Multiculturalists among us keep trying to defend enraged Koranimals with placards saying ”Behead all those who insult the prophet” by screaming “racist” at those who rightly take offence. This must not be tolerated.
Islam is not a race. Useful idiots who aid and abet this kind of behaviour must be ridiculed and shown the error of their ways.
Related:
- Tim Blair has had enough of the great “racism” shut-up
- But, but… I’m a university prof, how can I be racist?
We could do with a moratorium on compulsive accusations of racism. It won’t be easy to wean obsessive users away from kneejerk calls, so maybe an alternative accusation might be employed. I suggest regicide. If you’re going to aim anywhere, aim at the top.
A WHILE ago I got into an argument with a member of Sydney’s rich white Labor community. He decided that something I’d written about Islam was racist.
Trouble was, he couldn’t precisely identity what particular race I’d offended. Islam isn’t a race. You can test this at home by converting to the faith, which is substantially simpler than converting to black or Asian or white. Even David Hicks, no genius, managed his Islamic conversion easily enough.
My opponent ended up proposing a definition of race based more on religion, culture and background than on skin colour or genetic factors.
By those terms, then, he was satisfied about my racism. But by the same terms, any critic of Catholicism or Buddhism would also be racist. To say nothing of certain protesters who earlier this year marched through the city holding signs that read: “Behead all those who insult the prophet.” They might be racist against everybody who isn’t Islamic.
Similarly violent intimidation emerged this week on YouTube of Melbourne residents abusing European women during a suburban bus ride. Profane fury was apparently prompted by the women singing in their native French. Memo to Plastic Bertrand: don’t book Frankston gigs.
Clear threats are made in the clip, most of them unprintable. “Everyone on the bus wants to kill you and you’re going to have to get off eventually, bitch,” warns the main idiot. “You worked that out yet?”
That’s an interesting line from a dope who clearly hasn’t worked out it’s 2012 and everybody carries recording devices. He’s likely to face some court time for his trouble, if not a period of reflective confinement. Hopefully in the company of a roid-raging 120kg skinhead cellmate with a complete knowledge of Charles Aznavour’s discography and profound intimacy needs.
Australian media quickly decided that the attack for such it was – one goon smashed a window next to where the women were sitting – was not only hateful and bigoted but also racist. Internationally, the website Huffington Post first reported the video “shows the terrifying moment that white passengers on a Melbourne bus threatened to ‘f…ing boxcutter’ four black French women.” A correction soon followed. The man who shot the video told ninemsn: “Pretty much all the French girls were white, and there was just me who was brown and another dark guy on the bus.”
The attack was disgraceful, frightening and shameful. Other passengers either stood by as the abuse took place mostly from enraged men against women or joined in.
But it wasn’t racist. French isn’t a race. This isn’t to defend racists or racism, but to defend accuracy in language. If anything, the comments made by the foul Frankston fellow towards one woman in particular indicate a deep misogyny, in the way it was understood before that word underwent a recent Macquarie Dictionary makeover. (I’d add that other remarks allegedly made by this bloke prior to his anti-French tirade apparently do show he is indeed racist. He hates black people or “darkies”, to use the term he is alleged to have shouted. That line isn’t in the actual video. Again, accuracy is key. This is distinct from his abuse, and the abuse of others, towards singing bus passengers.)
My News Ltd colleague Tory Shepherd won’t be happy with this. Last week Tory, an excellent writer who nonetheless sometimes leans a little Adelaide University, wrote that any correction of racism claims in this case was “a strange and pedantic way to miss the point”. She continued: “I call bullshit on these apologists. What they want to do is declare racism non-existent so they can say whatever vile crap they like about people who are different from them.”
Really, Tory? Way to read minds. Perhaps some of us are simply weary of racism being invoked so frequently and so inaccurately that the accusation has been utterly devalued.
Prefer asylum seeker policies that don’t lure people to deaths at sea? Racist. Opposed to Barack Obama’s economics policies? Racist. Think welcome to country ceremonies are tokenistic and insincere? Racist. Alarmed by demonstrations calling for the destruction of Israel? Racist. Can’t locate a racial component in some white guy’s savage abuse of a white French woman? Racist again.
According to a British magistrate, it is racist to describe someone as Australian. Judge Brian Donohue ruled last week in the case of Petra Mills, accused by a New Zealand-raised neighbour of calling her a “stupid fat Australian bitch”. Said Chelsea O’Reilly: “She was trying to be offensive. I was really insulted.”
Donohue agreed, finding that “the word ‘Australian’ was used. It was racially aggravated.” Mills was fined for racially aggravated public disorder. So now, by various analyses, Islam, French and Australian are all separate and distinct racial types. Somewhere in Sydney a bloke named Jacques suffers a massive identity crisis every time he drops in at the mosque.
We could do with a moratorium on compulsive accusations of racism. It won’t be easy to wean obsessive users away from kneejerk calls, so maybe an alternative accusation might be employed. I suggest regicide. If you’re going to aim anywhere, aim at the top.
