# Australia - Love it or leave it!



## stockGURU (6 September 2009)

I have seen this sentiment - usually accompanied by an Australian flag - appearing on bumper stickers on cars in increasing numbers over the last few years. 

I thought this kind of rabid nationalism was more of an American trait, not an Australian one?

Personally, I find this kind of overt, aggressive, almost threatening brand of nationalism to be crass and undesirable. However, I'm wondering if perhaps there hasn't been some kind of fundamental social shift in this country in the last decade or so towards this kind of aggressive flag waving, so I thought I would put it up for discussion here. Perhaps I am imagining it?

What do you think of this kind of "Love it or leave it!" nationalism? Is it one you are comfortable with?


----------



## prawn_86 (6 September 2009)

stockGURU said:


> What do you think of this kind of "Love it or leave it!" nationalism? Is it one you are comfortable with?




Cant say i have noticed an increase in it, but im not really paying attention.

I think the idea of the slogan is flawed however, as without those who want to improve the country it would just go backwards. What's wrong with not liking certain things and trying to improve them?


----------



## white_goodman (6 September 2009)

stockGURU said:


> I have seen this sentiment - usually accompanied by an Australian flag - appearing on bumper stickers on cars in increasing numbers over the last few years.
> 
> I thought this kind of rabid nationalism was more of an American trait, not an Australian one?
> 
> ...




its known as bogan nationalism lol... but yeh there is a problem with some cultures not assimilating/segregating thesmelves from the rest of the wider community... however as a nation we would be fcukked without migrants.


----------



## mellifuous (6 September 2009)

white_goodman said:


> its known as bogan nationalism lol... but yeh there is a problem with some cultures not assimilating/segregating thesmelves from the rest of the wider community... however as a nation we would be fcukked without migrants.




Somehow the argument always falls this way - nationalism confused with ethnicity.   There's a lot of folk from different ethnic backgrounds waving our flag these days.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (6 September 2009)

stockGURU said:


> I have seen this sentiment - usually accompanied by an Australian flag - appearing on bumper stickers on cars in increasing numbers over the last few years.
> 
> I thought this kind of rabid nationalism was more of an American trait, not an Australian one?
> 
> ...




I think there has always been an undercurrent of this sentiment from Australians towards migrants.

Perhaps it has more to do with the increase in bumper stickers, rather than an increase in gingoism, baby on board etc etc 

gg


----------



## Zird (6 September 2009)

I despise racism in all it's ugly forms whether overt or subtle. One needs to be on the receiving end to begin to understand how prevalent and destructive it is.

There is a fishing place in the Royal National Park (NSW) where some F.Wit has written in huge black paint on the sanstone cliffs  telling non -anglo's to F - Off. In that setting in particular it is some what ironic.

Racism is a taught ignorance. Small children have little concern with ethnicity. Unfortunately we are all,  to some degree  afflicted with it. 

Personally I don't mind the words or even the basic sentiment "Love it or Leave it". But as this is Australia (but could be anywhere else also) I sense the undercurrent of racism within the message.


----------



## mellifuous (6 September 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Perhaps it has more to do with the increase in bumper stickers, rather than an increase in gingoism, baby on board etc etc
> gg




Yep.. 'baby on board' signs without the baby 'on board' and a sole driver/occupant of the vehicle always causes me to worry about the age of the driver.

However, great to see the flags - no need to be ashamed about being an Australian citizen.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (6 September 2009)

Zird said:


> I despise racism in all it's ugly forms whether overt or subtle. One needs to be on the receiving end to begin to understand how prevalent and destructive it is.
> 
> There is a fishing place in the Royal National Park (NSW) where some F.Wit has written in huge black paint on the sanstone cliffs  telling non -anglo's to F - Off. In that setting in particular it is some what ironic.
> 
> ...




Agree totally Zird.

Racism is nasty and crazy.

gg


----------



## trainspotter (6 September 2009)

The amount of zeal that has taken over this brand of "nationalism" is frightening for me. Usually reserved for the gun toting rednecks and the Australian Nationalist Movement of the 1980's led by Jack van Tongeren. It seems that the wheel is turning more towards the Right Wing of politics then is necessary of late.


----------



## jbocker (6 September 2009)

Australia, you gotta love it.

I am proud to be Aussie, but dont wish to flaunt it. I may carry the flag on Australia Day and will stand and sing the anthem with anyone who will call it home at appropriate events. 
What really peeves me is the bogan factor and a lot of houses that 'fly the flag' which closely resemble rubbish dumps, leaving the flag in shreds.

Aussies were once known as loveable larrikins at their worst, not raging loud mouth 1/2wits that seem to be growing in numbers. 

Racism has always sucked, and always will.


----------



## Bobby (6 September 2009)

*Most seem to miss the point of the thread * 

The way I read it is simple ~ *Give this country your first loyalty above any ethnicity or religion*

Those who can't just Pi** OFF !


----------



## Happy (6 September 2009)

Well, those who this is addressed to, aren’t gonna go nowhere.
So, this is just empty slogan.

Almost looks that only far right are able to address this problem, and looking at what happens in UK this is exactly the way it is going.

Some ugly stuff is in a pipeline, but this is probably only my mistaken feeling.


----------



## wayneL (6 September 2009)

But what is a country?

What is it that we are being loyal to?


----------



## Bobby (6 September 2009)

wayneL said:


> But what is a country?
> 
> What is it that we are being loyal to?




Thats a clever question Wayne , guess the answer is what the majority of citizens think  .
You Sir seem to have not found a country  yet   ~~~     but bet you come back to OZ  ...


----------



## Julia (6 September 2009)

wayneL said:


> But what is a country?
> 
> What is it that we are being loyal to?



That's an excellent question.

It's really difficult to define.  I've lived here for nearly 17 years, having moved from NZ because of the weather and no other reason.

NZ will always have a majority of my heart.  Can't really say why.  Perhaps it's because we always maintain a bond with the country where we grew up, formed relationships, were educated and became adults.

I'd be interested in others' responses to Wayne's question.


----------



## gooner (6 September 2009)

Bobby said:


> *Most seem to miss the point of the thread *
> 
> The way I read it is simple ~ *Give this country your first loyalty above any ethnicity or religion*
> 
> Those who can't just Pi** OFF !




Bobby

Personally, I'm an atheist. I don't "see people"

But I suspect most people with strong religious beliefs, whether Christian, Jewish, Muslim or Brethren would consider their first loyalty as being towards God and their religion not their country.

My first loyalty is to my family


----------



## Bobby (6 September 2009)

gooner said:


> Bobby
> 
> Personally, I'm an atheist. I don't "see people"
> 
> ...




Your fine with me Gooner , family comes first , some may place there parents birth place or religion first , these are the so called aussies that worry me .


----------



## nunthewiser (7 September 2009)

you are in australia

this is my land 

dont like it ?

leave



not so hard is it?


----------



## Tink (7 September 2009)

'Redneck on board' is what I think when I see those stickers.

Excellent question Wayne : )

I agree Prawn, without change we would be going backwards..

So I expect to see all these people that agree with this slogan to never complain about anything again...

What a load of baloney..


----------



## BradK (7 September 2009)

wayneL said:


> But what is a country?
> 
> What is it that we are being loyal to?




A country is an 'imagined community' - it is defined by what we are not rather than what we are. It is easier to see in the minds eye when there is a minority against which a so-called homogeneous majority can emerge. That is why Howard's 'UnAustralian' label worked so effectively against asylum seekers and other undesirables earlier this decade. 

Even the 'national interest' (and by this is meant the national _economic _interest mostly) is very suspect. We are cross cut by divisions (race, ethnicity, marriage status, religion, suburbs, street, house, money in the bank, where we drink) and its only when we have a common minority against us that we emerge as Australians. The TV tells us all day every day that 'I am, you are, we are Australians' but it is an incredibly manufactured and imagined concept. 

Benedict Anderson's 'Imagined Communities' is probably the most famous critique of nationalism. 

http://www.nationalismproject.org/what/anderson.htm

It seems Anderson can understand why someone would _kill_ for a country, but he has no idea why someone would _die_ for a country. And considering that nationalism is mainly a 19th and 20th century phenomenon, that is where all the death and destruction occurred. 

Crazy stuff this nationalism. 

Its not about religion, ethnicity, kin, kreed. Its about Ca$h ... cold hard ca$h. 

What are we being loyal to? Ourselves of course! We don't give a rat's **** about other Australians - except when there is a bush fire, or flood, or terrorist attack. Because those victims are the deserving victims. But when it comes to the undeserving... we simply don't give a ****. 

