Stupid, Racist Australians

Discussion Greater Forumosa
121

Well I don’t agree with that. I’ve never met an Aboriginal or African person who wanted to change their skin color to white. And if you’ve been to Australia you should know that many people prefer tanned skin to pale white skin; Australians will laugh at someone with bright white legs. Personally, I find unnaturally pale Taiwanese women very unattractive - give me a darker skinned one any day.[/quote]

Ahh, my apologies, I was not being very clear on my point. What I meant was that people who live in temperate regions ( especially Europe ) who are mostly white in terms of skin colour are more accustomed to living, working etc. with white- skinned people. People with dark- skin might look alien or abnormal to them, assuming that they have never met many dark- skinned people before. Thus, the native people are always more comfortable with people of their race. It is the same case in Africa. Dark- skinned Africans feel comfortable around other dark- skinned people, because it has become a norm for them. In my previous post, I was speaking in terms of how certain white people view dark- skinned people. This could be one reason why racism is prevalent in certain countries. I apologize for any misunderstandings. :bow:

I don’t know about the tanned part though, and I can’t comment on ‘’ pale Taiwanese women ‘’ either. :unamused: I can confirm however, that I find most foreigners, regardless of skin- colour or race, friendly and respectful. I’ve even met some friendly Iranians in the past, despite the hostile nature of their country, they are quite polite and courteous. 2012 is the 3rd year since I made a vow to become a non- baised or racist person. :wink:

122

Well I don’t agree with that. I’ve never met an Aboriginal or African person who wanted to change their skin color to white. [/quote]

Then why are the most famous female black celebrities have lighter skin? Shit in Africa having lighter skin as a girl does wonders. No one cares about how dark a man is, but how dark a woman is for certain.

123

Well I don’t agree with that. I’ve never met an Aboriginal or African person who wanted to change their skin color to white. [/quote]

Then why are the most famous female black celebrities have lighter skin? Shit in Africa having lighter skin as a girl does wonders. No one cares about how dark a man is, but how dark a woman is for certain.[/quote]

Celebrities in Taiwan beat up taxi drivers and avoid military service. So does that accurately represent a culture?

124

[quote=“Charlie Phillips”]

Celebrities in Taiwan beat up taxi drivers and avoid military service. So does that accurately represent a culture?[/quote]

Yeah a real accurate analogy :unamused:

Same shit in India, all the bollywood starlets have really light skin.

For every famous “dark” black person I can name 3 “caramel” black female celebs.

125

[quote=“cyborg_ninja”][quote=“Charlie Phillips”]

Celebrities in Taiwan beat up taxi drivers and avoid military service. So does that accurately represent a culture?[/quote]

Yeah a real accurate analogy :unamused:

Same shit in India, all the bollywood starlets have really light skin.

For every famous “dark” black person I can name 3 “caramel” black female celebs.[/quote]

That’s the way you flow, bro. You aggregate people into skin-colour types.

Good night, don’t let the bed bugs bite.

126

Well I don’t agree with that. I’ve never met an Aboriginal or African person who wanted to change their skin color to white. [/quote]

Then why are the most famous female black celebrities have lighter skin?[/quote]
I don’t watch television or read ‘that kind’ of magazine, so I wouldn’t know. I can only think of two female African celebrities - Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Asa, neither of whom seem particularly pale.

I can only imagine.

Hey! Caster Semenya! So that’s three. :discodance:

127

Well I don’t agree with that. I’ve never met an Aboriginal or African person who wanted to change their skin color to white. [/quote]

Then why are the most famous female black celebrities have lighter skin?[/quote]
I don’t watch television or read ‘that kind’ of magazine, so I wouldn’t know. I can only think of two female African celebrities - Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Asa, neither of whom seem particularly pale.

I can only imagine.

Hey! Caster Semenya! So that’s three. :discodance:[/quote]

not talking africa specifically, but look at the US. Beyonce, nicki minaj, rihanna, alicia keys, halle berry etc etc.

128

Well I don’t agree with that. I’ve never met an Aboriginal or African person who wanted to change their skin color to white. [/quote]

Then why are the most famous female black celebrities have lighter skin? Shit in Africa having lighter skin as a girl does wonders. No one cares about how dark a man is, but how dark a woman is for certain.[/quote]

Thanks for bringing this up, it used to puzzle me in the past. Science might be playing a role here. Just saying, African- American people with lighter skin could have non- African- American parents, or they could have simply evolved over time ( less melanin in their skin since the U.S is a temperate country ),or it could very well be artificial… like make- up or something.

Plus, like in Vietnam and Thailand where temperatures go up to 30 degrees C at times, people just wear protection ( clothes, hats etc. ) to prevent getting, well, black.

Just my 2 cents on the issue. :smiley: :2cents:

129

[quote=“Charlie Phillips”]

Celebrities in Taiwan beat up taxi drivers and avoid military service. So does that accurately represent a culture?[/quote]

Errrm… no comments. :s

130

Not all Indians are black/ brown. Those in the northern states have lighter skin. Bollywood is restricted to these northern states. That’s why you don’t see many back/ brown Indians on TV, but end up seeing them everywhere when you’re touring India.

131

Celebrities beat up taxi drivers? I thought taxi drivers would call ten of their friends to come and help. Isn’t that what normally happens?

Also, how do they avoid military service? Send one of these boy band bitches to my school and I’ll work the little poodle over for twelve months or whatever it is. :smiley:

132

Fortigun- missions, reservations, camps…all used to achieve ethnic cleansing and removal of people from their land. In the case of Tasmanian aborigines they WERE removed completely from Tasmania.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_War
By August 1834 the Aboriginal problem, as the colonists saw it, had been settled, since all but about a dozen natives had been removed from the mainland to the Wybalenna Aboriginal Establishment on Flinders Island.

The plan had been discussed openly in media almost a decade previously.
Colonial Times 1826On December 1, 1826,

[i]the Tasmanian Colonial Times declared that:

We make no pompous display of Philanthropy. We say this unequivocally SELF DEFENCE IS THE FIRST LAW OF NATURE. THE GOVERNMENT MUST REMOVE THE NATIVES – IF NOT, THEY WILL BE HUNTED DOWN LIKE WILD BEASTS, AND DESTROYED!
– Colonial Times and Tasmanian Advertiser, 1826[19]

The Newspaper goes on to argue that the only real solution would be to remove the Tasmanian Aborigines and place them upon “King’s Island”:

… let them be compelled to grow potatoes, wheat, &c, catch seals and fish, and by degrees, they will lose their roving disposition and acquire some slight habits of industry, which is the first step of civilization.

However the article also points out that:

If they are put upon the shores of New Holland they may be destroyed. If they remain here THEY ARE SURE TO BE DESTROYED. If they are sent to King’s Island, they will be under restraint, but they will be free from committing or receiving violence and we are certainly bound by every principle of humanity to protect them as far as we can.

This editorial confirms the fact that the relationship between settlers and Tasmanian Aborigines had become violent and that the only solution would be to place the aborigines on one of the Bass Strait islands. The editorial also warns that until this occurs, violence will continue as settlers seek to defend themselves, resulting in more deaths.[/i]

Now they might have thought that this was better than outright extermination of the aborigines, but it was most definitely ethnic cleansing.

133

Well I don’t agree with that. I’ve never met an Aboriginal or African person who wanted to change their skin color to white. [/quote]

Then why are the most famous female black celebrities have lighter skin? Shit in Africa having lighter skin as a girl does wonders. No one cares about how dark a man is, but how dark a woman is for certain.[/quote]

Just saying, African- American people with lighter skin could have non- African- American parents, [/quote]

It’s either that they got lucky, or the fact that 70%+ of black people in the US have a bit of white in them, slave masters gotta get some once in a while.

134

Evidence please.

This is a gross misrepresentation. You conflate the Black War (which did not attempt to remove the Aborigines from Tasmania), with the later removal of a couple of hundred Aborigines to Flinders Island in order to help preserve them. You are pointing to examples of attempts to preserve the Aborigines (attempts described in great detail in the quotations I provided from professional historian Henry Reynolds, quotations which you have not even read), and claiming they are attempts to destroy the Aborigines through ‘ethnic cleansing’. This is intellectually dishonest.

[quote]][i]the Tasmanian Colonial Times declared that:

We make no pompous display of Philanthropy. We say this unequivocally SELF DEFENCE IS THE FIRST LAW OF NATURE. THE GOVERNMENT MUST REMOVE THE NATIVES – IF NOT, THEY WILL BE HUNTED DOWN LIKE WILD BEASTS, AND DESTROYED!
– Colonial Times and Tasmanian Advertiser, 1826[19][/quote]

Again you quote an article which urged the removal of the Aborigines to ensure their survival and protect them from the settlers, and cite it as evidence of an attempt to destroy them. You are misrepresenting your sources completely.

Indeed, I note you didn’t bother highlighting the part which reads ‘we are certainly bound by every principle of humanity to protect them as far as we can’.

The aim of ethnic cleansing is to destroy an ethnic group. The aim of this action was to preserve it; the complete opposite.

135

Makiyo would be perfect there :discodance:

136

Makiyo would be perfect there :discodance:[/quote]
She’s an alky? :astonished:

137

Fortigun, you sure live in the land of doublespeak.

You believe the editorial truly had the best interests of the aborigines at heart? Of course not! Indeed their opening line is ‘We make no pompous display of Philanthropy’.
It was just proposing another way of getting rid of them, of solving the ‘aboriginal problem’ i.e. ethnic cleansing, but in an initially more human and politically correct manner than completely wiping them out. The end result, as was proposed a decade earlier, was their complete removal from the island of Tasmania. Ultimately the end result was also to wipe out pure blooded aboriginals also. It occured in stages but that was what was achieved. If that is not ethnic cleansing what is? The first step is always to ghettoise, to control.

