Australian Politics Forum - What is racism?

Mr Hammer

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 25212
Gender: male

Re: What is racism?
Reply #330 - Jan 9^th, 2017 at 4:53pm

Aussie wrote on Jan 9^th, 2017 at 4:17pm:

Quote:

It has to be asserting the superiority of one cultural/ethnic group (real or perceived) over another. I've never said anything that contradicts this basic point.

Arabia is for Arabs is

my

term. It has zero to do with a group superiority over another. I include Jewish 'Arabs' when I use the term Arabia is for Arabs. I specifically exclude Jews from Europe, the USA and elsewhere. They ought bugger orf, and leave that Land to the Arabs.

And, Arabia is not where Western influence of a significant kind ought to be. That is what is causing the problem. We interfere all the bloody time there.

What about Europe for Europeans? You must agree going by your obvious belief system. Huh

Back to top

IP Logged

Mr Hammer Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 25212 Gender:	Re: What is racism? Reply #331 - Jan 9^th, 2017 at 4:53pm miam
Back to top	IP Logged

Aussie Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 38840 Gender:	Re: What is racism? Reply #332 - Jan 9^th, 2017 at 4:55pm polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 9^th, 2017 at 4:42pm: Get ready for some verballing Aussie. What....for the zillionth time?
Back to top	IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 38840
Gender: male

Re: What is racism?
Reply #333 - Jan 9^th, 2017 at 5:00pm

Mr Hammer wrote on Jan 9^th, 2017 at 4:53pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 9^th, 2017 at 4:17pm:

Quote:

It has to be asserting the superiority of one cultural/ethnic group (real or perceived) over another. I've never said anything that contradicts this basic point.

Arabia is for Arabs is

my

term. It has zero to do with a group superiority over another. I include Jewish 'Arabs' when I use the term Arabia is for Arabs. I specifically exclude Jews from Europe, the USA and elsewhere. They ought bugger orf, and leave that Land to the Arabs.

And, Arabia is not where Western influence of a significant kind ought to be. That is what is causing the problem. We interfere all the bloody time there.

What about Europe for Europeans? You must agree going by your obvious belief system. Huh

Ima talking about Arabia. Europe is a different kettle of fish altogether, and is paying the price for Western interference in Arabia, as it bloody well should.

It

caused the problem.

Back to top

IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 96385

Re: What is racism?
Reply #334 - Jan 9^th, 2017 at 5:18pm

Mr Hammer wrote on Jan 9^th, 2017 at 4:01pm:

Karnal wrote on Jan 9^th, 2017 at 3:50pm:

Frank wrote on Jan 8^th, 2017 at 12:50pm:

Karnal wrote on Jan 8^th, 2017 at 12:05pm:

Ali G is a parody of Britishness itself, Sore End. Cohen's having a laugh at British migrant "youth culture" as shown on British TV - patronisingly.

At no point does Ali G ever mention his own religious beliefs. In the (awful) film, his name is revealed as Alister Graham.

It's a parody of West Indian yuf in England.

He's a parody of a TV presenter imitating West Indian yuf, dear boy.

I thought every British schoolboy knew that.

He's a Jewboy making fin of the gentile. Loads of Jews do it. Jerry Springer and Mauri Povich (Jews) made millions out of it.

Indeed. We have a Canadian one on our very board.

Back to top

IP Logged

Mr Hammer

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 25212
Gender: male

Re: What is racism?
Reply #335 - Jan 9^th, 2017 at 5:21pm

Aussie wrote on Jan 9^th, 2017 at 5:00pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Jan 9^th, 2017 at 4:53pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 9^th, 2017 at 4:17pm:

Quote:

It has to be asserting the superiority of one cultural/ethnic group (real or perceived) over another. I've never said anything that contradicts this basic point.

Arabia is for Arabs is

my

term. It has zero to do with a group superiority over another. I include Jewish 'Arabs' when I use the term Arabia is for Arabs. I specifically exclude Jews from Europe, the USA and elsewhere. They ought bugger orf, and leave that Land to the Arabs.

And, Arabia is not where Western influence of a significant kind ought to be. That is what is causing the problem. We interfere all the bloody time there.

What about Europe for Europeans? You must agree going by your obvious belief system. Huh

Ima talking about Arabia. Europe is a different kettle of fish altogether, and is paying the price for Western interference in Arabia, as it bloody well should.