Brad


----------



## Solly (7 September 2009)

I do dislike the redneck, bogan element that you sometime see with overt displays of rampant nationalism.

But the one thing that makes me cringe is some of the bad behaviour of some Aussies I see overseas, the ones who have temporarily left it.


----------



## mellifuous (7 September 2009)

Solly said:


> I do dislike the redneck, bogan element that you sometime see with overt displays of rampant nationalism.




Redneck - [http://www.answers.com/topic/redneck]

   1.  Used as a disparaging term for a member of the white rural laboring class, especially in the southern United States.
   2. A white person regarded as having a provincial, conservative, often bigoted attitude.

Bogan - [http://www.answers.com/topic/bogan]

The term bogan (pronounced /ˈboʊɡən/, rhyming with slogan) is Australian and New Zealand English slang, usually pejorative or self-deprecating, for a person who is, or is perceived to be, of a lower-class background. According to the stereotype, the speech and mannerisms of "bogans" indicate poor education, cheap clothing and uncultured upbringing. 'Bogans' usually reside in economically disadvantaged suburbs (often outer metropolitan) or rural areas[1].

Yep .. that's what sets you well educated, rich, and cultured folk apart  from those poor, ignorant, uncultured suburban and country folk that toil so hard for their 'daily bread'.

How stupid they are to express their love for their country.

Lucky you've got them else your life would be a lot less comfortable.


----------



## Solly (7 September 2009)

mellifuous said:


> Redneck - [http://www.answers.com/topic/redneck]
> 
> 1.  Used as a disparaging term for a member of the white rural laboring class, especially in the southern United States.
> 2. A white person regarded as having a provincial, conservative, often bigoted attitude.
> ...




*Return serve:*

I've got nothing against anybody displaying "their love for their country" and those who "toil so hard for their 'daily bread'."

That's how I live my life. Full on and flat out and avoid idle time.

And about being rich, you are rich, you are well aware how most in this world have to live.

I just detest public drunken, drugged out, boorish behaviour that impacts on others.

Try a walk down Cavell Ave on a Friday or Saturday night.

I stand by my post.


----------



## mellifuous (7 September 2009)

Solly said:


> *Return serve:* I just detest public drunken, drugged out, boorish behaviour that impacts on others. Try a walk down Cavell Ave on a Friday or Saturday night. I stand by my post.




If we accept that the words 'redneck' and 'bogan' have particular meanings, then how do you apply that meaning to individuals who  are drunk, drugged out, or exhibit boorish behavior that impacts on others if you don't determine whether those individuals come from poor, uneducated, and uncultured backgrounds?

Perhaps you might find that so many of them are well off, educated, and 'cultured'.

I agree that such behavior is unacceptable, but to file them under 'bogan' and 'redneck' is an insult to bogans and rednecks (imo) - perhaps they would be better filed under  - bored, aggressive, and spoilt. 

Maybe life has been too good for the young - perhaps hardship builds strength of character?


----------



## Tink (7 September 2009)

Solly said:


> *Return serve:*
> 
> I've got nothing against anybody displaying "their love for their country" and those who "toil so hard for their 'daily bread'."
> 
> ...




well said Solly


----------



## Glen48 (7 September 2009)

Aussie's are being dumbed down by the trash on TV, were they watch these crime shows and then think he Police can solve crimes the same way as the shows and can't understand the police taking so long to solve a crime, or believe the mainstream media churned out garbage... me I am out of here yesterday if  could.


----------



## whelan (7 September 2009)

Loyalty to the country always,loyalty to the goverment when it deserves it.                                                                                                                                                                                 Mark Twain


----------



## wayneL (7 September 2009)

whelan said:


> Loyalty to the country always,loyalty to the goverment when it deserves it.                                                                                                                                                                                 Mark Twain




What's the difference between a country and it's government?

(I have ideas, but interested in others)


----------



## whelan (7 September 2009)

Wayne,maybe the country is the ideal,but the government is the reality.


----------



## shortlist (7 September 2009)

Glen48 said:


> me I am out of here yesterday if  could.




But where to? I've travelled a lot and Aus has a good deal compared to many places. As for the bogans - every country has bogans. They're called white trash or trailer trash in US/Canada and chavs in the UK. Jeunes de la cite in France. Everywhere.


----------



## cuttlefish (7 September 2009)

I don't like the statement - I don't see how it conveys a positive message to anyone - really it just contains an implied threat.  Its more likely to be divisive than inclusive and to incite fear or feelings of defensiveness than to promote understanding and harmony.

What if I just 'like' Australia but don't 'love' it - does that mean I have to leave?  What if I love some aspects of Australia but dislike other aspects of it - do I have to leave then?

To me the statement is an overly simplistic, football team barracking style of flag waving nationalism.


----------



## GumbyLearner (7 September 2009)

cuttlefish said:


> I don't like the statement - I don't see how it conveys a positive message to anyone - really it just contains an implied threat.  Its more likely to be divisive than inclusive and to incite fear or feelings of defensiveness than to promote understanding and harmony.
> 
> What if I just 'like' Australia but don't 'love' it - does that mean I have to leave?  What if I love some aspects of Australia but dislike other aspects of it - do I have to leave then?
> 
> To me the statement is an overly simplistic, football team barracking style of flag waving nationalism.




Well said Cuttle. 

I'm no fan of nationalism either but do respect patriotism.

A wise friend of mine described it succinctly this way.

Imagine you're to buy a pencil.

The Aussie one cost a dollar and an overseas product costs 95cents.
Which one would you buy?

Imagine the overseas pencil was 90cents and the Aussie one was $1 dollar.
Which one would you buy?

Imagine the overseas pencil was 80cents and the Aussie one was $1 dollar.
Which one would you buy?

Then he said, imagine that even though the Aussie pencil was still more expensive than the foreign made product but it was totally crappy quality.

There comes a point where we need to question the patriotism we should afford to each other as citizens.

The title of this thread could just as easily be re-titled Australia - Buy it or buy better! 

Just my


----------



## Mr J (7 September 2009)

I have no care for nationalism/patriotism. I'm surprised people don't see it for what it is. A collection of quotes that sums up my feelings on the matter:


"Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious." 
- Oscar Wilde

"Heroism on command, senseless violence, and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism - how passionately I hate them!"
- Albert Einstein 

"Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind."
- Albert Einstein 

"Can anything be stupider than that a man has the right to kill me because he lives on the other side of a river and his ruler has a quarrel with mine, though I have not quarrelled with him?"
- Blaise Pascal 

"I am not an Athenian or a Greek, but a citizen of the world."
- Diogenes

"I have no country to fight for; my country is the earth, and I am a citizen of the world."
- Eugene V. Debs 

"Patriotism is a kind of religion; it is the egg from which wars are hatched."
- Guy de Maupassant 

"Patriotism is the willingness to kill and be killed for trivial reasons."
- Bertrand Russell 

"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all others because you were born in it."
- George Bernard Shaw 

"To me, it seems a dreadful indignity to have a soul controlled by geography."
- George Santayana 

"You'll never have a quiet world till you knock the patriotism out of the human race."
- George Bernard Shaw


----------



## GumbyLearner (7 September 2009)

Mr J said:


> I have no care for nationalism/patriotism. I'm surprised people don't see it for what it is. A collection of quotes that sums up my feelings on the matter:
> 
> 
> "Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious."
> ...




So Mr.J are you saying patriotism and nationalism are synonymous?

I know I was the first on the thread to mention the word "patriotism". 

Is that your only critique of my use of the that particular word "patriotism" or is there something more substantive in my post that has irked you? 

Essentially in laymans terms, I would never buy an Australian product from an Australian company if what they made was crap.


----------



## Trembling Hand (7 September 2009)

GumbyLearner said:


> Essentially in laymans terms, I would never buy an Australian product from an Australian company if what they made was crap.




like public transport?


----------



## stocksontheblock (7 September 2009)

Maybe the one thing that should be defined in the whole discussion is the definition of the words patriotism and nationalism. I think many people, and not referring to those who have posted in this thread have forgotten or don’t know what the true or historical meaning of these 2 words are. These sorts of words along with many others have changed and taken on new meanings in the 21stC.

Nationalism in its true sense is an ideology that has the basic premise that the country is a sovereign nation that holds true to statism. E.g. Fascism.

Patriotism in the broad view, is of a culture of a particular country: so its language, laws, its values, its religion etc.

Unfortunately both are used as interchangeable words when trying to describe the same thing – usually nationalism.

Nationalism and patriotism are not one in the same, although they may share similar traits, such as the national flag etc.

However, the 2 biggest differences between the 2 are:

1.	Nationalism is about an inwardly looking culture/politic/community (as a whole); and
2.	Patriotism has a more widely held sense of the individual.

Many ideologies hold similar views, or values if you want to put it that way, for example the Nazi party held very strong nationalistic and at the same time socialistic views and in fact implemented many policies and practices that would strongly identify with modern political parties like the ALP or the American Democrats – so called ‘left’ wing parties, however you could not call either of these 2 parties Nazi’s, or think their agenda is closely following Nazism.

I don’t think we live in a fascist state, although sometime’s you wouldn’t know it with the agenda of the ALP (just my little dig), however I generally think that the Australian people are more often than not tolerant of others, and generally accepting of others. I have said to people in the past if you don’t like it here then go, yet this was based on an individual set of circumstances rather than a collective notion of an insular country for ‘white Australians only’.

For example, when I hear some English (from the UK) moan and whinge about it being to hot, or to big (the country), or things cost more, or they cant find what they use to get in the UK (usually all of these at the same time) I will make a comment along the lines of: “well, if things were so good back in the UK then go back, I’ll even chip in for the air-fare”.

However, the notion of all “Asians” go home is abhorrent to most, and I don’t believe you will ever see much come from it. Australia, like any country has an under-current of racist propaganda yet all in all we are a well travelled, well educated and well formed society with a strong basis of law governing the country, health for all, and wages that provide a good and reasonable standard of living. Sure, these are all debatable – within your own personal context, yet when its all said and done this is a pretty dam good country to be in to educate your children, get good health cover, find a job, buy a house and so on.

I have lived in a lot of countries around the world, and apart from some – in the sense of better government spending, not necessarily location (what’s on offer broadly), this is one of the best places to be.

So when you see the car go by with such slogans and stickers attached just have a quiet laugh to yourself and think to yourself what a lucky person, for if that’s their biggest worry in the world then they are very luck people.


----------



## theasxgorilla (7 September 2009)

prawn_86 said:


> I think the idea of the slogan is flawed however, as without those who want to improve the country it would just go backwards. What's wrong with not liking certain things and trying to improve them?




Here, here Prawn... exactly!


----------



## Mr J (7 September 2009)

I'm not discussing nationalism and patriotism, and my post wasn't directed at you GumbyLearner, I just have that feeling towards both of them. A nation is an artificial construct and holds no meaning to me. I don't use labels and I won't judge myself by one. Some will talk of the nation's people, culture, ideals, values etc, but these vary so greatly it is silly to talk in generalisations. I just don't find patriotism to be sensible.

This thread is deja vu for me, as I'm sure we had this discussion a while back. I said something similar, and there were a few characters here telling me to pack my bags and leave.


----------



## Surfer35 (7 September 2009)

Took the missus up to Coffs Harbour not so long ago which is the town of my youth. Plenty of bogans up there and most of them are my mates from school.

Now the missus, being Japanese, got quite a bit of attention up there (generally all positive) as there are not a lot of Japanese at the Coffs Hotel on a Friday night.

An old mate of mine was asking her about what she liked and disliked about Australia. She said she liked the way people were so friendly, the sense of space, the beaches, koalas (she is Japanese!) etc.

He then pressed her for what she didn't like to which she replied, in good fun, that she didn't like the way people here whear shoes inside but then go barefeet to the shopping mall.

He then told her that if she didn't like it here she should p*ss off back to Nip Land. Now, there are times when friendships end on the spot, and this was one of them. I really should have knocked his teeth out but that would have made me no better than him.

Luckily, she went on to meet some great people up there, but the "like it or leave" attitude when displayed by an ignorant bogan is terribly embarrassing.


----------



## theasxgorilla (7 September 2009)

Mr J said:


> I'm not discussing nationalism and patriotism, and my post wasn't directed at you GumbyLearner, I just have that feeling towards both of them. A nation is an artificial construct and holds no meaning to me. I don't use labels and I won't judge myself by one. *Some will talk of the nation's people, culture, ideals, values etc, but these vary so greatly it is silly to talk in generalisations.* I just don't find patriotism to be sensible.




So true, and yet I can go to England and think to myself, Ah, I'm in the UK, or Holland and think, Ah, I'm in The Netherlands, or Australia and ... you get the picture.  If you look a bit harder you'll find those things that make the people off a country about the same, and if you look harder again you'll find the things in people that make us all about the same.

FWIW, no matter how different you think you are, if you grew up here, it's very difficult to escape the fact that you're Australian.


----------



## mellifuous (7 September 2009)

theasxgorilla said:


> FWIW, no matter how different you think you are, if you grew up here, it's very difficult to escape the fact that you're Australian.




With respect to ethnicity, an aboriginal is the only ethnic  'Australian', otherwise an individual's ethnicity is determined by where his/her parents come from.  A very different concept to citizenship, whereby if we were born here, then we are Australian citizens.

Actually, I phoned ethic affairs quite some years ago and asked about grants - I told them I wanted to start a club and wondered if grant money was available and was told that it was available to start a club, but when I told them it for an English club, I was told that wasn't anything to do with Ethnic affairs.

Greek, Italian, etc. etc. was okay, but not English.

So, I'm an non-ethnic Australian citizen, of English/Scottish heritage, but English ethnicity is not covered by Ethnic Affairs (or whatever they call it now), so it's no man's land for me and millions like me.

Maybe things have changed, I don't know.  Just my experience.


----------



## Glen48 (7 September 2009)

I have an interest in 2 Acres on a river bank in the Philippines and can build house there for about 4K and grown my own veggies etc so when the rot sets in I won't have any worries and unless you have well over a million $ and about to retire here there is no future here.
With house prices poised to fall and take 15+ years to come back to today level that is not for me so as soon as I can sell what I have for any price I am away.
However I have a Lounge suite on E bay had over 600 lookers and not one offer now looking at dragging it out on to the Footpath and hope some one will collect it.


----------



## prawn_86 (7 September 2009)

Glen48 said:


> as soon as I can sell what I have for any price I am away.




I'll take your house for $1000


----------



## nunthewiser (7 September 2009)

prawn_86 said:


> I'll take your house for $1000





I,ll give him $ 1200 plus a plane ticket and a hawian shirt


----------



## prawn_86 (7 September 2009)

nunthewiser said:


> I,ll give him $ 1200 plus a plane ticket and a hawian shirt




Dammit nun cant you help out a struggling student by letting him buy a cheap house? :


----------



## nunthewiser (7 September 2009)

prawn_86 said:


> Dammit nun cant you help out a struggling student by letting him buy a cheap house? :





ok the house is yours................ i didnt want to give away my hawian shirt anyway


----------



## disarray (7 September 2009)

prawn_86 said:


> I'll take your house for $1000




$1300 

this thread has cropped up before as Mr J mentioned and much the same has already been said (with wayne once again posing the ponderings he loves to pose)

the heart of the matter is people are different. rant and rail and cry your bitter tears all you want, but the simple fact is all human beings are different on an individual level, and collectives are different on a collective level.

be they physical differences like iq, athleticism, skin tone, or cultural differences like language, religion, and sociology, humans are a varied species and people will naturally seek the company of others like them. there are very good evolutionary reasons for this and it is not something that should just be dismissed with typical moral snobbery and throwing about words like "racist" or "bogan" or any other elitist prig labelling scheme the oh so enlightened social relativists like to bandy about from their ivory towers in monocultural neighbourhoods.

nationalism is part of an identification method for people of common attributes to rally around. it can be around physical attribute like whites / blacks / asians only, or cultural attributes like muslims / puritans / german speakers / people who like to wear green socks, or value attributes like free speech / gender or sexual equality / religious freedom, or simple geography. nationalism in and of itself isn't a bad thing, it can provide focus and a sense of belonging to people, and as humans are social creatures this can create positive outcomes, the trick here is to define "nation". is it a geographical, racial, cultural, sociological collective? or perhaps (heaven forbid we try and inject some depth into the concept) a combination of these?

the problem, as always, occurs when extremist viewpoints from whatever side of the divide come into play and denigrate the viewpoints of others while loudly proclaiming the superiority of their own.

so to cut to the chase, what is most important, and what our society lacks is a clear and concise statement of what we stand for, and the values that we consider mandatory for members who wish to participate in our society. yes, we have the right as a society to demand certain modes of behaviour from people who wish to take part in our (somewhat fractured) social compact.

gender equality, religious freedom, a fair go to have a go (not to be confused with the fair go to take advantage of society, which it seems to have been hijacked into), these are some of the base values of our society and they are not up for negotiation. regardless of race or creed, either hold these values or piss off. ie. love it or leave it.

it's not rocket science, it just needs to be discussed in a level headed and rational way without all the supercharged emotion and endless emo butthurt that accompanies any discussion on race, culture, and whether we should all be stuffed into the same "one size fits all" anthropological box.