Let’s read Charles Darwin’s account from the same wikipedia page.
All the aboriginals have been removed to an island in Bass’s Straits, so that Van Diemen’s Land enjoys the great advantage of being free from a native population. This most cruel step seems to have been quite unavoidable, as the only means of stopping a fearful succession of robberies, burnings, and murders, committed by the blacks; but which sooner or later must have ended in their utter destruction. I fear there is no doubt that this train of evil and its consequences, originated in the infamous conduct of some of our countrymen. Thirty years is a short period, in which to have banished the last aboriginal from his native island,—and that island nearly as large as Ireland. I do not know a more striking instance of the comparative rate of increase of a civilized over a savage people. The correspondence to show the necessity of this step, which took place between the government at home and that of Van Diemen’s Land, is very interesting: it is published in an appendix to Bischoff’s History of Van Diemen’s Land. Although numbers of natives were shot and taken prisoners in the skirmishing which was going on at intervals for several years; nothing seems fully to have impressed them with the idea of our overwhelming power, until the whole island, in 1830, was put under martial law, and by proclamation the whole population desired to assist in one great attempt to secure the entire race. The plan adopted was nearly similar to that of the great hunting-matches in India: a line reaching across the island was formed, with the intention of driving the natives into a cul-de-sac on Tasman’s peninsula. The attempt failed; the natives, having tied up their dogs, stole during one night through the lines. This is far from surprising, when their practised senses, and accustomed manner of crawling after wild animals is considered. I have been assured that they can conceal themselves on almost bare ground, in a manner which until witnessed is scarcely credible. The country is every where scattered over with blackened stumps, and the dusky natives are easily mistaken for these objects. I have heard of a trial between a party of Englishmen and a native who stood in full view on the side of a bare hill. If the Englishmen closed their eyes for scarcely more than a second, he would squat down, and then they were never able to distinguish the man from the surrounding stumps. But to return to the hunting-match; the natives understanding this kind of warfare, were terribly alarmed, for they at once perceived the power and numbers of the whites. Shortly afterwards a party of thirteen belonging to two tribes came in; and, conscious of their unprotected condition, delivered themselves up in despair. Subsequently by the intrepid exertions of Mr Robinson, an active and benevolent man, who fearlessly visited by himself the most hostile of the natives, the whole were induced to act in a similar manner. They were then removed to Gun Carriage Island, where food and clothes were provided them. I fear from what I heard at Hobart Town, that they are very far from being contented: some even think the race will soon become extinct.

Stop hiding behind semantics and snippy counter arguments.

138

That should be my tagline!

139

No I don’t, and I’m hardly blind to the racism and Darwinian-driven antagonism of late 19th century settlers to the Aborigines. I have no loyalty to the settlers (still less to Australia itself), and I freely condemn their violent takeover and repeated unjustified attacks on the Aborigines. But I do believe we have to be intellectually honest with the facts.

The editorial is irrelevant; the editor wasn’t the one making the decision. This is a bait and switch; you cite what the government did, but describe it using the words of someone else entirely.

Again you’re conflating different sources; what you’ve actually proved is that what was proposed a decade later didn’t actually happen.

It seems you’re unaware that in Australia what you’ve just said is considered grossly racist. :noway:

But this wasn’t the ‘first step’, it was almost the last step in the history of the contact between the settlers and the Aborigines. You have it completely backwards. The removal of the Aborigines was a step taken by the government in an effort to help them survive, in particular to spare them from attacks by the settlers. Attempting to take steps to preserve an ethnic group is the opposite of ethnic cleansing.

Why? Why not read the far more detailed, knowledgeable, and accurate account of the professional historian I cited at length previously? Why are you averse to professional commentary on this subject? But even then, it’s clear you haven’t read your own source. Darwin states explicitly that the reason for removing the Aborigines was to protect them. Here’s the sentence following the one you underlined.

Once more you’re misrepresenting your sources.

This is complete nonsense. I’m simply exposing your misuse of sources.

140

Well I don’t agree with that. I’ve never met an Aboriginal or African person who wanted to change their skin color to white. [/quote]

Then why are the most famous female black celebrities have lighter skin? Shit in Africa having lighter skin as a girl does wonders. No one cares about how dark a man is, but how dark a woman is for certain.[/quote]

Just saying, African- American people with lighter skin could have non- African- American parents, [/quote]

It’s either that they got lucky, or the fact that 70%+ of black people in the US have a bit of white in them, slave masters gotta get some once in a while.[/quote]

:laughing: :roflmao: :laughing: Oh man, that’s so wrong… well, anyway, how do you know 70% of African- American ‘’ have a bit of white in them ‘’ ? I believe the question is ‘’ How much BLACK do African- Americans have in themselves ? ‘’ … everyone knows our great, great grandparents came for Africa… yes, all 7 billion of us. :wink: