A Certain talkback radio announcer said that asians cannot drive cars.
WHAT about little old ladies and 17 year olds?

It's interesting how you can't make ascertations towards a particular race without being called a racist. I'm not a fan of him at all, but surely free speech is still allowed.

I have a similar opinion to the announcer based on personal experience working in carparks. 9/10 asian drivers that I come across are a hazard in carparks...personal experience. You nearly have to jump on their bonnet before they see ya. Generally they can't follow clear concise directions. Next I'd say the female elderly, then male elderly, then the younger drivers who speed in carparks...

So call me racist, call me sexist, call me ageist...

I take what you say on board but this particular radio announcer thinks he is some sort of God and can say what he wants in as arrogant and offensive a way as he chooses.
I had the misfortune of having to work with this pig some years ago and his attitude to anything that he does not agree with is that he has a right to put it down as harshly as he likes and there are no repercussions.
This was more of a statement about arrogance.

So it's the person at issue here, not the comment?.

Yes. Nobody, even in the light of freedom of speach should have the bad manners to so publicly put down others as if he is perfect.
I have no idea why anybody even tunes in to this idiot.
Probably a bit like a tongue poking at a sore tooth. You do it to see how painful it is.

Not sure which talkback host you are refering to but we are in very difficult territory if some people are allowed to say something and others are not. That could become a particularly nasty approach to censorship.

The same generalisation was made regularly regarding asian drivers on Fat Pizza.

R0bert

I'm not talking about censorship here I am talking about tact and manners and human decency.
For instance, if you saw someone on the street you hadn't seen for a while who had gained a large amount of weight, would it be socially acceptable for you to go running up to them and publicly humiliating them?
The radio announcer was being particularly rude about the fact that in his opinion the entire population of one ethnicity are all crap drivers. This may be true or not but you get a bit sick of the arrogance of some people.
Said radio announcer drives a large, extravagant petrol guzzler because he thinks it makes him look like a big man.

StG: "It's interesting how you can't make ascertations towards a particular race without being called a racist"

Um, StG - if by "ascertations towards a particular race" you mean something like 'ascribe particular characteristics to a category of humans distinguished from everybody else on the basis of some half-baked biological definition', then that's exactly what racism is.

Most Australians are racist, but tend to be quite shocked when this is pointed out to them, and why.

Of course, that's one reason why Lawsy et al are so popular.

Do you all remember the song sung by Kermit the frog?
Why are there so many songs about rainbows?
Well, why are there so many pigs in the media and what's on the other side. Radio is audible yet only illusion and radio has nothing to hide.So I've been told and I choose to believe it, it's nothing that I want to be......someday we'll find it the realist connection,
the lovers the dreamers and me.

I do not like him yet he is right, the only crime? he should have the right to say what Sydney is saying every day.
It is not racist it is not evil it however is quite true.

Goddess
I can imagine working with him would be difficult. Hes a typical old school tell it how it is Aussie with most most probably a bit of a ego to go with it.
He doesnt seem to care- to a point if he upsets Howard or anybody else.
Most real Aussies are like that.

However I reject his claim to be as straight as a gun barrel and that hes not run or gagged by anybody through personal experience.
John Laws cow tows to the Media Giants and owners of large companies.
His is dishonest- or his producer is dis honest if he is unaware.
John Laws was sent footage of barbaric trament to animals in the live animal exports trade after speaking with me on the phone.

Along with it was information taken over a long period of time.
He wrote back saying he wanted to invite us on his show to expose this cruelty once and for all.
However each time we contacted his office as arranged his producer refused to put us on air. One one ocashion when he had run out of excuses he simply hung up.

Why? Well I am guessing because he knows Packer Murdock and many other high profile people are involved in the barbaric trade.

To this day he has not spoken ONE word about the distrurbing footage he saw.
As for Asian Drivers- Mmm it about on the money so hes only being honest.
Rude if you like but honestly they put peoples lives at risk.

"The eyes have it".!

Goddess, if you are not talking censorship then have fun. If it's Laws then like most talkback hosts there seems to be no room for honest representation of opposing views.

So glad Graham does not run OLO like that (despite what some might claim).

R0bert

Well it is hard to believe that John got it wrong.

I arrived one day at the roundabout at the corner of Boundry Rd
and New Line Rd Cherrybrook and there was a car stopped in the
roundabout.
As I passed it cautiously I looked over and there was a Chinese lady
looking up her street directory.

I'm sorry about your experience "from behind the golden microphone"
with possibly the most disgusting egomaniacs ever to crawl the earth.
The truth is that if this pig is not likely to get either an ego boost or a cash one, he couldn't give a rats about the pain and suffering of anything.
As a co-worker I had to put up with this crap every day because little old ladies and gentlemen tune in to listen to his imperious self-serving crap religiously, thus upping the ratings.
Mercifully, I am now almost out of the disgusting broadcast industry and couldn't be happier.

"His is dishonest- or his producer is dis honest if he is unaware."

"As for Asian Drivers- Mmm it about on the money so hes only being honest." (Quotes: PALIF)

Honesty is a really subjective thing, isn't it?

There is a big difference between being honest and being rude and obnoxious.
If smeone came up to me and called me a skinny freckle-faced woman it would be entirely true but it wouldn't be tactful or tasteful.

Ginx
Perhaps the best things is when I get the time I will post our letter to him- and his reponse.
Then put up the list of events that took place there after and what was said.

Let others be the Judge.

Heavens he commented on the driving habbits of these people in general
I have not seen too many people disagreeing with what he said- just if he should have said it.
Mmm There we go again.

Radio Announcers should not be gagged for "any reason."

CJ Morgan said: "Most Australians are racist, but tend to be quite shocked when this is pointed out to them, and why."

Forget reds under the bed, CJ Morgan sees racists under every bed!

Of course, only people of European ancestry can be racist. I wonder, has CJ Morgan ever lived in a non-Western country?

Dresdener: "Of course, only people of European ancestry can be racist."

Your words, not mine. While racism isn't confined to Westerners, its effects are far more negatively experienced in Australia by those who are of Aboriginal, Asian or African descent. This is because the old white supremacist ideology of our forebears never really died out.

"I wonder, has CJ Morgan ever lived in a non-Western country?"

Sure have, old chap. Lived, worked, and conducted research in several countries in the Asia-Pacific region. Have you?

I've noticed that much of the most obviously racist commentary in this forum tend to be posted by those who also are most voluble in their defence of Christianity. Is this a coincidence?

Dresdener: "While racism isn't confined to Westerners, its effects are far more negatively experienced in Australia by those who are of Aboriginal, Asian or African descent. This is because the old white supremacist ideology of our forebears never really died out."

Why is it that those who see racism behind every corner are so obsessed with categorizing people as 'white' or not? For example, you don't refer to Asians as 'yellow', or Aboriginals and Africans as 'black', but yet you have no compunction about using racial terms to describe people of European descent. Why the double standard? Is this some sort of attempt to de-culturalize people of European descent and reduce them to nothing more than a skin colour?

I consider myself to be European in a cultural and civilizational sense - just because I have pale skin and a big nose is really quite incidental and irrelevant.

"Sure have, old chap. Lived, worked, and conducted research in several countries in the Asia-Pacific region. Have you?"

In that case you'd know how racist many Asian societies are.

Speaking of research, are you affliated with this group by any chance?

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/disrupting_white_lives

"I've noticed that much of the most obviously racist commentary in this forum tend to be posted by those who also are most voluble in their defence of Christianity."

Ah, so it's racists under the bed, and Christian fundamentalists behind the curtains?

Poor Dresdener seems to be making a habit of attributing ideas to me that I haven't expressed.

In this thread I've referred to Westerners, to whom I've said that racism is not confined. I've also referred to the "old white supremacist ideology of our forebears", which is hardly a controversial statement to anybody who has more than a cursory knowledge of Australian history.

This can hardly be described as being "obsessed with categorizing people as 'white' or not". That is not my concern at all, but it seems to weigh heavily on the somewhat limited minds of those who comprise the audience of "cettain talkback radio announcers".

Dresdener: "In that case you'd know how racist many Asian societies are."

Indeed. However, that's always been one of the better aspects of Australian society, in my view - besides a small minority of disaffected morons, we're generally not like that - at least consciously. How does the fact that other societies are overtly racist justify racism in Australia? I'd like to think we're better than that.

Dresdener: " are you affliated with this group by any chance?"

No. Never heard of them.

Dresdener, if you want to engage in debate with me, please try and restrict yourself to ideas and comments that I've actually expressed, as opposed to what you think I might have said or thought.

CJ Morgan said: "In this thread I've referred to Westerners, to whom I've said that racism is not confined. I've also referred to the "old white supremacist ideology of our forebears", which is hardly a controversial statement to anybody who has more than a cursory knowledge of Australian history."

Being a child of the 80s, I was taught the black armband view of Australian history. I am patently aware of the crimes committed against this continent's original inhabitants. In hindsight, the thing that most ticked me off about the way in which Australian history was taught was not the monomaniacal focus on the mistreatment of Aboriginal people, but the way in which the British settlers were referred to in racial terms - 'white'.

I don't define myself in terms of discredited pseudo-scientific racial categories, so why should this be acceptable in school curriculum? Who are 'white' people anyway? Arabs? Armenians? Persians?

The so-called 'White Australia Policy', which you are indubitably referring to, was laced with racist elements to be sure, but also reflected a desire by Australian policymakers to preserve the country's European character. Prior to the introduction of multiculturalism, Australia was still an ‘ethnocultural’ nation, where migrants were expected to assimilate into the dominant Anglo-Celtic culture. As John Curtin proclaimed: "We shall hold this country, and keep it as a citadel for the British-speaking race, and as a place where civilisation will persist."

Most nations are still based on ethnicity. For example, consider the world's newest nation, Montenegro. Do you consider ethnic nationalism to be 'racist'? I'm not being invidious when I ask this question. Rather, I'm trying to ascertain what you define as a nation and how you view the relationship between the nation-state and ethnicity.

Dresdener; "Most nations are still based on ethnicity. For example, consider the world's newest nation, Montenegro. Do you consider ethnic nationalism to be 'racist'? I'm not being invidious when I ask this question. Rather, I'm trying to ascertain what you define as a nation and how you view the relationship between the nation-state and ethnicity."

Since in tbis post you are being uncharacteristically reasonable, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

I've been deeply engaged in notions of race, ethnicity, nationhood and sovereignty for a long time - both personally and professionally. I'm now pretty well retired from my professional engagement with these issues, but I retain an active interest in how they manifest and influence the world that my chikdren and grandchildren will inherit.

If you're serious about understanding distinctions and linkages between nation, state and ethnicity, you could do worse than by reading Benedict Anderson's 'Imagined Communities'. As an anthropologist, I like Bruce Kapferer's 'Legends of People, Myths of State' as a good analysis of Australian national identity - but of course there's stacks more if you're serious.

I hope this helps.