----------



## wayneL (7 September 2009)

disarray,

There are even more ponderings arising from your post. Perhaps for another time. 

But here's a somewhat light-hearted pondering. I have three passports - Oz, Canuck and Pom... and people here think we're either Kiwi or South African, but definitely not Australian. 

Sometimes I'm left to ponder what the hell to say when folks ask where we're from.


----------



## disarray (7 September 2009)

where do you feel you are from?


----------



## wayneL (7 September 2009)

disarray said:


> where do you feel you are from?




Outer space sometimes 

Nowhere really, happy to fit in where I am if possible.


----------



## GumbyLearner (7 September 2009)

Trembling Hand said:


> like public transport?




Monopolies inherently don't provide choice. Even private ones like Connex. Aptly named mind you.


----------



## theasxgorilla (7 September 2009)

mellifuous said:


> With respect to ethnicity, an aboriginal is the only ethnic  'Australian', *otherwise an individual's ethnicity is determined by where his/her parents come from*.  A very different concept to citizenship, whereby if we were born here, then we are Australian citizens.




Tend to disagree.  Have seen the situation a gazillion times where a person comes to a foreign country with their parents and through growing up in that country identify first and foremost with being from that country.  How ethnicity is "determined" for legal/political reasons can be very different to how a person feels inside, although the former can of course affect the latter.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (8 September 2009)

The racist element of nationalism is bad. Pure and simple. Though being careful to protect and preserve one's identity is logical. Consideration and thought are required to be an unbiased bigot - it goes both ways.


----------



## mellifuous (8 September 2009)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> The racist element of nationalism is bad. Pure and simple. Though being careful to protect and preserve one's identity is logical. Consideration and thought are required to be an unbiased bigot - it goes both ways.




and the social engineering element of socialism is good - right?


----------



## Tink (8 September 2009)

cuttlefish said:


> I don't like the statement - I don't see how it conveys a positive message to anyone - really it just contains an implied threat.  Its more likely to be divisive than inclusive and to incite fear or feelings of defensiveness than to promote understanding and harmony.




Yep, well said Cuttlefish

I have a friend living here from Canada and she was appalled by those stickers.

Australia is what it is because of migration and people tend to forget that...


----------



## mellifuous (8 September 2009)

Tink said:


> I have a friend living here from Canada and she was appalled by those stickers.  ..




Ah! yes, Canada - the Utopia where ordinary people live.  

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb3211/is_200212/ai_n7887843/



Tink said:


> Australia is what it is because of migration and people tend to forget that...




http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4521442.stm

Yes, lest we forget.

The food is good, but the riots are bad.


----------



## Tink (8 September 2009)

Oh, so the only people causing trouble in Australia are migrants are they?

Look in the paper abit closer will you -- I am sure you will find many others...


----------



## mellifuous (8 September 2009)

Tink said:


> Oh, so the only people causing trouble in Australia are migrants are they? Look in the paper abit closer will you -- I am sure you will find many others...




? I agree with your statement that we should not forget we are a country of immigrants.

They're all immigrants fighting - are you suggesting some aren't immigrants? 

Perhaps you're inferring that those sons/daughters born (in Australia) to  immigrants are somehow different to the latter day immigrants?

If you read the preamble "... Violence triggered by race tensions has hit Sydney for a second night, with youths damaging cars and shops. ..."

They're all immigrants, they just happen to belong to different races.

Lest we forget {that Australia is a country of immigrants}


----------



## Tink (8 September 2009)

Tink said:


> Oh, so the only people causing trouble in Australia are migrants are they?
> 
> *Look in the paper abit closer will you -- I am sure you will find many others..*.







By the way, unless you are Aboriginal, you migrated here too


----------



## gooner (8 September 2009)

Tink said:


> By the way, unless you are Aboriginal, you migrated here too




Aboriginals migrated here too - just a lot longer ago. We are all out of Africa.


----------



## mellifuous (8 September 2009)

I wasn't fighting in sydney, so what's it got to do with me or me being aboriginal or not being aboriginal?   I think, with respect, that you've run off the rails.

However, I've already stated in this tread about my 'ethnicity' - I know I'm a child of a child of  migrants, and I know that I'll never have Australian ethnicity, as I'm constantly reminded every day.

That's the price I pay for having been born in this country.  The price every child of a migrant pays and will continue to pay.   We will never have ethnicity based on the country we live in.

I will always be a second class citizen unable to answer the question 'are you an aboriginal or Torres Strait islander?'.

Although I was lucky enough to be classified as 'Indian' on my Thai car registration certificate.


----------



## Tink (8 September 2009)

Oh sorry mellifuous  - I thought you were having a go at migration

I read it in a hurry..

Unfortunately the media doesnt help highlighting these things but migration has been good for this country..


----------



## mellifuous (8 September 2009)

gooner said:


> Aboriginals migrated here too - just a lot longer ago. We are all out of Africa.




When I look around town these days, it seems like migration has come full circle.

'Tink', I'm not against immigration - perhaps I'm more against how the government 'social' engineers, but it's a subject I'd rather not get into on this forum.


----------



## stocksontheblock (8 September 2009)

mellifuous said:


> I will always be a second class citizen unable to answer the question 'are you an aboriginal or Torres Strait islander?'.




Before pulling out the violins, I have got to know how you are constantly reminded that you are a second class citizen.

Are you spat at in the streets on a daily basis?
Are you subjected to racial profiling?
Do the police pull you over constantly?
Are you unemployed as you are rejected for every job based on your race?
Can you not get a bank account in this country?
Must you sit at the front, or back of the bus (or train)?
Are you refused entry to shops, cinemas, restaurants?
Are you denied citizenship?
Can you not access schooling and education materials?
Are you refused health cover/care?

What is it that makes you a second class citizen? Its one hell of a claim you make.


----------



## overit (8 September 2009)

stocksontheblock said:


> Before pulling out the violins, I have got to know how you are constantly reminded that you are a second class citizen.
> 
> Are you spat at in the streets on a daily basis?
> Are you subjected to racial profiling?
> ...




As a youngster I was subject to most of these. Do I win a prize?

BTW I am a single white australian male.

I can post examples if you dont believe me.


----------



## mellifuous (8 September 2009)

stocksontheblock said:


> Before pulling out the violins, I have got to know how you are constantly reminded that you are a second class citizen.
> 
> Are you spat at in the streets on a daily basis?
> Are you subjected to racial profiling?
> ...




Come on then, you've set the standard, play your violin.

But, I'm sure a lot have suffered (1) police pulling over constantly, (2) racial profiling, (3) refusal of health care, and (4) rejected for some jobs based on race.


----------



## Tink (8 September 2009)

mellifuous said:


> *When I look around town these days, it seems like migration has come full circle.*
> 
> 'Tink', I'm not against immigration - perhaps I'm more against how the government 'social' engineers, but it's a subject I'd rather not get into on this forum.




So you think its gone backwards?


----------



## mellifuous (8 September 2009)

Tink said:


> So you think its gone backwards?




no, (tongue in cheek), just full circle - I was referring to immigration from Africa (well, the horn of Africa area).  Just playing with the previous post that referred to all races 'coming from Africa', so now that immigration is coming FROM Africa, then immigration has really come 'full circle'.


----------



## Mr J (8 September 2009)

Surfer35 said:


> He then pressed her for what she didn't like to which she replied, in good fun, that she didn't like the way people here whear shoes inside but then go barefeet to the shopping mall.




Well, that varies greatly, and I expect it correlates well to the buildup of the area. This is a rare site in inner Sydney (and probably not from inner Sydney), but common around beachy areas or outer/poor suburbs.



> However, I've already stated in this tread about my 'ethnicity' - I know I'm a child of a child of migrants, and I know that I'll never have Australian ethnicity, as I'm constantly reminded every day.




That's not true, as different people will treat you differently. Many people will accept you as an Australian, and of course there will be those that won't (or at least refer to your ethnicity first). I don't care where you're from or what you look like, and despite what you may have experienced, many people do feel the same way I do.

