Conversations with a racist

And in which I finally complete my internet persona: Private Tom D. Beagle.*

Thankfully, I have never met any explicitly racist people in person. I see them only in the media outlets, indulging themselves in hatred of the minority of the decade. Most (actually, all) racists are cowards, the type of people who will gleefully assault anybody when their back is turned, but will beg for mercy if the odds ever turn against them. This is by and large a fine thing, because of racists didn’t care for the consequences of their actions there would be a great many more assaults against people of colour and differing cultures.

However, one racist (and most likely neo-Nazi, judging by the anti-Semitism), for reasons entirely unbeknownst to me, decided to contact me over my facebook profile. I don’t know who Mr. ‘Save Your Race’ (his actual facebook name. How that got past the moderators is beyond me) is, and I don’t think I will ever meet him (to my eternal gratitude), but the conversation between us is quite revealing is his paranoia and unshakable belief in his conspiracy theories, and the general snark I direct towards those who I have nothing by total contempt for. All grammar and spelling mistakes are preserved. And yes, those nine words are how he started the conversation.

Mr. Race: your a dickhead. so are you a sheep or a lefty commie

Mr. Beagle: Judging by your name and your terrible grammar, I'd say you're a Klansman?

Mr. Race: Oh yes ... thats right. And judging by your pic you are a nob. Hay lefty we wont forget whom turned on our own culture.

Mr. Beagle: My culture is one of equality, love, acceptance and egalitarianism. Your culture, if your name is anything to by, is one of paranoia, violence, and raw hatred.

Mr. Race: Ok then you are a sheep. With a view that has been taught to you. The movies that lower our morals and the shit fatty food that poisons our race and make it harder for an increasing amount of women to fall pregnant. Do u at least except that the way the white culture is going it wont exist in 50 years depending on were you live in the globe. You talk down to someone you know nothing about, so i would have to assume your the ignorant one. Have not mention violence in anyway. Hatred whom do i hate. People that will over flow my own country with in ten years and leave the white population a minority that will make my family's life very dangerous to live in the area i was born in and grew up in. I’m afraid the day you work out you were wrong your so called friends from different races will show you that all though they benefit more then whites they wont actually practice it them selves. They will in turn however breed huge families and live in ghettos where white people are not safe to go. And leach of the welfare state my white culture has created. Egalitarianism = socialism.

Mr. Beagle: Did you learn all that from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion? Please tell me what movies lower our morals (let me guess: any film featuring a non-white). As for your 'fast-food outlets are in league with the communists, Jews and race-mixers' conspiracy-in most countries (certainly, in America and to a lesser extend Australia), those most affected by fast-food and obesity are African-American communities. I find in mildly ironic that you say I "talk down" to you, given that you began this conversation with "your [sic] a dickhead".

Regarding multiculturalism and violence; I suggest you go down to Dandenong. You'll see for yourself how "dangerous" it is to live there. I know paranoia is a hallmark of racism, but I think you've outdone even Hitler's standards. White people are majority in Australia. New Zealand, Canada, America, Britain and all of Western and Eastern Europe. Despite your delusional persecution fantasies, whitefolk are not in a danger of 'dying out' and, judging by our numbers, won't ever be. Your "Egalitarianism = socialism" is hilarious in its ludicrousness. The Tea Party protester have a greater understanding of socialism than you do. Go to a library, borrow a few books on socialism and Marxism, and come back when you have a clue. And on a final note, we have paragraphs, apostrophes and spell check for good reasons. Use them.

Mr. Race: I will make this easy for you to read then. The elders of Zion= Yes i would say it is probably true. Fast food = Rich people who like you have no national interest or even understand the principle of it. They are killing my people just to make money. Communist Jews = look into that. Do you understand how there connected? You’re a sheep that believes in Egalitarianism. Seriously i doubt you will believe that by the time your 50.

Then there is this= Regarding multiculturalism and violence; I suggest you go down to Dandenong. You'll see for yourself how "dangerous" it is to live there. ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? What does that mean. You except there are a problem???? Not sure how you see that and don’t get there is a problem. Please don’t waste your time saying its poverty.

Then there is this= I know paranoia is a hallmark of racism, but I think you've outdone even Hitler's standards. White people are majority in Australia. New Zealand, Canada, America, Britain and all of Western and Eastern Europe. Despite your delusional persecution fantasies, white folk are not in a danger of 'dying out' and, judging by our numbers, won't ever be.

That was true 50 years ago. No longer the case. Europe has huge problems with third world immigration. As does Canada and Britain. This comment alone shows how little you know. Its ok i can see you are young but the problem is we don’t have time for sheep like to work it out.

Arab families on average have 7 - 8 kids, Australian beauro of stats will back that as well as 67 percent of Arab man between 18- 65 are on welfare. We on the other hand have 1 2 or 3 at most you do the maths. Then we have white man whom run of with Asian females. That is a huge worry.

Whites have a low birth rate everywhere. It’s the same story worldwide. In Sydney there are suburbs where white were the majority only ten years ago that are now 90 percent ethnics.

And finally you mention my spelling even though you understood every thing i said. First point if im wrong just worry about correcting my way of thinking, the fact that you even attack my spelling and grammar makes you argument look weak.
Not to mention you made an error your self last time lol dickhead. And I left spaces so you had a chance to stop and let your brain catch up.

Mr. Beagle: Thank goodness you've discovered the 'enter' key. Now all you'll need to learn how to use apostrophes, and you'll be well on your way to passing grade 5 english. Zion? Proven forgery. The Bible is more historically accurate. Egalitarianism is a principle of human equality-no doubt you think equality is evil. I never said countries don't have immigration issues-certainly some do (France springs to mind). However, the concept that whitey is going to die out is total paranoia. If you start making claims about statistics, I wouldn't mind a few links (I assume you can copy and paste). As for your 'white boy/asian girl' paranoia, what business is it of yours as to who goes out with who?

Mr. Race: I think its safe to say you agree with me then. You are just too ignorant to realise how bad things are. Sydney will have no white people left there in 20 years time.
I don’t really care if the whole Zion story is true. As i have seen enough of the Zionist movement to know that the whole creating Israel part was true. And the bible is another Jewish movement like all the "ism movements" they created to control us goym or gentiles.

I have nothing against everyone been given a fair chance as long as it’s for my own culture. I don’t want other people from other countries being put first before Aussies. And that is happening all the time. Your whole Egalitarianism principle is a pipe dream. I don’t think you have any real life experience to understand that.

Don’t mention France the fact that you understand that, and i even have to argue with you makes you look stupid, not as stupid as the hat in your picture but close.

As for the links i will back up my facts ASAP. And last but not least. You will get to see for your self everything i have said is true. Asians have the ability to swamp this country and the fact that huge amounts of white man are breeding with another races with only sped that process up. But i think you already get what i mean. You just can’t get a white chick so you had to fuck a monkey instead. And i wont be correcting my spelling mistakes. Go fuck your self.

After that, I simply didn’t bother responding. Mr. Race was a raving lunatic, and to misquote Darp, “calling him batshit is an insult to bat guano fetishists everywhere; calling him fruitloops is an insult to anything fruity with a hole in the middle etc etc…” However, Mr. Race wasn’t done venting his spleen over me, and emailed me again, beginning with a reference to my profile picture:

Mr. Race: thank god you got rid pof the hat pic. Now grow a brain and save your culture. I dont want to have to repeat myself.

Mr. Beagle:I can image you wouldn't. Typing, when you only have bloody stumps from a life of knuckle-dragging, must be very difficult. I certainly haven't forgotten your cruel comments from our previous conversation. I must ask-what happened that turned you into such a monster? Did you white girlfriend dump you for a darkie? Mugged by a Lebo? Or was it good ol' neo-Nazi indoctrination from the cradle? Enlighten me.

Mr. Race:I am not a monster. Im doing your family a favour by standing up for our culture. You on the other hand are quite happy to keep your head in the sand. Lebo's gang up on aussies here all the time. We no longer own sydney your town will be next. One day you will see that your ideas are wrong. As for Hitler he went up against the bankers thats why he is known as the most eveil man to ever walk the face of this earth. Does nto matter that others have killed far more cause they dont have hollywood against them. I surpose you still beleive the globe is warming aswell. And i must say chack your spelling that last comment was bad even for you. And the picture of you and your sister is gross. Put the hat back on lefty.

Mr. Beagle: Stop referring to 'our' culture, as my culture is quite different to yours. Hitler may not have killed the most people, but as far as raw genocide goes, he is by far the worst. You don't try to exterminate an entire people in gas chambers and be seen as a hero for it. As for climate change, yes, I'd say it is happening. Pardon me for listening to those thousands of scientists who are presenting the evidence. Of course, given that you refer to black people as 'monkeys', you'd know all about ignoring science. Finally, that is a friend of mine, not a relative. I presume you thought we were siblings because it's quite obvious your parents were.

Mr. Race: You live here in australia as do i so we have the same culture.Raw genocide lol raw brainwashing more like it. Hitler had to lock the jews up as they are extremly sly and made germany lose the first world war so the allies would give them Israel. And thousands of scientists also agree that the globe stopped warming in 1998. Your tv wont teach you that so i geuse you will be wrong for a long time to come. In the 1970's we were going to freze to death in the 1990's we had a whole in the ozone now we have carbon taxing so we white people can pay third world shit wholes more money that they can waste with the badly corrupted countries. Listen to 2gb 873 am from sydney around the same time as now they can help your brainwashed ways. Seriously you just beleive every thing. You know santa's not real right.

Mr. Beagle: It's quite hilarious, you stating that I "just beleive [sic] every thing [sic]" whilst believing in ludicrous conspiracy theories. The first world war had bugger-all to do with Israel-that state was formed after the second world war. The ignorance, stupidity and hate, it burns.

Mr. Race: Ok look i get why you dont undrstand. But world war one and two were directly linked to The state of Israel. Did you think they just woke up one day and decided to invade Palistine. The jews were being sent there by hitler as well. The british controlled Palistine before the jews took over.

Now here is a lesson for you . 1n 1916 Germany was winning the war, the zionist jews offered the allies america if they gave them israel. Now how do you think they did that. Cause at the time american was very neutral. The media conned america and took her to war. And if you dont beleive it, research it and you will see that your brainwashed verion of history is far removed to what actually happen. I dont agree with the mass slaughter of any human beings but that does stopped you from thinking that just cause i dont agree with you.

Ok research this - its proven fact. Its not just from Nazie website. Your in the matrix now , take the plug out of your head and learn. This thing shows you realy have no idea about world history is these two words. Balfour Declaration ....

The ignorance, stupidity and hate, it burns. Funny fuck ,,,in other words baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaabaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa you fucking sheep

Mr. Beagle: Or maybe Germany lost the war because it was fighting on two fronts (East and West). What is it with you and Jews? Can't you use a different scapegoat,just for a change?

Mr. Race: Ok please just refer to last point did you look into the balfour declaration at all. The media is whom taught you that anyone who says anything about the Jews are nuts, when realistically they have been causing trouble for hundreds of years look into the Russian revolution. But also go back to the part about world war one you have to understand how easy it is for the Jews with their media control to control us. It is obvious if you look into it. I do say racist comment, it come out of frustration from people like you whom are completely brainwashed. Our education system is a joke, our children run muck. Our movies are immoral our politicianwork for big business. Our music has five year old girls acting like strippers after watching lady gaga and britney spear, The Jews and the lefties are behind most if not all of that. Once you have had your bubble burst there is no turning back. Unless of course you don’t care about your country or people. Then all is lost with YOU. Not all Jews are bad. Just the Zionist. I have two friends whom are Jews. One of them agrees about this more then i do the other one is like you.

Again, after this, I didn’t bother. As it is quite clear, I regularly read FightDemBack!, and so have a rough idea of what constitutes the average neo-Nazi’s mind. To remisquote Darp, Mr. Race is as “mad as a cut snake. As a meat axe. Bananas. He’s a broken packet of biscuits, as ugly as a box of blowflies, and he couldn’t organise a root in a brothel. Of course, with an ideology that handles like a dog on lino, it’s no wonder he’s got kangaroos loose in the top paddock. Or to put it another way: the lights are on but nobody’s home (the mystery bag that passes for his brain is empty) and consequently he feels like a pork chop in a synagogue. And despite this bloke not being the full quid / a snag short of a barbie / a couple of tinnies short of a slab, he still claims to be as proud as a rat with a gold tooth!”

Thankfully, Mr. Race has found a new target to irritate, as he no longer sends random emails. The exchange, although brief, was a fascinating insight to a person who is governed by his basest, most regressive instincts humankind is capable of, whose mind is trapped within an inescapable maze of conspiracies, who blames everything wrong in his life on minority groups, and who would probably murder every Jew and person of colour he could find if he weren't such a sniveling coward hiding behind a pathetic screen name.

Here's hoping Mr. Race goes the way of Derek Vinyard.

* Middle name may spontaneously change depending on my whimsical tastes. As of now I like 'Delano' but Wilson, Walter, Raphael, Leonardo, Charlie, Woodrow and William are also possible.

Tool of the Year 2009

Earlier this year, Military HQ hosted an ‘Unaustralian of the Year.’ Not to be outdone, I instead hosted ‘Tool of the Year 2008’, for that special someone who wasn’t simply Unaustralian, but a hypocrite and asshole to boot. The winner was Fred ‘Boobies are Satan’s pillows’ Nile, who had the gal to ruthlessly demonise the Muslim-Australian community, and then turn around and claim to be representing Muslim interests. Like I said, a hypocrite and an asshole.

As 2009 comes to an end, I need to pick another TOTY. There were a number of contenders (Rudd, Minchin, Nile again, Tuckey, ) but only one person could fulfill that vomit-inducing combination of tooliness.

Namely, Fred Nile, again. And for very similar reasons he won last year. It may seem unfair that Nile win again, given that Kevin “Should I commit to human rights for refugees, or try and peel some votes off the ‘Howard racists’ voting bloc? Too late-found the dog whistle!” Rudd certainly came close. However, Nile wins again simply for outdoing himself this year.

Recently, a CDP operative was revealed to have made a string of abusive and derogatory remarks about Muslims in a few email exchanges. If they were about Jews, he wouldn’t have been so much criticized as booted out of the country. The CDP went into damage control, with Nile himself saying the party “disassociates itself completely" from the comments, ''which we totally reject. No one deserves to be subjected to such language and insult.'' However, one should look at some of Freddy’s ideas about domestic policies and Muslims: ban them from the military, and deport them.

So the TOTY medal must to go Fred ‘dy Kruger’ Nile, for critisising a CDP member for remarks that are, although cruder, still no less ostracizing than his own writings. Maybe Nile should apply the Wallace test to himself, and then actually asking “WWJD” before revelling in his hatred of the Other.

However, Nile also receives the runner-up prize for TOTY, for his views on women. Fred says he is "concerned about the sexual exploitation of women in our society." This 'concern' of course, is more about women having reproductive and sexual freedom than anything else. Nile states that the Greens "sexually objectify" women through their civil libertarian policies on sex, that that this is damaging to women. However, Nile has shown exactly what he thinks of women, regarding women serving in the military:

"Combat roles will also expose female soldiers to gunshot injuries, which could prevent them from being able to bear children."

Women: nothing they do or contribute towards society is more important than being a baby factory. This alone could win Nile TOTY 2010.

Hattip to Orville Strayan.

“Give them enough rope and they’ll hang themselves.”

I first read that quote in Naughty Stories for Good Boys and Girls, although it applies equally well for racist politicians trying to enter the mainstream debate. Enter Nick “...immigration...is destroying this and every other white nation in the world” Griffin, Grand High Wizard of the KKK British National Party.

Recently, Griffin appeared on Question Time, a BBC panel show featuring political figures from across the spectrum. During the show, he made various hilarious statements-most notably, that the Ku Klux Klan is "non-violent" and that he does “not have a conviction for Holocaust denial.”

That quote exposes the problem for the Fuhrer and his party; that they are fundamentally too extreme. The reason for the BNP’s increased vote is due to widespread disillusion at the major parties (Labour, Conservatives, Liberal Dems) and the extensive corruption that their MPs have shown. Hence, the increased support for the BNP is more of a protest vote than anything else. But when Nick goes on national television and gives openly sympathises with one of the most infamous white supremacist organisations in history, that create serious problems of allegiance for all BNP voters outside of the hatecore bonehead supporters.

Nick, in his Holocaust statement was clearly trying to have his cake and eat it too: not explicitly denying the Holocaust, but still sending a message to the Brownshirts watching at home that he’s still a died-in-the-wool anti-Semite. The BNP, when previously quizzed on its openly neo-Nazi views, stated that, its political ideals have shifted over time and that the Party is more moderate than before (see point vii). Statements such their leader, however, expose how superficial Nick’s shift to the centre is.

That's why I think giving the BNP this sort of publicity is needed, as it exposes the Party for what it is: a front for neo-Nazism. Gordon Brown stated “We’ve got a duty to expose the BNP for what are racist and sectarian politics.” I agree entirely; give Nick enough time on air, and the BNP’s support will implode harder than One Nation (although hopefully for different reasons).

Piers and Andrew. Pornstars in other lives.

Piers 'Idiot's Andrew Bolt' Akerman is a well established idiot.

The Left, which has been pushing for this new global wealth redistribution scheme, must decide whether it really wants to punish nations like India, where 42.5 per cent of children under five are malnourished.

Fracken' genius (although it should be spelled 'teh Left').

But the true gold comes from Andrew 'Murdoch's bitch' Bolt. I wonder how Andy would feel if he knew his material has such strong support from leading white supremacist forum Stormfront?

"Lest we forget." We have forgotten.

(apologies for the lateness of this post. The Generals have hit us soldiers with exams, and studying is a higher priority)

From the Age:

A RIGHT-WING political wind has blown across Europe, sweeping the far-right British National Party into the European Parliament and delivering another humiliating blow to Prime Minister Gordon Brown's Labour Party. As the results of the four-day poll rolled in, a record low turnout saw electoral gains for unaligned, far-right and anti-immigration parties in the Netherlands, where anti-Islam campaigner Geert Wilders won a seat, and in Austria, Belgium, Britain and Slovakia. In Hungary, the anti-Semitic and anti-Roma (Gypsy) extremist party, Jobbik, also won a seat.

Good fuck no. This is a serious problem. I don't mind if conservative/free-market parties gain power if it energises the lefties to do better next time. However, when a hardline party with a policy of hatred is gains a voice in parliament, I'm frightened for these countries.

However, the news that the rabidly anti-immigration, far-right British National Party had won two seats in the European Parliament has shocked both Labour and the Conservatives. "It's a sad moment for British politics," Health Secretary Andy Burnham said. BNP chairman Nick Griffin was elected in the north-west of England with 8 per cent of the vote. He denied his party was racist, but said: "We do say this country is full up. The key thing is to shut the door."

The BNP's beliefs?

Interracial relationships are "self-inflicted genocide".

Non-whites who are born in Britain aren't true Britains.

Foreign aid should be cancelled.

Criminals have no rights.

Muslims are plotting to take over Britain (so not much difference from the original anti-Jewish conspiracies, then).

The notion of such a party gaining more than zero votes is terrifying enough. But to actually gain seats, there is something rotten in Britain. OK, I can understand the Brits' dissatisfaction with the Labour and Conservative parties, given the blatent corruption within them. Hence, otherwise loyal Labor or Tory supporters would be seriously considering a 'protest vote' against the major parties to send a clear message. That, I understand and support.

But supporting the 21st century Klan is not the way to do it. There are other, marginally less insane parties that one could vote for-the Greens or the Liberal Democrats, for example.

Mr Griffin told Sky News: "This is a Christian country and Islam is not welcome, because Islam and Christianity, Islam and democracy, Islam and womens' rights do not mix."

Wrong, wrong and wrong, you cross burning, white sheet wearing, stiff-arm saluting, "Dey tuk er jerbs!" spouting, racist lunatic. Go back to ranting against the Jews-it's more up your alley.

We must remember that this was how the Nazis first began in the early '20s. They never stated that Jews should be exterminated; they said that Jews should be removed from Germany because Germany was ethnically Aryan. It was only after the Nazis took power in government that their true extremism was revealed. Support for nationalist parties is an indication that people have forgotten how hate groups are. The current level of support for the BNP is a sign that people are no taking what hate groups are capable of. It only takes a few anti-white or anti-immgrant attacks to create a snowball effect and create an actual (if localised) race war. We should know, because there are certain parallels here in Melbourne.

The chairman of the Ethnic Communities Council of Victoria, Sam Afra, said it would be unacceptable for the Indian community to take the law into its own hands. "There is a danger this will become like a chain reaction with the victim becoming the perpetrator. We don't want to get to that," he said.

[my emphasis]

Economic uncertainty breeds anti-immigrant anger, which is what is happening at the moment in Britain. All Europeans should be extremely wary of parties like the BNP. The above situation in such an economic climate is what would transform them into a genuine political force.

Cross-posted here.

"Lord McCulloch." "Yes, master." "RISE."

It might be different from the original context, but it seems McCulloch is well-versed in the Dark Side, having joined Pauline 'Sidious' Hanson's first political party, One Nation.

She was anointed by some in the media as the next Pauline Hanson, after her fierce resistance to Muslims moving into her neighbourhood in Sydney's Camden.

Now Kate McCulloch has taken a further step in that direction, announcing today that she will stand as One Nation's candidate for the seat of Macarthur at the next federal election.

One Nation announced the appointment with a media release titled: "Kate McCulloch - campaigner against Camden Islamic School joins One Nation.

Because Islam is pure evil and has never contributed anything to Western civilisation.

"They take our welfare and they don't want to accept our way of life," she said after the council vote. "Hezbollah is a terrorist organisation. I'm sorry, I just don't want them in Australia."

Ignoring the ridiculous notion that Muslims are welfare parasites and are against "our way of life"*, if all Muslims are terrorists, then does that make me a neo-Nazi for being white?

"So many people felt so strongly about the issue in Camden but they were too terrified to speak out, and that's sad," she said.

I actually with Kate there. I can imagine that there are many Muslims living in Sydney would who would like to discuss the school proposal issue politely, but have become increasingly terrified due to the Cronulla riots and pigs' heads at the school site.

But Mrs McCulloch said she was prepared for an onslaught from the media.

"I have a feeling how the media are going to portray me as xenophobic and racist," she said.

You don't need the media to help with that, sweetheart.

"They will sensationalise. You have to cop it sweet.

"It doesn't worry me what they call me. I've got six kids. I know I stand for good values."

Your "good values" would make the BNP proud.

There was too much time and money being spent on helping poorer countries overseas and helping asylum seekers, while Australian citizens such as farmers needed help, she said.

So we should give less help to poorer brothers? Funny-I thought you said you were a Christian. Besides, what do you care about cost? Howard's Pacific Solution, which you love so very, very much, cost over 7 times as much to process refugees off shore, as compared to processing them in Australia.

"We need to keep the Australian culture, the Australian way of life," she said.

If the Australian culture/way of life* needs racism and hatred to defend itself, than it doesn't deserve to exist. And I'd to see you try to explain why you can't defend your ways and customs simply by sticking to them yourself, and letting everybody live in peace.

"I really feel the two major political parties are not doing anything to help the everyday person. They are too busy being politically correct. No one speaks honestly."

OK Kate, I'll be honest. You are a twisted, malicious excuse for humanity whose values and paranoia of 'them' would fit perfectly into McCarthyist America. Your exist for the sole purpose of causing others great pain, and if anything, you enjoy it. You have based your political career on demonising and ostracising a minority group, and you show no empathy towards them. You base your views on people you see in the street on whether they wear a hijab or not. Not only will you ultimately fail in your goals of dividing Australia along your perceived 'us vs. them' boundaries, but you will be forever remembered as a vile and pathetic creature whose vision of a utopian Australia is sewage. I'd feel sorry for you, however you take such great joy in your ignorance and and resentment, I can't bring myself to feel it.

How's that for honesty?

*Could somebody-anybody-explain what the 'Australian way of life' actually is? As of now it's just a rallying call for rednecks, racists and general nationalistic cranks.

Holy original writings, Batman!

I've gone for over two months without a Lazyboy Moment! Of course, if anybody has noted, this drop in Lazyboy Moments may have had something to do this the great increase in fundiewatching. Well, it's time for another Moment, because the pigs 30 miles away from the front trenches think it's a fine idea to saddle us soldiers with essays with ridiculously close due dates. Hence, Lazyboy time. I actually haven't read this yet, so sorry if it's less interesting then what the title makes out.

Causes of Racism in Britain

Abdel-Qadar Yassine analyses the roots of racism in Britain

“…With us there is nothing more consistent than a racist humanism, since the European has only been able to become a man through creating slaves and monsters” (J. - P. Sartre, 1967).
The ‘fundamental’ of both Western civilisation and Christianity in the Western World: “Is their inability to recognise that they share the planet not with inferiors but with equals. Unless western civilisation intellectually and socially, politically and economically, and the Christian church theologically, can learn to treat other men with fundamental respect, these two in their turn will have failed to come to terms with the actualities of the twentieth century” (Smith, 1957).
Racism is the belief that races have distinctive cultural characteristics deter-mined by hereditary factors and that endows some races with an intrinsic superiority; this belief may involve abuse and aggressive behaviour towards members of another race. This article tries to point to the causes of racism in Britain, but a great deal of space is spent on racism in general. This is felt to be justified, firstly, because “racism in Britain” can mean racism towards people living outside as well as inside Britain, and, secondly, because foreign settlers are regarded as “The Enemy Within” (P. Gilroy, 1992), linking the outside with the inside, the general with the specific.

The Main Causes
It is obviously not just presence of physical differences between groups that creates races, but “the social recognition of such differences as socially significant or rele-vant” (Van the Berghe, 1967). Why do certain societies consider such differences important, whereas others do not? Van de Berghe says that “Allowing…for the independent discovery of racism in a number of societies, it remains true that the Western strain of the virus has eclipsed all others in importance”, and it is only through the colonial expansion of Europe that racism spread widely over the world. The reasons commonly given for Western racism include personality, social Darwinism, and bour-geois ideology. P. Mason (1954) reminds us of the basic facts.

“It does no seem that the barriers are based on an aversion which is innate between the races themselves, something comparable with the dislike which most people feel of snakes and some cats… Children do not seem to feel any aversion for people of ano-ther colour until it is taught them”

The explanation of racism in terms of personality is to ask why certain people become racially prejudiced, while others do not. This psychological question is relevant, though here it will only be dealt with briefly. Van de Berghe explains two theories: “frustration-aggression” and “authoritarian personality”. Quite simply, the first one explains racism as a type of relief from “frustration”, where a “scapegoat” may become the object of aggressive behaviour; however, this cannot be an adequate explanation because it neither explains the presence of racism when there is no “frustration” nor why the scapegoats should be chosen in racial terms (as opposed, perhaps, to gender, class, or even politics). People with an “authoritarian” personality exist in large numbers in every cohesive society, and it is probably manipulation by them that give racism its strength. Again, this does not really explain racism in a society any more than explain racism in a society any more than it explains non-racism, because people with “authoritarian” personalities could be imbued with either viewpoint. Also T.F. Pettigrew showed that the much higher degree of anti-Negro preju-dice among Southern whites as compared with Northern whites could not be accounted for in terms of differences in authorita-rianism between the two groups.

Many social commentators apply the idea of ‘class struggle’ to explain racism. For them racism is a kind of bourgeois ideology designed especially to “rationalize the exploitation of non-white people of the world”, especially during the imperialistic phase of Capitalism, and that is why it is defined as an “epiphenomenona sympto-matic of slavery and colonial exploitation” (Van den Berghe). Themes of grownup childishness, civilising mission, savagery and arrested evolution were common in the New World, Africa and later Palestine. Some believe that it was “not until the 19th century that racism became a well-defined ideology” (Van the Berghe). However, many have felt that racism raised “questions beyond the limits of traditional Marxist class analysis and have pointed to the need for deeper analysis of non-class forms of domination” (J. Solomos, 1986) and it also seems that racism can be fond in non-capitalist or non-economic interactions (Rex, 1986). This is summed up by H. Wolpe (1986):

“It does not follow that because race, under certain conditions, may be interiorised in the class struggle, all conflicts which centre on race are, therefore, to be conceived of as class struggles. On the contrary, it will be argued that struggles focusing on race may take on a form in which class is not interiorised within them…”
Darwinism, although originally a theory in the biological sciences, was adopted by bourgeois social science of the late 19th century and the notions of evolution, survival of the fittest, hereditary determinism and near constancy of the gene pool were used to describe society. Even today many people seem to believe in a kind of linear evolution of civilizations has a limited span in time, suggesting that a more ‘cyclic’ view of history might be appro-priate. This, in a way, is what F. Fanon suggest, when he talks as a black man:

“The white man was wrong. I was not a primitive, not even a half-man. I belonged to a race that had already been working in gold and silver two thousand years ago”.

That is why social Darwinism is not itself an ideology, but merely an expression of the understanding ideology; it is again a rationa-lisation of racism.

The ideas of Enlightenment spread by the American and French Revolutions conflicted with racism and yet contributed to its development. As Van de Berghe so finely put it:

“The blatant contradiction between the treatment of slaves and colonial peoples and the official rhetoric of freedom and equality, Europeans and white North Americans began of dichotomise humanity between men and submen (or the ‘civilised’ and the ‘savages’)”

Herein lies the real cause of modern Western racism. It is a kind of arrogance; it is a kind of hypocrisy where egalitarian ideas are only extended to ‘people’, in other words, whites. This is why so few people in the “West” are interested in real democracies outside the Western world, and why regimes such as those of South Africa and Israel (both being European in culture) are only democratic for the ‘master race’ but tyrannical for the subordinated group. Then racism:

“if it is not innate and natural, must be induced and it must be due to something in the history of the contact between the race, treating history here in the fullest possible sense in which it includes the present”. (P. Mason, 1954).

There is no space to discuss in detail “the history of the contact”, but a good example is: that ‘intellectuals’ who glorify the Crusades can easily justify Zionism and the conquest of The ‘New’ World. Racism is so ingrained that it seems to work even “across the lines of normal politics as well as within them” (A. H. Richmond). Many social commentators are ‘afraid’ to deal with the real problem and its extent but instead hide behind a superficial economic theory, or explain racism solely in terms of colonialism (whereas colonialism, as well as slavery, can easily be explained in the wider context of an ideology of racism); it might be appropriate to remember that most of these commentators, as well as Marx, himself, are “Western”. The association in metaphor of the ideas of white and black with good and evil may also work in people’s subconscious and sometimes even in their consciousness. It seems appropriate to try to find out what the response would be if these non-white races lived as a minority in close contact with the whites. Would the rights white man enjoys be extended to the non-white or not?

A final point which seems so very crucial is the guilt Europeans feel for the crimes committed against the Jews, whereas no guilt, but often pride, is felt at the annihilation, slaughter, and deportation of the native peoples of America, Australia, Southern Africa and Palestine. I feel that Fanon, unintentionally perhaps, explains this point lucidly:

The Jew “is a white man, and apart from some rather debatable characteristics, he can sometimes go unnoticed… Granted, the Jews are harassed. They are hunted down, exterminated, cremated. But these are little family quarrels. The Jew is disliked from the moment he is tracked down. But in my case everything takes on a new guise. I am over determined from without. I am the slave not of the ‘idea’ that others have of me but of my own appearance”.

