So, lets talk about racism for a minute

[manic_depressive13]

How unreasonable! Just because we slaughtered their ancestors, stole their children, are living on their land and are, as a society, responsible for the crippling poverty that most Aboriginals find themselves in DOES NOT justify their having tea without inviting the white kids, and heavens forbid that they get a head start finding a job.

Outrageous.

Seriously, just because you don't consider yourself a racist doesn't mean racism has disappeared. Plenty of other people are still racist and, even if they weren't, the effects of past racism still linger. It's all well and good if people aren't racist anymore, but because of that racism minority groups such as Aborigines are currently living in poverty, have higher crime rates, have higher infant mortality rates, lower life expectancy and lower literacy rates. Shit like this doesn't fucking disappear when everyone decides to stop being racist. We have to help them, and if that means giving them some jobs and letting them have tea parties, great. Perhaps we SHOULD let them take all our jobs as compensation for taking all their land. God knows we're refusing to give them any other sort of compensation.

 

[Sexy Devil]

This thread reminds me of an Aboriginal joke I heard like a week ago. Fair warning that it is a wee bit racist but it's appropriate to the thread, so if you're easily offended just don't read it.

Spoiler

An aboriginal's son asks his dad, "dad, what's democracy?"
"well, son, that's when whites work and we get all the benefits from it!"
"but dad, aren't the white people pissed off about it?"
"sure they are, but thats called 'racism'"

How unreasonable! Just because we slaughtered their anscestors, stole their children, are living on their land and are, as a society, responsible for the crippling poverty that most Aboriginals find themselves in DOES NOT justify their having tea without inviting the white kids, and heavens forbid that they get a head start finding a job.

Outrageous.

Just because you don't consider yourself a racist doesn't mean racism has disappeared. Plenty of other people are still racist and, even if they weren't, the effects of past racism still linger. It's all well and good if people aren't racist anymore, but because of that racism minority groups such as Aborigines are currently living in poverty, have higher crime rates, have higher infant mortality rates, lower life expectancy and lower literacy rates. Shit like this doesn't fucking disappear when everyone decides to stop being racist. We have to help them, and if that means giving them some jobs and letting them have tea parties, great. Perhaps we SHOULD let them take all our jobs as compensation for taking all their land. God knows we're refusing to give them any other sort of compensation.

I have some Aboriginal friends who are pretty wealthy, wealthier than I am. I got better grades at school (I was getting straight 90s, they were getting 60s) because I just generally tried harder, but all the scholarships were sent their way.

Personally I'm a believer in helping on a case-by-case basis rather than by race. The conclusion of "they're black ergo they need our help" just seems to be a waste of government resources when they don't actually need help. So yeah, I'd much rather the wealth was distributed based on who actually needs it rather than judging based on race generalisation. That may mean that a lot of Aboriginals still get their money anyway, and I'm fine with that, provided they actually need it.

 

[JoJo]

http://jewamongyou.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/aboriginal-vs-slav.jpg?w=510

Dude. I have NEVER met an Aborigine with a skull like that. And I doubt that in the 300 years since the colonization of Australia that the skull shape has changed.

The first skull looks more like a neanderthal.

Not to mention that the website looks less than reputable, and seems to have been written by a racist.

Seems to me like you're either misinformed, or a racist yourself.

You may have seen my post by now but if you haven't, check out post #16 on this thread, which proved the first skull was indeed Neanderthal and which gamezombie helpfully "forgot" to mention when he was quoting you, since from what I can see that was his sole bit of evidence that Aborigine people are less intelligent than other races other than vague assertions about evolution and racial IQ gaps. Never-mind that IQ is affected by environment and itself is a rather arbitrary measure of intelligence.

 

[Darth_Dude]

http://jewamongyou.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/aboriginal-vs-slav.jpg?w=510

Dude. I have NEVER met an Aborigine with a skull like that. And I doubt that in the 300 years since the colonization of Australia that the skull shape has changed.

The first skull looks more like a neanderthal.

Not to mention that the website looks less than reputable, and seems to have been written by a racist.

Seems to me like you're either misinformed, or a racist yourself.

You may have seen my post by now but if you haven't, check out post #16 on this thread, which proved the first skull was indeed Neanderthal and which gamezombie helpfully "forgot" to mention when he was quoting you, since from what I can see that was his sole bit of evidence that Aborigine people are less intelligent than other races other than vague assertions about evolution and racial IQ gaps. Never-mind that IQ is affected by environment and itself is a rather arbitrary measure of intelligence.

Thank you, I just had a look.

I'm honestly disgusted that people can argue for this line of thinking. What a dick horrible person.

 

[neoontime]

Uh, this turned really ugly. To give my minority perspective, affirmative action will always be a problem in society (yes, I will call it affirmative action). Too many people think its not working fast enough or not working at all. Some say its working beyond its purpose and causing minorities to be favored beyond all citizens. Some are jealous of the benefits and some just claim it white guilt and call it stupid. Any way this is put out people will be angry. I'm not sure what about it other than saying that this is definitely not a perfect world and that there will always be problems like this.