This is just one reason why I dislike labels, such as nationality. If people generalise Australians as bare-feet racists, why would I want to identify myself as an Australian? This constant use of labels (nation, ethnicity, culture, religion, socio-economic status, gender etc) leads to generalisations, which breeds ignorance and stupidty. One could suggest that "Divide and Conquer" is still in full effect.


----------



## stocksontheblock (8 September 2009)

mellifuous said:


> Come on then, you've set the standard, play your violin.
> 
> But, I'm sure a lot have suffered (1) police pulling over constantly, (2) racial profiling, (3) refusal of health care, and (4) rejected for some jobs based on race.




Ohhh it’s playing, just for you!

I'm "sure a lot" may have or have suffered this. You don’t say what it is you have suffered to be considered a “second class citizen” in this country.

Tell us all how badly you have been treated to warrant such a deeply emotive statement as a "second class citizen".

If you want to complain about the apparent injustice of it all then explain it.

If you are such the down-trodden second class citizen that you claim then why have you not left for greener pastures? No, this is not a, if you don’t like it then leave statement, yet if life is so bad as to be treated as a second class citizen then go where you will be a 'first class citizen'. I sure as hell would not put up with being treated as a “second class citizen”.


----------



## stocksontheblock (8 September 2009)

overit said:


> As a youngster I was subject to most of these. Do I win a prize?
> 
> BTW I am a single white australian male.
> 
> I can post examples if you dont believe me.




I dont claim this doesnt or hasnt happened, what I have said is that to use such a term as a "second class citizen" then you are in a bad way.

So, if this did in fact happen to you, do you consider yourself to be a second class citizen? Does it still happen to you?

If it doesnt, what do you think changed it?


----------



## trainspotter (8 September 2009)

overit said:


> As a youngster I was subject to most of these. Do I win a prize?
> 
> BTW I am a single white australian male.
> 
> I can post examples if you dont believe me.




I believe you overit. Anyone who has an orangutan for an avatar is cool in my books.


----------



## mellifuous (8 September 2009)

stocksontheblock said:


> Ohhh it’s playing, just for you! If you are such the down-trodden second class citizen that you claim then why have you not left for greener pastures? No, this is not a, if you don’t like it then leave statement, yet if life is so bad as to be treated as a second class citizen then go where you will be a 'first class citizen'. I sure as hell would not put up with being treated as a “second class citizen”.




Oh.. but I have left.

but, look, you're an educated person, you read my quote and the reason I said it.. so, why carry on?


----------



## stocksontheblock (8 September 2009)

mellifuous said:


> Oh.. but I have left.
> 
> but, look, you're an educated person, you read my quote and the reason I said it.. so, why carry on?




Carry on? Because you have - now that you have left, I will use past tense - compared your time living in Australia to that of the 'blacks' in South Africa during apartheid.

I’m trying to understand how you can possible make this comparison. I think I have read all your posts (unless I missed something), and I don’t see anything that explains your "second class citizen" status.

You make no inference that you felt like a SCC (going to abbreviate this now) on a few occasions, you make it very clear in your posts that when you lived her you were a SCC.

The 'blacks' under apartheid in SA were classed as SCC's, so by comparing yourself to that is just plain rubbish.

So, I have been looking for your examples, and explanation as to how you come to the conclusion you were/are a SCC in this country (Australia).


----------



## overit (8 September 2009)

stocksontheblock said:


> I dont claim this doesnt or hasnt happened, what I have said is that to use such a term as a "second class citizen" then you are in a bad way.
> 
> So, if this did in fact happen to you, do you consider yourself to be a second class citizen? Does it still happen to you?
> 
> If it doesnt, what do you think changed it?




Yes most of it still happens. I dont consider myself a second class citizen, I just realise that life is never a level playing field and deal with it. It could be much worse.

Every day though I read in the news that the government is attempting a new way to demonise me and to socialise my pay packet and make it harder for me to be free and rise above it. I love australia but this is the main reason why I have been keeping an eye out for alternatives. If there is a greener pasture out there I would like to know about it.
_
possible rant alert_

What yanks my chain the most is that the groups claiming to be most discriminated against and about being second class citizens are actually the worst offenders of the very practices they claim to despise when they get a chance. 

I tried to get an electrical apprenticeship not long ago... majority of the positions were for females or aboriginals. When I went to uni for my civil engineering degree... they were throwing assistance at females and aboriginals. When I did some training courses at tafe... turns out I was the only idiot paying full fee as the rest were governments subsidised minorities. Then when I do get ahead of the pack the government rapes my pockets to feed the vicious circle again. 

If I had single white male only apprenticeships, training courses, restricted areas, flag, handouts, government assistance there would be international outrage. 

I wont even begin to mention how I am an atheist. Probably the most detested trait on the planet. I guess I should be lucky that there is no identifying mark to alert others of such vulgar free thinking and I can lurk in the shadows of society unnoticed. [/rant]


----------



## stocksontheblock (8 September 2009)

overit said:


> Yes most of it still happens. I dont consider myself a second class citizen, I just realise that life is never a level playing field and deal with it. It could be much worse.
> 
> Every day though I read in the news that the government is attempting a new way to demonise me and to socialise my pay packet and make it harder for me to be free and rise above it. I love australia but this is the main reason why I have been keeping an eye out for alternatives. If there is a greener pasture out there I would like to know about it.
> _
> ...




I love it ... if it wasn't for the fact that I now have a meeting I would add a little more.

I couldnt agree more - particularly with the piece: "What yanks my chain the most is that the groups claiming to be most discriminated against and about being second class citizens are actually the worst offenders of the very practices they claim to despise when they get a chance."

Well, sh*t I guess I am doomed just as you are, and declare my atheisim right now. Long live free thinkers !!! and thinking !!!


----------



## Chris45 (8 September 2009)

I received this in an email yesterday and I reckon it's food for thought:


Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life. 

Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components. The religious component is a beard for all of the other components.

Islamization begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges.

When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well. 

Here's how it works. As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will be for the most part be regarded as a peace-loving minority, and not as a threat to other citizens. This is the case in:

United States -- Muslim 0.6%
Australia -- Muslim 1.5%
Canada -- Muslim 1.9%
China -- Muslim 1.8%
Italy -- Muslim 1.5%
Norway -- Muslim 1.8%   

At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs. This is happening in:

Denmark -- Muslim 2%
Germany -- Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%
Spain -- Muslim 4%
Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%  

From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. This is occurring in:

France -- Muslim 8%
Philippines -- Muslim 5%
Sweden -- Muslim 5%
Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad & Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world.  

When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris , we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam, and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam, with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam. Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections, in:

Guyana -- Muslim 10%
India -- Muslim 13.4%
Israel -- Muslim 16%
Kenya -- Muslim 10%
Russia -- Muslim 15%  

After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in:

Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%  

At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare, such as in:

Bosnia -- Muslim 40%
Chad -- Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7% 

From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels, such as in:

Albania -- Muslim 70%
Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%
Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%
Sudan -- Muslim 70%  

After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and in some ways is on-going in:

Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%
Egypt -- Muslim 90%
Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%
Iran -- Muslim 98%
Iraq -- Muslim 97%
Jordan -- Muslim 92%
Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan -- Muslim 97%
Palestine -- Muslim 99%
Syria -- Muslim 90%
Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%
Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%  

100% will usher in the peace of 'Dar-es-Salaam' -- the Islamic House of Peace. Here there's supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim, the Madrasses are the only schools, and the Koran is the only word, such as in:

Afghanistan -- Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%
Somalia -- Muslim 100%
Yemen -- Muslim 100%

Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% states the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons.

"Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; the tribe against the world, and all of us against the infidel." -- Leon Uris, 'The Haj'

It is important to understand that in some countries, with well under 100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia Law. The national police do not even enter these ghettos. There are no national courts, nor schools, nor non-Muslim religious facilities. In such situations, Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. The children attend madrasses. They learn only the Koran. To even associate with an infidel is a crime punishable with death. Therefore, in some areas of certain nations, Muslim Imams and extremists exercise more power than the national average would indicate.

Today's 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world's population. But their birth rates dwarf the birth rates of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, and all other believers. Muslims will exceed 50% of the world's population by the end of this century.

_Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat_


----------



## stocksontheblock (8 September 2009)

Chris45 said:


> I received this in an email yesterday and I reckon it's food for thought:
> 
> 
> Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life.
> ...




Not that it might not be plausible, however interesting, if not for the background of this man and his obvious agenda.

