|
Post by epictetus on Jul 25, 2016 21:16:07 GMT 10
Homage does not work when a kid prays for a new bicycle and there was a song about God not providing a Mercedes Car on request and people abandon the idea in favour of critical hospital care. Wonderment is fine, just don't expect the cavalry to turn up if you spurn the ambulance and hospital services. "Lord, won't you you buy a Mercedes Benz."
|
|
|
Post by cster on Jul 28, 2016 9:01:46 GMT 10
There's a girl with finite resources. She wanted to shine so bright she burnt out the fuel in a short time. They mature faster than men do, kind of explains why they spend so much money on anti wrinkle cream don't it?
|
|
|
Post by epictetus on Jul 28, 2016 16:06:25 GMT 10
Epic says; ‘I don't know the answers and believe humanity can never know them. Is that religious, or spiritual, atheist or agnostic?’
A wee bit wrong there Epic….All of humanity must know! especially if one follows the assumption of there being a Universal consciousness (combined knowledge) But sadly most of humanity will not recognise it as being so. Whether the latter is innocent by accident or by design is the mute point that has made up spiritual discussion for the past squillion years.
Yes, well it seems obvious, doesn't it that consciousness is fundamental, and I mean consciousness, not just mental operations. I mean that which underpins mental operations, that which enables us to perceive and think and exercise our will, whether it's free or determined. But there are those, Daniel Dennett comes to mind, who will have nothing of this. Consciousness and all that proceeds from it are simply emanations of matter. And if that's the case, our consciousness reaches out to nothing; it merely reflects back on its material source. So what we think we are conscious of is not really there. It's a kind of mirage that we all share. God knows why, but in an infinite universe there's been plenty of time for this to evolve and an infinity of ways in which it may have done so. My handle on all this gets me so far. Beyond that I can't get any further. I need a brain upgrade. I need Daniel Dennett's brain so I can see deeper and further. But if I'm imprisoned within my own material limits what is there to see that's deeper and further?
|
|
|
Post by alans on Jul 28, 2016 16:40:58 GMT 10
Well, that seems to have fallen flat on its arse. I thought we could get something really up and running. Oh well. Up to someone else. Alan
|
|
|
Post by epictetus on Jul 28, 2016 16:55:17 GMT 10
Do not despair. O Alan S.
"If you post it they will come." Well, maybe. (Apologies to "Field of Dreams".)
|
|
|
Post by Sediba on Jul 29, 2016 0:13:34 GMT 10
Regarding the Aboriginal, I disagree with the lot of you. And you all fail Anthropology 101. Please repeat the class and stop talking simplified shortsighted ill-informed nonsense. Meantime I will pray for your white souls to the Black God.
|
|
|
Post by donte on Jul 29, 2016 7:39:58 GMT 10
Regarding the Aboriginal, I disagree with the lot of you. And you all fail Anthropology 101. Please repeat the class and stop talking simplified shortsighted ill-informed nonsense. Meantime I will pray for your white souls to the Black God. I would roll with you on that score also Greg.... but thee an me do not agree where the anthropology stakes begin or of the evolution thereof.
So far (in posts to date) I find there is not too much wrong with the superficial comments on the ills of the Aboriginal Australian; Blind Freddie could have noted those divisions. However, it is the depth of the spiritual nature of the Aboriginal that has not been delved into and I guess that is what you are alluding to.
We do broach the subject in a few posts above; although we are not speaking of the problem at hand we are talking about the causes. The following may be a bit tongue in cheek, but a few may cotton on and relate it.... Epic said; ‘I don't know the answers and believe humanity can never know them. Is that religious, or spiritual, atheist or agnostic?’
Donte said in reply..... A wee bit wrong there Epic….All of humanity must know! especially if one follows the assumption of there being a Universal consciousness (combined knowledge) But sadly most of humanity will not recognise it as being so. Whether the latter is innocent by accident or by design is the mute point that has made up spiritual discussion for the past squillion years.