It

caused the problem.

why is it different?? Huh

Back to top

IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 96385

Re: What is racism?
Reply #336 - Jan 9^th, 2017 at 5:22pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 9^th, 2017 at 3:58pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 8^th, 2017 at 9:39am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 16^th, 2016 at 11:40am:

Apparently, the "clear reference to racial groupings" as well as "his desire for genocide" is all encapsulated in that one phrase "arabia for arabs" - correct FD?

Just one problem - arabs are not a race, they are a linguistic group, defined only by the language they speak - not from any genetic commonalities that might class them as a "race" - as understood by the 19th century notion of the word.

Interestingly, when I pointed out this clear contradiction in FD's position, he flayed away in deflection in typical fashion

Gandalf have you shifted from insisting "Arabia is for Arabs" is not racist because Arabs are not a race, to saying it is not racist because it implies no inferiority?

Quoting me out of context. My point about arabs not being a race was to highlight the logical inconsistency in your argument. You are the one insisting racism has to be about "race" - not me. I don't believe in the existence of any "race" - remember? And before you get too carried away with this new line of attack alleging that I think racism can be based on any arbitrary human categorisation (and therefore why not doctors?) - I'll simply point out that I said from the very beginning that it has to at least be based on cultural/ethnic groups (and yes, that can include religions) - real or perceived.

The fact is I said from the very beginning that 'arabs for arabia' could very well be racist - but depending on the context. It has to be asserting the superiority of one cultural/ethnic group (real or perceived) over another. I've never said anything that contradicts this basic point.

You do know that FD's just having a laugh, don't you, G? He doesn't actually believe anything he's posting, he's just squirming to avoid confessing to his wacism.

If not Abu, dear, you.

Back to top

IP Logged

Mr Hammer Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 25212 Gender:	Re: What is racism? Reply #337 - Jan 9^th, 2017 at 5:22pm miam miam shuzbutt
Back to top	IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49371
At my desk.

Re: What is racism?
Reply #338 - Jan 9^th, 2017 at 7:45pm

Quote:

I interpret that as stating one race is superior to another - don't you?

Generally when people state specifically that they are not saying one is superior, I interpret it to mean that one is not superior.

If you do interpret it as a statement of superiority, why is "Arabia for Arabs" not a statement of superiority?

If "kill all the non-whites" specifically excludes superiority as a justification, will you insist it is not racist?

Quote:

Pretty much.

It was in the context of foreign policy towards Israel - specifically about what should happen in the future.

Quote:

I never said I thought Aussie had a particular coherent argument

Goes without saying.

Quote:

But not thinking something through particularly well doesn't make one racist.

He did actually accept the racist tag.

Quote:

Still not getting through am I? 'muslim' is not the racist part, inbred therefore stupid is.

No it isn't. You only think this because you think inbred parents necessarily have inbred children. In order to make this case you have to invent an entire story about purebred recessive retarded ethnicities as the only possible way to get to stupid.

Quote:

Quoting me out of context.

It is from this thread Gandalf. Same context. You just chop and change your argument as the irrationality of each finally dawns on you.

Quote:

And before you get too carried away with this new line of attack alleging that I think racism can be based on any arbitrary human categorisation (and therefore why not doctors?)

I did not say this. You did. Why not doctors was my response to your insistence that because races are fake then racism can be based on any fake grouping. I gave a clear and non-arbitrary requirement that is wholly consistent with the conventional interpretation of race.

Quote:

I'll simply point out that I said from the very beginning that it has to at least be based on cultural/ethnic groups (and yes, that can include religions) - real or perceived.

So why go to so much effort to argue that "inbred and therefor stupid" is the racist part, not Muslim?

When you converted to Islam, what cultural/ethnic group did you join? Why did you previously state religion as a separate group rather than insisting it is a type of ethnic/cultural group?

Quote:

The fact is I said from the very beginning that 'arabs for arabia' could very well be racist - but depending on the context. It has to be asserting the superiority of one cultural/ethnic group (real or perceived) over another. I've never said anything that contradicts this basic point.

Yes you did. You said there is an implied inferiority in my example of white people, despite it specifically excluding inferiority. That is a contradiction. You read it into the argument when it is specifically excluded, and exclude it where nothing has been stated.

Quote:

Arabia is for Arabs is my term. It has zero to do with a group superiority over another. I include Jewish 'Arabs' when I use the term Arabia is for Arabs. I specifically exclude Jews from Europe, the USA and elsewhere. They ought bugger orf, and leave that Land to the Arabs.

Ah, not racist at all then hey Aussie? Gandalf, how does this differ from my white people example?

Quote:

Get ready for some verballing Aussie.

Aussie never could explain what the problem is with "verballing". Can you? I give you a far harder time than Aussie.

Quote:

Ima talking about Arabia. Europe is a different kettle of fish altogether, and is paying the price for Western interference in Arabia, as it bloody well should. It caused the problem.

Are you saying the continent rather than the people caused the problem?

Did the Arabs ever cause any problems in Europe?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 47546
Gender: male

Re: What is racism?
Reply #339 - Jan 9^th, 2017 at 7:51pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 9^th, 2017 at 2:27pm:

Frank wrote on Jan 8^th, 2017 at 9:26am:

So they DO have a separate, other cultural identity. That's what the beard and the hijab and niqab say, loud and clear; we are not like you, we are a separate, self-separating, unintegrated group.

False dichotomy. Having a non-western 'cultural identity' shouldn't necessarily be interpreted as a big "F you" to western culture. This is what closed-minded people like you assume - because you are always assuming the worst of these people. The fact is, the overwhelming majority of cultural minorities in a western multicultural society have more than proven themselves to be compatible and productive in western society. No doubt you, and I suspect Yadda will blunder back in with your obligatory anecdotes of a few ratbags who buck the trend, but it doesn't change the fact that you are wrong- demonstrably so.

Fudging, pal, you are fudging. They do demonstrate their cultural separateness as much as they can. The niqab, the ostentatious beard above the pajamas, the endless demand for prayer rooms, prayer breaks, early marks on Friday, special consideration during Ramadan, sensitivity to this that and the other are all demands because thy are unwilling to fit in with Western customs and culture.

They are exploiting a tolerance that is not extended by Muslims to non-Muslims when THEY are in their own Muslim cultural surroundings in Muslim countries. I could not flaunt my disregard for Muslim culture and customs if I went to a Muslim country where they do expect you to dress like a Muslim. I couldn't eat my BLT sandwiches openly at Ramadan, I could't refuse to exchange niceties at Eid and so forth. If the police stopped me I could't make a fuss about being discriminated against because my wife an daughters are not covered. And if I said they shouldn't take the Koran's word (5:51) about disdaining me to heart, I would be up on blasphemy charges like the mayor of Jakarta.

It's all one way cultural sensibility with 'demonstratively pious' Muslims. They always demand what they do not extend to others. Muslims keep their heads down as long as they have to. There is no celebration of 'cultural diversity and tolerance' in Muslim countries. There is sectarian violence and oppression of the wrong kind of Muslim and of the non-Muslims. Because that's what Islam demands.

Just imagine for a minute what the world would be like if Muslim countries were as tolerant and accommodating as Europe, North America, Australia and NZ. Just imagine.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49371
At my desk.

Re: What is racism?
Reply #340 - Jan 9^th, 2017 at 7:59pm

The world would be a very different place. Islam erased almost the entirety of western civilisation up to that point, locking it out of human development almost completely. Where there was once the most advanced civilisations on the planet now stand some of the most backwards and oppressive. A poo stain running from West Africa to Pakistan, and coming soon to a South East Asian country near you. They have barely progressed over 1400 years, and where they have it was the rest of the world dragging them kicking and screaming. We had to repeatedly send in our armies just to bring an end to slavery.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Karnal Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 96385	Re: What is racism? Reply #341 - Jan 9^th, 2017 at 8:01pm Another one for the Wiki, FD. Now you can quote yourself.
Back to top	IP Logged

polite_gandalf Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20027 Canberra Gender:	Re: What is racism? Reply #342 - Jan 10^th, 2017 at 6:41am Karnal wrote on Jan 9^th, 2017 at 8:01pm: Another one for the Wiki, FD. Now you can quote yourself. He does. The 'faith ratchet' page is literally full of claims of muslims "saying" stuff - which when you look at the links, is actually FD saying it for them.
Back to top	A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said: Quote: Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms. IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: What is racism?
Reply #343 - Jan 10^th, 2017 at 6:44am

Frank wrote on Jan 9^th, 2017 at 7:51pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 9^th, 2017 at 2:27pm:

Frank wrote on Jan 8^th, 2017 at 9:26am:

So they DO have a separate, other cultural identity. That's what the beard and the hijab and niqab say, loud and clear; we are not like you, we are a separate, self-separating, unintegrated group.

