an absurd basis. At this stage I should probably also declare that three of my children have aboriginal heritage. They're all extremely intelligent. The oldest is looking at an OP1, if he pulls his finger out, and wants to do medicine. The middle one was a member of her maths team, which came third in a maths competition. The youngest is a contributor to these threads, and no-one's picked her for ten yet!

And what exactly is their "blackness"? From what I can work out "Aborigines" is a term which includes people from a number of waves of invasion of this continent who have characteristics in common with people who live in what we now call Asia, as well as Micronesia. Are they "black" to Redneck, and if not, what?

Thats the problem with people like "Redneck" they see anything thats dark ethnic as black & inferior to whites.

Genetically black Africans are the only true distinct human race.
All other dark skinned races are either mongolid or caucasoid, and all part of those sub-groups which include Aborigines,Indian,Arabs,Polynesians ect.

Aethiopids, and the Masais who are nilote ,then theres the khoisan of Southern Africa ,are true disticnt genetic black people.

People in Senegal have higher IQ test than people in Ireland,and that has nothing to do with them being genetically superior to whites.Their pure blooded black Africans.

Well he calls himself a 'Redneck' what more can you expect.

To-GrahamY

I compliment you on your ability to acknowledge the validity of the fundamentals of what I have written. You appear to have accepted that different breeds of men can have different temperaments and intelligence levels, just as different breeds of horses, cats and dogs. I assume then that your thinking is advanced enough to acknowledge that genetics is a factor in human and animal behaviour?

The issue that you raised as to what constitutes “the black race: is a valid one. But even Jared Diamond, who’s acclaimed book “Guns, Germs and Steel” was a book entirely devoted to the concept that human beings are one race, admits on page 378 that the terms “black, white and asian” are such useful shorthand terms for an anthropologist recounting the history of human settlement, that he admits that he uses the terms himself in his book.

Jared Diamond goes to great lengths in his book to point out that even within the “black race” there is very significant genetic differences in physical appearance. I accept that all races, including the black race, can have very significant genetic differences within their own component ethnicities. But I use the term “black race” in a general way, as Jared Diamond does himself.

The logic you have used in your reasoned argument is not up to scratch. Black Labrador dogs may have exactly the same faithful and patient characteristics as cream coloured Labrador dogs. But what defines different breeds of dogs is not the colour of their fur, but their physical appearance. A black Labrador is still recognisable as a Labrador. With humans we use a different categorisation because human breeds are much more related to skin colour. The differences in physical appearances between races and ethnicities are so marked, that the place of ethnic origin in almost all racially akin humans can be generally ascertained with accuracy. Arabs look different from Norwegians.

There may be smart aboriginal people (like deceased Senator Neville Bonner) but in general, I conclude that aboriginal people are not very bright. I do not consider mixed race people in that conclusion.

A yellow man and a black man sit at bar, while a white man looks on. The yellow man is served a glass, and says
"Its half empty"
The black man then quips
"Looks half full"
and the white man mumbles
"Nar.. Youre both wrong"

Redneck, you're trying to duck the issue of what exactly constitutes a "race". A more recent read than Diamond's, and from a much better thinker, is Richard Dawkins' "The Ancestor's Tale". Dawkins is a Darwinian evolutionist, and I don't think would have any problem with the idea that certain populations might have different IQs, or anything else for that matter. He has a discussion on race in the book which starts from the premise that humans are almost more uniform than any other species because he hypothesises that we came through a near-extinction window sometime in the not-to-distant past.

That leads him to prima facie reject the racial distinction you are making, however he does, almost grudgingly accept that race does have some validity as a concept, not because it marks a significant genetic difference, but because, for various reasons, humans use it as a marker. This is presumably where Diamond is coming from.

It reminds me of the left/right political distinction that we habitually make, even though we know that it breaks down when you look at it closely in particular instances.

So, we might call someone black, but at the level of the human organism it is a very minor difference, but because it is so wide spread, it has some utility.