Epic replied... Yes, well it seems obvious, doesn't it that consciousness is fundamental, and I mean consciousness, not just mental operations. I mean that which underpins mental operations, that which enables us to perceive and think and exercise our will, whether it's free or determined.
But there are those, Daniel Dennett comes to mind, who will have nothing of this. Consciousness and all that proceeds from it are simply emanations of matter. And if that's the case, our consciousness reaches out to nothing; it merely reflects back on its material source. So what we think we are conscious of is not really there. It's a kind of mirage that we all share. God knows why, but in an infinite universe there's been plenty of time for this to evolve and an infinity of ways in which it may have done so.
My handle on all this gets me so far. Beyond that I can't get any further. I need a brain upgrade. I need Daniel Dennett's brain so I can see deeper and further. But if I'm imprisoned within my own material limits what is there to see that's deeper and further?
................................................................................................................................................................................. The answer is in these last lines of Epics, and one needs to keep in mind that the Abo culture though primitive to some, has not as yet had the spirit driven from it. The Australian Aboriginal are a classic example of universal consciousness in full view
But we are doing our utmost.....to frustrate them
|
|
|
Post by madametarot on Jul 29, 2016 8:11:59 GMT 10
Regarding the Aboriginal, I disagree with the lot of you. And you all fail Anthropology 101. Please repeat the class and stop talking simplified shortsighted ill-informed nonsense. Meantime I will pray for your white souls to the Black God. You Greg, are obviously looking for some Aboriginal unique history that justifies something "special" today.. But the reality is the current generations of Aboriginals have to live in today's world. They can't turn back the clock, even your black God seems reluctant to turn back the clock. It is not about the colour or history it is all about getting the best quality of life we can in 2016. Do you understand Greg? This is 2016 and everything that represents 2016 is available to everyone in Australia. If anyone "Cocoons" themselves, by choosing to live in a remote area, and or rejecting the opportunity to be educated, then they are disadvantaging themselves. The situation has nothing to do with history. My father lived in a tent because his father was a navvy on the railway line and the job moved - but my father and his brother and 2 sisters got educated enough not to have to work as laborers. The next generation was encouraged to get a trade. The next generation were encouraged to get uni degrees The aboriginals who reject a basic education and a further education are simply denying themselves, it has absolutely nothing to do with a 60,000 year heritage I do not know the figures but I do know that Bindi went to school with my eldest son in Townsville and Bindi and my son Blake topped the classes through all the grades. Bindi is a full blood aborigine who was with a German family. I do not know where she is now, but Blake is a partner in 3 IT company's in the UK . Blake's mother (my wife) learned to walk on a dirt floor in a mining town (now gone) in the Atherton tableland. Time marches on, and the sooner the Aboriginals who are doing it tough in remote communities figure it out the sooner they will enjoy the benefits of Australia 2016. It has absolutely nothing to do with 60,000 year heritage, what their ancestors did, dreamtime, love of their land and learning how to survive living off the land.
|
|
|
Post by cster on Jul 29, 2016 11:00:16 GMT 10
Some amongst us prey for a return to the Avatarian type livelihoods of old, when we had a connection to earth beyond what we know today. Fat chance really cause I don't even have a gps in my brain yet the birds do. Just like windows I lost it in the upgrade to me 5.7
|
|
|
Post by Sediba on Jul 29, 2016 11:03:05 GMT 10
No Col. I don't understand how you came by your views. Your entire post is nonsense. It's fundamental premise is wrong, and all you're doing is building on it and restating it. It has nothing to do with suffering and hardship of your rellos. It has nothing to do with your comparisons.
Your, and everyone else except Tute, opinions are appalling in this day and age.
If You want to know why your ideas are shortsighted, then just ask yourself how well they worked so far. Your homespun, hard earned knowledge is shallow, callow, and wrong.
Furthermore, I'm tired of racism, from now on I'll stick to my end of the forum .. Please stay here.
