Racism in Australia
Moderator: GH Moderators
Re: Racism in Australia
Just out of interest manbush, where do you get the figure that more children are removed now than under back then? The estimates for forcible removal of children under the stolen generation policies is between 1 in 3 and 1 in 10 children from the start of the century up until 1970...
Re: Racism in Australia
I read a year or 2 ago, quick google search came up with this article (yes I see the hypocrisy with trusting a news report)
In 1969 when it ended 1000 were in "custody" compared to 4500 in 2009
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... tions.html
In 1969 when it ended 1000 were in "custody" compared to 4500 in 2009
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... tions.html
I bow down to thee oh great Nickman, the wisest of the wise, your political adroitness is unsurpassed, your sagacity is unmatched, your wisdom shines through on this forum amongst us mere mortals as bright as your scalp under the light of a full moon, never shall I doubt your analytical prowess again. You are my hero, my lord, my savior, may you accept my offerings so you continue to bless us with your genius.
Racism in Australia
It's very misleadingly worded. No mention of rates relative to population which is the important bit for one. Only picking one year (at the end once the policy had already declined and lost support) is the other glaring one.
More does need to be done though, I agree with that part of the article
More does need to be done though, I agree with that part of the article
- Albi
- David Furner
- Posts: 3781
- Joined: June 6, 2005, 11:26 am
- Favourite Player: Laurie Daley
- Location: Bundaberg, QLD
Re: Racism in Australia
Just books I've read -manbush wrote:I gather you have access to where the policy states this if so can you share. Without hard evidence I do like to give people the benefit of the doubt on something as evil as you are claiming.Stuat wrote:In a case like this intention is important. The intent of the policy was to assimilate aboriginals thus making their culture cease to exist. That was the reason for the policy. That's why some people refer to it as genocide.
IMO without seeing the actual documentation it looks like history being rewritten by the apologists as the goal you keep mentioning wouldve been impossible with the numbers taken, you can't destroy a whole culture by taking only some kids (majority I'm aware of were only half Aboriginal which is why they were in danger )
-Genocide and settler society: frontier violence and stolen indigenous ...Dirk Moses
-Journal of Genocide Research Volume 1, Issue 3, 1999
-The `Stolen Generations' and Cultural Genocide The Forced Removal of Australian Indigenous Children from their Families and its Implications for the Sociology of Childhood -ROBERT VAN KRIEKEN
- Genocide and settler society. Robert Manne
Canberra Raiders Bronze Member
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.
Racism in Australia
*waits for someone to bring up Windschuttle and Bolt- aka the stolen generation deniers*
-
- Ricky Stuart
- Posts: 9174
- Joined: May 20, 2008, 2:50 pm
Re: Racism in Australia
Hey Albi, if you can get your hands on a book by Stan Grant it is the best book on the issue I have read, lots of interesting perspectivesAlbi wrote:Just books I've read -manbush wrote:I gather you have access to where the policy states this if so can you share. Without hard evidence I do like to give people the benefit of the doubt on something as evil as you are claiming.Stuat wrote:In a case like this intention is important. The intent of the policy was to assimilate aboriginals thus making their culture cease to exist. That was the reason for the policy. That's why some people refer to it as genocide.
IMO without seeing the actual documentation it looks like history being rewritten by the apologists as the goal you keep mentioning wouldve been impossible with the numbers taken, you can't destroy a whole culture by taking only some kids (majority I'm aware of were only half Aboriginal which is why they were in danger )
-Genocide and settler society: frontier violence and stolen indigenous ...Dirk Moses
-Journal of Genocide Research Volume 1, Issue 3, 1999
-The `Stolen Generations' and Cultural Genocide The Forced Removal of Australian Indigenous Children from their Families and its Implications for the Sociology of Childhood -ROBERT VAN KRIEKEN
- Genocide and settler society. Robert Manne
http://www.harpercollins.com.au/authors ... index.aspx
Re: Racism in Australia
Might surprise you but I agree, I guess thr main difference is I believe they've got to start helping themselves rather than blaming everything else, once you're stuck in the blame game it's very hard to improve your situationStuat wrote: More does need to be done though, I agree with that part of the article
I bow down to thee oh great Nickman, the wisest of the wise, your political adroitness is unsurpassed, your sagacity is unmatched, your wisdom shines through on this forum amongst us mere mortals as bright as your scalp under the light of a full moon, never shall I doubt your analytical prowess again. You are my hero, my lord, my savior, may you accept my offerings so you continue to bless us with your genius.