BTW, if your theory was correct, then "black" genes ought to make the offspring of "mixed" marriages less intelligent than they would otherwise be, so you don't seem to really believe in your theory yourself.

BOAZ_David, do I agree that Chinese people are different to Europeans? Not to be flippant, but my answer depends on what's meant by 'Chinese' and 'Europeans'. And how deep you want to drill within those categories. Chinese diasporas have formed from at least the 14th century through trading and seafaring. There are now about 30,000,000 ‘Chinese’ who don’t live in China. Indonesia and Thailand have about 9,000,000 each while Singapore has the highest concentration - 3,000,000 or 75% of its population. When do they become Indonesians, Thais or Singaporeans?

The Lambing Flat riots are hardly an example of ‘ethnic cleansing’. The violence was a mixture of racial, cultural and economic factors. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambing_Flat_riots . Large numbers of Chinese continued to live in Australia in the mid 19th century and, White Australia Policy notwithstanding, their numbers have grown steadily since.

How helpful are racial or ethnic labels? In 2001, 6.7 million Australians said their ancestries were Australian and 6.4 million said English. The third most common was Irish (1.9 million), followed by Italian (800,000), German (742,000), Chinese (557,000) and Scottish (540,000). In total, more than 160 ancestries were separately identified. (ABS 4102.0 - Australian Social Trends, 2003). Who are ‘Australians’? Incidentally I know many ethnically Chinese-Australians who speak only English. One barracks fanatically for Collingwood. Culturally he is, to use your term, diametrically opposed’ to another Chinese-Australian who barracks madly for Carlton.

Now what do we mean by the English (as an example of ‘Europeans’)? Britain has continually absorbed invaders and been home to multiple peoples. When the Romans swept into Britain they found regional physical differences - red-headed people in Scotland, small, dark-haired types in Wales, lanky blondes in southern England. When imperial power collapsed (c.410 AD) most of Britannia was taken over by successive 'Germanic' kingdoms – Angles, Saxons and Jutes who mixed with indigenous populations. Eventually mixed natives and immigrants became the English. Now we have people from the old Empire. (www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/prehistory/peoples).

You can see I have problems with your simple idea of ‘two competing races’. And ‘culture is a very tricky word.

Redneck, I’ll have one more go and then I’ll give up on you. First, I can agree that people have different coloured skins or different cultures or different levels of intelligence, but it’s absurd for you then to assert that:
(a) Skin colour, culture or intelligence are causally connected or
(b) Knowing a person’s skin colour enables you to conclude something about their intelligence or vice versa
(c) Any of the three variables has a bearing on a person’s moral status or right to respect or social opportunities.

It is simply ridiculous and offensive to go from the proposition that you can accurately identify a person’s race (or a dog’s breeding) to the outrageous conclusion that “in general…aboriginal people are not very bright”.

It would be equally absurd and offemsive for me to conclude that because you write in a manner that is not very intelligent – sight unseen - you must be white and pure bred at that.

To-GrahamY

I don’t have to “duck” anything. I am comfortable with this subject and if you don’t understand my explanations then please ask me explain those points again. Due to the 350 word limit, it would be helpful if you did not bring up too many points for discussion in one post.

You have read a book by a person who holds my views on the inequality of races. Yet you say that the author of that book rejects the concept of races? As First Officer Spock would say to Captain Kirk, “but that is illogical, Captain.”

Now to your next point.

Human beings are one species and this is often termed a “race”. (ie, The human race) But the word race has two meanings in my Macquarie dictionary. The word “race” can, and does, refer to different groups of humans who’s genetic adaptations to environment has affected their physical appearance so much that they can be identified as being from particular regions of this planet. The concept of race may be an inexact concept, because some ethnicities do not fit conveniently into the three major racial groups But the word “race” is still a useful generalization.