Greg
|
|
|
Post by cster on Jul 29, 2016 11:14:36 GMT 10
Hmmmm a turfing war, I'm going to ask Clem to come in with the jugcord for you two. I intend as do others to wander all over this website and I don't want to need a visa or cop any tariffs for doing so.
|
|
|
Post by Sediba on Jul 29, 2016 11:19:07 GMT 10
Just keep that opinionated old ditherer outta my way. I'll do my best to stay out of his.
|
|
|
Post by epictetus on Jul 29, 2016 13:48:00 GMT 10
No Col. I don't understand how you came by your views. Your entire post is nonsense. It's fundamental premise is wrong, and all you're doing is building on it and restating it. It has nothing to do with suffering and hardship of your rellos. It has nothing to do with your comparisons. Your, and everyone else except Tute, opinions are appalling in this day and age. If You want to know why your ideas are shortsighted, then just ask yourself how well they worked so far. Your homespun, hard earned knowledge is shallow, callow, and wrong. Furthermore, I'm tired of racism, from now on I'll stick to my end of the forum .. Please stay here. Greg Hi Greg You are very sensitive on Aboriginal questions, and it's not for me to judge that sensitivity, but excessive feeling may need to be examined. You're also a bit quick to accuse others of racism, but so far there's been no definition on this forum of what racism might be. However, unfairness and narrow-mindedness, where they exist, are not challenged by avoiding the subject. And to make quick and unsubstantiated assertions from an assumed moral high ground and then to run away won't move anyone from their current position. Still, you may not want to get involved in this discussion, and that's fine if it doesn't add value to your life. As my friend Arthur S. once said "The fact that there's a brawl in the street below your window doesn't mean you have to join in" (or words to that effect).
|
|
|
Post by alans on Jul 29, 2016 15:11:19 GMT 10
There are a large number of Chinese in my area. Their families have a lot of respect for education and hence their children are often seen in the local library with their heads in books. The Europeans here tend to take a much more laid-back approach - enjoyment, parties, travel, etc. I don't think we can say that one way is better than another, but the outcome will surely be different. This is the same with the aboriginals. They have a different attitude to life and the land. It is unfortunate that this attitude bodes ill for the children growing up in our society. Life has changed and lifestyles must change with it or the proponents go under. We have changed even during our lifetimes. I can feel sorry that the aboriginal lifestyle is on its way out but at the same time accept society as it is. This isn't being racist - essentially humans are all more or less the same under the veneer of culture (memes?) overlaying us. If I've hurt your feelings, Sediba I apologize but this is what I think.
By the way Epictetus, I really admire your avatar. It is simple but says a lot. Is it Indian? It looke Buddhist. Cheers, Alan
|
|
|
Post by epictetus on Jul 29, 2016 17:02:01 GMT 10
Hi Alan. It's Ganesha, the Hindu deity, "widely revered as the remover of obstacles, the patron of arts and sciences and the deva of intellect and wisdom." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ganesha
Maybe if I attach myself to Ganesha, a little of his virtue might trickle down. There are varying stories about how he got an elephant's head, but I can't remember them. Something about his father, Shiva's, impetuosity I think.
|
|
|
Post by Sediba on Jul 29, 2016 17:18:45 GMT 10
You are very sensitive on Aboriginal questions I'm sensitive to all matters of human inequality. Do you think I shouldn't be? Is it possible to be too sensitive? You're also a bit quick to accuse others of racism If you mean am I calling Col a racist ... then no, I'm not. Col posts simplex ill-informed solutions to race problems that reek of inequality. He doesn't know he does it, that much I grant. Col is a good well meaning man, but he is trigger happy and rarely thinks something completely thru before passing judgement. That's my opinion anyway. but so far there's been no definition on this forum of what racism might be Well, let's use the WIKI version: Racism is a product of the complex interaction in a given society of a race-based worldview with prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination.And further: According to a United Nations convention, there is no distinction between the terms "racial" and "ethnic" discrimination. The UN convention further concludes that superiority based on racial differentiation is scientifically false, morally condemnable, socially unjust and dangerous, and there is no justification for racial discrimination, anywhere, in theory or in practice.So stop patronising, stop belittling ... equal means equal. Can LGBT people get married Epic? Yes they can. Equal means equal. No distinction.
|
|
|
Post by madametarot on Jul 29, 2016 17:34:00 GMT 10
Yes I think we have to be careful with correctness it can cause huge problems (even if not the root cause) The last thing people need (who are in difficult circumstances that they can get out) of is sympathy. They need encouragement to progress not encouragement to stay as they are.
At least that is the way I see it.
|
|
|
Post by epictetus on Jul 29, 2016 22:02:39 GMT 10
Thanks Greg.
Yes, the Wiki definition is not a bad one. Racism consists of race-based "prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination" without going on to blur race and ethnicity.
The UN one, ironically from a highly compromised organisation, sounds more like an outburst than a definition. I've been on committees that come up with definitions of this kind. I can see now the talking heads around the table and the emotionalism of some, the indifference of others, the opportunism of more than a few, and the sheer confusion of others.
The Wiki definition isn't bad, though many if not all of us are prejudiced in some way about those who are different from us. If "prejudice" means pre-judging, i.e. forming a judgement about someone before we know them, then I'd say we're all prejudiced. If I see a bunch of young men approaching me in a quiet street, especially if they're "of middle eastern appearance", I think I'd be a bit anxious. Of course they may well be just students going to the madrassah, and my prejudice has let me down. "Stereotyping" also. If I assume that prostitutes are all cheap tarts who'd stand out in a crowd, I'd be wrong. Some are, but driving taxis in inner Melbourne in the 70s and having been young in Bangkok and Vientiane gives me authority to say that many prostitutes in public look and act no differently from any other young women. Our stereotype derives from the streetwalkers you might see in Darlinghurst Road or Fitzroy Street. If that's all you've seen, however, stereotyping may be excusable. I'm sure it's widespread, anyway, whatever it refers to.
The key word in the Wiki definition is "discrimination". I may be prejudiced and bedevilled by stereotyping, but if I don't actually discriminate (negatively) on the basis of race (or ethnicity if you like), then my racism is interior and passive. My sin is not racism but, perhaps, ignorance or just less than universal identification with the human race in whatever form it takes. If, however, for example, I choose candidate A (white) over candidate B (brown) for a job purely on the basis of colour (assuming that there's no such thing as "race" under the skin), then you could say I was "racist", but only then, when I've disadvantaged someone because of their colour.
Unless, of course, the person I disadvantaged was white. If I am told by the government to choose candidates of colour in order to meet Affirmative Action targets then racism is acceptable, at least to the government and identity-based lobbies, because it may well be (and actually is the case) that better qualified white candidates have been set aside in favour of poorer qualified non-whites. But this is "acceptable" racism in the minds of those who advocate these targets.
The term "racist" began as and probably still is a yuppie term used to keep the great unwashed in their place. Overt racism, at least in regard to how people speak and who they prefer to keep company with, starts in the places where new migrants settle and either find work or live on benefits. Over time the prejudice, stereotyping, politically incorrect speech and attitudes, youth punch-ups and so on fade away as people get to know each other better and fear less that their jobs are being taken or that the migrants are getting huge handouts. Then the next wave of immigrants cops it from the previous waves. Of course, the Yuppies who loved to fling the term "racism" around and taught it to the kids usually didn't live in areas where there were too many recent migrants around, at least not those down at heel.
I worked in migrant and multicultural education for years, managing these (mainly language) programs for Catholic schools in Victoria and SE Queensland. I almost never accuse anyone of racism because there's much more to it than mere labelling. The Wiki definition acknowledges its complexity. The UN one is essentially a rant dressed up as a definition, but then what can you expect from a body that has Saudi Arabia as Chair of its Human Rights Council Panel? Whoops, there I go again - prejudice and stereotyping. I'm sure these UN Saudis love Jews and Infidels and wouldn't do a thing to restrict the freedom of Christians in their most noble kingdom. (Apologies for the sarcasm.)
|
|
|
Post by epictetus on Jul 29, 2016 22:31:18 GMT 10
What have LGBT (LGBTQA now) couples got to do with the discussion?
Anyway, of course they can get married. the government really has nothing to do with it. They marry each other; the government doesn't marry them. To officiate it all they have to do is find an authorised celebrant. It makes no difference anyway, other than flinging convention in the face of the conservative majority. Established de facto relationships are entitled to government benefits as much as de jure ones.
Would I regard an LGBTetc couple as married if they said they were? You bet. Are they "married" in the sense that my wife and I were married in 1972. Not really, but who cares? A couple who are committed to each but can't have children are still married. Two 90 year-olds can still marry. Two divorcees marry all the time. If two gay people or two sexually confused people want to marry, good luck to them. If two siblings want to marry I have no objection, though I understand there are health risks in that.
I'm conservative. Despite divorce, childless marriages, etc, to me the core model of marriage is a commitment between a man and a woman open to the chance of children being born from it and the commitment extending to them. I'm entitled to that view, and people who tell me I shouldn't be can go jump. But if someone has a different view I'm not going to try and talk them out of it. This is an area where different views create no harm, so let them be. Let a hundred flowers bloom.
|
|
|
Post by Sediba on Jul 29, 2016 22:47:39 GMT 10
The UN definition resulted from a study. It does me, even if the Devil crafted it.
The UN convention: Superiority based on racial differentiation is scientifically false, morally condemnable, socially unjust and dangerous, and there is no justification for racial discrimination, anywhere, in theory or in practice.
What part of this definition do you think is unfairly biased? What part of it should be changed because it's incorrect.
Stereotyping is not excusable when it is racially based. It's intrinsically discrimination. You stereotype when you refuse LGBT people the right to marry. That's discrimination. Col discriminates when he says Aboriginals must integrate .... because he means they must integrate with us, one way. Because we are the better organised .. 'better organised' is Col's code for white people without actually pronouncing white people. That's discrimination. It's also stereotyping. You can't have better organised unless you have inferior organisation. Col thinks we have done a better job on this place since we got here than the Aboriginals did in 60k years. He's wrong of course, but does that matter?
It's superiority based on racial differentiation which is scientifically false, morally condemnable, socially unjust and dangerous. There is no justification for racial discrimination, anywhere, in theory or in practice.
Epic, your post is a rambling watered down semi-apology, Or so it seems. Just re-read the bit on prejudice where you defer all intent for important semantic correctness. There is no doubt that either you or I or the UN don't know what that word means in the definition and the context of that statement.
Hey .... but I still luv ya's both. Poor misguided birds, how will ever find the Simurgh.
Greg
|
|
|
Post by madametarot on Jul 30, 2016 8:25:18 GMT 10
The UN definition resulted from a study. It does me, even if the Devil crafted it. The UN convention: Superiority based on racial differentiation is scientifically false, morally condemnable, socially unjust and dangerous, and there is no justification for racial discrimination, anywhere, in theory or in practice.What part of this definition do you think is unfairly biased? What part of it should be changed because it's incorrect. Stereotyping is not excusable when it is racially based. It's intrinsically discrimination. You stereotype when you refuse LGBT people the right to marry. That's discrimination. Col discriminates when he says Aboriginals must integrate .... because he means they must integrate with us, one way. Because we are the better organised .. 'better organised' is Col's code for white people without actually pronouncing white people. That's discrimination. It's also stereotyping. You can't have better organised unless you have inferior organisation. Col thinks we have done a better job on this place since we got here than the Aboriginals did in 60k years. He's wrong of course, but does that matter? It's superiority based on racial differentiation which is scientifically false, morally condemnable, socially unjust and dangerous. There is no justification for racial discrimination, anywhere, in theory or in practice. Epic, your post is a rambling watered down semi-apology, Or so it seems. Just re-read the bit on prejudice where you defer all intent for important semantic correctness. There is no doubt that either you or I or the UN don't know what that word means in the definition and the context of that statement. Hey .... but I still luv ya's both. Poor misguided birds, how will ever find the Simurgh. Greg I I do not apologise for misleading you Greg, because you just added some critical words that I did not mention. I never mentioned black and white. My argument was based on the fact that if those living in remote Aboriginal communities want the benefits of modern Australia then they have to be like everyone else - get a basic education and move on, time and changes in the world march forever onward. If you see that as racist then "tough titties" Greg. You have a phobia, you are obsessed with finding examples of racism everywhere. If you must know Greg, I was the Godfather of a TI (Thursday Island) girl, I have a Malaysian Chinese Doctor, a Vietnamese female Dentist I have Indian/Australian family living next door and when we moved here on the other side we had an Irish musician (professor of stringed instrument at the Con, an internationally renowned harpist) who was married to a South American. I lived in Mossman NQ for a few years (I looked after the automation in the sugar mill and I got married in Mossman) and they had a substantial black community, some had integrated and were well respected families and some had not integrated and just hung around and caused trouble amongst themselves (getting drunk and fighting each other). I built a house at Machans Beach near Cairns and we had a lot of TIs in the area and a large family of TIs next door. I worked for a while at Capricornia ply mill as the Engineer until it closed down and there were 3 white and 40 black mostly TI the TIs are very good workers. As a kid we helped out a migrant family from Ceylon and the father lived with us until he could bring his family out. At high school I always sat next to a Chinese kid ( because he was never a nuisance). At the men's shed we have a part Aboriginal with a leg bracelet who has been in lots of different Jails and we all get on fine with him plus of course a cross section of the community. I have played rugby league against black teams and played bowls with and against a vast amount of immigrants. So you can stick your racist label on me Greg because I have already stuck my racism phobic label on you.
|
|
|
Post by alans on Jul 30, 2016 10:08:29 GMT 10
Dear Epictetus, you have certainly done a lot in your life and have come a long way. Your comments are well thought out and presented. However, I am surprised at your thoughts on LGTBQA marriage. Surely the main point to the attitude of those people is that they know that when adversity strikes a couple, they are treated unfairly. Property is not distributed as it would be to a normal married couple. If one partner ends up in acute medical care, the wishes of the other are often not taken into account. Much of marriage revolves around the property rights as well as the rights of partners to care adequately for each other's wishes. That is my understanding anyway. Cheers, AlanS
|
|
|
Post by Sediba on Jul 30, 2016 11:10:37 GMT 10
I kinda like AlanS .... Heheee
|
|
|
Post by epictetus on Jul 30, 2016 12:01:48 GMT 10
Dear Epictetus, you have certainly done a lot in your life and have come a long way. Your comments are well thought out and presented. However, I am surprised at your thoughts on LGTBQA marriage. Surely the main point to the attitude of those people is that they know that when adversity strikes a couple, they are treated unfairly. Property is not distributed as it would be to a normal married couple. If one partner ends up in acute medical care, the wishes of the other are often not taken into account. Much of marriage revolves around the property rights as well as the rights of partners to care adequately for each other's wishes. That is my understanding anyway. Cheers, AlanS Hi Alan You may well be right. I'm not well informed about these things. I just understood from my experience and what I'd read (e.g. with regard to de facto couples in the ADF more than 30 years ago, and that male gay couples can now adopt children) that de factos had pretty much the same rights and consideration in legal matters as de jure couples.
|
|
|
Post by donte on Jul 31, 2016 12:16:42 GMT 10
The quote below is applicable to this debate, whether Abe Lincoln said it or not is not relevant; nevertheless, it covers most of the variables under discussion herein. Most of us would realise the wisdom of the content. It is factual, precise and hard to fault.