 

[misfit119]

It happens everywhere, not much you can do about it. If you're white complaining that someone else getting benefits because they're not white is apparently racist. I don't understand how it isn't, but hey, some people feel guilty over stuff they haven't actually done.

Well let me put it to you like this. Read this article: http://tinyurl.com/6vpygf8 Then think to yourself, in any supposed civilized country would that ruling be made if a minority had been the aggressor instead of the victim?

Which leads me to the original post...

My school recently had a morning tea for only the aboriginal students and their parents.

This irritates me.
When did it become acceptable to be racist when it isn't against a minority?

If you were part of an oppressed group and you wanted to arrange a group for people who are the same as you then how is it racist? It's the same thing as a girls only get together, a boys only, members of the sports team, etc etc. It'd be like complaining that those pesky Jewish folk won't let a Christian join their Jewish Club or something else stupid. I mean people do it, and they complain loudly, but it's still pretty dumb. And considering how easy it is to get away with doing stuff to those indigenous folks over there if I were one I probably wouldn't want to spend any more time than I had to around the white folk just in case someone gets any funny ideas.

 

[Dogstile]

It happens everywhere, not much you can do about it. If you're white complaining that someone else getting benefits because they're not white is apparently racist. I don't understand how it isn't, but hey, some people feel guilty over stuff they haven't actually done.

Well let me put it to you like this. Read this article: http://tinyurl.com/6vpygf8 Then think to yourself, in any supposed civilized country would that ruling be made if a minority had been the aggressor instead of the victim?

None. That ruling should not have been made and the judge is an idiot. I am failing to see your point. I'm saying any racism is bad. I don't know what you were trying to say. Sorry

 

[manic_depressive13]

The other bloke is barking mad but your frothing hyper "liberalism" is just as distasteful. Modern Australians have nothing to do with the previous persecutions, which were undertaken in a different age and under a different moral understanding. To expect modern Australians to pay is ridiculous. Taking steps to assist or challenge problems is fine. Positive discrimination (an obvious oxymoron) and unbalanced benefits are patronising, divise and ill thought out. Tackling discrimination by discriminating is plain ridiculous. 1984 is rapidly approaching but it isn't the right wing that will take us there, it is the Liberal Totalitarian, the man so absolutely convinced of his own open mindedness and moral rectitude that he becomes what he purports to despise.

Nonsense. In 2009 the unemployment figure for Indigenous Australians was 18%, which was three times higher than the rest of the population. Studies have actually demonstrated that an aboriginal person is three times more likely to be rejected for a job than a similarly qualified white person. If they are being rejected on the basis of being aboriginal, why is it wrong for the government to step in and provide jobs for them on the basis of being aboriginal? I mean, they make up 2.5% of Australias population. At worst we're giving a tiny percentage of the populace a slight advantage, but in reality we are trying to level the playing field in the face of discrimination. Why is that so terrible?

Just because you're not directly responsible for the plight of a group of people doesn't mean you're not obligated to help them. The fact remains that the standard of living you are currently enjoying came at the expense of the Aborigines and now their children are paying the price.

 

[RJ 17]

As for the OP, I've already seen enough people talking about affirmative action so I won't mention it again. However I will mention that it seems to me that the people who always bring race into an issue first are actually the ones that cry about how an issue/position is racist.

I mean look at the Treyvon Martin case...first reports by the media would have us believe that Zimmerman was a drunken redneck who just couldn't wait to shoot a black kid. Then it came out "Oh wait...Zimmerman is hispanic and not some drunken white guy? Oh...OH! Well he's not really a hispanic either! He's a WHITE-hispanic!!" "Yeah, but we're still boned because he's a registered democrat and not a republican." "Wellll fuck..."

 

[cobra_ky]

Dang. I was hoping this thread would be about actual racism, not someone upset over tea.

Oh well. let's see what we have to work with here.

As for the OP, I've already seen enough people talking about affirmative action so I won't mention it again. However I will mention that it seems to me that the people who always bring race into an issue first are actually the ones that cry about how an issue/position is racist.

I mean look at the Treyvon Martin case...first reports by the media would have us believe that Zimmerman was a drunken redneck who just couldn't wait to shoot a black kid. Then it came out "Oh wait...Zimmerman is hispanic and not some drunken white guy? Oh...OH! Well he's not really a hispanic either! He's a WHITE-hispanic!!" "Yeah, but we're still boned because he's a registered democrat and not a republican." "Wellll fuck..."

I'm not in the mood to argue the existence of white Hispanics right now (but protip: race exists in Latin America too). But the Trayvon Martin case has always been about a man shooting an unarmed teenager to death and the police doing nothing about it. You're the first person i've ever seen give a flying crap how George Zimmermann votes.

 

[RJ 17]

Dang. I was hoping this thread would be about actual racism, not someone upset over tea.

Oh well. let's see what we have to work with here.

As for the OP, I've already seen enough people talking about affirmative action so I won't mention it again. However I will mention that it seems to me that the people who always bring race into an issue first are actually the ones that cry about how an issue/position is racist.

I mean look at the Treyvon Martin case...first reports by the media would have us believe that Zimmerman was a drunken redneck who just couldn't wait to shoot a black kid. Then it came out "Oh wait...Zimmerman is hispanic and not some drunken white guy? Oh...OH! Well he's not really a hispanic either! He's a WHITE-hispanic!!" "Yeah, but we're still boned because he's a registered democrat and not a republican." "Wellll fuck..."

I'm not in the mood to argue the existence of white Hispanics right now (but protip: race exists in Latin America too). But the Trayvon Martin case has always been about a man shooting an unarmed teenager to death and the police doing nothing about it. You're the first person i've ever seen give a flying crap how George Zimmermann votes.

Well I'm certainly not in a mood to argue about media coverage of the Zimmermann case either, suffice to say the point of my comment was that the media were the first ones to interject race into the situation. The more details that come out, the more it appears everything the media initially reported was wrong and, at least in the case of the 911 call that NBC played, completely fabricated.

My point isn't about what race Zimmermann should be classified as, my point was what I said in the beginning: the people that cry racism are often the first ones to interject race into a situation. Regardless of what Zimmermann's race, there's no solid proof he shot Martin because Martin was black. Could he be proven a racist in court? Perhaps. But that hasn't been proven yet.

 

[manic_depressive13]

Wow, you really are liberally basted in sanctimony aren't you? The fact I am not directly responsible for the plight of a group of people does completely mean I am not obligated to help them. In fact let's rewrite that so it is impersonal as therein lies the crux of the matter: if one is not directly responsible for the plight of another group of people then one is not obligated. That is a basic tenant of free law and society. One gets to choose what one does, even if that is "morally incorrect". That is the entire point of law. I may choose to help, indeed I often personally often do (not Aborigines, I live in the UK but whoever I choose to assist). What you advocating and what is so unpleasant is as stautory duty to "help". You are removing people's ability to choose, you are subsituting your morality for the wider population's, subverting the State to your own ends, no matter how well meaning that is wrong. These are the actions of a totalitarian. Sure it's a "slight" advantage for a "tiny" sliver of the population now but what about next week when you decide vegitarians have had a hard time? Or people who wear red t-shirts? In the UK they are already suggesting that children from "bad schools" should be allowed in to university when they have worse grades that people from "good schools". Utterly unworkable and unfair.

Discrimination of any sort is discrimination plain and simple, no amount of Socialist "we are so moral, it's for the right reasons" nonsense will change that. You sir, in your desire to claim the moral high ground, are advocating a small and controlled form of bigotry that has the potential to grow. And you are, despite your vehemence and belief in your own rectitude, completely wrong.

Well I think you're wrong. I believe it is a person's responsibility to help those in need and I don't believe a lack of direct culpability for their circumstances frees you from that obligation. Besides, we don't get to choose what we do even if it is morally incorrect. THAT'S why we have laws. To protect us from (and also prevent us committing) murder, theft, discrimination, etc. All these are behaviours which society deems immoral so we have legislated against them. However, since stastics show that anti-discrimination laws are obviously not working, the government has been forced to take further action. Sometimes what is dubbed "positive discrimination" is necessary to fight racism, just like violence is sometimes necessary to fight violence. It is not an ideal solution but sometimes there is little other choice.

Incidentally, I do think vegetarians have a hard time, and I am in support of any legislation which may improve the quality of life for animals or put sanction on how much meat may be produced. As for the thing about students from disadvatged schools getting precedent, I think it would make far more sense to simply increase funding to the disadvantaged schools. If government funding of private schools in the UK is as disproportionate as it is here I wouldn't be surprised if your entire education system is turning to shit. The red shirt thing was just stupid.

I don't really understand why you think 'socialist' is a dirty word. I do have the moral high ground. You can pretend I'm being insincere if that makes you feel better for being selfish and callous towards the suffering of others; I don't really care either way. However, claiming that I'm "completely wrong" does not make it so.

 

[Signa]

I don't know if it's a cultural thing or a genetic, but there's got to be a reason why Asians are so good at math and high-twitch video games. I also don't see a lot of Asians that are really physically strong either. It stands to reason that something causes these common differences between races, and genetics seems like a good place to start pointing the finger.

As an Asian I can tell you that not every Asian out there is good at math (even though yes I did sleep through AP Calculus and ace all my tests). As far as I can tell, at least in regards to Vietnamese people, the intelligence or studiousness is driven by our culture. Back in Vietnam, students could only advance in grade if they were within a top percentage of their class. So this motivates students to study harder if they want to be more successful than their peers. Take that mindset and bring it over to the US, you have some parents instilling the same drive into their children (not all).

As far as physically strong, I can do 30 pull ups. =D There's not an actual demand in Vietnam to have overly strong people. If you look at it, it's better to be small and agile in the jungles of Vietnam or those fsking tunnels that the NVA built.

Yeah, that's all true, but just because you might be an exception doesn't disprove the generalization. The reason this is such a touchy issue is if there is some genetic pre-disposition to be better at some things than others based on your race, I just called you a shitty Asian. It's a no-win situation for me even asking the question out of curiosity.