Re: Racism in Australia
Curious if they contain the actual policy or just people's opinions of what the policies wereAlbi wrote:Just books I've read -manbush wrote:I gather you have access to where the policy states this if so can you share. Without hard evidence I do like to give people the benefit of the doubt on something as evil as you are claiming.Stuat wrote:In a case like this intention is important. The intent of the policy was to assimilate aboriginals thus making their culture cease to exist. That was the reason for the policy. That's why some people refer to it as genocide.
IMO without seeing the actual documentation it looks like history being rewritten by the apologists as the goal you keep mentioning wouldve been impossible with the numbers taken, you can't destroy a whole culture by taking only some kids (majority I'm aware of were only half Aboriginal which is why they were in danger )
-Genocide and settler society: frontier violence and stolen indigenous ...Dirk Moses
-Journal of Genocide Research Volume 1, Issue 3, 1999
-The `Stolen Generations' and Cultural Genocide The Forced Removal of Australian Indigenous Children from their Families and its Implications for the Sociology of Childhood -ROBERT VAN KRIEKEN
- Genocide and settler society. Robert Manne
I bow down to thee oh great Nickman, the wisest of the wise, your political adroitness is unsurpassed, your sagacity is unmatched, your wisdom shines through on this forum amongst us mere mortals as bright as your scalp under the light of a full moon, never shall I doubt your analytical prowess again. You are my hero, my lord, my savior, may you accept my offerings so you continue to bless us with your genius.
- Albi
- David Furner
- Posts: 3781
- Joined: June 6, 2005, 11:26 am
- Favourite Player: Laurie Daley
- Location: Bundaberg, QLD
Re: Racism in Australia
Oh, it's comingStuat wrote:*waits for someone to bring up Windschuttle and Bolt- aka the stolen generation deniers*
I still remember the Bolt Vs Manne debate. Bolt petulantly bleated "JUST NAME 10".. Manne then proceeded to eviscerate Bolt so comprehensively I almost felt some pity for the vile little man..Almost
Of course this hasn't stopped Bolt.. Truth and Bolt are mutually exclusive.
Canberra Raiders Bronze Member
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.
Racism in Australia
Didn't Manne the go on to send him a letter with over 100 names, which was never replied too
- Albi
- David Furner
- Posts: 3781
- Joined: June 6, 2005, 11:26 am
- Favourite Player: Laurie Daley
- Location: Bundaberg, QLD
Re: Racism in Australia
Come of it MB, you're being obstructivemanbush wrote:Curious if they contain the actual policy or just people's opinions of what the policies wereAlbi wrote:Just books I've read -manbush wrote:I gather you have access to where the policy states this if so can you share. Without hard evidence I do like to give people the benefit of the doubt on something as evil as you are claiming.Stuat wrote:In a case like this intention is important. The intent of the policy was to assimilate aboriginals thus making their culture cease to exist. That was the reason for the policy. That's why some people refer to it as genocide.
IMO without seeing the actual documentation it looks like history being rewritten by the apologists as the goal you keep mentioning wouldve been impossible with the numbers taken, you can't destroy a whole culture by taking only some kids (majority I'm aware of were only half Aboriginal which is why they were in danger )
-Genocide and settler society: frontier violence and stolen indigenous ...Dirk Moses
-Journal of Genocide Research Volume 1, Issue 3, 1999
-The `Stolen Generations' and Cultural Genocide The Forced Removal of Australian Indigenous Children from their Families and its Implications for the Sociology of Childhood -ROBERT VAN KRIEKEN
- Genocide and settler society. Robert Manne
You're not ever going to find a written policy using the word 'genocide'.. You need to instead look at the actions of the government to decide what their motivations were. Holocaust deniers use the same rhetorical tool as you'll never read a nazi policy that makes specific reference to the anhilation of 6 million jews.
Canberra Raiders Bronze Member
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.
Re: Racism in Australia
I'm not sure how denying that aboriginals were systematically wronged in the past, when they were, has anything to do with them taking responsibility? If anything denying that what happened was wrong shows a failure of wider society to take responsibility for ITS past actions, not the other way around. If you've read my posts on this, I think Aboriginal communities need to be given control over their own destinies for policy to work and be effective. So I agree to an extent, but that doesn't change what happened in the past. Nothing is gained by denying it. Or is our sense of national identity so weak we cant handle fessing up to a few past wrongs?manbush wrote:Might surprise you but I agree, I guess thr main difference is I believe they've got to start helping themselves rather than blaming everything else, once you're stuck in the blame game it's very hard to improve your situationStuat wrote: More does need to be done though, I agree with that part of the article
1930's quote from Cecil Cook, Protector of natives
"Generally by the fifth and invariably by the sixth generation, all native characteristics of the Australian Aborigine are eradicated. The problem of our half-castes will quickly be eliminated by the complete disappearance of the black race, and the swift submergence of their progeny in the white."
