Home » Australian Politics » Le boxer noir

Le boxer noir

I just love this little piece from Gerard Henderson in today’s SMH :

Ah its the old politics of identity and our friends from the left seem really intent upon having a monopoly upon who can call themselves this or that. Frankly the sooner we remove any and all  largess that relies upon any sort of racial qualification the better this nation will be in terms of social harmony. Then it will be of no consequence if anyone wants to call themselves “aboriginal”, Immigrant or gasp even a Londoner. Because it simply won’t matter where anyone comes from what will matter is who you are now and if you are in need. Then it should be your need and not your ethnicity that matters to qualify you for any largess and assistance of  from the government.

Cheers Comrades


14 Comments

  1. deknarf says:

    The tragedy is that so many people claim the right to free speech and then lack the capability to say anything other than that which is stupid and/or inappropriate and/or tactless and/or deliberately inflammatory etc, etc. English is so much better than that in creating a language so capable of expressing ideas and views — and these twinkies lack the ability to use it. So we have Henderson defending the utterings of a thickhead about aboriginality or not, whilst having a bit of a ‘slag off’ at Mansell (another idiot). The three of them all being extremists of one colour or another (pun intended).
    And here we be, of political persuasions far divided, having to reiterate Voltaire (well I think it was he anyhow): ‘I may not agree with what you say, but I would defend, to the death, your right to say it!’ Which then raises the dilemma; ‘would I go to the battlements for such as these in defence of something that I believe in so strongly?’ Such people as these make you question your values!

  2. Ray Dixon says:

    So Mundine’s as stupid as Bolt? What’s new?

  3. Iain Hall says:

    Ray. its not a question of stupidity but one about wanting a society that offers neither favor nor discrimination on the basis of race.

  4. Craig says:

    Pretty funny that Mansell believes in the Neo Nazi, “One drop rule.”, being if you have one drop of Aboriginal blood you’re then an Aboriginal. In fact our current federal laws with the Australian government are Neo Nazi in nature as they believe in the “One drop rule.”, too. So who are the real racial supremacists for benefits and privilege?

    In the end I’m not bothered, as this way I know to stay clear of confused peoples. I also wonder if the federal government keeps these racial rules so as not to advertise a fairly successful genocide of a peoples? As only 40000 full blood Aboriginals remain, so I guess the government statisticians need the white Aboriginals to bolster the numbers some what.

    I fundamentally disagree with the Liberal right wing of Borg assimilation policy, ethnicity matters as well as race. In fact the current undoing of the European union could even be put down to the ethnicity and cultures of the North, South and peripheral fringe, being so fundamentally different, a further European fiscal union is doomed to the same fate as the current EU problems.

    Take the Middle Eastern and North African ethnicities, democracy will never exist in the Middle East or North Africa, not what we consider democracy any way. Tribal supremacy rises to the top in these Islamic countries, which is the polar opposite to the individual liberal autonomy born out of the enlightenment , so praised by the Anglo-Saxon. So in the future the Arab springs will be looked at as a Liberal minded failure of foreign policy.

  5. Ray Dixon says:

    Iain, even you (rusted on conservative) would have to acknowledge that for the best part of the 200 years from 1788 we certainly discriminated against aborigines based on their race. Given that our enlightment has only come to the fore as recently as 1967 when we first allowed aborigines to be regarded as citizens (by constitutional amendment via referendum) you do understand, don’t you, that we are still in that transition phase of bringing them up to the playing field you and I regard as a natural entitlement of our birth? That’s why it seems to some people that aboriginal descendants are getting ‘preferential’ treatment – when it’s merely to give ‘em a hands up. I don’t begrudge them that but the longer people like you do, then the longer it’ll go on for.

  6. Ray Dixon says:

    I should add that I actually agree that *some* aboriginal descendants are probably getting entitlements they don’t deserve or need, but it would be few and, besides, that’s just what happens with government programs. It’s much like how some multi-millionaire retirees are still getting a pension and other benefits – they slip through. So be it.

  7. Brian says:

    I remember Mansell well from his activism many years ago and I find him a complete tit. And yes, he does play upon his alleged Aboriginality, perhaps not for financial gain but for profile and attention. Because without it, he’d be a nothing and a nobody. Geoff Clark here in Victoria is another who springs to mind.