Excitement is growing in the Arab world over the upcoming TV series Kh 
Yesterday I discussed the "Vulture Club" expose where some m 
So now will the Obama administration attempt to destroy Israel's 
You will recall that shortly after the elections, I reported on hearin 
We've heard a lot of noise over the past week about Britain, Fran 
It seems that some people are having buyer's remorse over Yair La 
Meet Jen Psaki, President Obama's new State Department spokeswoma 
Peter Bouckaert, the 'human rights watch' official who was q 
The American people's representatives in Washington have told Pre 
Reuters' Dan Williams reports that Israel is preparing for a prot 
A 'human rights watch' official, and several foreign corresp 
Heh (Hat Tip: Bernie K). 
{ 5 comments }
So,as it currently stands:
Racist – anybody who denounces jihad and ideologically driven rape gangs.
Misogynist – anybody who calls shenanigans on a lying,obfuscating prime minister.
Jeez,they’ve got my number.
“incendiary” Language, not incompetence and failed policy is the problem:
Lenore Taylor criticises Tony Abbott’s language on boat people rather than Labor’s catastrophic actions – a common form of assymetrical analysis among political correspondents today:
Even his insistence that asylum seekers on bridging visas do some work – a very good idea – is presented with the rationale that it would do away with the ‘’something for nothing mentality’’ and the situation that refugees will ‘’enjoy life on the Australian taxpayer without giving something back’’.
Why should we assume that someone who has risked their life to get to Australia and build a new future would expect ‘’something for nothing’’ or would seek to give nothing back?
Taylor calls this talk “incendiary” and says Abbott should be more careful with his language.
“Islam isn’t a race.”
Indeed.
“French isn’t a race.”
Indeed.
“Australian media quickly decided that the attack for such it was – one goon smashed a window next to where the women were sitting – was not only hateful and bigoted but also racist. [...] it wasn’t racist”
It was racist.
“This isn’t to defend racists or racism, but to defend accuracy in language.”
Well, if this is only a matter of vocabulary, you can easyly read “bigoted” when you see “racist”.
Claiming that jews are untermenschen is not racist, but bigoted. Claiming that French are ape is not racist, but bigoted. Easy, isn’t it?
Of course, if you want to “defend accuracy in language”, you will never use “anti-Semitic” for “anti-Jews hatred”, because “Jew people” does not equal “Semitic people”, isn’t it?
“So now, by various analyses, Islam, French and Australian are all separate and distinct racial types.”
Which analyses?
“We could do with a moratorium on compulsive accusations of racism. It won’t be easy to wean obsessive users away from kneejerk calls”
On the contrary, it is very easy. You only need to set up your pet totalitarian dictatorship, in which people cannot use the word “racist” and “racism” as they want, but only as you want.
So, why do liberal statists always slander and mis-label those they accuse? Their main problem is that liberals hate personal responsibility, so they avoid it by selling endless group-rights victimology scenarios instead. That way the cowards can pretend to be champions without accusing any individual criminals of their crimes! For instance:
The muslim ideology is all about hate, revenge, intolerance, violence and lying to gain advantage over your enemy – it’s all about might-makes-right extortion, aka CRIME.
So why does it now always seem to be “illegal” to accuse these moslem criminals of their crimes, if doing so might hurt their feelings (and so “make” them commit even more crimes!)? Simply because:
Liberals are racists – they always assume that ONLY White, Western people (including, of course, the Jews in Israel,) are INTELLIGENT enough to be judged guilty of being truly evil, while all their pet “People Of Colour” (including, of course, the “swarthy palestinians,”) just can’t help being violent animals, the poor oppressed little dears, so they’ll always indulge their crimes, much as one ignores the new puppy as it pees on the rugs.
;-)
They want to avoid all individual self-reliant personal responsibility by hiding behind group might- made- rights, and the only way to do this is to assert that: “It’s an absolute fact that there can be absolutely no absolute facts! since there’s always such a diversity of causes and effects, we can never really know anything for sure, so our subjective opinions are the diversely opposite equals to your silly objective facts! And since people are all fallible (and potentially dangerous) mistakes, we must form ever-larger gangs to protect our selves!”
So, never having any facts which would ever agree with their perpetual irrationality, the left must always resort to the slanderous evasions known collectively as the critical thinking logical fallacies – the deflective ad-hominem personal attacks, the distractive strawman red-herrings, and of course the immoral relativist’s favorite, the tu quoque – i.e: “islam isn’t evil because we all do it too! Whee!” As if simply comparing many different categories of wrong, somehow made one of them into a right!
Isn’t it funny that people who actually have facts, rarely (if ever) seem to feel the need to indulge in fallacies?
;-)
Agreed. So, it is not racist to criticize Judaism, since it’s a religion. We can criticize Christianity, Judaism and Islam in the same level. I agree with that.
When we read in jewish books the typical Jewish (specially Orthodox Jewish) slanders against Goyim, Christians, Blacks and all other non-jews in the world (quite interestingly, not many against Muslims) we are rightfully entitled to complain and appoint it as much as we want. Christians who live in Israel and are persecuted by Orthodox Jews in a daily basis would love to know that.
And, of course, useful idiots who aid and abet this kind of behaviour must be ridiculed and shown the error of their ways :-)
Comments on this entry are closed.