False dichotomy. Having a non-western 'cultural identity' shouldn't necessarily be interpreted as a big "F you" to western culture. This is what closed-minded people like you assume - because you are always assuming the worst of these people. The fact is, the overwhelming majority of cultural minorities in a western multicultural society have more than proven themselves to be compatible and productive in western society. No doubt you, and I suspect Yadda will blunder back in with your obligatory anecdotes of a few ratbags who buck the trend, but it doesn't change the fact that you are wrong- demonstrably so.

Fudging, pal, you are fudging. They do demonstrate their cultural separateness as much as they can. The niqab, the ostentatious beard above the pajamas, the endless demand for prayer rooms, prayer breaks, early marks on Friday, special consideration during Ramadan, sensitivity to this that and the other are all demands because thy are unwilling to fit in with Western customs and culture.

They are exploiting a tolerance that is not extended by Muslims to non-Muslims when THEY are in their own Muslim cultural surroundings in Muslim countries. I could not flaunt my disregard for Muslim culture and customs if I went to a Muslim country where they do expect you to dress like a Muslim. I couldn't eat my BLT sandwiches openly at Ramadan, I could't refuse to exchange niceties at Eid and so forth. If the police stopped me I could't make a fuss about being discriminated against because my wife an daughters are not covered. And if I said they shouldn't take the Koran's word (5:51) about disdaining me to heart, I would be up on blasphemy charges like the mayor of Jakarta.

It's all one way cultural sensibility with 'demonstratively pious' Muslims. They always demand what they do not extend to others. Muslims keep their heads down as long as they have to. There is no celebration of 'cultural diversity and tolerance' in Muslim countries. There is sectarian violence and oppression of the wrong kind of Muslim and of the non-Muslims. Because that's what Islam demands.

Just imagine for a minute what the world would be like if Muslim countries were as tolerant and accommodating as Europe, North America, Australia and NZ. Just imagine.

Sorry old boy - but you are so full of crap.

You haven't even attempted to counter the fact that cultural minorities in the west are overwhelmingly accepted by society, and the overwhelmingly integrate and contribute positively. You just revert to type, ranting on about your baseless stereotypes. Its almost like you are trying to come across as a bigot.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: What is racism?
Reply #344 - Jan 10^th, 2017 at 7:04am

freediver wrote on Jan 9^th, 2017 at 7:45pm:

If "kill all the non-whites" specifically excludes superiority as a justification, will you insist it is not racist?

How absurd can you get? Only in your world could the statement "kill all non-whites" be said in a context that "specifically excludes superiority as a justification". I thought I told you before to use your head FD.

freediver wrote on Jan 9^th, 2017 at 7:45pm:

It is from this thread Gandalf. Same context. You just chop and change your argument as the irrationality of each finally dawns on you.

No. I used your argument to demonstrate the logical inconsistency in it. You then quoted me stating that argument and claimed that it was my argument. It would of course have been very easy to understand its not my argument - given my repeatedly stated point that I don't even believe in races.

freediver wrote on Jan 9^th, 2017 at 7:45pm:

When you converted to Islam, what cultural/ethnic group did you join?

*facepalm*

Seriously, how many times am I going to have to explain this FD?

It is *NOT* a cultural/ethnic group to *ME*. But it clearly is as far as racists are concerned. They construct a whole array of false cultural/ethnic - and yes 'racial' markers - like psychopathy, misogyny, inbreeding and inbreeding related retardedness - and use those stereotypes to engage in racism against muslims.

Thats what I've always said FD - racism is based on cultural/ethnic/racial constructs of the racist. Which is what you started to go with too - but then went back into nonsensical territory by asserting that you can judge on behalf of the racist and declare what they do and don't consider a 'race' for racism purposes. ie the invented term 'all muslims are sand negro' can definitely be racist, but 'all muslims are inbred-retarded' can't be - even though both are cases of bigotry based on broad-stroking an entire "ethnic" group.

And yes, absolutely, if a racist perceives doctors to be a cultural/ethnic/racial group, they can be 'racist' against them. I just can't conceive of it happening though.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Poll
Question: Is the statement is my signature racist?
yes 5 (55.6%) no 3 (33.3%) depends 1 (11.1%) don't know 0 (0.0%) Total votes: 9 « Created by: polite_gandalf on: Jan 29^th, 2017 at 9:05am »