You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot help small men by tearing down big men. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer. You cannot help the poor man by destroying the rich. You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income. You cannot further brotherhood of men by inciting class hatred. You cannot establish security on borrowed money. You cannot build character and courage by taking away man's initiative and independence. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves.
It fills/fits every post so far….. Irrespective of the posters intent…….. Inequality is bull…t. Who’s ears are you offending with what? The task in hand is not racism, its freedom! To speak, to listen, to ignore.
As I was in the lecturing mode I thought I would spring the following wise words to ponder over also….
Make for yourself a definition or description of the thing which is presented to you, so as to see distinctly what kind of thing it is, in its substance, in its nudity, in its complete entirety, and tell yourself its proper name, and the names of the things of which it is compounded and into which it will be resolved. For nothing is as productive of elevation of mind as to be able to examine methodically and truly every object which is presented to you in life and always to look at things so as to see at the same time what kind of universe this is and what kind of use everything performs in it and what value everything has with reference to the whole and what with reference to man, who is a citizen of the highest city, of which all other cities are like families: what each thing is, and of what it is composed, and how long it is the nature of this thing to endure…… Marcus Aurelius Antonius 163 AD
Nothing really untoward about the wisdom in the above either, apart from the enlightened nature of the narrative along with the year the words were supposedly spluttered. Rather ironic that we are still spluttering….which means we are slow learners. Unless of course there was no yesterday…. Incidentally….for those interested; It has been intimated that I must be a follower of anthropology 101. Personally think anthropology, be it the 101 brand or whatever, is more a discipline belonging in Gregs domain…. Apart from acknowledging an existence of the same within our vocabulary its realities hardly feature on my horizon at all. (see bold; in above paragraph)
|
|
|
Post by Sediba on Jul 31, 2016 12:54:00 GMT 10
Tute, Anthropology 101 would at least give them some understanding of their fellow man.
Most here who display racism are insular. Their life is routine. It revolves around bowls clubs, men's sheds, and middle class white trash activities which they pursue because life has gone beyond their reach. Ordinary active life is beyond their medication control. So they have settled in to what they now accept as living. They think that all should integrate with them ... And if they don't all the blackfellas are doomed, because it's the only choice that's sensible ... Jesu phuckin wept!! After all, look how well it works. Monday at the doctors on the health fund, free magazines to read in the surgery. Tuesday bowls, Wednesday visit the shed, and what to do with the rest of the week. Well, we have to go to Maccas on thurday, it's pension day and the french fries are reduced to 50c a cup with chicken lo-cal salt.
The six o'clock news keeps them fully informed of everything and there's no more they need to know. There is always time to write tracts advising others on how to spend retirement profitably, mens sheds, bowls clubs, flower arranging for the handicapped. A helpful text on how to routinely live life for retirees is always handy, without them we wouldn't know how to do it. I don't know how stone age man, or even iron man, or even medevial man survived without a bowls club or a mens sheds. These things are very important to whitetrash middleclass existence. They're necessary to life, essential. They're not just there as symbols, half way stations for the failed, for those who ran their race to soon.
Middle class whitetrash living is a symbol of failure, not a symbol of life. You live it because you have nothing else to live ... But don't start sprouting that others should fall in line with that drugged opiate of an existance ... Especially blackfellas.
Still when you're not working all day for a packet of pay, then that's living allright. But I'd rather be found dead in a ditch.
Greg
|
|
|
Post by Sediba on Jul 31, 2016 13:04:14 GMT 10
All Muslims should be shipped to Alaska immediately. Otherwise this might happen. _____________________ Murder of Muslim relegated to page 18, next to the cheap beer ad REPORTS RIDAH HASSAN 31 JULY 2016 Adam Abu-Mahmoud passed away in Liverpool Hospital on 18 July after he was chased and repeatedly stabbed by a group of teenagers in Sydney’s south-west. The paramedics arrived to find Adam bleeding in the arms of his father, with the knife still lodged in his back.
Had this been a white teenager attacked by a group of Muslim or Arab men, the mainstream media would have burst into life to mourn the (white) life lost and to decry the barbarism of Islam, the problem of radicalised Muslim youth and the Arab gangs terrorising our streets.
Instead, this murder was treated with the callous Islamophobia that the Australian establishment has perfected: relegated to page 18 of the Daily Telegraph, squeezed alongside an advertisement for First Choice Liquor. A teenager murdered, sure, but have you heard about the sweet deal on the 12 pack of Coronas?
Such is the backward world we live in. Racists like Sonia Kruger are given a national platform to play the victim, cry “unsafe” and sob their pathetic tears having been called out for bigotry, while the real violence experienced by Arabs and Muslims hardly earns a mention, let alone any sympathy. ___________
When you promote ethnic cleansing should you also stand in the dock with these murderous teenagers? Does your promotion play a part in incitement?
|
|
|
Post by madametarot on Jul 31, 2016 13:11:43 GMT 10
The quote below is applicable to this debate, whether Abe Lincoln said it or not is not relevant; nevertheless, it covers most of the variables under discussion herein. Most of us would realise the wisdom of the content. It is factual, precise and hard to fault.
You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot help small men by tearing down big men. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer. You cannot help the poor man by destroying the rich. You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income. You cannot further brotherhood of men by inciting class hatred. You cannot establish security on borrowed money. You cannot build character and courage by taking away man's initiative and independence. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves.
It fills/fits every post so far….. Irrespective of the posters intent…….. Inequality is bull…t. Who’s ears are you offending with what? The task in hand is not racism, its freedom! To speak, to listen, to ignore.
As I was in the lecturing mode I thought I would spring the following wise words to ponder over also….
Make for yourself a definition or description of the thing which is presented to you, so as to see distinctly what kind of thing it is, in its substance, in its nudity, in its complete entirety, and tell yourself its proper name, and the names of the things of which it is compounded and into which it will be resolved. For nothing is as productive of elevation of mind as to be able to examine methodically and truly every object which is presented to you in life and always to look at things so as to see at the same time what kind of universe this is and what kind of use everything performs in it and what value everything has with reference to the whole and what with reference to man, who is a citizen of the highest city, of which all other cities are like families: what each thing is, and of what it is composed, and how long it is the nature of this thing to endure…… Marcus Aurelius Antonius 163 AD
Nothing really untoward about the wisdom in the above either, apart from the enlightened nature of the narrative along with the year the words were supposedly spluttered. Rather ironic that we are still spluttering….which means we are slow learners. Unless of course there was no yesterday…. Incidentally….for those interested; It has been intimated that I must be a follower of anthropology 101. Personally think anthropology, be it the 101 brand or whatever, is more a discipline belonging in Gregs domain…. Apart from acknowledging an existence of the same within our vocabulary its realities hardly feature on my horizon at all. (see bold; in above paragraph)
Err I read this a couple of times and I am not sure what the point was - A translated quote from 163 AD is as valid as a green carrot, but I know not its relevance anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Sediba on Jul 31, 2016 13:36:21 GMT 10
Err I read this a couple of times and I am not sure what the point was That's OK mate, just get a dictionary and a theasaurus and take it slowly, one word at a time. They're not real big words, Tute kept them simple. Otherwise it will mean about as much as a green carrot to you. 😈
|
|
|
Post by alans on Jul 31, 2016 16:27:24 GMT 10
When I started this thread I realised that it would contain some contentious issues but let's keep personalities out of the debate. If we keep to the facts as we see them, it remains a debate otherwise it just becomes an argument which nobody can win. I have noticed that Sediba is very conscious of the rights of aborigines and coloured people. Maybe we could bear that in mind when we write. Cheers, Alan
|
|