BOLT OBSESSED OVER A.B.C. OBSESSION ABOUT BOATPEOPLE CONCERNS

The convicted racist and extreme Right-wing propagandist, Andrew Bolt, in his column today has claimed that the ABC is ignoring the Abbott government’s ‘success’ in ‘stopping the boats and the drownings’. He claims that: “The new Abbott Government’s policies to stop the boats, stop the drownings and gradually empty the detention centres are clearly working.”

Well, if one happens to be a xenophobic racist who is anxious to keep non-white foreigners out of Australia then the policies of the closet thing Australia has ever got to a fascist government are, indeed, working. But, what needs really to be asked is; are the government’s policies morally the right policies?

Bolt and the extreme Right of Australia like to argue that it’s all about stopping the drownings at sea as though they actually care that foreigners they hate are dying in their attempts to find their way to Australia. If it were just about preventing the drownings at sea then it would have been a simple task of providing either a far more efficient system of detecting refugee boats and then ensuring their safe arrival in Australia or, alternatively, providing them with seaworthy boats – as they are now doing. But, rather than forcing them back to Indonesia, which in itself puts the passengers in extreme danger, they could have been escorted to Australia in safety.

Bolt is attempting to implicate the ABC in the tragedies of the past and at the same time asking why the ABC is not supporting the government’s inhuman treatment of desperate asylum seeking refugees. Bolt has in his recent columns inferred that the ABC’s reports of asylum seekers being mistreated and abused by both the Australian Navy and by Australian authorities in the governments concentration camps on Manus Island and elsewhere are somehow ‘un-Australian’.

Bolt insists the ‘government’s policies are working’ and for xenophobic racists of Australia they are.

The problem is they are the wrong policies. They do not reflect Australia’s refugee obligations and they show Australia as a nation of unsympathetic racists, bigots, liars and hypocrites.

It is the Abbott government and the likes of Bolt that are being un-Australian by promoting their xenophobic hatreds of boatpeople under the pretence of caring about them.

We should be thanking the ABC for exposing the truth about what the government is doing in our name.

BOLT’S OBSESSION WITH RACE AND CRIME

As part of Bolt’s program of promoting racism and perpetuating race hatred in Australia, he very frequently cherry-picks violent crime events committed by black or Islamic immigrants or their descendents to support his argument that African and Islamic peoples should not be allowed into Australia – especially if they are refugees.

In his column today Bolt has picked on the brutal alleged pack rape of a 14-year-old Sydney girl apparently by a ‘group of men of African appearance’. It seems the police and some media outlets were reluctant to describe the alleged offenders as such. Bolt, of course, says they should because in doing so, some ‘99% of the population will be excluded’.

In fact, providing racial descriptions of any perpetrator of any crime is about as useful as describing the DNA that a perpetrator had left behind at the crime scene – it’s completely valueless as far as any potential witness is concerned. If anyone had witnessed a pack rape they would be reporting it to the police regardless of what race the perpetrators were.

And, even if there were some merit in providing a racial descriptions, one can rest assured that Bolt’s reasons for appearing so concerned lies, not in his interest in apprehending the perpetrators but, rather, in using the crime to propagandise the demonisation of, in this case, African people.

Bolt is not a crime writer; he’s a racist propagandist. His sole interest in the case is that it provides him with yet another opportunity to peddle his hate of anyone non-white and non-European.

BOLT’S BLOGGIES: THE IGNORANT AND THE CONFUSED

Yesterday, in response to an Andrew Bolt’s post titled ‘Clarence Thomas: The worst Abuse came from the Left’, I wrote:

Most from the Left dislike hard Right conservatives. The Left dislike Clarence Thomas because he is a hard Right conservative; not because he is black. The Left’s dislike of him has nothing to do with his colour. American white supremacists (right-wing) dislike Clarence Thomas because he’s black. Democrats, who have a very long history of racism, are mostly not ‘Left-wing’ as you infer; they’re just not as Right-wing as Republicans. It was Southern Democrats that were pro-slavery to the point they wanted to secede from the Union, a position that brought on the American Civil War.

Your simplistic and primitive attempt to fit up the Left as ‘racists’ is blatantly transparent.

The response from Bolt’s Bloggies displayed a level of ignorance that highlighted the madness of the right-wing due to Bolt’s influence. As well as plain ignorance, confusion about the differences between the Left and the Right are also exposed.

Here are two examples of the responses to my comment. The first from ‘KB worrier’ who writes:

“Your simplistic and primitive attempt to fit up the Left as ‘racists’ is blatantly transparent.”