AO Neville, Chief protector of natives, 1930
"Eliminate the full-blood and permit the white admixture to half-castes and eventually the race will become white"
Those are the guys who were in control. Its hard to read much "care" and "best interests" into their statements. In fact its quite clear that eliminating "blacks" is the primary objective...
In any case, this might be right up your ally Bloody Aboriginese not being grateful for all we have done for them!
http://benpobjie.blogspot.com.au/2012/0 ... eople.html
Re: Racism in Australia
I've never denied they have been wronged, just dubious on the stolen generation part as are many others, it's a part of history with much debate around it.Stuat wrote:I'm not sure how denying that aboriginals were systematically wronged in the past, when they were, has anything to do with them taking responsibility? If anything denying that what happened was wrong shows a failure of wider society to take responsibility for ITS past actions, not the other way around. If you've read my posts on this, I think Aboriginal communities need to be given control over their own destinies for policy to work and be effective. So I agree to an extent, but that doesn't change what happened in the past. Nothing is gained by denying it. Or is our sense of national identity so weak we cant handle fessing up to a few past wrongs?manbush wrote:Might surprise you but I agree, I guess thr main difference is I believe they've got to start helping themselves rather than blaming everything else, once you're stuck in the blame game it's very hard to improve your situationStuat wrote: More does need to be done though, I agree with that part of the article
What I want is for both sides to accept responsibilty for where they currently are, has sitting around whinging and blaming everyone else ever helped?
I bow down to thee oh great Nickman, the wisest of the wise, your political adroitness is unsurpassed, your sagacity is unmatched, your wisdom shines through on this forum amongst us mere mortals as bright as your scalp under the light of a full moon, never shall I doubt your analytical prowess again. You are my hero, my lord, my savior, may you accept my offerings so you continue to bless us with your genius.
Racism in Australia
I agree bushy, the blame culture is a massive problem whether that is blaming history for present issues or as we more commonly see, blaming people who are socially disadvantaged for their plight. Apportioning blame never leads to a solution.
Understanding the historical roots of present problems is essential in finding effective solutions regardless of the race of the person with problems.
Some people might want others to feel guilty for past wrongs they had nothing to do with but that's not my style. I like to think of myself as a pragmatist who looks at an existing
situation in context and looks at how it can be improved.
Understanding the historical roots of present problems is essential in finding effective solutions regardless of the race of the person with problems.
Some people might want others to feel guilty for past wrongs they had nothing to do with but that's not my style. I like to think of myself as a pragmatist who looks at an existing
situation in context and looks at how it can be improved.
- gangrenous
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16543
- Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
Re: Racism in Australia
You needn't worry Albi, I was just feeling like expressing some unjustifiable offense. It was over-rated.Albi wrote:From much of your previous writing, I've come to respect much of what you have to say so would therefore like you to clarify why you think i'm racist?gangrenous wrote:I find some of your views offensive and racist Albi.
Re: Racism in Australia
Going soft gangrenous, let me try
I don't believe Albi is racist, just an extreme left wing nutter but by definition he could be classed as one, wanting to treat a group of people differently based on their colour rather than purely on need
I don't believe Albi is racist, just an extreme left wing nutter but by definition he could be classed as one, wanting to treat a group of people differently based on their colour rather than purely on need
I bow down to thee oh great Nickman, the wisest of the wise, your political adroitness is unsurpassed, your sagacity is unmatched, your wisdom shines through on this forum amongst us mere mortals as bright as your scalp under the light of a full moon, never shall I doubt your analytical prowess again. You are my hero, my lord, my savior, may you accept my offerings so you continue to bless us with your genius.
Racism in Australia
Haha manbush! I agree we should base addressing disadvantage based on need. The best way to do that is focus on the most disadvantaged communities and groups. Most of the most disadvantaged are aboriginal. So the lions share of funding available will go towards addressing disadvantage in aboriginal communities... And the privileged will shout "reverse racism"
The next big group will be the mentally ill, so they take another big chunk of funding in our ideal world etc etc
Sadly though, society has no real interest on addressing social disadvantage based on "need". Instead we compensate privileged groups who don't need help, based on the number of votes that can be bought. Tax breaks for retirees, public funding of private schools, private health insurance rebates etc etc. We are having a debate about whether the family tax benefit should be means tested ****! Families on over 150k a year definitely don't "need" help. In the end the already advantaged get special treatment. We expect it, but it's rude for really disadvantaged groups to expect more equal treatment! Ungrateful lot that they are
And all this from governments who claim to be "small" government. I'm sorry but all those schemes are the absolute antithesis of small government policies if people are going to be logically consistent... No matter how much you tax though (Note: Howard government was the biggest taxing government in modern history, also increased spending far far more than the Rudd/Gillard government which has actually cut spending in a few years and taken 2% less GDP per year in tax!) the cake is only so big. If need played a role we would be dividing the pie very differently.
*warning hyperbole overload *
The next big group will be the mentally ill, so they take another big chunk of funding in our ideal world etc etc
Sadly though, society has no real interest on addressing social disadvantage based on "need". Instead we compensate privileged groups who don't need help, based on the number of votes that can be bought. Tax breaks for retirees, public funding of private schools, private health insurance rebates etc etc. We are having a debate about whether the family tax benefit should be means tested ****! Families on over 150k a year definitely don't "need" help. In the end the already advantaged get special treatment. We expect it, but it's rude for really disadvantaged groups to expect more equal treatment! Ungrateful lot that they are
And all this from governments who claim to be "small" government. I'm sorry but all those schemes are the absolute antithesis of small government policies if people are going to be logically consistent... No matter how much you tax though (Note: Howard government was the biggest taxing government in modern history, also increased spending far far more than the Rudd/Gillard government which has actually cut spending in a few years and taken 2% less GDP per year in tax!) the cake is only so big. If need played a role we would be dividing the pie very differently.
*warning hyperbole overload *
Re: Racism in Australia
That's what I'm all about mate, help the most needy first regardless of colour and if 2 of different colors are just as needy give the same level of help. Colour shouldn't come into it.Stuat wrote:Haha manbush! I agree we should base addressing disadvantage based on need. The best way to do that is focus on the most disadvantaged communities and groups. Most of the most disadvantaged are aboriginal. So the lions share of funding available will go towards addressing disadvantage in aboriginal communities... And the privileged will shout "reverse racism"
Some Aboriginal communities are a tough issue, how much should a government spend on areas with a tiny population whether black or white, at what point is it their responisbilty if they want a better life to move (with assistance) to areas capable of giving the help needed.
I bow down to thee oh great Nickman, the wisest of the wise, your political adroitness is unsurpassed, your sagacity is unmatched, your wisdom shines through on this forum amongst us mere mortals as bright as your scalp under the light of a full moon, never shall I doubt your analytical prowess again. You are my hero, my lord, my savior, may you accept my offerings so you continue to bless us with your genius.
Racism in Australia
If your worried about money spent on the undeserving that is a complete waste, then you would be far better directing your attention at the middle class. How much should we spend helping families buy new things? How much should we spend providing support they don't need, which comes out of every bodies taxes.
Addressing severe disadvantage even in small communities is a far far better use of the money that goes towards those goals if need even comes into the equation of how you distribute government funds. It seems nowadays everybody wants to be on welfare, personally I find that pretty disgusting.
Just for background, my politics is let's say unconventional. I believe in a strong safety net, that is some welfare, a good public health system, free quality education etc. I also believe small government and low taxes are a worthy goal. Australia has a unique and IMO the best model of welfare anywhere in the world. Welfare is capped, no matter how rich you were, how much you were earning, if you go on the dole you get the same as everybody. This keeps welfare costs down. Meaning we can provide an adequate safety net (unlike America) and low taxes. Contrast this to Scandinavia, where how much you were earning dictates how much you get on the "dole". Essentially having heaps of middle class welfare, that requires high taxes to pay for it (the model arguably works better than the American model but I don't think it is close to ideal). The Howard government and the Rudd/Gillard government have put this unique system in jeopardy. The Howard government by ramping up middle class welfare to an unprecedented extent, the Rudd/Gillard government by keeping those changes in place. Those schemes are a far bigger waste of money IMO, than actually addressing real disadvantage.
The "help themselves" stuff has been discussed at length in this thread. I agree. But resources are also needed to help address the disadvantage. Essentially, communities need to be given control over their destiny, to do that they need to be given control over resources to improve their communities. Welfare is a stop gap, it stops people starving but doesn't help anyone out of poverty. To do that you need investment etc. Doing that is a far better use of government money than giving the family tax benefit to household on more than 150k a year etc etc
Addressing severe disadvantage even in small communities is a far far better use of the money that goes towards those goals if need even comes into the equation of how you distribute government funds. It seems nowadays everybody wants to be on welfare, personally I find that pretty disgusting.
Just for background, my politics is let's say unconventional. I believe in a strong safety net, that is some welfare, a good public health system, free quality education etc. I also believe small government and low taxes are a worthy goal. Australia has a unique and IMO the best model of welfare anywhere in the world. Welfare is capped, no matter how rich you were, how much you were earning, if you go on the dole you get the same as everybody. This keeps welfare costs down. Meaning we can provide an adequate safety net (unlike America) and low taxes. Contrast this to Scandinavia, where how much you were earning dictates how much you get on the "dole". Essentially having heaps of middle class welfare, that requires high taxes to pay for it (the model arguably works better than the American model but I don't think it is close to ideal). The Howard government and the Rudd/Gillard government have put this unique system in jeopardy. The Howard government by ramping up middle class welfare to an unprecedented extent, the Rudd/Gillard government by keeping those changes in place. Those schemes are a far bigger waste of money IMO, than actually addressing real disadvantage.
The "help themselves" stuff has been discussed at length in this thread. I agree. But resources are also needed to help address the disadvantage. Essentially, communities need to be given control over their destiny, to do that they need to be given control over resources to improve their communities. Welfare is a stop gap, it stops people starving but doesn't help anyone out of poverty. To do that you need investment etc. Doing that is a far better use of government money than giving the family tax benefit to household on more than 150k a year etc etc
Re: Racism in Australia
Money to the undeserving is a different issue, one im against as well but not something I've even hinted at in this thread. Everyone wants something for free and successive governments have just encouraged that idea, it's why I didn't take the $900 vote buy from Rudd despite my lack of finances.Stuat wrote:If your worried about money spent on the undeserving that is a complete waste, then you would be far better directing your attention at the middle class. How much should we spend helping families buy new things? How much should we spend providing support they don't need, which comes out of every bodies taxes.
I bow down to thee oh great Nickman, the wisest of the wise, your political adroitness is unsurpassed, your sagacity is unmatched, your wisdom shines through on this forum amongst us mere mortals as bright as your scalp under the light of a full moon, never shall I doubt your analytical prowess again. You are my hero, my lord, my savior, may you accept my offerings so you continue to bless us with your genius.
- FuiFui BradBrad
- Bradley Clyde
- Posts: 8648
- Joined: May 3, 2008, 10:23 pm
- Favourite Player: Phil Graham
- Location: Marsden Park
Re: Racism in Australia
I think the tax system Cuba experimented with is the way to go. Tax everyone 90% on their base salary. This could make things like education and health care free, keep public transport and roads adequately maintainted and reducing the cost of housing.Stuat wrote:Just for background, my politics is let's say unconventional. I believe in a strong safety net, that is some welfare, a good public health system, free quality education etc. I also believe small government and low taxes are a worthy goal. Australia has a unique and IMO the best model of welfare anywhere in the world. Welfare is capped, no matter how rich you were, how much you were earning, if you go on the dole you get the same as everybody. This keeps welfare costs down. Meaning we can provide an adequate safety net (unlike America) and low taxes. Contrast this to Scandinavia, where how much you were earning dictates how much you get on the "dole". Essentially having heaps of middle class welfare, that requires high taxes to pay for it (the model arguably works better than the American model but I don't think it is close to ideal). The Howard government and the Rudd/Gillard government have put this unique system in jeopardy. The Howard government by ramping up middle class welfare to an unprecedented extent, the Rudd/Gillard government by keeping those changes in place. Those schemes are a far bigger waste of money IMO, than actually addressing real disadvantage.
Because the tax is on the base salary, any money you make from bonuses, overtime etc is exempt
Feel free to call me RickyRicky StickStick if you like. I will also accept Super Fui, King Brad, Kid Dynamite, Chocolate-Thunda... or Brad.
Nickman's love of NSW
Nickman's love of NSW
- NSW has done a superb job - 18/12/2020
- NSW has been world-class with their approach to date, that's a fact. - 04/02/2021
Racism in Australia
But the two are linked! You can't dole out billions and billions to the middle class and then cry poor when it comes to putting systematically disadvantaged groups on a level footing. That goes for aboriginal communities, some white communities, the disabled, the mentally ill etc... That is not IMO a fair way of doing things. Poverty breeds poverty, simply telling people isn't a solution, see Albi and pickles posts.manbush wrote:Money to the undeserving is a different issue, one im against as well but not something I've even hinted at in this thread. Everyone wants something for free and successive governments have just encouraged that idea, it's why I didn't take the $900 vote buy from Rudd despite my lack of finances.Stuat wrote:If your worried about money spent on the undeserving that is a complete waste, then you would be far better directing your attention at the middle class. How much should we spend helping families buy new things? How much should we spend providing support they don't need, which comes out of every bodies taxes.
I'm not about more welfare or anything like that, but creating opportunities for disadvantaged groups, it costs money. Infrastructure, education, healthcare, mental health services, access to investment opportunities all cost money. Those things are always invariably far better (and I'm talking public here) in higher socio economic neighborhoods. A kid in Red hill, does not have the same quality of services as one in Rooty hill or Alice springs etc... "Solving" these problems is complex and is far too often put in the too hard basket. What money is thrown at them is often so half arsed and poorly targetted it is pretty much useless.
If we are talking tax, I'd abolish business tax entirely and replace it with an economy wide super profits tax, to remove some of the barriers to growing and setting up new businesses and thus promote innovation
- Albi
- David Furner
- Posts: 3781
- Joined: June 6, 2005, 11:26 am
- Favourite Player: Laurie Daley
- Location: Bundaberg, QLD
Racism in Australia
You're welcome to your opinion of course . My view is is that certain groups have been systematically neglected and discriminated in the past and as a result are profoundly disadvantaged today.. IMO by not addressing this through direct action, perpetuates the initial neglect..manbush wrote:Going soft gangrenous, let me try
I don't believe Albi is racist, just an extreme left wing nutter but by definition he could be classed as one, wanting to treat a group of people differently based on their colour rather than purely on need
And since you're getting all personal and stuff MB let me say this.. Your libertarian views are misanthropic, which is typical of that ideology.. Essentially it's - I'm doing ok so the rest of humanity can go get ****.. Sad really as you seem like a nice guy otherwise
Canberra Raiders Bronze Member
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.
-
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 13407
- Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
- Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
- Location: Canberra :(
Re: Racism in Australia
Why is it that anyone who thinks our nation should show compassion to those less fortunate, believes scientists over media personalities and is inclined to read and comprehend history and understand it's implications is considered a left wing nutter.Albi wrote:You're welcome to your opinion of course . My view is is that certain groups have been systematically neglected and discriminated in the past and as a result are profoundly disadvantaged today.. IMO by not addressing this through direct action, perpetuates the initial neglect..manbush wrote:Going soft gangrenous, let me try
I don't believe Albi is racist, just an extreme left wing nutter but by definition he could be classed as one, wanting to treat a group of people differently based on their colour rather than purely on need
And since you're getting all personal and stuff MB let me say this.. Your libertarian views are misanthropic, which is typical of that ideology.. Essentially it's - I'm doing ok so the rest of humanity can go get ****.. Sad really as you seem like a nice guy otherwise
- Albi
- David Furner
- Posts: 3781
- Joined: June 6, 2005, 11:26 am
- Favourite Player: Laurie Daley
- Location: Bundaberg, QLD
Racism in Australia
Because greed, materialism and contempt for those unable to attain wealth, are considered virtues. Any governmental initiative is considered wasteful and frowned upon, because of a potential to negatively impact on their own wealth. Utter selfishness.Green eyed Mick wrote:Why is it that anyone who thinks our nation should show compassion to those less fortunate, believes scientists over media personalities and is inclined to read and comprehend history and understand it's implications is considered a left wing nutter.Albi wrote:You're welcome to your opinion of course . My view is is that certain groups have been systematically neglected and discriminated in the past and as a result are profoundly disadvantaged today.. IMO by not addressing this through direct action, perpetuates the initial neglect..manbush wrote:Going soft gangrenous, let me try
I don't believe Albi is racist, just an extreme left wing nutter but by definition he could be classed as one, wanting to treat a group of people differently based on their colour rather than purely on need
And since you're getting all personal and stuff MB let me say this.. Your libertarian views are misanthropic, which is typical of that ideology.. Essentially it's - I'm doing ok so the rest of humanity can go get ****.. Sad really as you seem like a nice guy otherwise
Canberra Raiders Bronze Member
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.
Racism in Australia
Agree Albi and GEM. Fact has also gone out of fashion. It's too inconvenient for a lot of vested interests who have a lot to use. To steal a joke, fact has a left wing bias
- Albi
- David Furner
- Posts: 3781
- Joined: June 6, 2005, 11:26 am
- Favourite Player: Laurie Daley
- Location: Bundaberg, QLD
Racism in Australia
That's right... Free market fundamentalists assured us that 'the market' via 'the invisible hand' answer to all problems.. Instead, it's used to fund right-wing think tanks and pseudo scientific cranks such as climate change deniers that muddy the water and put all humanity at risk in the name of greedStuat wrote:Agree Albi and GEM. Fact has also gone out of fashion. It's too inconvenient for a lot of vested interests who have a lot to use. To steal a joke, fact has a left wing bias
Canberra Raiders Bronze Member
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.
- gangrenous
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16543
- Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
Re: Racism in Australia
How many people exactly have said anything that opposes your second paragraph Albi? And your first sentence GEM? I think you are mistakenly linking people thinking a protest was unwarranted with people thinking nothing bad has ever happened to the Aboriginals and/or that they should receive no assistance.Green eyed Mick wrote:Why is it that anyone who thinks our nation should show compassion to those less fortunate, believes scientists over media personalities and is inclined to read and comprehend history and understand it's implications is considered a left wing nutter.Albi wrote:You're welcome to your opinion of course . My view is is that certain groups have been systematically neglected and discriminated in the past and as a result are profoundly disadvantaged today.. IMO by not addressing this through direct action, perpetuates the initial neglect..manbush wrote:Going soft gangrenous, let me try
I don't believe Albi is racist, just an extreme left wing nutter but by definition he could be classed as one, wanting to treat a group of people differently based on their colour rather than purely on need
And since you're getting all personal and stuff MB let me say this.. Your libertarian views are misanthropic, which is typical of that ideology.. Essentially it's - I'm doing ok so the rest of humanity can go get ****.. Sad really as you seem like a nice guy otherwise
I thought that the protest was an overeaction to an innocuous statement by Tony Abbott. I think that the media beat it up worse than it was (it seemed like when Gillard fell it was mainly guys with cameras harassing her). I think since the comment was not overtly (imo) racist that in hindsight the protest probably did more bad than good. Clearly people agree with that and disagree with that, particularly my first sentence of the paragraph. I am happy to discuss why people are offended by the comment and found it racist, I think that's valid discussion. What annoys me is when people suddenly feel that no one but an Aboriginal or an expert should be allowed to have an opinion, or even participate in a discussion. I don't see how that's going see relations improve.
-
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 13407
- Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
- Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
- Location: Canberra :(
Re: Racism in Australia
gangrenous wrote:How many people exactly have said anything that opposes your second paragraph Albi? And your first sentence GEM? I think you are mistakenly linking people thinking a protest was unwarranted with people thinking nothing bad has ever happened to the Aboriginals and/or that they should receive no assistance.Green eyed Mick wrote:Why is it that anyone who thinks our nation should show compassion to those less fortunate, believes scientists over media personalities and is inclined to read and comprehend history and understand it's implications is considered a left wing nutter.Albi wrote:You're welcome to your opinion of course . My view is is that certain groups have been systematically neglected and discriminated in the past and as a result are profoundly disadvantaged today.. IMO by not addressing this through direct action, perpetuates the initial neglect..manbush wrote:Going soft gangrenous, let me try
I don't believe Albi is racist, just an extreme left wing nutter but by definition he could be classed as one, wanting to treat a group of people differently based on their colour rather than purely on need
And since you're getting all personal and stuff MB let me say this.. Your libertarian views are misanthropic, which is typical of that ideology.. Essentially it's - I'm doing ok so the rest of humanity can go get ****.. Sad really as you seem like a nice guy otherwise
I thought that the protest was an overeaction to an innocuous statement by Tony Abbott. I think that the media beat it up worse than it was (it seemed like when Gillard fell it was mainly guys with cameras harassing her). I think since the comment was not overtly (imo) racist that in hindsight the protest probably did more bad than good. Clearly people agree with that and disagree with that, particularly my first sentence of the paragraph. I am happy to discuss why people are offended by the comment and found it racist, I think that's valid discussion. What annoys me is when people suddenly feel that no one but an Aboriginal or an expert should be allowed to have an opinion, or even participate in a discussion. I don't see how that's going see relations improve.
I was actually referring to wider Australian society where the only politicians who support a compassionate approach to asylum seekers are the Greens and some crazy union firebrand senator (Doug Cameron). These people are attacked constantly as left wing nutters for their stance on asylum seekers, environmental protection and climate change.
The problem with non-experts or the ill-informed commenting on certain topics is there are simply too many dumb people in our society who are unable to tell the difference between the dribble from neo-con think tank mouthpiece and that of a respected expert in the field of discussion.