Immigrants in Britain
Racism takes on specific forms depending on the type and state of society, and impor-tant factors are the organization of society and its dynamic political and cultural processes (S. Hall, 1978). After World. War. II Britain faced a significant demographic crisis, because its population was ageing and dependency ratios remained high, on top which there had been, for several decades, net outward migration. The entry info Britain of immigrants meant that in 1983 it was estimated that almost one million people born in the U.K. were of West Indian or Asian descent, in addition to the 1,3 million born abroad. A. H. Richmond (1988) descri-bes the situation forcefully.

“Despite the scale of its immigration, Britain has remained insular in its outlook and isolationist in its policies. Immigrants from the ‘New Commonwealth were not welcomed, or effectively woven into the fabric of a polyethnic, multicultural society. Britain was reluctant to admit those who by race or cultural did not fit the image of a traditional ‘white Anglo Saxon’ population. Those who were allowed to settle faced widespread prejudice and discrimination. Personal and institutional racism persisted, even toward the second and subsequent generations born In Britain of immigrants parents or grandparents”.

P. Fitzpatrick looked at law in general and the Race Relations Act of 1976 in particular and concluded the racism seemed “sym-biotic with liberal Capitalism in Britain”:
“…There were certain persistent limits, certain bounds beyond which law did not proceed in countering racism. What, in an immediate sense, stood on the other side of those bounds and checked the law’s advance was the power and autonomy of employers”.

Black violations of the law are often defined as a cultural attribute and are used to supply the proof that the Blacks are incompatible with Britain. The solution P. Fitzpatrick suggests is to make the national “community and its law the incarnation of a rational universal ordering. Those of a ‘different culture’ are not, however, merely excluded from superior reasons”. Having a constitution, to which everyone can refer, therefore seems to be a good idea (in fact some have argued that one of the important reasons there is opposition to the writing of a constitution in Britain is that it would mean giving rights to non-white). After World. War. II, in particular, Britain experienced a relative decline in its power and influence, and it also declined economically (access to North Sea oil postponing the time when material standards would be seriously jeopardised). The size of the male labour force in employment fell by almost two million in ten years, while the number of employed women actually increased slightly, “reflecting the growth in service industries and part-time employment typical of post industrial Societies”. Predictably, immigrant workers were relatively hard-hit, especially the male population to other parts of the Commonwealth to one in which there was a multi-way flow of people to and from many parts of the world resulted in violent disturbances, beginning in Nottingham and London in 1958 and subsequently repeated at intervals in many other cities, the most serious outbreaks occurring in 1981 and 1985”.

A. H. Richmond seems here to be suggesting that the racial situation is made worse during periods of change, when there is insecurity. If one simultaneously considers the disturbances in Los Angles in 1992 and the theory that some people propound, that social changes in the US appear about eight years later in Britain, it may be that the worst is yet to come. These conflicts reflect a combination of the influence of history, and also class and ethnic factors, which are exacerbated by the economic crisis and government fiscal policies.

A H. Richmond reminds us of the hard facts:“Black and Asian immigrants and their descendants growing up in Britain are relatively segregated by region and concentrated in inner city neighbourhoods. They are also over-represented in manual occupations, as well as among the unem-ployed”.

Unskilled service personnel and labourers are proportionally over represented, but they are not a majority among the immigrant population, or the second generation (Brown, 1984). What all Black and Asian minorities have in common is “persistent exposure to the racial prejudice and discrimination that pervades British society”, which cannot be explained merely in terms of competition for housing, jobs or other resources but is “deeply embedded in the institutional structure of western societies and has been internalised in the personalities of those who live and work within and through those institutions” (A. H. Richmond). Measures taken to solve the problem are not aimed at the roots of the problem, but at trying to contain conflict; the problem will thus persist and flare up from time to time, and perhaps if one is a pessimist or a believer that history repeats itself then one would predict that it may soon flare up conclusively (e.g. looking at the events in Spain 500 years ago may encou-rage pessimism).

The immigrants had to face the older ‘colonial’ ideas, which ranged from a racist to a paternalistic (i.e. in a sense arrogant) attitude. There is a fear that the traditional ‘British way of life’ would be threatened by the immigration, which needed to be limited in the interests of the community as a whole (Lawrence, 1982). Culture is seen by many as something fixed and not something intrin-sically fluid, changing, unstable and dynamic (P. Gilroy). The culturalism of the ‘new’ racism has gone hand in hand with a definition of race as a matter of difference, but here again are found notions of supre-macy and ‘pure cultures that must not be corrupted’. It seems that there is an urgent need to analyse, in depth, what being ‘Bri-tish’ means, and rather then resorting to emotional outcries that merely encourage conflict. A. H. Richmond suggests that “Nationalism asserted itself in terms of the prior ‘rights’ of the indigenous ‘English’ over ‘alien’ invaders”, highlighting the old attitude about the civilised and the savages. Extremists demanded more restrictive immigration laws and repatriation, and even those who condemned these calls still “main-tained a substantial measure of social distan-ce from the immigrants” (A. H. Richmond). It seems that the mass media reinforce, and sometimes inflame, racial hatred through selective reporting (perhaps these are the modern manipulators of the ‘authorita-rian”?), and children have ‘learned to be prejudiced’ at home, in the school and in the community (Davey, 1983). There are certain factors, including teacher racism, which impede the opportunities of ethnic minority children in education (Swann, 1985), education being very important when one considers the competition for work and realises that education is an important method of improving the ‘status’ of the ethnic minorities.

References: -Van the Berghe (1967), “Race and Racism - A comparative perspective”
-Brown (1984), “Black and white in Britain: The third PSI survey”
-Davey (1983), “Learning to be prejudiced: Growing up in Multi Ethnic Britain”
-Davison (1966), “Black British: Immigrants in England”
-F. Fanon (1990), “The facts of Blackness”
-P. Fitzpatrick (1990), “Racism and the Innocence of Law”
-P. Gilroy (1990), “One Nation under a Groove: The cultural Politics of ‘Race’ and Racism in Britain”
-S. Hall (1978), “Racism and moral panics in Post-war Britain”
-Lawrence (1982), “Just plain Common sense: The Roots of Racism”
-P. Mason (1954), “An essay on racial ten-sion”
-T. F. Pettigrew (1956), “Regional Diffe-rences in Anti-Negro Prejudice”
-A. H. Richmond (1988), “Immigration and Ethnic conflict”
-J. Rex (1986), “The role of class analysis in the study of race relations – Weberian perspective”
-J. P. Sarte (1967), „Preface“ to F. Fanon, “The Wretched of the Earth”
-J. Solomos (1986), “Varieties of Marxist conception of ‘race’, class and the state: a critical analysis”
-Smith (1957), Islam in Modern Historyi
-Swann (1985), “Education for all”
-H. Wolpe (1986), Class concepts, class struggle and racism”

Racists are like fundies...

...if just a touch less insane (which is still saying a lot).

From local Klansman party, the Australian Protectionist Party.

The brutal bashing of an young man at Sunshine train station, in Melbourne, has once again highlighted the problems of crime associated with the immigration of large numbers of black Africans into Australia. [1]

Because no white guy has ever raped, assaulted, robbed or murdered. EVER.

Professor Andrew Fraser warned us all in 2005 about these dangers, when he said “Experience practically everywhere in the world tells us that an expanding black population is a sure-fire recipe for increases in crime, violence and a wide range of other social problems” [2]. Fraser was persecuted by the so-called “Human Rights” industry for telling the truth.

That's quite an ironic truth you have there, pal.

We must remember that societies become more and more authoritarian when they fall under the rule of regimes that push political multiculturalism and political correctness. Under Liberal-Labor’s politically-motivated multiculturalism laws, telling the truth can be illegal - but if we aren’t able to tell the truth, then who will?

Because allowing new arrivals to practice their own cultures (as compared to forcing migrants to assimilate to 'our' culture. Given that this multination consists of Jews, Buddhists, Christians, Hindus, Pagans, Muslims, non-believers, Asians, Aborigines, Western and Eastern Europeans, Italians, Greeks, Saharan and sub-Saharan Africans, Indians and Sri lankans, I would love to know what 'our' culture consists of) is apparently authoritarianism.

Whilst every society, ethnic group and race all have a percentage of people that commit violent crimes, research shows us that this percentage is significantly higher amongst black African males; to be quite clear, this does not mean that all of them are violent criminals, but that - compared to the general population - a higher percentage of black African males are more likely to commit crimes of violence. This is a fact, as shown by crime statistics in countries such as Australia, England and the USA. [3]

The organisation that has produced this is the white supremist New Century Foundation. You'll excuse me for taking their findings with a ocean's worth of metaphorical salt.

Newspaper reports in Australia have confirmed the higher crime rates of black Africans. For instance, the Herald Sun revealed that whilst the general rate of alleged crimes was 1 in 85, the rate for Somalians was 1 in 23. Political multiculturalists may offer all sorts of excuses as to why the black African crime rate is so much higher, blaming poverty, war trauma, etc., but the fact remains that their crime rate is indeed higher. [4]

I found the page showing these statistics here (from Crikey). Given that the stats don't show how many people of each ethnic group live in Victoria, it's impossible to say how much of a percentage of Somal-Australians are involved in crime.

This is not a matter of faceless “statistics”, but of real people suffering as victims of crime - it is about real people being hurt, disabled and killed. These higher crime “statistics” could mean your brother is bashed, your sister is raped, or your friend is murdered. Higher crime rates are about real people.

Yes, that can happen. Anybody can bash or rape or murder.

If we can choose between bringing in immigrants from a European people with a low crime rate, or from an African people with a high crime rate, who would choose the high crime option?

This reminds me of a line from Wolverine to Magneto, from Ultimate X-men.

"You told us life was just a choice between man wiping us out and the homosapien holocaust you always wanted. But Charles Xavier offered me third option...teaching 'em we're all human!"
(italic emphasis mine)

The fact is that political multiculturalists are extremists. They would rather have thousands more Australians being bashed, raped or murdered, rather than admit their mistake and halt the immigration of black Africans.

Who is to blame? It is the politicians and multiculturalists who are the problem. It is high time that we dumped the extremist ideologies of political multiculturalism and political correctness. It’s time that we started to protect Australians - and protect our nation’s future.

Flock off, you Bullsucking Nazis. Your scare tactics failed when your American counterparts talked of the dangers of racial integration. It failed when you ranted on about the 'Asian invasion' during the 1970s. And it'll fail now.

Stuff we should read.

Alas, fellow culture soldiers, but I have been terribly busy at the moment. Rather then fight alongside my fellows in the front trenches, I have been spirited away to the home front, to nurse elder statesmen and women in their final years.*

Unable to properly contribute my ideas to the blogosphere, I will (for today at least) direct readers (if only Reuben and Luli) to miscellaneous articles of interest.

- Ongoing racism against young Sudanese-Australians. Take a bow, Mr. Andrews.
- A scientist calls for ethics guidelines to be developed in relation to the use of robots. Good idea.
- The National Geographic examines intelligence in everyday animals, whilst Iceland debates whether to use its rivers for power, or to keep them as they are. (My opinion: keep them natural. We have other resources.)
- TIME magazine looks at Nelson Mandela, American Libertarianism, Obama's rise, global warming, capitalism, Somalia, the case for climate change, the abortion war in America, European multiculturalism, and Fiji.

That oughta keep the soldiers occupied.

*Working at a nursing home.

America still racist (suprise, surprise).

Well... this is interesting.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Deep-seated racial misgivings could cost Barack Obama the White House if the election is close, according to an AP-Yahoo News poll that found one-third of white Democrats harbor negative views toward blacks — many calling them "lazy," "violent," responsible for their own troubles.

The poll, conducted with Stanford University, suggests that the percentage of voters who may turn away from Obama because of his race could easily be larger than the final difference between the candidates in 2004 — about two and one-half percentage points.

Certainly, Republican John McCain has his own obstacles: He's an ally of an unpopular president and would be the nation's oldest first-term president. But Obama faces this: 40 percent of all white Americans hold at least a partly negative view toward blacks, and that includes many Democrats and independents.

More than a third of all white Democrats and independents — voters Obama can't win the White House without — agreed with at least one negative adjective about blacks, according to the survey, and they are significantly less likely to vote for Obama than those who don't have such views.

Here's my polling question: is anyone really that surprised? You only have to take a glance through the ADL's website to realise that America still has a long way to go in resolving her race problem.

However, neither party will address it. The Democrats can't because Obama will look as if he's playing the race card. The Republicans won't because it detracts from their mindless " 'Merica, 'Merica, 'Merica, ra ra ra!" rhetoric that they love so much.

Racism won't be solved if Obama becomes President. It won't be solved if (sadly, not when) a public apology is made on behalf of Euro-America to Afro-America and Native America for the former's crimes of slavery and genocide against the latter two. It can only be solved when every American of every colour, gender, class and orientation looks into their core and asks themselves "What is wrong with American bigotry?" before asking "What can I do?"

Racism will be solved when a black guy can walk down the streets of New York City and pull out his wallet without being shot 40 times in the chest. It will be solved when politicians no longer resort to fear-mongering to win elections at the cost to the social fabric. It will be solved when the combined number of every neo-Nazi, KKK, skinhead and generic racist and anti-Semitic organisation's numbers hit zero.
Anything else is delusion.

As Jasmyne Cannick puts it:

White women still clutch their purses when Black men and women are near them and white people still falsely accuse Blacks of committing crimes because it’s an easy out. Hell—they’ve done such a good job on us, there are plenty of Blacks who share the same feelings of whites about Blacks—yes their own people!

Like white men in the White House, these polls come a dime a dozen and don’t do anything but create an outlet for the mainstream news to bring up the subject of race relations as breaking news—when it’s not. We know exactly how we feel about each other, we know exactly who we are voting for and why. And whether or not the candidates address race relations, we know that race has as much to do with our vote as the economy and the war in Iraq.

Tell me something I don’t know—like why we fall for this crap every time.

And just to be fair—here are some adjectives, nouns, and verbs that have been used to describe whites by Blacks:

P.W.T., trailer park trash, oppressive, backstabbers, selfish, greedy, racist, jealous, hateful, slackers, corrupt, culture bandits…

Icould go on, but you get the point.

Show compassion? Must I?

I never consider myself to 'hate' anything or anyone. I consider genuine hate to be prejudice-prejudging someone from a characteristic (ie skin colour, religion, sexual orientation) that frankly has bugger-all to do the person themselves. But some people really know how to push my buttons. Like racists. You know the type. The knuckle dragging, club wielding, bear pelt wearing, 'just dragged my freakishly hairy ass out of the same caves that the rest of humanity left thousands of years ago' types of racists. Like these.

Four admit to bashing Sudanese teen

RIDING home from his part-time job at KFC last October, 17-year-old Sudanese refugee Ajang Gor was attacked by a group of youths who shouted racist taunts at him.

In an unprovoked assault they called him a "black c--t", punched him and hit him over the head with a Bacardi Breezer bottle, before leaving the Melton resident unconscious on the road and stealing his mobile phone.

Shane Psaila, 19, of Patho, Chris Carlin and Andrew Hoskins, both 21, of West Melton, and James Butler, 19, of South Melton, pleaded guilty in the County Court yesterday to one count each of recklessly causing serious injury.

Hoskins also pleaded guilty to theft and Carlin to possession of a drug of dependence.

Prosecutor Paul Moran told the court the four men had spent most of October 9, 2007, drinking and smoking cannabis. They left the local pub with a takeaway pack of Breezers about 5pm.

On their way home they passed Ajang Gor and his younger brother riding their bikes home from work.