Even his own website profile details a very "Christian" view:

http://www.frontline.org.za/about_director.htm

Not sure about a Dr Peter Hammond though - "he also earned a Doctorate in Missiology and has an honourary Doctorate of Divinity".

Maybe he uses the word Dr. to possibly hide the Rev. part?


----------



## Chris45 (8 September 2009)

Good work stocks! OK, so he obviously has an agenda but much of what he says about Islam does sound pretty close to the truth to me.


----------



## Happy (9 September 2009)

stocksontheblock said:


> ...
> I couldnt agree more - particularly with the piece: "What yanks my chain the most is that the groups claiming to be most discriminated against and about being second class citizens are actually the worst offenders of the very practices they claim to despise when they get a chance."
> 
> ...





*Yanks my chain too.*

I don’t want to pretend that I don’t know why Australia has such a nurturing approach to Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders, however this racially motivated assistance doesn’t bring hoped for results.

I know there are some who work hard, or just work, but masses are after ‘sit down money’. 

All they want to do is booze and drug and everybody to jump around them to close that life expectancy gap, educational gap, and every other gap there is.

Pictures of derelict houses splashed around the world do not come with editorial who demolished the houses, who blocked the toilets, who littered the place and all the other nasty things coming out of picture.


----------



## overit (9 September 2009)

wayneL said:


> What's the difference between a country and it's government?




I have an analogy. A country is like a farm. The government is like a plague of locusts. The farm (country) is what is left after the locust plague (goverment) has done its best to rape and pillage the goodness from the farm.

We truely are the lucky country. Despite all of our bureaucratic non-sense we still manage to have a reasonable farm left over.

Our continued bureaucratic stupidity never ceases to amaze me. If this guy was a sports star he would have had no trouble gaining a visa and probably even receive funding.



> Visa bungle forced top US surgeon Frank Trost out
> 
> September 09, 2009 12:00am
> 
> ...


----------



## Ageo (9 September 2009)

Whos more Australian, an Immigrant coming here when he's 40 and works hard and contributes to society for 20+yrs or a local bogan who bludges off the government, cries the dole doesnt pay enough, gets drunk with his mates, starts fights with ethnics and calls himself a "proud" aussie?

This should be interesting..................


----------



## Happy (9 September 2009)

overit said:


> ...
> Our continued bureaucratic stupidity never ceases to amaze me. If this guy was a sports star he would have had no trouble gaining a visa and probably even receive funding.





Some cases border on insanity.

Hope this fellow doesn't feel bitter toward all Australians.


----------



## Mr J (9 September 2009)

I can only imagine the pack of a-holes that must inhabit the Health and Immigration Departments. And to think that the country is being run by this type - I'd get angry about it if I had expected any better.



Ageo said:


> Whos more Australian, an Immigrant coming here when he's 40 and works hard and contributes to society for 20+yrs or a local bogan who bludges off the government, cries the dole doesnt pay enough, gets drunk with his mates, starts fights with ethnics and calls himself a "proud" aussie?
> 
> This should be interesting..................




The bogan, since he was born here. Just another example of why nationality is a useless label.


----------



## overit (9 September 2009)

Geez you cant get anymore australian than a bogan can you??? 



> What is a bogan?
> 
> BOGAN (pronunciation boe-gn) is a term used primarily in Australia to describe a particular section of the working class demographic.  This derogatory slang word is a gender-neutral noun; this being important as many bogans tend to gravitate towards one another forming relationships and extended families.  A bogan family is not an uncommon phenomena in certain regions.  A bogan typically resides in either a low-cost housing estate, government housing or in the outlying regional areas of continental Australia.  Generally bogans tend to congregate in areas with little or no features & amenities.
> 
> ...


----------



## DB008 (9 September 2009)

Hey Ageo,
It would be sad to see the doctor depart. Is there some way that we can voice our objections?
And l agree. Some bogan who bludges and sits in there fat a**, smokes pot and is useless gets away with everything. Crazy. Then they complain that the dole sin't paying enough.
 I'm up for getting rid of the dole altogether.


----------



## Tink (9 September 2009)

Ageo said:


> Whos more Australian, an Immigrant coming here when he's 40 and works hard and contributes to society for 20+yrs or a local bogan who bludges off the government, cries the dole doesnt pay enough, gets drunk with his mates, starts fights with ethnics and calls himself a "proud" aussie?
> 
> This should be interesting..................




*The Immigrant*..........for putting into society for the country, himself plus supporting the bogan..who sits on his bum all day whinging......

Regarding that doctor being sent back to the USA, thats so wrong...


----------



## nunthewiser (9 September 2009)

mmmmmmmm a lot of bogan slagging going on around ere

i resemble these comments


----------



## nunthewiser (9 September 2009)

and in fact im feeling unwelcomed in my own country 

in fact 

jam sand up ya clackers and pizzorf if ya dont like it here!


----------



## nunthewiser (9 September 2009)

amen


----------



## overit (9 September 2009)

Looks like the bogans might be looking for a new place to live also! 



> Government decides how drunk 'drunk' is
> 
> BAR staff in South Australia could soon be given clearer guidelines to determine when a tipsy patron should be turned away.
> 
> ...




What sort of nanny state are we becoming. No wonder tourism australia has a battle on its hands!


----------



## nunthewiser (9 September 2009)

one last comment 

want to know what THIS akkadakka lovin,bourbon swilling, desert boot wearing , flanno loving bogan finds hilarious ?

he often pays the peoples wages that like to whinge about him so much ..heheheheheh

ironic aint it my sweeties 

GAWD BLESS AUSTRALIA and a country where an illiterate bogan can buy himself someone thats "apparently" better classed than him 

i love australia 


hahahahahah funny stuff when you think about it

no offense intended .especially to none of you whose wages i have paid in the past


----------



## Mr J (9 September 2009)

Nun, you're too sharp to be a bogan.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (9 September 2009)

Tink said:


> Regarding that doctor being sent back to the USA, *thats so wrong*...



I agree!

But so is the hypocrisy of the bleeding hearts.


----------



## trainspotter (9 September 2009)

nunthewiser said:


> one last comment
> 
> want to know what THIS akkadakka lovin,bourbon swilling, desert boot wearing , flanno loving bogan finds hilarious ?
> 
> ...




LOLOL @ Nun ... I can vouch for the authenticity of this poster.


----------



## nunthewiser (9 September 2009)

trainspotter said:


> LOLOL @ Nun ... I can vouch for the authenticity of this poster.





LOL that was my stand in that you met


----------



## trainspotter (9 September 2009)

nunthewiser said:


> LOL that was my stand in that you met




*CRIKEY !! *I wouldn't like to meet the real one then! Should be good for a laugh or two. Must catchup soon to discuss the state of influx of bourbon to the liver ratios again.


----------



## Bobby (9 September 2009)

I,m for less middle eastern immigration , Why ? ~  they are crook citizens , eg: crime , welfare dependence & integration concerns for a start .


----------



## doctorj (9 September 2009)

Bobby said:


> I,m for less middle eastern immigration , Why ? ~ they are crook citizens , eg: crime , welfare dependence & integration concerns for a start .



Don't feed the troll!


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (9 September 2009)

Bobby said:


> I,m for less middle eastern immigration , Why ? ~  they are crook citizens , eg: crime , welfare dependence & integration concerns for a start .




I wouldn't agree.

I've met some good Lebs.

They said the same about the Micks during the First World War.

The people are ok, its their mullahs and priests who fire them up.Godbothering is the root of all evil. 

gg


----------



## nunthewiser (9 September 2009)

doctorj said:


> Don't feed the troll!




how are his comments any worse than the comments from ppl here slagging of various people of australian descent ie "bogans " ?


----------



## trainspotter (9 September 2009)

doctorj said:


> Don't feed the troll!




Just LOLLING my @rse off at this one ! Bullseye !


----------



## Bobby (9 September 2009)

doctorj said:


> Don't feed the troll!




I'm  in Australia     

This is Aussie Stock forums general chat ,  try having an opinion of a members post without calling them a troll  .


----------



## GumbyLearner (9 September 2009)

doctorj said:


> Don't feed the troll!




The 3 troll questions


----------



## doctorj (9 September 2009)

Bobby said:


> I'm in Australia
> 
> This is Aussie Stock forums general chat , try having an opinion of a members post without calling them a troll .



I was giving you the benefit of the doubt.  I couldn't believe anyone would be so brazenly racist.


----------



## Bobby (9 September 2009)

Doctor said:


> I was giving you the benefit of the doubt.  I couldn't believe anyone would be so brazenly racist.