Your implication that the word “race” is so general in meaning that it should not be used, is like saying that the words “a flock of birds” or “a pack of dogs” have no meaning unless they declare exact numbers. When I say “dog”, what springs to mind? An Alsatian, Poodle or Jack Russel? The word “dog” is used in exactly the same way as ‘race” is used in plain language. As a general as opposed to specific description of genotype.

You have already conceded that different breeds of dogs exist with different levels of intelligence and different temperaments. But you now appear to be submitting a premise which if you applied it to dogs as you applied it to humans, it would go like this.

Pit Bulls could not possibly have a reputation for being dangerous and attacking children, because Pit Bulls are just dogs, and all dogs are almost genetically identical.

Frank, great to see we are making actual progress here :)

I have any major problem with your explanation regarding the blood lines of 'English' people etc history is history.

But the important point I feel should be made here, is that those blood/genetic mixing each came at a horrific cost in human life, and the displacement of 100s of 1000s of families. It also involved the loss of land, and quite probably caused further examples of the same thing as the newly displaced Celts, pushed by the Angles and Saxons, and Jutes etc, had to find a means of survival on new land occupied by their fellow Celts of different tribes.

Taking this into our era. The more extreme the cultural difference, the more likelihood of conflict (ultimately) and, unquestionably an attempt to obtain social dominance.

The greatest danger for Australia, is this.

1/ Because most Aussies are of Anglo/Irish/Scottish/Celt background, no one 'culture' of any of them is acutely manifest, though English is the more likely. Still, there would not be major differences except perhaps for food (Hagis ? eeeuuugghhh).Hence, when removed from any local conflict issues, they were able to blend into the new "Australian" identity.

Such is not the case with Greek,Italian,Lebanese,Turkish,Polish,Croatian, Russian etc who would have a much stronger sense of cultural identity from the old country.

When a 3rd generation Aussie of Greek background says "I'm so proud to be (wait for it)..."GREEK" (report in Herald recently)-something is seriously wrong with that persons attitude in regard to Australia.

So, we need:
-Recognition of the Anglo etc cultural history as the framework.
-Australian Cultural identity re-inforcement
-Limitations and controls on numbers from non Anglo etc backgrounds.

To-FrankGol

I don’t blame you for “giving up” on me Frank, your posts are obviously getting more emotional, disjointed and desperate. I see you have just resorted to chucking more questions at me again, so that you don’t have to explain or do anything yourself. At least you have to admit that we rednecks are not as dumb as your stereotype of us presumes.

Look mate, there are two sides to this argument. If you believe that every human being on this planet is genetically identical in every conceivable way, except skin colour and physical appearance, then the onus is on you to present a reasoned argument to support your claim. But so far, all you have done is make noble statements and ask me lots of questions, without bothering to present an argument yourself. You have demanded that I provide scientific proof to support my premise, but it has not even occurred to you that the onus is also upon you to do exactly the same thing. Your position is “my position is obviously right, so unless you can prove my position is wrong, then it proves I must be right.” Such an attitude is intellectually dishonest, and it is not the mindset of a person who has mastered the art of objective critical thinking.

You have accepted the concept of “all men are equal” because you knew that it was expected of you to do so. It never occurred to you to question what you had been culturally conditioned to regard as “only normal”. Then along comes a heretic who contradicts the prevailing orthodoxy on the grounds of reasoned logic, and you are outraged. Since your cultural conditioning assures you that racists are all idiots, you confidently go into battle against us armed with little more than a conviction of moral superiority and some easily refuted cut and paste arguments which you simply parrot with an air of self righteous indignation.

But you come up against an opponent who has acquired his conviction from an objective assessment of known facts, and you flounder badly.

Let’s see if we can make more progress, BOAZ_David. You lament the horrific cost of ‘blood/genetic mixing’ - human life, the displacement of countless families, the loss of land. Following this sensitive reasoning, I presume you also lament the loss of lives, displacements and loss of land of Australia’s Indigenous people. But I notice in your statement of what's needed that you do not mention Indigenous Australians. Is this an oversight or do you have some ideological opposition to their equal participation in Australian life?

You appear to say ‘the greatest danger for Australia’ is in cultural conflict between Australians of Anglo/Irish/Scottish/Celt background (the majority collectively) and those who come from other backgrounds. You lament that these ‘others’ have a ‘much stronger sense of cultural identity from the old country’. Do you have evidence or is this just another seat-of-the-pants judgment. (I notice your list of these ‘others’ is predominantly European and wonder if that is consciously chosen?)

I wonder if your argument confuses ancestry with culture? Culture is a complex web of influences. A Scottish doctor and a Vietnamese-background psychologist in Melbourne are likely to have more affinity with each other culturally than with a Scottish fruit-picker and a Vietnamese-speaking fruit-grower in Mildura. New cultural variables: occupation/income/education and location and what about gender, religion, political beliefs or age?.

When ‘a 3rd generation Aussie of Greek background says "I'm so proud to be (wait for it)..."GREEK", you say “…something is seriously wrong with that persons attitude in regard to Australia”.’ Should I be equally worried when my son-in-law says he is so proud to be (wait for it)… “ENGLISH”. What are you frightened of? Noticed any Greek-Australians on the rampage lately? Can I walk on Russell Street tonight?

A friend sent me this: “Being British is about driving in a German car to an Irish pub for a Belgian beer, and then travelling home, grabbing an Indian curry or a Turkish kebab on the way, to sit on Swedish furniture and watch American shows on a Japanese TV. And the most British thing of all? Suspicion of anything foreign ".

Redneck, the reason people give up on arguing with you is not because you are winning, but because you don't obey the rules of logic. It just ends up being a waste of time. Take your argument about dogs. You arbitrarily define a huge swathe of the populace as being of the black "race", even though there are people with dark skin in all parts of the globe with very different genetic inheritances from each other, and then impute to that whole group particular characteristics on the basis of your own preconceptions.

Then when I point out that this is the same thing as condemning all black dogs without looking at breed you insist that this is a proof of your point because if Pit Bulls were just dogs and all dogs were genetically identical, then they couldn't have a reputation for being dangerous. It would only be proof of your proposition if you could substitute "black dog" or some other sort of coloured dog for "pit bull". You can't because they are different concepts.

Until you recognise and play by logical rules, you'll tend to end up playing on your own. I'm certainly withdrawing from this conversation, there are plenty of other more profitable things to do.

An absurd play in one act brought to you by Opinion On-Line:

FRANKGOL [Tuesday, 13 June]: First, I can agree that people have different coloured skins or different cultures or different levels of intelligence…
REDNECK [Wednesday, 14 June 2006]: If you believe that every human being on this planet is genetically identical in every conceivable way, except skin colour and physical appearance, then the onus is on you to present a reasoned argument to support your claim.

FRANKGOL [Tuesday, 13 June: Rolls his eyes and makes a declaration containing not one single question.]
REDNECK [Wednesday, 14 June]: I see you have just resorted to chucking more questions at me again… all you have done is make noble statements and ask me lots of questions, without bothering to present an argument yourself.

FRANKGOL [Tuesday, 13 June, repeats, with rising frustration]: First, I can agree that people have different coloured skins or different cultures or different levels of intelligence…
REDNECK [Wednesday, 14 June]: You have accepted the concept of “all men are equal” because you knew that it was expected of you to do so.

FRANKGOL [Tuesday, 13 June, trying to remain calm]: It is simply ridiculous and offensive to go from the proposition that you can accurately identify a person’s race (or a dog’s breeding) to the outrageous conclusion that “in general…aboriginal people are not very bright”.
REDNECK [Wednesday, 14 June, without irony] Then along comes a heretic [like me] who contradicts the prevailing orthodoxy on the grounds of reasoned logic, and you are outraged.

REDNECK [Wednesday, 14 June]: Since your cultural conditioning assures you that racists are all idiots…
FRANKGOL [Wednesdat, 14 June late at night]: You make my case so eloquently, Redneck, and I now am really convinced that not all people have the same level of intelligence.

[EXEUNT]

Dear Frank
to continue

When your son in law expresses ‘pride’ in being English, YES.. you should be concerned, because it is an indicator of a racial superiority inclination.

I’m not ‘proud’ of my Scottish and English ethnic heritage, I’m aware of them, but considering my ancestors on the Scottish side were ‘cleared’ from the highlands to provide expanded sheep grazing by those on the English side (loosely speaking) their is not much to be inherently proud of. Even if one could identify a host of magnificent discoveries made by ‘our’ mob, it is not cause to be ‘racially’ proud.
The only point I’m trying to make re ‘ancestry’ is the cultural one. Our ancestry is what shaped the culture of early Australia and down to this day.

On the indigenous people, please refer to my many posts in support of them in the various threads on such topics. (bear in mind I’m married to an indigenous girl from Malaysia, so I have a strong appreciation of such issues)

The thing is, our culture as Australians is ‘predominantly’ derived from the English/Irish/Scottish etc background. This is not to deny the cultural realities of the many migrants. The problem can arise though, if, for example, there is a cultural clash between minority migrants and that which was established by our early founding fathers and mothers. If such a clash occurs, (for example food laws of Muslims, contact with opposite sex-shaking hands etc) we need to ask ourselves “Are we going to accomodate/tolerate/modify in order to make this group feel comfortable, or, should they accomodate/tolerate/modify their cultural expectations to match those of the country into which they were offered a place ?

If we don’t have a cultural policy, we will end up ‘accomodating’ at very great expense every foreign culture which arrives here. Separate ‘Muslim’ toilets at a University for 1.5% of the population is ludicrous. The preferred alternative is to inform people of different culture before they come here..’This’ is how it is, can you adjust ? If not, please stay in your present country.
Is this unreasonable?

i think racism is dreadful. we actually learnt about racism last term and found out many dreadful stuff. i think racism has got to stop and you should treat everyone the same. btw, read a vulture street story by graham young.

To GrahamY(oung?) Thank you,"brown eyed girl"

It is generally accepted that the human race is divided into three sub category “races”, Negro, Mongoloid and Caucasoid. I agree that even within the black race, very wide genetic adaptations to local environmental conditions have created black people with very different physical appearances. Whether any of these black ethnicities are smarter than others is a matter of pure speculation. But one thing is certain; wherever black societies exist they are failures. Where black communities rule themselves, they are failures. Where black communities exist within successful white communities they are also failures. Concluding that black people in general, (however you define them) are not real bright, appears to me to be a reasonable assumption based upon self evident reality.

You imply that it is absolutely wrong to impute a group of characteristics to a race. But we do it all the time. If I was to say to you that Asians are smart and hardworking people, you would probably readily agree. And white people generally do openly say that Asians are smart and hard working people. But nobody is going to scream “racism” for that. But it is racism. However, say that black people are lazy and not real bright and every trendoid for miles around runs around in a state of red faced apoplexy screaming that this is despicable racism. So, “imputing” nice things about races is OK, but “imputing” nasty things about races is not OK. I put it to you that your real position, and that of your supporters, is that black people must never be criticised. Even when that criticism is based upon observable reality.

Your “logic” on the subject of white skins/ black skinned people and white furred/ black furred dogs is child’s play to refute. It is common within breeds of dogs for dogs to have different coloured fur. Even within litters of pups, wide fur colours and patterns occur. This does not occur within human races or ethnicities where skin colour is geared to ethnicity. The only “white” indigenous Somali's or Aborigines are albino’s.

Redneck,you really should read over then listen to what you're saying.Or maybe you don't know think.

"It is generally accepted that the human race is divided into three sub category “races”, Negro, Mongoloid and Caucasoid".

Those are Negroid,Caucasoid and Mongolid. Then the other small terms or sub groupings to discribe physical features,skin complexion.

Those "black" people aren't genetic blacks, their caucasoids and mongolids.So when you say you 'think' Asians &Whites are smarter it doesn't make that much sense, because genetically the people you say are less smarter than people with white skin are genetically caucasoid and mongolids, minus your skin colour& features,thats why they call it sub-races.

Like I said before negroid people in senegal have higher IQ test than people in Ireland,and senegalese are physically and genetically different from both causcasoid or mongolids.

When you go out and get a deep tan,do you get less smarter? Will you committ more crimes ? lol "Redneck"

To FrankGol

Slither back for an inaccurate Parthian shot Frank? In future, you had better do your homework if you want to cross pens with me.

To Amel

So, what you are saying is that the “Negroid” race does not exist and everybody is either “Caucasian” or “Mongoloid”?

Boing? Boing? I think that you had better rethink that one.

Your claim that the people of Senegal have a higher IQ than the people of Ireland is not only racist, it sounds like complete BS to me.

On the question of whether I get more criminal when I am getting a suntan, the answer is no. Regardless of what shade of white my skin becomes through tanning, my ethnicity does not change.

Read this well.

Negroid =Black Africans, Nilotes, Khoisans,Bantuids ect ,like the senegalese who have higher IQ test than white Irish Caucasoid.

Mongolids=Japanese,Chinese,Koreans,polynesians other sub groups.
In the Caucasoid and Mongolid race there are sub-races, which include people with dark skin.Like Arabs,Indians others into each race or sub-race .

You seem to think skin colour equals smartness less violence.Thats why I asked you if you go out to get a deep than,would that make you less smart.

Your answer should be No,because race is mostly base on genetics.

jane doe

is that ur name or alias or....yea. get urself. sweetheart ur a cupcake. who doesnt know that nature did not make the HIV virus? wat all of a sudden n the late 70's this disease naturally appeared from nature? propaganda has stricken u dead like many others who walk blind. step ur game up dogg. besides you and some others on here...probably think that the united states really went to war on terrorism and not just for oil, and once again as history repeats itself the lighter peoples coming to bring democracy and good will 2 a darker peoples(i think the 7001st time thats happened)....probably dont kno that fdr let pearl harbor happen so that we could "want" to go to war as a nation. ur right. i will take my problems back with me 2 akabulan(afrika) but first i'm gonna need my 40 acres and a mule as well as the hundreds of years of cheap-my bad-free labor. i mean which is why the US became so wealthy as a nation cuz they were on the backs of strong afrikans. then i will go back 2 afrika while u- ms. jane doe-kan go back 2 tha caucasus(caucasoid) mountain range and we'll call it a day. wat do u say?

REDNECK,What is wrong with the SENGALESE being smarter than you [or me]anyway?? I admit i have Irish blood in me and proud of it .
True,while your Ethnicity may not change, the darker tan you have ,will ensure the people who do not know what a good bloke you really are, at least in a large part of Australia will be suspicious of you .This unnecessary "colouring" of your world you will find somewhat annoying for both you and your family.

Yes if you are white you are right,that is true according to many white Australians,take the case of Andrew Bolt as a classical example,he is the "INFALLIBLE?" spokesman on issues relating to the Aboriginal nation,just to mention the stolen generation issue,read him and all the replies he gets from racists whites,that he writes the truth,and they thank him for ir,and in return he thanks them,it saddens me think,that a racist of the kind of Andrew Bolt,is allowed to get away with his theories about the Aboriginal people,and by that instigates,more and more white readers,who believe in his theories,to further the cause of racism,ans also thereby feeding ,their,stupid narrow minded mental capacity on ignorance,that are ill founded,and is helping to undermine the regard others have for Aboriginal people,who are still the outcastes of white society,that white rule has created,by Australian governments ,past and present,and yet all we read and hear about is the bad about the Aboriginal people,who created it no other then the White Society of Australia