mothra wrote on Jul 30^th, 2017 at 7:50pm:


You need to pay a visit to lakemba.
It's not a happy place.

There is a difference between racism and common sense.

Sometimes one must be logically zenophobic for the betterment and safety of the civilization.

If one introduces species of creatures that dont fit in, do not contribute to the health or environment or that have a negative impact on the existing environment, is it not sensible to preclude these from entering that environment?
We stop foreign animals coming into Australia, to protect Australian animals.
We stop the import of foriegn plants to prevent destruction of native species.

Surely you will not lable this as plantiphobic or animalophoboc.
It is just sensible control.

As we have seen, with rabbits and cane toads, importing the wrong species has catastrophic effect on the environment.

So to we must prevent the import of toxic cultures, cultures that cause disharmony or perpetrate ill feelings simply by being what they are.
This CULT brings violence wherever it goes, and beyond.
It is itself totally intolerant, racist and regilionistic.
It tolerates nothing but its own and seeks to eliminate all others in its sick drive to destroy everything not islam.

Every country that has welcomed this CULT has see crime grow exponentially.
Every country that has taken in this CULT has had its welfare rorted and decimated by its followers.
Every country that has given refuge from the horrors of countries that are controlled by this its own cult, denigrate, insult and create harm to that countries people.

This is not a CULT of peace, its teachings are openly violent and warfare focussed.
This CULT brings destruction wherever it goes.

Its not racism, because there is no one race.
But this CULT uses racism to promote its own agenda of control.

It is religionism that this CULT practices, in that it refuses to allow any other religion to practice openly.
This CULT demands its rights to practice in every other country.
But in CULT governed countries no other religion os allowed.

Who is the true racist?
Who is truely intolerant?

Its not racism to want to protect oneself, its common sense.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 30^th, 2017 at 7:02pm:


Well put.

It's always a one way ticket with this racist crap.

Any contradiction, criticism & counter opinion is racist.

Every offense taken is because the speech, action or suggestion is racist.

The continuing/continual perpetuation of the myth that only whitey is or can be racist.

You should chuck your cracked record in the bin Mothballs & make an appointment for a repress.

I think it is very racist and bigoted of a very very large number of third world immigrants and refugees that they are not assimilating as quickly as possible. Coming to Australia and the West and still carrying on like they are in some third world enclave is deeply offensive because of its racist disdain for Australia.

No wonder these people get back what they are putting out.

5 Reasons It's Difficult To Explain Racism To Casual Racists

People have a lot of interesting excuses when they're caught being racist. "I'm not racist," they say ...

"... I have lots of black friends!"

"... you're the racist for making it about race!"

"... I'm just being honest about the facts!"

"... I was just making a joke!"

Why do they tell these obvious, transparent lies? Do they think you're that dumb? Maybe. But maybe they aren't lies at all. Maybe they really believe this stuff, as crazy as that seems. Here's how that might happen.

#5. They're Not Sure What Your Endgame Is

So the goal of calling out someone on their racism, theoretically, is to get the "I'm Not A Racist!" person (let's call her Natasha Not-A-Racist) to acknowledge her own racist attitude or action and change it. Let's say the confronter (Yvonne Yes-You're-Racist) wants to get Natasha to stop saying "wetback." She's not trying to punish Natasha; she just wants her to stop calling all the Latinos in the office by a word that implies the only reason they could possibly be in the U.S. is they illegally swam across the Rio Grande, and all will proceed as before.

So she's confused when Natasha goes ballistic, shouting, "This is what's wrong with society today!" and going on about "PC police" calling everything "hate speech" and "crucifying" anyone who "isn't tolerant enough for them." She makes a mental note that her bugger SJWs forum friends are going to love this one.

This strikes Yvonne as a bit of a disproportionate response. She was just hoping Natasha would say sorry, quit doing it, and they could forget about it and go to lunch.

But Natasha thinks this is a power play where Yvonne "wins" if she can convince people Natasha is racist. Natasha envisions getting a scarlet R slapped on her and forever being known around the office as "the one that said 'wetback'" while everyone turns up their noses at her and feels superior. Yvonne must be doing this to gain status and look more "enlightened" than Natasha, who will lose status and have a black mark on her record; that is if she's EVEN ALLOWED TO SAY "BLACK MARK" anymore.

Most of the time Natasha's paranoia comes out of nowhere, but sometimes Yvonne contributes to it by not showing there is a series of steps Natasha can take to fix things and get to a place where nobody is mad at her anymore. She doesn't have to wear that R forever -- or even at all. It's not really Yvonne's responsibility to spell it out, but sometimes she can accidentally leave the impression that public shaming is the only goal.

This puts Natasha in a scenario we'll call the Racist's Dilemma. It's like the Prisoner's Dilemma but for potential racists, where the choices look like this: (1) admit you did something racist and be forced to do a walk of shame and get looked down on by all the "PC people," or (2) stonewall as hard as you can and maybe they'll go away. In Racist Prison, everyone was framed. You can see why people often go for (2). If you can change choice (1) in their mind to "stop doing it, say sorry, and everything goes back to normal more or less," then (2) will look a lot less attractive.

#2. They Didn't Mean To Be Racist

Here's what it feels like to be called out on unintentional racism: You're trying to make a complex argument for how to deal with Iran and someone keeps interrupting you to tell you you're pronouncing "nuclear" wrong. What a pedantic prick.

Here's what it feels like to receive unintentional racism: A guy is driving to get groceries and on the way he runs over you with his car. When you complain, he calls you a pedantic prick.

Natasha thinks whatever racial slur or stereotype she might have incidentally brought up is far less serious than the point she was making or the joke she was telling, and those Yvonnes out there are tunnel-visioned nitpickers. In most cases, most of us will have the opposite priorities.

This is why "Oh come on, I didn't mean to be racist; I was just trying to tell a joke" gets the same looks as "Oh come on, I didn't mean to run down a pedestrian; I was just trying to get groceries."

It's not so much "I meant well" or "I had good intentions" (although you get that too) as "I was talking about something completely different and you're changing the subject!" This is why they go on about "All I was trying to do ..." and how you "missed the point."

I think we make it worse by using the word "hate" to describe any kind of bigotry. If someone doesn't feel "hate" or anger or any strong feeling toward that group, they think they're off the hook. The grocery shopper probably didn't "hate" the guy he ran over, but the guy is the same amount of dead no matter how the shopper felt.

Another step beyond "I didn't mean to be racist" is "I wasn't thinking about race at all," and its buddy "You're the one making this about race."

When a manager hires 10 white people in a row despite having qualified minority candidates, quite often they "weren't thinking about race at all." For every blatantly racist asshole that won't hire some race because "They have no work ethic," there's a well-meaning manager with the same subconscious biases we all have, unintentionally feeling a better "vibe" from candidates similar to them.

When Manager Natasha gets called out, this is the first time in the process that race has been directly brought up, so it seems totally true to her when she says, "You're the one bringing race into it." Race has, of course, been heavily involved the whole time, but it's been doing its dirty work out of her subconscious.

Sometimes being less racist requires thinking more about race.

#1. They Totally Wouldn't Mind If It Was Them

People are always egregiously misusing some of the greatest wisdom in the world. In this case, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." "Why do black people get so upset when I use the N-word?" asks Natasha. "I don't mind if anyone calls me a 'honky.' In fact, I laugh along. I guess the difference is that I have a sense of humor and they don't!"

The problem with testing any phrase or action that might offend, say, black people, by thinking of the equivalent phrase or action aimed at white people, is that there often isn't any. If there was some group that held the overwhelming majority of political offices and dominated corporate leadership in the most powerful country in the world and had previously enslaved white people for 400 years, and they had at some point during the slavery period invented a nickname that implied white people were subhuman and were still using it now, then sure, you could use that to guess how a black person would feel about the N-word, maybe.

Natasha might think, "OK, I'll just imagine how I would feel in that situation, then!" But no, that's a terrible idea. People imagine strange things about themselves in fictional fantasy scenarios; they're always suspiciously witty and badass and impeccably moral.

There are areas where we can never be "on the scene" and get firsthand evidence, and we take other people's word for it. We don't run most experiments ourselves; we take scientists' word for what happened. We don't fly to Syria to see what ISIS is really doing; we take our favorite reporter's word for it (for better or worse). But when it comes to how racism feels, people like Natasha seem compelled to go "on the scene" and verify it directly, through the power of imagining themselves into other people's shoes.

The issue is a lack of trust, which you can see in common Natasha phrases like "outrage culture" and "victim mentality," which mean "You're lying about how hurtful this word is to you, because you're playing some kind of power game." If Yvonne is white, there's an additional suspicion that maybe she's just pretending to care about the other group as part of this power game, to gain righteousness points.

If Yvonne can convince Natasha this isn't a power game and the goal isn't to shame her, Natasha might stop insisting on making the call about how other people should feel. But I realize this is like saying that if you could modify your car to fly, your commute to work would be easier.


http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-you-cant-convince-anyone-that-theyre-racis...

Racism is a form of mental disease and it is very present in Australia.
The main reason for this is that Yobbos have very strong inferiority complex because of their isolation and convict heritage.