You think giving me the benefit of the doubt was posting  ( don't feed the troll )  .

Now you say its because you can't believe I'm so brazenly racist ! 

 I'm a racist then in your eyes  by being concerned with middle eastern immigration ?


----------



## stocksontheblock (10 September 2009)

Bobby said:


> I'm a racist then in your eyes  by being concerned with middle eastern immigration ?




An out and out racist? Maybe not! A closet racist, you sure are!


----------



## Glen48 (10 September 2009)

The Dr. problem is he is not a she, I know of 2 overseas women who should not be allowed to stay here and Migration have been informed yet they now have more right than I do.. one even has legal Aid to chase me for wages whilst in a partnership


----------



## Chris45 (10 September 2009)

A bit off-topic, but if a racist is a person who believes that one race is superior to others, then when I look at this photo I must confess to being a racist:


----------



## overit (10 September 2009)

Chris45 said:


> A bit off-topic, but if a racist is a person who believes that one race is superior to others, then when I look at this photo I must confess to being a racist:




Dont worry I get called racist all the time yet I have more non-white friends than white friends... go figure! You cant point out factual observations now without being called racist. The whole racism thing has gone overboard now to the point where it is reverse racism! Somehow this is acceptable though!

But just wait till times get tough... people revert back to their own ilk! I see it happen all the time, just one day it will be on a bigger scale. Patriotism is a form of this. Look what happened after sept. 11. When people feel safe they spread their wings and open up, when they are threatened they bunker down  with their own kind as it is perceived the safest option. Their own kind may be a religion, nationality, ethnicity, locality, bloodline or whatever depending on situation. It happens everyday in small examples. We are still but animals run on instinct.


----------



## Timmy (10 September 2009)

WARNING!

Those with no sense of humour;
Those with an inflated opinion of their own opinion;
Those who denounce PC (but paradoxically seem to be very much so);
Those incapable of using judgment.

LOOK AWAY NOW!

Here’s one of my favourite websites.  

http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/

I am such a racist.


----------



## nunthewiser (10 September 2009)

Timmy said:


> Those with an inflated opinion of their own opinion;
> :





very cool

LOL i might have to borrow that in the future


----------



## overit (10 September 2009)

Timmy said:


> WARNING!
> 
> Here’s one of my favourite websites.
> 
> ...




Thats HILARIOUS! So true!


----------



## Mr J (10 September 2009)

Chris45 said:


> A bit off-topic, but if a racist is a person who believes that one race is superior to others, then when I look at this photo I must confess to being a racist:




Not racist, just ignorant of cultural and socio-economic effects. Would it surprise you if blacks dominate the NBA not because they're genetically superior physically to whites, but because they play a lot more of it as kids, and it is seen a meal ticket to many? Consider the outrage if I took a similar stance and suggested that blacks are mentally inferior to whites and asians, because they don't do as well academically? Is it true? Most people would say no, the blacks are more disadvantaged.


----------



## disarray (10 September 2009)

Mr J said:


> Most people would say no, the blacks are more disadvantaged.




and most people would be wrong.

i know its easier for people to shout "la la la everyone is identical" but physical, hormonal and neurological differences exist between the races. we see how a slight difference in neurotransmitter levels can lead to schizophrenia or any number of other neurological conditions, why is it so difficult to imagine that such a finely tuned species as ours might have a wide range of conditions, responses, abilities or, heaven forbid, advantageous evolutionary traits which have evolved in response to environmental conditions?

humans live in different environments and have evolved different physiological and neurological methods of adaptation? say it ain't so!!!


----------



## Mr J (10 September 2009)

Yes, there are differences, but much of these can without doubt be attributed to diet, culture and socio-economic status. The fact is that variation in any single 'race' is so great, that comparing genetical differences between races does not seem to be that useful.


----------



## disarray (10 September 2009)

Mr J said:


> Yes, there are differences, but much of these can without doubt be attributed to diet, culture and socio-economic status. The fact is that variation in any single 'race' is so great, that comparing genetical differences between races does not seem to be that useful.




this is where you are wrong, and this attitude is the root of the race relations problem we have in the west. the physical differences are great, and they are the root influence of these cultural and socio-economic factors that people keep trotting out as the be all and end all of human behaviour.

plenty of other cultures don't have this problem, they are openly racist towards others and this is also the wrong way to deal with it. 

emotional responses will always provide inaccurate and half assed responses to important issues, be the issues political, mechanical or sociological, but putting up some limp wristed moral absolute is much easier than having to take the trouble to actually think about something


----------



## Mr J (10 September 2009)

> this is where you are wrong, and this attitude is the root of the race relations problem we have in the west. the physical differences are great, and they are the root influence of these cultural and socio-economic factors that people keep trotting out as the be all and end all of human behaviour.




So, you're suggesting that blacks are physically superior, and this is why they are poor?



> emotional responses will always provide inaccurate and half assed responses to important issues, be the issues political, mechanical or sociological, but putting up some limp wristed moral absolute is much easier than having to take the trouble to actually think about something




I'm not being emotional and am always thinking, so perhaps you can provide some data and analysis to convince me. You won't be able to, because tests have already proven that variance within a race is far greater than the variation between races. This means it is completely wrong to generalise by suggesting that one race is better than another. A race may be more likely to produce better individuals, but there are no conclusive results. Some people will point to the NFL or NBA, but that can be explained by other factors.


----------



## disarray (10 September 2009)

Mr J said:


> So, you're suggesting that blacks are physically superior, and this is why they are poor?




no, i'm suggesting we research and discuss race in a rational and scientific way. sorry to dismantle your attempt to build a strawman.



> I'm not being emotional and am always thinking, so perhaps you can provide some data and analysis to convince me.




Race differences in average IQ are largely genetic



> You won't be able to, because tests have already proven that variance within a race is far greater than the variation between races.




well i just did. and the point isn't variation amongst race, its variation between races. totally different things.



> This means it is completely wrong to generalise by suggesting that one race is better than another.




who is suggesting that?



> A race may be more likely to produce better individuals, but there are no conclusive results.




yes there are, its just that some people are unable to detach their emotions from their logic and accept the facts over their beliefs.



> Some people will point to the NFL or NBA, but that can be explained by other factors.




such as? black people play more basketball as kids? white people swim more? asians play more badminton?

there's plenty of research out there, google is your friend. anyway its a controversial topic so personal belief, experience and values will usually have the last say in someones opinion.


----------



## stocksontheblock (10 September 2009)

disarray said:


> no, i'm suggesting we research and discuss race in a rational and scientific way. sorry to dismantle your attempt to build a strawman.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Well disarray I've read much of the 'stuff' you have said and all that can be said is you have a wonderful opinion, if you can call it that.

Sure 'Google' is our friend, so how about using it and proving some of the 'stuff' you have claimed.

While I think much of what you have said is complete rubbish - my opinion - I am sure there is a body of 'evidence' to support you, so lets see it. Your final claim that this is controversial may very well be true, yet it doesn’t excuse ‘controversy’ as a reason for not supporting what you say.

I hope to read some very interesting ‘stuff’ from you.


----------



## Mr J (10 September 2009)

> no, i'm suggesting we research and discuss race in a rational and scientific way. sorry to dismantle your attempt to build a strawman.




I'm sorry, you lost me. Why are you being childish?



> Race differences in average IQ are largely genetic




They admitted the test was developed with a European bias, so what would you expect? The only anomaly is that East-Asians scored higher than whites, but that can be explained by work ethic.



> well i just did. and the point isn't variation amongst race, its variation between races. totally different things.




No you didn't. The point of variation among a 'race' still stands.



> who is suggesting that?




You are, by stating that blacks are physically superior but mentally inferior.



> yes there are, its just that some people are unable to detach their emotions from their logic and accept the facts over their beliefs.




I have no emotion in this, I think that shows in the way I'm approaching your arguement. You seem to be the one acting emotionally, by talking down to me and being petty.



> such as? black people play more basketball as kids? white people swim more? asians play more badminton?




That was my point. Your theory would argue that country people a genetically superior since they're over-represented in sports. Do you believe that to be true?



> there's plenty of research out there, google is your friend. anyway its a controversial topic so personal belief, experience and values will usually have the last say in someones opinion.




There's plenty of material supporting both sides, and much of it is biased and with an agenda. You advise me to research it more thoroughly, and I advise you to do the same.

Anyway, we're way off-topic here.