- Albi
- David Furner
- Posts: 3781
- Joined: June 6, 2005, 11:26 am
- Favourite Player: Laurie Daley
- Location: Bundaberg, QLD
Racism in Australia
As is clear from my statements; I'm neither an Aboriginal or an expert yet engage freely.. Other than people whom spew forth demonstrably false populist garbage, I'm happy to engage with all. So what precisely is your beef?gangrenous wrote:How many people exactly have said anything that opposes your second paragraph Albi? And your first sentence GEM? I think you are mistakenly linking people thinking a protest was unwarranted with people thinking nothing bad has ever happened to the Aboriginals and/or that they should receive no assistance.Green eyed Mick wrote:Why is it that anyone who thinks our nation should show compassion to those less fortunate, believes scientists over media personalities and is inclined to read and comprehend history and understand it's implications is considered a left wing nutter.Albi wrote:You're welcome to your opinion of course . My view is is that certain groups have been systematically neglected and discriminated in the past and as a result are profoundly disadvantaged today.. IMO by not addressing this through direct action, perpetuates the initial neglect..manbush wrote:Going soft gangrenous, let me try
I don't believe Albi is racist, just an extreme left wing nutter but by definition he could be classed as one, wanting to treat a group of people differently based on their colour rather than purely on need
And since you're getting all personal and stuff MB let me say this.. Your libertarian views are misanthropic, which is typical of that ideology.. Essentially it's - I'm doing ok so the rest of humanity can go get ****.. Sad really as you seem like a nice guy otherwise
I thought that the protest was an overeaction to an innocuous statement by Tony Abbott. I think that the media beat it up worse than it was (it seemed like when Gillard fell it was mainly guys with cameras harassing her). I think since the comment was not overtly (imo) racist that in hindsight the protest probably did more bad than good. Clearly people agree with that and disagree with that, particularly my first sentence of the paragraph. I am happy to discuss why people are offended by the comment and found it racist, I think that's valid discussion. What annoys me is when people suddenly feel that no one but an Aboriginal or an expert should be allowed to have an opinion, or even participate in a discussion. I don't see how that's going see relations improve.
Canberra Raiders Bronze Member
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.
-
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 13407
- Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
- Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
- Location: Canberra :(
Re: Racism in Australia
The beef, I think is some people think populist garbage is just as valid or more valid than a well researched opinion based on fact (see climate change debate).
Sadly Albi, IMO Australia is rapidly embracing that strange American paradigm; where the intelligent and educated members of our society (Pro Tim Flannery, Dr Bob Brown) are considered out of touch with reality and those who are completely out of touch with reality are the new experts (Mr Alan Jones, Mr Andrew Bolt, Mr Tim Wilson)
Sadly Albi, IMO Australia is rapidly embracing that strange American paradigm; where the intelligent and educated members of our society (Pro Tim Flannery, Dr Bob Brown) are considered out of touch with reality and those who are completely out of touch with reality are the new experts (Mr Alan Jones, Mr Andrew Bolt, Mr Tim Wilson)
- gangrenous
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16543
- Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
Re: Racism in Australia
Apologies*, my response was coloured by just having skimmed this
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/ ... 1qssk.html
Where it seems the author concludes the leader of the opposition shouldn't have been able to comment on the tent embassy at all, which I find ridiculous.
*Edit - The second paragraph wasn't intended to be directed at anyone in the thread.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/ ... 1qssk.html
Where it seems the author concludes the leader of the opposition shouldn't have been able to comment on the tent embassy at all, which I find ridiculous.
*Edit - The second paragraph wasn't intended to be directed at anyone in the thread.
- Albi
- David Furner
- Posts: 3781
- Joined: June 6, 2005, 11:26 am
- Favourite Player: Laurie Daley
- Location: Bundaberg, QLD
Racism in Australia
I agree.. The educated are marginalised as elitists out of touch with the 'ordinary person'. Instead the peddlers of misinformation step forth because they dishonestly offer simple solutions to complex issues.Green eyed Mick wrote:The beef, I think is some people think populist garbage is just as valid or more valid than a well researched opinion based on fact (see climate change debate).
Sadly Albi, IMO Australia is rapidly embracing that strange American paradigm; where the intelligent and educated members of our society (Pro Tim Flannery, Dr Bob Brown) are considered out of touch with reality and those who are completely out of touch with reality are the new experts (Mr Alan Jones, Mr Andrew Bolt, Mr Tim Wilson)
Canberra Raiders Bronze Member
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.
Racism in Australia
The standard of political discourse in the country has declined horribly over the last decade or so. Look at the comments on any article on any news website. Even if it's about a fundraiser for Campsie bowls club it is bound to descend into mud slinging by people on either side of politics rather than a genuine discussion of the issues on hand. I'm sure having a minority government contributes but it seems like a race for the bottom t the moment.
This issue is a prime example of both sides playing politics with an issue to try to score points rather than making a concerted effort to try to understand and address the issues. You know when there is more interesting political discussion on a rugby league website than on the abc site that the world has gone a bit crazy.
This issue is a prime example of both sides playing politics with an issue to try to score points rather than making a concerted effort to try to understand and address the issues. You know when there is more interesting political discussion on a rugby league website than on the abc site that the world has gone a bit crazy.