Far less so than your confusion regards ‘conservatives” and “far right”. “Far right” is what you left extremists exhibit with your entrenched bigotry and intolerance of any viewpoint which does not Kowtow to your gods of whatever is your bleat-de-jour is (usually something that comes from a conservative regardless of the benefit to the community as it must be opposed and collateral damage be damned )

Another response came from ‘Blair’ (though I don’t think it was Tim Bair) who wrote:

Damien, [sic] your simplistic and primitive [sic] to rewrite and ignore history is blatantly transparent.

 
Democrats created, funded and have belonged to the KKK throughout it’s [sic] history in the USA (remember Senator Robert Bird) and attempts to protray [sic] them as right wing is simply absurd.

For ‘Blair’, so it would seem, the Ku Klux Klan is Left–wing.

The level of ignorance of Bolt’s Bloggies is astounding but what’s really disturbing is the way Bolt has almost succeeded in convincing the more extremist elements of the intellectually bereft Right that ‘the Left is Right’.

It’s all part of a program whereby Bolt has set out to convince the Right-wing that they are not really Right-wing but just ‘conservatives’ and that the Left are really Right-wing and that speaking up for minorities and the underprivileged and supporting the rights of Indigenous people to identify as they wish is some kind of ‘New Racism’.

EXTREME RIGHT MAKE NEUTRAL A.B.C. LOOK LEFT WING

Extreme right-wing commentator Andrew Bolt, together with many of his fellow Murdoch-employed propagandists and the Abbott government, have spent the last few weeks trying to convince themselves and the Australian people that Australia’s national broadcaster, the ABC, is ‘biased toward the Left’.

The problem is that it’s only the right-wing of Australia that thinks the ABC is biased. According to a ReachTEL poll taken on Thursday, 30 January 2014, 67.8% of those polled did not think the ABC was biased toward the Left. 59.6% of them thought the ABC was unbiased while 8.2% thought the ABC was biased toward the Right.

The Right-wing of both politics and the commentariat traditionally are contemptuous of negative news relating to Right-wing policies – especially news that exposes the government’s shortcomings.

The ABC is charged with providing information to Australians that is honest and unbiased – even if it contradicts the policies and statements of the government and its propagandists in the Right-wing media.

Of late, the ABC has been charged by the government and Right-wing commentators as being ‘unpatriotic and unsupportive of the Australian side’.

The reality is that the ABC is not biased toward the Left but that, as far as the Right-wing is concerned, the ABC is not biased toward the Right-wing. Since the ABC is financed by taxpayers, the extreme Right-wing like Quadrant magazine and the neoconservative Australian think tank Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) have for some time been demanding that the ABC be privatised in order to ‘stop the bias’.

Not all conservatives, however, are so keen to privatise the ABC as the Right-wing extremists. The Coalition’s Communications Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, came out in defence of the ABC after Abbott’s attack on it.  

Any serious move to privatise the ABC is likely to be met with strong resistance from the Left, ordinary Australians and many conservatives who, even if they think the ABC is biased toward the Left, would likely strongly oppose privatisation.

The bottom line is this: to the extreme Right, even the ABC’s neutral reporting seems ‘Left-wing’. However, the extreme Right has influence. All Australians must be prepared to resist any interference with the ABC, let alone privatisation.

TIM BLAIR BLARES HIS PHILANTHROPY FOR ALL TO SEE

Tim Blair, Andrew Bolt’s opposite number in Sydney, today parades what he believes is his credential that protects him from being labelled the racist he actually is.

Apparently Blair is a little worried about the progress a 17-year-old boy he’s sponsoring through World Vision is making.

If anyone else were sponsoring kids through World Vision then I’d say ‘Good on them’, but I really have to wonder about Tim Blair’s motives since he is such a well known racist and especially since he is clearly trying to create an image of being a philanthropic caring Aussie who is concerned about kids in Zimbabwe by publicising it on his blog. The reality, of course, is that’s all it is about; image.

In my opinion, the only two reasons Blair sponsors this lad from Africa is, one; to attampt to create an image that precludes him from being labelled a racist and, two; providing sponsorship will likely ensure that he stays in Africa and not come to Australia.

Once a racist, always a racist.

IT’S NOT ABOUT SAVING LIVES: IT’S ABOUT THE XENOPHOBIA OF AUSTRALIA’S RIGHT-WING

The right-wing of Australia like to tell the rest of Australia that their motives and the governments policies are all about saving the lives of people travelling to Australia in unseaworthy boats.

This is a blatant lie.

If all it was about was saving lives as the right-wing of Australia claim, then it would be a simple matter of finding other ways of getting asylum-seeking refugees safely to Australia. It’s a dead giveaway, however, when they start imprisoning those that have the audacity of making it to Australia in hell-hole camps, that the true motives of Australia’s right-wing are actually far from altruistic.

For some reason there seems to be a fear of calling this for what it really is: racism. The advocates for ‘stopping the boats’, both among the commentariat and politicians – from both sides of mainstream politics – give every reason under the sun other than their real reason as to why the boats need to be stopped. They range from; stopping the drownings, stopping terrorists coming into the country, accusing them of being nothing more than economic refugees, through to being unable to assimilate, resorting to crime and forming gangs, and – most ludicrous of all – wanting to force Australia to become part of some Islamic caliphate where Sharia law is imposed.

All of this, regardless of the excuses, is nothing other than straight out racism.

Whether we like it or not, we are well beyond the point of no return of living in a globalised world where transport to any part of the planet is reasonably priced and easily accessed by most people in our world. We obtain and exchange goods and services from and to places all around the world. We are able to quickly and easily communicate with just about anyone anywhere. We are able to access books, films, music and news from around the world. We are able to join social networks and forums that link the planet; yet, for some reason, despite seeming being able to integrate through all of these means with the rest of the world, there are some amongst us that are unable to accept actually being part of a multicultural society in our own neighbourhood.

Scaremongering, demonising, Islamophobia and just plain flat out lies are the tools of racists. The mainstream media needs to expose Australia’s treatment of boatpeople for what it really is; racism, and we need to tell those that treat asylum seeking refugees as criminals that it is they that are not wanted in Australia.

ANDREW BOLT: THE QUINTESSENTIAL AUSTRALIAN RACIST

In a recent interview with Australia’s newly elected Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, Australian journalist Andrew Bolt displayed the extent of his well-known racism when the discussion turned to Australia’s indigenous people. It went thus:

AB: I assume you believe all Australians should be treated equally on the grounds of race and ethnic origin.

PM: Yes.

AB: Why do you then want the Constitution rewritten so that some Australians are given different status on the grounds of their racial ancestry?

PM: Well, that's not I want [sic]. I want to appropriately acknowledge indigenous people in the Constitution. Now, that doesn't necessarily mean that we have two classes of Australian citizens, and any proposed amendment that did in effect create two classes of citizens wouldn't be put forward by me, and would deserve to fail if it was.

AB: But dividing people by race …

PM: Yeah, but you're assuming that anything along these lines will divide people by race.

AB: Yes, I do.

PM: Well, I don't accept that this is mission impossible.

The words ‘racist’ and ‘racism’ have been universally accepted as being derogatory in the sense that the words are usually used to convey a negative perception of a person or a persons attitude to people of a different race, culture or religion. A racist is a person of one race who, for whatever reason, hates people of another race simply on the basis that those other people are of a different race. The hatred is usually accompanied by, or more usually caused by, an innate fear of the other and/or a sense of superiority over the other. That sense of superiority usually revolves around sense of cultural superiority and/or differences in physical appearance which to the racist denotes both cultural and physical superiority.

What Bolt attempts to do is deny his racism while at the same time promote it and, in order to achieve this, he has developed a rhetoric that tries to ‘invert’ his racism. He does this by insisting that, if we recognise the differences in other people’s cultures, religion, heritage and physical appearance, then that in itself is racism. In other words, recognising the positive aspects of people of different colour, religion, culture or heritage is to Bolt as much racism as the more usual negative characteristics that we think of when considering and using the words ‘racist’ and ‘racism’.

Where Bolt’s attempts to hoodwink us fails is in what he offers as an alternative – and it is this that betrays his racism.

What Bolt says he wants is for all Australians to be treated equally. The problem here, however, is what Bolt wants to set as the standard by which equality is attained – and that for Bolt is a white Anglo-European-Judea-Christian dominated Western orientated monocultural society which others, if they must be here, are expected to adopt and assimilate into leaving their own cultures and religions behind. Bolt insists that ‘they’ become like ‘us’ and that they not be allowed to integrate ‘their’ culture and religion into ‘ours’.

Bolt wants to deny Australia’s Indigenous people their right to recognition as Australia’s first people in a future revised constitution. He supports the crackpot ideas of Keith Windschuttle who denies the ‘stolen generations’ and denies that widespread massacres and ethnic cleansing of Aboriginal people by white settlers occurred during colonisation.

Bolt is the quintessential Australian racist; he denies that he is a racist and accuses anyone that attempts to recognise the attributes of the culture, heritage and religion of others as being racist against white Anglo-European-Judea-Christians who want a Western orientated monocultural nation.

The very idea of a multicultural, multiracial society that recognises the virtues of the culture, heritage and religion of different races co-existing in our nation is a complete anathema to Andrew Bolt.