    I have no issue with individuals who associate with a particular race or culture, if it helps them to understand themselves and their heritage. But using it as either a soapbox or for financial gain is wrong. I guess this is what Andrew Bolt was saying in his famous faux pas. He was criticising individuals for misusing and exploiting their racial status, rather than vilifying them on the basis of race. His problem was that he’s such a shoddy researcher that he got much of it wrong and was made to look foolish as a result.

    I’m not given to agreeing with much that Craig has written, but I think he is spot on there. The so called “Arab Spring” will prove to be no such thing. Unless it refers to a spring that goes “boing” and hurls them all back to where they were before (or worse).

  8. Iain Hall says:

    Craig

    I fundamentally disagree with the Liberal right wing of Borg assimilation policy, ethnicity matters as well as race.

    I tend to disagree with that , to some extent those from distinct minorities have to assimilate into the majority culture if they want to succeed in the material sense this does not mean that they have to forgo their personal identity, just that they have to become part of the mainstream economic paradigm.
    Ray

    you do understand, don’t you, that we are still in that transition phase of bringing them up to the playing field you and I regard as a natural entitlement of our birth? That’s why it seems to some people that aboriginal descendants are getting ‘preferential’ treatment – when it’s merely to give ‘em a hands up. I don’t begrudge them that but the longer people like you do, then the longer it’ll go on for.

    Ray its not the “hands up” that I begrudge them but the racial qualification for that largess that I find offensive. Now its all well and good to suggest special treatment based upon race is a “transition phase” but how much longer are we going to be in in that phase?

    Brian

    I have no issue with individuals who associate with a particular race or culture, if it helps them to understand themselves and their heritage. But using it as either a soapbox or for financial gain is wrong. I guess this is what Andrew Bolt was saying in his famous faux pas. He was criticising individuals for misusing and exploiting their racial status, rather than vilifying them on the basis of race. His problem was that he’s such a shoddy researcher that he got much of it wrong and was made to look foolish as a result.

    I tend to agree with you here Brian except for the part where you suggest that Bolt got ” much of it wrong” I would say that he got some of it wrong but mostly he got it exactly right

  9. Brian says:

    No he did not. He made a series of assumptions about the motives and actions of a group of individuals, based on incorrect facts (much like those offered by your mate “kman”). The Federal Court ruled that Bolt got critical facts wrong and thus vilified the persons involved. No assumption can be correct if the facts are wrong.

    Which is not to say that Bolt should not have written the article. If what he alleged could be proved true, it would be worthy of the strongest criticism. But he didn’t prove it because he was not in possession of the correct facts or reliable evidence. I don’t believe he was being racist but his competency as a journalist/researcher was certainly lacking.

  10. Iain Hall says:

    Did you actually read the pieces in question Brian? Or are you basing your opinion on the hearsay of the bolt haters?

  11. Brian says:

    What a strange question. Of course I have read Bolt’s original columns. I read his material regularly, out of curiosity more than anything. And I followed the case closely and read both the coverage and the final judgement.

    As for the “Bolt haters”, I don’t take much notice of garbage spun by bloggers and people who comment on news sites, Iain. Most are full of crap. I prefer to look at the available facts.

  12. Iain Hall says:

    Not a strange question at all if you have interacted with bolt critics as often as I have.

  13. Craig says:

    I’m not given to agreeing with much that Craig has written, but I think he is spot on there. The so called “Arab Spring” will prove to be no such thing. Unless it refers to a spring that goes “boing” and hurls them all back to where they were before (or worse).

    Interesting Brian. Well if you agree with my premise on the “Arab Springs”, you would inextricably have to agree with my opinion on the EU. Why? Well, it has very similar, though to differing degrees, cultural factors drawn along meta ethnicity borders that make my prediction and the present EU afflictions, true.

  14. Brian says:

    Not a strange question at all if you have interacted with bolt critics as often as I have.

    Like I said, where possible I base my views on first hand evidence, not those who sit around and chatter about it.

    Well if you agree with my premise on the “Arab Springs”, you would inextricably have to agree with my opinion on the EU.

    To a degree I do, Craig. When the EU started I never believed it would succeed. Europe in many respects is just a tribal jigsaw. Its borders, alliances and relationships have been drawn, collapsed and re-drawn so many times that an idiot or an eternal optimist could believe the EU would last or succeed.

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the Sandpit

I love a good argument so please leave a comment

Please support the Sandpit

Please support the Sandpit

Do you feel lucky?

Do you feel lucky?

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 259 other followers

%d bloggers like this: