Monthly Archives: February 2013

On racism and “intellectual” game playing

I like (Ok, maybe not quite the right word for) the following description of responses to today’s racial abuse—& yes, I acknowledge the full details and that underling this is a general hatred issue someone has—is copied with permission from an “In the News” thread on Whirlpool.), in response to posts like this one quoted below. Note that quotes from others this poster is replying to are indicated by quote marks within this block quote.

Matt writes: “I hope everyone here would challenge any form of abuse, rather than poring over their dictionary. Over and out.”

Well in a point he (Jeremy Fernandez) and I are doing so in challenging the abuse Australians get by being labelled racist based on abuse such as in this article.

The abuse wasn’t racially motivated nor does it illustrate the view of the majority of Australians.

Heliotic writes… “It wasn’t a racist attack it was only a verbal attack using racist terms.”

How is calling someone black a racist term?

1. Someone posts article outlining racist feral bogans being… racist feral bogans

2. Chorus of blinkered responses ignoring the problem, missing the point or both:
a) Just cause one person is racist doesnt mean that everyone is racist, therefore there is no problem
c) Well, go to China! They are HEAPS more racist than us! Therefore, we dont have a problem!
d) I am a middleclass white male betweent he ages of 16 and 45 and one time someone called me a skip! Everyone else is racist, not white people! WHEN IS WHITE HISTORY MONTH?!
e) Racism is bullcrap, man. How come they can call each other the n-word, but I can’t say it?!
f) A variety of offtopic standard rants, such as vague ‘out of touch magistrate judges soft on crime’, some kind of random ‘stop teh boatz’ argument
g) Someone says something along the lines of ‘if you hate Straya and Freedom so much, why don’t you just get out of mah country!’. Because if you don’t think Australia is perfect, you are an unAustralian traitor attacking the Anzacs and Bindi Irwin.

3. Ten pages of followup wherein people argue over petty semantics, new posters blunder in and spit out the same thing that someone else has said every second page.