"They immediately began shouting abuse at them saying, 'You black dogs, you get off your bikes and wait for us,' " Mr Moran said. "(One of the men) caught up to Ajang and used a closed fist to strike him."

He said the Sudanese youth was then hit over the head with a bottle that smashed on impact. He fell to the ground, striking the gutter and losing consciousness. Hoskins then stole his phone, and the four men fled.

The four were arrested on November 2, and made admissions in interviews with the police, but only one admitted to racially taunting the refugee.

Psaila told police that he had called him a "black c--t" and repeated the sentiments during his interview. "He's a bitch and he shouldn't even be in the country," Psaila told police.

Barristers for the four men said their clients had histories of drug or alcohol abuse, but none could give a reason for the assault. But Brian Birrelle, for Psaila, said his client's "lack of schooling has robbed him of a value system".

Terry Strong, for Butler, said the 19-year-old regretted his part in the assault: "He is sorry and he is ashamed of his conduct."

Counsel for the four asked Judge Phillip Coish not to impose immediate jail terms, a submission that the prosecutor, Paul Moran did not oppose.

But Judge Coish said he felt they had committed serious crimes that could warrant immediate jail time.

"I've got a 17-year-old riding home from a part-time job. He's just attacked and bashed senseless and then I've got a series of extreme racist taunts," he said.

The assault occurred a day before the funeral of 19-year-old Sudanese refugee Liep Gony who died after he was bashed and left for dead on a Noble Park nature strip two weeks earlier.

The week before the attack on Ajung Gor then immigration minister Kevin Andrews said that the Howard government had cut African refugee numbers because "some groups don't seem to be settling and adjusting into the Australian way of life".

In May this year The Age revealed that racial harassment of Africans increased following Mr Andrews' claims, according to a confidential Immigration Department report.

After he was attacked, Mr Gor told The Age he believed Mr Andrews' comments had spurred on his attackers.

"It's been said that we Sudanese are misbehaving and that there is a higher rate of crime, but I'm not sure if all these accusations are right," he said after his release from hospital.

Yesterday Mr Moran told Judge Coish that Ajang Gor no longer lived in Melton because of the incident.

Judge Coish ordered Psaila, Butler and Hoskins to undergo assessment for community based orders and released all four on bail until August 22.

(my emphasis)

At times like this, I'm reminded of the theologian and civil rights activist Malcolm X- "I believe in the brotherhood of man, all men, but I don't believe in brotherhood with anybody who doesn't want brotherhood with me. I believe in treating people right, but I'm not going to waste my time trying to treat somebody right who doesn't know how to return the treatment."

For someone to qualify as a human, one must require certain traits: kindness, compassion, empathy, altruism...traits that prevent this from occurring. I'm more reserved about Butler, but for Psaila...I don't count him as a human.

I have a new wish for my birthday: to put Shane "KKK" Psaila in the same room with Jasmyne "Unapologetically Black" Cannick and Sergeant "Savage" Wah for 1 hour.

A side note: could you imagine the hysteria if a young white guy had been bashed by violent Sudanese-Australian youths? You'd hear Kevin Andrews screeching "UNINTEGRATED" all the way from Canberra.

Blurring the lines of bigotry

Some time ago, I wrote a post about how 'racism' was a term that was inaccurately applied to hatred of Muslims (and more historically Jews). I asserted that this was due to race and religion being two totally different concepts (namely, one being biological and the other being cultural). This is fair enough. But recently, in classic spontaneity that only my brain is capable of, I realised that they were much closer then I first thought.

Although racism and religiophobia have differences in the target of hatred, what they do share in common are the thought processes behind them; namely, the fear of the Other.

The Other is the classic 'use and them' philosophy: that there is us, united as one, against them, which will overrun us of we don't band together. The Other can be group of people with a defining similarity; Muslims, Lebanese, Afro-Australians, Jews, gays...you name a group, chances are, they are considered the Other by another group.

In this sense, religiophobia and racism are similar to the point of being the same. It isn't a tremendous leap in logic to go from disliking a group of people for their ethnic heritage (for example, Arab-Australian Muslims) to disliking them for their perceived racial characteristics. The lines become even more blurred with Neo-Nazis and white supremacists in general, who often refer to Jews as a 'race', despite Judaism so obviously being a faith.

This raises an interesting question; if racism and religiophobia are the same (or at least, very similar), then where does that leave homophobia? Hatred of the gays is certainly the fear of the Other-go to any ultraconservative 'Christian' organisation's website and you'll see the same smears being trotted out-that gays molest children, that they actively 'recruit' children, that they're in league with pedophiles, that they're sinners, that they hate Christians...the list just goes on.The us and them philosophy is in full swing here, just the same as racism and religiophobia. So why do we count religiophobia as racism and give homophobia a separate classification?

My reasoning is that, quite often, certain religious practitioners have clear 'give aways' that identify their faith. Currently, Muslim women are the best example. If you see a woman wearing a hijab, it's just as clear to what her religion is, as is knowing the ancestry of a white man (namely, European). Also, the reason in the 4th paragraph establishes that racism and religiophobia more easily align to each other then with homophobia, although racists and religiophobes do tend to be homophobes as well.

Finally, why doesn't sexism rate a mention? Although it certainly is bigotry, in my opinion is a bigotry (quite possible the only one) that doesn't rely on the Other-or at least not in the same way as the aforementioned bigotries. Racism, religiophobia and homophobia all share the same idea that this is 'our' country, and those who don't fit into 'our' ideal citizen. In most cases, 'our' model citizen share most-if not all-of the following characteristics:

1. White
2. Christian
3. Heterosexual

We've seen these prerequisites mentioned by Drew Fraser, with the CDP and the Camden affairs, with Liberal Party members routinely attacking the Muslim-Australian community in classic dog-whistling style, and certainly with both Rudd and Howard endorsing Alan Jones' views that those "Middle-Eastern grubs" should "scurry back...to their lairs." The difference between a racist, a religiophobe, a homophobe and a sexist is that the former three would state their particular Other (most likely Afro-Australians, Muslims and gays) would bring nothing but dysfunction to 'their' country, the sexist wouldn't. No sexist would deny that women are vital to the country's existence; they would just say that women belong in the kitchen/laundry.

So, conclusively, where have we arrived at? Pretty much the same spot we started at. However, I have been able to articulate some thoughts and distinction of various incarnations of hatred:

1. Racism and religiophobia, although different in terms of a target, share the desire to label someone's external difference (whether it be a hijab, kipa or skin colour) and use it to justify demonising the Other.
2. Point 1. differs religiophobia and racism from homophobia, due to there is no defining external characteristic for gays.
3. All of the above differ from sexism, as the former hatreds mark the particular group of people as an Other, whilst sexism is just more generally oppressive.

One would think that racism in the 21 century would be a little more discreet.

I was checking up on the most popular Klansman political party* (the one that has managed to elect a senator) and I was naturally drawn to their immigration policies. And was I in for a shock. As the title suggests, I thought that for a hardline racist party to elect a senator they’d have an army of spin doctors to rival that of the Liberals, making sure that their racism well-hidden, a la CofCC. I was hysterically wrong. They might as well just say “We don’t want them darkies and Muzzies in our country!!1!” because what they have here isn’t any better.

Beware, you might want a sick bag ready:

ONE NATION POLICY STATEMENT:

#11 IMMIGRATION & CUSTOMS

One Nation believes in zero net immigration, (subject to review depending on economic conditions) & that coming to Australia is a privilege that must not be undervalued. We reserve the right of discretion to ensure these privileges are maintained, so protecting our economy, social cohesion & cultural heritage.

POLICY #11: CUSTOMS & IMMIGRATION

One Nation notes that immigration throughout the last century has been of great benefit to Australia. However it must be recognised that inappropriately high levels of immigration can be detrimental to employment, to national infrastructure, services & environment.

Illegal unauthorised arrivals by sea & air, has increased 354%. The situation is virtually out of control. Australian's are demanding action, these invaders should not be allowed to land on Australian soil, boats without documentation, containing illegal cargo should be turned around before they enter our waters, any detention should not be on the Australian mainland. Processing will be immediate, with no legal appeals. (Certainly not at taxpayer’s expense)

Our immigration program is in urgent need of overhaul; an immediate hold on immigration is necessary, until the economy has recovered. Then the balance needs to be bought back to the 1960 percentages to protect our culture & heritage, & promote, assimilation, nationalism, loyalty & pride in being Australian. (The real cost of immigration adds at least $15 billion Pa. to our foreign debt)

One Nation will re-Australian-ise the department by returning to its correct name "Immigration Department" we will dismantle the multiculturism part, & restore democratic choice.

To ensure it reflects the will & aspirations of Australians.

Australian "citizenship" is a valued privilege, to qualify it will be necessary to study the Australian Constitution & laws & after five years pass a test in English & swear allegiance to the crown & flag. This will eliminate the expense of printing material in foreign languages, & ensure assimilation & employment of those genuine in becoming a good citizen in their adopted country.

One Nation will review the criteria for business migration, increasing the minimum capital requirement; participants not complying with agreed terms to be placed on notice of repatriation.

Foreign student migration is abused to the extent that it precludes Australians from entry to educational institutions. One Nation believes that due to most countries now having good education facilities it is no longer necessary for them to come here to study.

The carrier's (airlines & shipping) who convey people to the country without documentation will be responsible for them. This includes immediate return to port of embarkation, & any other costs incurred.

One Nation will withdraw from UN treaties on migration & refugees, that conflict with our sovereign rights & laws, & amend laws if required.

DISCRETION

This means freedom of judgement or choice, to choose wisely, with the current terrorist problems this is essential. The facts are that all involved in terrorist activities to date have been Muslims between the age of 17 & 40. Muslims see terrorism as a black & white issue. A jihad between Muslims & infidels. Our policy in this regard has nothing to do with race; it is about protecting our country from a real threat.

Obviously. If you ignore the Creativity Movement, KKK, Army of God, Earth Liberation Movement, Animal Liberation Movement, IRA, and every racist skinhead movement in existence, then obviously only Muslims are responsible for terrorist attacks.

A minimum of five years waiting period on social security benefits for newly arrived migrants

Migrants passing a complete & thorough health check before acceptance being granted. Including AIDS, Hepatitis TB. (Due to the AIDS epidemic in Africa, it would be to risky to allow black immigration from there.

That's not what the ex-Immigration Department said:

Liberal Bruce Baird said Ms Hanson had her facts wrong in suggesting immigrants were bringing disease into the country.

Mr Baird said all immigrants underwent strict health and character checks before being granted visas.

"Ms Hanson will never let the truth get in the way of a good story,'' Mr Baird said in a statement.

"There are no immigrants from Africa or any other place in the world coming to Australia with diseases. This is pure fiction, designed to provoke racial intolerance in the community.''

Continuing on (BTW, I am aware that Baird is responding to racist remarks made by Hanson, not the ONP. However, his statement still stands):

Family reunion other than for immediate family, & that Australian relatives provide unconditional guarantees that they will provide full financial support, so that the family members do not disadvantage, indigenous Australians who have worked hard all their lives to provide hospital & social services.

The character of people wishing to migrate to Australia to be investigated. No dual citizenship, Australian citizenship to be mandatory after 5 years residency.

One Nation proposes that Immigration will become the Department of Customs & Immigration; Responsible for protection of our coastline from illegal invaders, goods (Drugs) & terrorists, control & monitoring of entry & leaving of people & goods, issue of passports, visas & other documentation

BRIEFING: IMMIGRATION

Australia does not presently write its own immigration policy in spite of any claims to the contoury. It yielded that right when it signed an international agreement, The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination of the United Nations on October 13,1966. This was ratified on September 13, 1975, without a referendum & against the will of the people as required under the constitution. Coalition governments, have used this to deliberately introduce into Australia unassimilable aliens, while at the same time people from where our founding ancestors originated, are deliberately prevented from entering.

Yup-it's OK if the majority wants it!

Deliberate over taxation has caused a drop in our birth rate, & so the government has an Immigration policy of multiracialism "Populate & Perish", to confuse the public they call it multiculturism.

IMMIGRATION DEPARTMENT

Immigration Dept covers the following: Citizenship, Grants, Illegal Migration, Migrant Services, Migrating to Australia, Passports & Visas, Visiting Australia.

Facts from Departments 2000-2001 Annual Report:

Average staffing was 4000, $18,949,000 was written off for detention of illegals

Total cost for immigration activities $666,607,000. Multicultural activities $76,620,000.

Number of registered migration agents as of 30/6/2001, 2429.

Asylum Seeker's Assistance Scheme cost $11,163,000.

Of 58,674 over stayers only 9054 removals so far.

1,646 applications & appeals to the courts.

1,877 refused entry at airports, 4141 illegal boat arrivals.

$350,000 paid to Federation of Ethnic Communities Councils of Australia for operating expenses $407,000 for interpreters.

$98.9 million paid to contractors under the Adult Migrant English Program.

RACISM

This is a new term, which gained currency soon after WW11. It has been defined differently in various dictionaries, in wording & meanings.

Racism is a term used as a weapon of offence against white people who are proud of the achievements of their race & history, & who wish to live among people of their own kind.

Actually, racism is a weapon against a racial or ethnic minority group. Just about every black Australian and Muslim woman could testify examples.

Racism is used as a weapon against the freedom of speech. Article 19 Declaration of Human Rights states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion & expression; this right includes the right to hold opinions without interference & to seek, receive & impart information & ideas through any media & regardless of frontiers."

Uh...racism has nothing to do with freedom of speech. It's whether you promote your racist views-that's when it may conflict with FOS laws (depending on the country). Racism as an ideology itself is perfectly legal.

This is now the outcry when the people of Australia try to debate their future & protect the country from the failed evils of multiculturism. In an attempt to gag debate, the coalition has introduced "Anti-Discrimination Legislation," the Beattie Government announced an apartheid policy for Queensland, to celebrate Australia day 2003.

IMIGRATION DETENTION AMENDMENT BILL 2003

The speech by Senator Len Harris clearly points out some of the loopholes that allow illegals (criminals, drug dealers & terrorists) to use our legal system at the expense of the crown to remain in the country. Labor typically has put forward a plan for a special appeal committee that would add further delays & costs.

The loophole in sect. 1963 of the immigration act, allows illegals to appeal & to be released into the community for up to 540 days on an interlockery order.

These people are now in detention centres because they have chosen to be it’s their wilful decision.

The cost to the Australian taxpayer is horrendous; the average time for a case in the Federal Court is 179 days, appeal to the Full Court 149 days, appeal to the High Court 189 days. Total 550 days, at an average cost per illegal of $270,000. This is not acceptable; the money would be far better invested in public health & other areas.

Len Harris clearly pointed out ONE NATIONS policies when speaking to this bill that will eliminate this loophole.

WHITE AUSTRALIA

All conducted surveys clearly show over 85% of Australians wish to retain the white Australia Policy which was replaced with the evil multiculturism policy without their consent.

One Nation will ensure the will of the people.

(my emphasis)

Personally I wouldn't mind a few links to back up those uncited statistics. And I'm also curious-if the majority of people wanted highly draconian laws against hate speech ? As in to the point where it became a genuine threat to free (not just hate) speech? Would you still rant on about the will of the people (as if that has anything to do with justice) or would you want certain laws that the majority of people, even if they wanted it, still couldn't remove? It's a two-way street, d*ckheads.

PS: If you want proof that this is genuinely their policies, then I have the screenshots if you want them emailed.

*Other Klansman parties include Australia First, the Australian Protectionist Party, Pauline Hanson’s United Australia Party, the Australian League of Rights and Australians Against Further Immigration**

**A more accurate title would be Australians Against Further Non-White Immigration, but I doubt it would be popular.