----------



## disarray (10 September 2009)

mr j, its the whole "superior / inferior" thing you are stuck on. THAT is the emotional attachment you keep bringing up and trying to ascribe to me. its got nothing to do with superiority and inferiority, just because something is different doesn't mean its better or worse, it just means its DIFFERENT.

i don't actually recall saying anyone is better or worse, or making any value judgements whatsoever. what i have said is that differences exist, they have been well researched and documented so they should be calmly and rationally discussed and used within policy frameworks to attempt to create better outcomes for society.

for example education is the key to progress, yet educational outcomes are consistently sub-standard for certain groups. why is this so? how can we tailor our educational methodology to create better outcomes for these groups? is education a one size fits all approach? or do certain groups possess certain characteristics that could be better nurtured and utilised through modified teaching techniques and more relevant curriculum? this can then flow on to culture and religion and crime and poverty and the wider tapestry of society.

as a supposed multicultural society we are doing ourselves a great disservice by stuffing everyone into the same one size fits all socio-cultural framework and then pointing fingers of blame when reality doesn't conform to assumptions. monocultural societies tend not to have to face these sorts of social conundrums so we really are just making it all up as we go along. what we DO need to do is set a base level of behaviours and values expected from society then work from there.

oh yeah, @stocks, what the hell are you going on about? or are you just getting all righteous and indignant for the hell of it and feel like sharing?


----------



## stocksontheblock (10 September 2009)

disarray said:


> mr j, its the whole "superior / inferior" thing you are stuck on. THAT is the emotional attachment you keep bringing up and trying to ascribe to me. its got nothing to do with superiority and inferiority, just because something is different doesn't mean its better or worse, it just means its DIFFERENT.
> 
> i don't actually recall saying anyone is better or worse, or making any value judgements whatsoever. what i have said is that differences exist, they have been well researched and documented so they should be calmly and rationally discussed and used within policy frameworks to attempt to create better outcomes for society.
> 
> ...




There is nothing righteous or indignant about anything I have said. Where is the proof? At the moment it’s a right load of rubbish, well your opinion, and nothing more.

Your example of education is a great point. What certain groups of people are you talking about? Mr J made a very good point earlier - at least I think it was him - when he mentioned the soci-economic status of 'groups' of people. This has very little to do with a culture or group of people, to which I think you allude: it’s based on race.

These 'groups' are people who come from an area. Let’s take the old gem of 'western suburb' kids. There is no one single demographic that makes up this group. This is poor white trash as people call them, or as the thread and others have suggested 'bogans', Asians, 'blacks', many immigrants and the like. Historically in many cities around Australia these groups have under performed in educational rankings and this is a WIDE and very variety group of people - both race and culturally. So how does this fit in?

The whole tenement of your point rests on that there is some body of 'evidence' - and please give me a link to it, that claims 'blacks' have a lower IQ, or some other racial group

If you split a society and provide better education or health or opportunities than another then there will be an inevitable difference. Treat all of them equally and test on a level playing field and there will be very little difference to indicate what you are suggesting.

As I have said, you claim Google to be the font of all knowledge, so use it and show how what you are saying is true.


----------



## disarray (10 September 2009)

stocksontheblock said:


> If you split a society and provide better education or health or opportunities than another then there will be an inevitable difference. Treat all of them equally and test on a level playing field and there will be very little difference to indicate what you are suggesting.




seriously, give the whole "better" "superior" "inferior" thing a rest ok? 

but i'll tell you what IS discrimination, and it's happening right now - affirmative action. you know - splitting society and providing better education or health or opportunities to one group over another. "treat everyone equally" he says, "there will be very little difference" he says. we already give preferential treatment to aborigines and there are still yawning chasms between them and the mainstream. so you think we should remove positive discrimination for the aborigines and treat them equally? well you would wouldn't you? or else you'd be a hypocrite.



> As I have said, you claim Google to be the font of all knowledge, so use it and show how what you are saying is true.




i already have a few posts up. now how about you go grab some facts to show how what YOU are saying is true.


----------



## Mr J (10 September 2009)

disarray said:


> mr j, its the whole "superior / inferior" thing you are stuck on. THAT is the emotional attachment you keep bringing up and trying to ascribe to me. its got nothing to do with superiority and inferiority, just because something is different doesn't mean its better or worse, it just means its DIFFERENT.




That isn't emotional, it would be fact. Lions and dogs are different, but the fact is that in a fight, a lion is superior to a dog. If it were proven that blacks make for better sprinters, then it is correct - and not emotional - to say that blacks would produce superior sprinters. "Different" is just a term people would use to make everyone feel better.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 September 2009)

Mr J said:


> That isn't emotional, it would be fact. Lions and dogs are different, but the fact is that in a fight, a lion is superior to a dog. If it were proven that blacks make for better sprinters, then it is correct - and not emotional - to say that blacks would produce superior sprinters. *"Different" is just a term people would use to make everyone feel better.*



....but the difference is the catalyst for that thought. Difference is an observational fact or proven fact. These facts may not make someone feel better, nor conveying the difference by using an adjective.


----------



## stocksontheblock (11 September 2009)

disarray said:


> seriously, give the whole "better" "superior" "inferior" thing a rest ok?




I haven't used a single one of these terms.



disarray said:


> but i'll tell you what IS discrimination, and it's happening right now - affirmative action. you know - splitting society and providing better education or health or opportunities to one group over another. "treat everyone equally" he says, "there will be very little difference" he says. we already give preferential treatment to aborigines and there are still yawning chasms between them and the mainstream. so you think we should remove positive discrimination for the aborigines and treat them equally? well you would wouldn't you? or else you'd be a hypocrite.




You’re absolutely right! I would be a hypocrite as you term it. However, I have never agreed with letting the insane run the asylum. The plight of the Aboriginal people of this country is one that has very little to do with ‘positive discrimination’ as you call it. There are a multitude of reasons as to why they continue to languish as they do. Some of it is self inflicted; a little of a poorly conceived idea that they are owed something for nothing; some to do with ‘injustice’ by the white people; a lot to do with cronyism; a lot to do with mismanagement; a lot to do with fraud and misappropriation; a lot to do with letting the insane run the asylum; and just a little to much of ‘we know what’s best for you’.

Much of what I have read from you seems to run the line that there is a genetic trait that ‘separates’ races – if I have this wrong them please correct my assumption. So, based on this, are you suggesting that Australian Aborigines are predisposed to living in squaller; poor hygiene; lack of personal belief to be better; lack of will to better themselves; lack of will to … well pretty much anything? If only it was so simple, we could just wash our hands of it all and say, well we can’t do anything, for anything we do will not work. Sorry, just accept that? I don't think so.

If positive discrimination needs to be used to change a previously ingrained cultural bias them I guess if it’s a means to an end then sure why not, yet like all things this well not be used in a method that will better certain ‘groups’ or ‘races’ of people because this is a politically expedient way to drive votes and agendas.



disarray said:


> i already have a few posts up. now how about you go grab some facts to show how what YOU are saying is true.




Maybe I have missed it, yet all I have seen from your posts is that there is proof or evidence to suggest blah blah blah ... I haven't seen a single piece of actual proof or evidence offered up to back your assertion. As for anything I have said - it’s not proof or evidence of anything, I have suggested that in the absence of evidence or proof, what your suggesting is just rubbish.

I can remove all the emotive content from this whole debate, yet that is not to say that whether you are black or white that taking exception to such beliefs is rubbish, especially if the view is formed purely on the basis of race.


----------



## Mr J (11 September 2009)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> ....but the difference is the catalyst for that thought. Difference is an observational fact or proven fact. These facts may not make someone feel better, nor conveying the difference by using an adjective.




Please consider the rest of the post. Suggesting we're "different", but not acknowledging that a race is superior if proven so, is simply an exercise to make peopel feel better. It's saying something along the lines of "they're not better, just different". It sounds a bit like "it's not you, it's me". If a race is proven better at an activity, then it's a fact that they're superior at it, not just "different".


----------



## Timmy (2 August 2010)

Some random thoughts on *Australia ... Love It Or Leave It!* bumper stockers, I mean stickers.

If you want to vote for the current opposition party, then you obviously want to change Australia and so should you therefore leave it?

If you are an expat Aussie, can you get a sticker that says *Australia ... Love It And Leave It!* ...?

Hey, if you are an expat Aussie, how do you vote in the Federal Election?  Who is your local member?  Do we have a Member for Expats?  And what about the Senate, what state are you in for the election purposes?  (Actually serious questions ... OK, maybe not the member for expats one then).  

I know the thread is about a bumper sticker and so this is all probably a bit confusing ... but there you go.

.


----------

