U.S. Politics, Elections & Culture issues

[Soldier of Macedon]

The one constant of racism has been the ongoing treatment of the Indigenous community.

From individuals or from the state? If you're referring to the former, there have always been bigoted morons, but they're a dying breed. As far as the state goes, there are still some issues relating to the indigenous community which need to be addressed. However, in both cases, their treatment, although not perfect, is far better than it was, say, a few decades ago.

Each immigration wave, particularly post WWII has experienced racism...whether that be the German and Dutch migrants after WWII...the Southern European wave of the 50/60/70's...the Turks in the 70's and earlier...the Asians in the 80's and most recently the Indian,Chinese, African and Islamic communities...

Societies which are largely homogeneous or well integrated naturally perceive outsiders as different in the beginning. In some cases, that can lead to racism. I have lived through it, particularly when I was younger, as I am sure many of you from Australia have. It's an unfortunate reality that exists in most countries. But you get past it and the more a new community (and its members as individuals) integrates the less it becomes a problem. On the other hand, there are refugees in Germany from different backgrounds who openly despise and fight each other in the camps. Is that racism? Do you think the immigrant communities (including our own) that arrived in Australia didn't have their own perceptions about the other races and ethnic groups who had also arrived or were already inhabiting this country? Preexisting animosities and cultural clashes are bound to flare up in increasingly heterogeneous societies and the finger shouldn't always be pointed in one direction. There are always teething problems when you add a new element into the mix, the keys are communication, understanding and eventual integration, concepts which some in our society (both settled and recently arrived) either fail to grasp or refuse to accept.

I wouldn't say there's a particularly hardcore element of racism but there's certainly a very high occurrence of low level racism throughout the country...

I have no doubt that it happens. But a very high occurrence? Can you cite some examples in support of that?

I think it's worse the further you move away from the large multi-cultural centres of the capital cities and larger regional towns.

By regional towns, are you referring to rural areas? If so, the population numbers there are dwarfed by those in urban and suburban areas. Those towns aren't as exposed to multiculturalism as elsewhere so naturally the perception of some in those areas would be more ignorant and narrow. That will continue to change with time.

The same processes that are at work in Britain, Europe and the US are at play in Australia...and I think it's largely economically driven...as people feel the pinch through job losses, the blame turns to the newly arrived immigrants......

That is part of the issue, but there is more to it than just the economy. Anyway, I am in no way negating the fact that there is an element of racism in Australia. It exists. I just don't think it is worse than it was previously. And as a side note I also want to add that I don't think people being conservative on some issues should be classified as racists.

[Risto the Great]

It exists. I just don't think it is worse than it was previously.

If the likes of Pauline Hanson are a "thing" now (and it definitely is a thing), then it is worse. And this is all purely economics. Things aren't quite as peachy as they used to be on this island so we might as well blame those sneaky newcomers.

[Soldier of Macedon]

If the likes of Pauline Hanson are a "thing" now (and it definitely is a thing), then it is worse.

Worse than the White Australia Policy? Worse than the way convicts, immigrants and natives have been treated in the past? Come on. The system may not be perfect, but from a political perspective, immigrants have never had it better in Australia. And even on the social front there have been significant improvements due to decades of cultural cohabitation between those of an Anglo-Celtic background and others.

And this is all purely economics. Things aren't quite as peachy as they used to be on this island so we might as well blame those sneaky newcomers.

Economics is a factor, but it is not the only one. There are many who are unhappy about some changes taking place or exceptions being made in society just because governments and establishments want to cater to the demands of certain minorities. Whether they're right or wrong in feeling this way is debatable, but it doesn't automatically qualify them as racists. Like I stated before, I don't believe people being conservative on some issues should be classified as racists. Not all of the people who feel this way support the One Nation platform. As far as Pauline Hanson goes, she used to be a "thing" in the past, it fizzled out. It will again.

[Risto the Great]

Worse than the White Australia Policy? Worse than the way convicts, immigrants and natives have been treated in the past? Come on. The system may not be perfect, but from a political perspective, immigrants have never had it better in Australia.

The fact there is a perception that immigrants have never had it better is a justification for racism for the more simple minded and is evidenced by the growing support for far right wing politicians.

Economics is a factor, but it is not the only one. There are many who are unhappy about some changes taking place or exceptions being made in society just because governments and establishments want to cater to the demands of certain minorities. Whether they're right or wrong in feeling this way is debatable, but it doesn't automatically qualify them as racists. Like I stated before, I don't believe people being conservative on some issues should be classified as racists. Not all of the people who feel this way support the One Nation platform. As far as Pauline Hanson goes, she used to be a "thing" in the past, it fizzled out. It will again.

I would say the Hanson thing will boom or bust in rough alignment with the Trump thing. The fact that there is a Trump thing and rising support in places like Europe for the far right wing is evidence enough it is a "thing" nowadays. If we accept it as a "thing" then it is easily argued that it's being fuelled largely from racism.

It is inevitably a thing (or fizzle) based on how the pendulum is moving at any point in time. This is a case of what happens when it has swung too far and too long into the far right territory.

If we look at Macedonia, it could be argued that ethnic Albanians are afforded too many rights. We in the Diaspora would advocate a very far right Macedonian political party to sort that mess out! So perhaps it is a matter of perspective.

If we look at USA, I cannot wait to see how the USA/Mexico situation develops.

[Soldier of Macedon]

The fact there is a perception that immigrants have never had it better is a justification for racism for the more simple minded and is evidenced by the growing support for far right wing politicians.

It's not just a perception, it's a fact. That said, anybody that uses this as a justification to be racist is an idiot, no argument there. But I think it's useful not to compartmentalise too much when discussing such a broad issue, because there are various reasons why people may choose to vote on the right of the political spectrum.

I would say the Hanson thing will boom or bust in rough alignment with the Trump thing. The fact that there is a Trump thing and rising support in places like Europe for the far right wing is evidence enough it is a "thing" nowadays. If we accept it as a "thing" then it is easily argued that it's being fuelled largely from racism.

Their ideologies may follow similar patterns and there is some cross-continental support, but there are nuances among them and their supporters. Sure, many of them are fruitcakes and racists, but many are just normal people or patriots who don't like what's become of their countries after years of certain policies. Some of them have been directly affected. The latter are't motivated by racism.

If we look at Macedonia, it could be argued that ethnic Albanians are afforded too many rights. We in the Diaspora would advocate a very far right Macedonian political party to sort that mess out! So perhaps it is a matter of perspective.

How would one reconcile this with a somewhat opposing view about Australia and still remain consistent?

If we look at USA, I cannot wait to see how the USA/Mexico situation develops.

How do you think the illegal immigration problem in the U.S would be best handled?

[Karposh]

The rise of Pauline Hanson and One Nation back in the mid-90s was a direct result of John Howard stirring things up with the whole "Asian Invasion" rhetoric. Hanson merely picked up where Howard left off. In my opinion John Howard was the quintessential racist, that is to say, a much bigger racist than Hanson and her dim-witted supporters ever were or are. John Howard is your educated racist - the worst kind. Hanson typically appealed to the uneducated racist - the ugly Australian. That was her supporter base.
However, unlike Hanson, Howard was too smart to push it any further. I've known a lot of John Howards in my time - school teachers, neighbours, work colleagues, etc but, in saying that, I'm with SoM on this one. The John Howards of this country are a dying breed and the Australia of today is much like America has been for generations - in terms of identity. In America, Italians, Poles, Irish and others are all proud to be Italians, Poles, Irish or whatever, but they are even prouder to be loyal and patriotic Yanks. This is the reality I see today.
The only reason Hanson has picked up pace again is due to the Islamic threat and the fear of the home-grown terrorist. Will this fizzle out again? I think so. It might take a little longer to overcome than the "Asian Invasion" threat but it too will pass.
I don't think it's fuelled by racism either but by two ways of life - Western Democracy Vs Islam.

[Gocka]

It has always been there, but in the shadows, because for the most part these people knew that their views constitute a very small minority. They knew they would face condemnation should they expose themselves publicly. Now they feel as if their views are supported at the highest levels of government, even if that is not the case. The rhetoric mainly during the campaign process, and the appointment of Bannon as senior most policy adviser has emboldened those types.

See in most cases a crazy person is a can of gasoline, all he needs is a spark to blow. A spark can happen unintentionally, like throwing a cigarette butt on the ground carelessly. Trump's nationalist and at times racist rhetoric was the spark. Now the consequences are probably undesirable to even Trump, but the fire has already started. This is why sane decent politicians do not play with fire the way Trump did, because they know that words matter. Trump merely wanted to rile people up to get a certain kind of vote, but it was short sighted. At his point I doubt he can make it stop, a lot of these people are under the impression that Trump agrees with them, but just can't say it now because of the evil liberal media.

Its like a comedy sketch, Trump says "don't do racist things" and racists say "rrrriiiggghtttt racism is bad wink wink" Trump says " No seriously don't do this stuff" Racists say " yeah yeah we wont do aything wink wink"

Frankly I'm not convinced some of the people around Trump like Sessions and Bannon are not full on racists to begin with.

Antisemitism and “Islamophobia” existed in America before Trump came into power.

Doesn’t he support the state of Israel? Wouldn’t a speech by him on Anti-Semitism only consolidate his oppositions attack? He has been hammered hard for his recent statements on Israel, if he makes a speech on anti-Semitism any time soon it may give people the impression that either he himself has Jewish lineage or something other.

What good was Obamas speeches on gun violence, how can this Anne Frank centre possibly believe that Trump could deliver a speech that is going to do “magic” upon these anti-Semitist and anti-islamist… Turn them overnight, purge them of their hate.

[Karposh]

With regards to the ever growing trend of Conservatism in the world today, I think it's a valid point to stress that it's not all about racists and bigots and Islamophobia. There is another reason that is often overlooked here. People have simply become fed up with the broken values that are on offer today.
I expressed an opinion on this, on a different thread, regarding the erosion of traditional values for the rubbish that we have today and I was quickly howled down. I don't think it's a pre-requisite to be a member of the Flat Earth Society or to be just another crack-pot on a rant to call something out for what it is. It is an intrinsically human thing to speak out when you see something you feel isn't quite right. Seeing these f#cked up things going on all around us and choosing to ignore them is actually the text book definition of burying one's head in the sand and pretending like it doesn't happen...Not expressing an opinion that speaks out against it.
I hope the Conservatism trend keeps growing and growing and we see some actual changes in society today from being lobotomised zombies (as a consequence of social media and other modern mediums) to restoring some human dignity back into people that is not reliant on narcissism for validation of self worth but on traditional Christian values.

[Gocka]

I never quite bought this argument. At what point in human history can you say that things were better? I hear the same things being said in the USA and I don't understand when this magically time period was that we are trying to go back to when things were so much better.

In the USA, 25 years ago we had rampant gang violence and high crime rates, 40 years ago they were still hanging black people and calling for segregation in the south. 50 years ago we had race riots and blacks were second class citizens. 70 years ago we were in WW2, 85 years ago was the great depression, people were starving to death and women weren't allowed to vote yet. 100 years ago was WW1, the bloodiest war in modern history. Go back any further and you have the slavery, civil war, etc etc.

The living standard today of even the poorest American or Australian is many times better than it ever was at any point in time. People are safer, live longer, have easier jobs, work less hours. The world is far from perfect but its been an upward trend.

So if people have never been any better off in the past then why do they feel like something is so horribly wrong today? When did the world ever adhere to so called Christian values?

Most of the time (not that this pertains to you Karposh) when people start talking this way its because they feel left behind in the modern world, or they don't like how racially and culturally diverse their home country is. The reason that many believe that a lot of this rhetoric is Islamophobic or Racist is because the entire premise seems to be rooted in a falsehood. There is nothing wrong with the world today that hasn't been wrong all along, but people tend to assign whats wrong today to whoever sticks out the most or who ever came last.

In the USA you have former coal miners bitching that there are no more jobs. That's because all they know how to do is mine coal and its the 21st century where things like nuclear fusion and solar are being researched. Its the equivalent of the telegram industry being mad that they ran out of business when the telephone was invented and blaming the lack of jobs in telegrams on the Irish. We have former factory workers that got paid $50 an hour to push some buttons, now a computer can do it for free and they have no education and training to make them good at anything else.

Those times are never coming back, and it seems many people won't accept that. But its still laughable to say those times were any better then they are now. What are we really angry about?

With regards to the ever growing trend of Conservatism in the world today, I think it's a valid point to stress that it's not all about racists and bigots and Islamophobia. There is another reason that is often overlooked here. People have simply become fed up with the broken values that are on offer today.
I expressed an opinion on this, on a different thread, regarding the erosion of traditional values for the rubbish that we have today and I was quickly howled down. I don't think it's a pre-requisite to be a member of the Flat Earth Society or to be just another crack-pot on a rant to call something out for what it is. It is an intrinsically human thing to speak out when you see something you feel isn't quite right. Seeing these f#cked up things going on all around us and choosing to ignore them is actually the text book definition of burying one's head in the sand and pretending like it doesn't happen...Not expressing an opinion that speaks out against it.
I hope the Conservatism trend keeps growing and growing and we see some actual changes in society today from being lobotomised zombies (as a consequence of social media and other modern mediums) to restoring some human dignity back into people that is not reliant on narcissism for validation of self worth but on traditional Christian values.

[Gocka]

As far as Australia, if its anything like the USA then I have side with RTG.

There is definitely a regression going on in tolerance.

To say that it used to be worse so even a little intolerance now is acceptable is a false argument. WW2 was not as bad as WW1 but I doubt anyone would frame it that way.

Maybe saying its worse than ever is misspoken, but its hard to argue that some progress that was made isn't being eroded all over the world.

I think its fair to say its worse now than it was at its best. In the case of racism and the like any form of regression is bad.

A similar argument is used in the USA about the Irish and Italians who were abused ad discriminated against, and managed to overcome and become Americans. That somehow some level of intolerance is okay because it will work itself out eventually. If we are truly better than we were than anything short of 100 is not good enough and there is no excuse. To say previous immigrant generations had it worse is not some kind of consolation.

[vicsinad]

Good points, Gocka.

[Karposh]

Yes, good points Gocka Completely and honestly 100% agree. However, I wasn't trying to be nostalgic about life in the past. Clearly, living life today has obvious advantages and I am grateful for that. We have advanced in pretty much every way, you're right. There is less wars (can be debatable), standard of living is much better, tolerance of others is greater, (basically paste all that you said above here). But at what cost? Yes, we have gained so much but we have also lost something along the way that I'm sure you understand has nothing to do with living standards and modern achievements. Surely, there's more to life than that. But that's my point, no one cares about that thing which we have lost. It's no longer important when all the wonderful things we have today we owe to ourselves and worrying about basic human decency that is championed by all those religious, loony zealots is a waste of time and an archaic concept that has no place in a modern society.

[Gocka]

I get where you are coming from, I hear the same thing in the USA, that people are less caring, less friendly, lack manners,maybe some of that is true, certainly when we talk about religion. The only thing that I can say definitively is that life may have been more simple in the past, slower pace and less going on.

To be honest I feel like the good ole days mind set has to do with every generation's experiences as children. All of us live in the now as adults in the past we were kids, before that we don't know what it was like because we were not around. I think as kids your life is simple, you are oblivious to most of the world and its horrors, your self awareness doesn't kick in util at least your late teens. Maybe that's why we tend to think it was always better in the past.

I actually believe super conservative movements will actually set the world back in decency and tolerance. I have faith in the liberal millennial generation, they seem out of touch and a bit soft, but they are for the most part kind and much more thoughtful and accepting than their predecessors. This conservative surge is the last remnants of an aging population in the west. Time will tell I suppose.

Yes, good points Gocka Completely and honestly 100% agree. However, I wasn't trying to be nostalgic about life in the past. Clearly, living life today has obvious advantages and I am grateful for that. We have advanced in pretty much every way, you're right. There is less wars (can be debatable), standard of living is much better, tolerance of others is greater, (basically paste all that you said above here). But at what cost? Yes, we have gained so much but we have also lost something along the way that I'm sure you understand has nothing to do with living standards and modern achievements. Surely, there's more to life than that. But that's my point, no one cares about that thing which we have lost. It's no longer important when all the wonderful things we have today we owe to ourselves and worrying about basic human decency that is championed by all those religious, loony zealots is a waste of time and an archaic concept that has no place in a modern society.

[Vangelovski]

How would one reconcile this with a somewhat opposing view about Australia and still remain consistent?

That's an excellent question SoM.

WARNING: The following post will offend someone, somewhere.

For progressives (generally, some may disagree but will find it hard to substantiate) consistency does not need to exist and according to some it does not exist - its just an artificial concept that some people adhere to (the same people will then also make claims about 'science' and what it supposedly can do, yet 'science' itself assumes consistency and wouldn't make any sense without it).

The claim that consistency is not necessary, ultimately, lies in the fact that progressivism does not accept the existence of absolute truth or of one objective reality. In fact, progressivism promotes the idea that truth is subjective and that reality only exists as experienced subjectively by the individual (that would mean there are over 7 billion competing 'realities'). Consistency may be used as a rule in one place, but discarded in others. Its all up to the individual to subjectively decide what reality is and what truth will apply. So while a principle may be true or necessary for Macedonia, it does not need to be true or necessary for Australia. For example, a progressive could hold the view that a Muslim majority in Macedonia could be bad, while a Muslim majority in Australia could be good and still be 'consistent' (even though they don't accept the concept) with their progressive world view. In fact, consistency can get you into a lot of trouble among progressives, particularly if it does not align to currently accepted political sensitivities (which will inevitably change anyway). An example of this is women's rights. Make a joke about a woman in Australia and you're a misogynist. Beat a woman to death in Saudi Arabia and watch the tumble weed blow around as progressives demonstrate their tolerance of a foreign culture.

Of course, I disagree with this point of view and I believe that both objective truth and one objective reality exist and therefore consistency is a fundamental principle - all of which clearly makes me a racist, misogynistic, homophobic, Islamophobic, climate change denying, flat earth deplorable who thinks that gender is determined by DNA rather than a person's feelings.

[vicsinad]

That's an excellent question SoM.

WARNING: The following post will offend someone, somewhere.

For progressives (generally, some may disagree but will find it hard to substantiate) consistency does not need to exist and according to some it does not exist - its just an artificial concept that some people adhere to (the same people will then also make claims about 'science' and what it supposedly can do, yet 'science' itself assumes consistency and wouldn't make any sense without it).

The claim that consistency is not necessary, ultimately, lies in the fact that progressivism does not accept the existence of absolute truth or of one objective reality. In fact, progressivism promotes the idea that truth is subjective and that reality only exists as experienced subjectively by the individual (that would mean there are over 7 billion competing 'realities'). Consistency may be used as a rule in one place, but discarded in others. Its all up to the individual to subjectively decide what reality is and what truth will apply. So while a principle may be true or necessary for Macedonia, it does not need to be true or necessary for Australia. For example, a progressive could hold the view that a Muslim majority in Macedonia could be bad, while a Muslim majority in Australia could be good and still be 'consistent' (even though they don't accept the concept) with their progressive world view. In fact, consistency can get you into a lot of trouble among progressives, particularly if it does not align to currently accepted political sensitivities (which will inevitably change anyway). ls.

Cow shit on my shoe is bad, cow shit in my garden is great. So cow shit can be bad, good, both or neither. If coming to a different conclusion based on different facts and circumstances makes me inconsistent, then so be it.