Mundine.....again.

[Terry Zarsoff]

It's a fairly uninspiring anthem anyway. Throw in the Britain by Night flag, and you have a recipe for sitting it out in my book.

 

[ManlyMatt]

He talks about wanting to move forward.....


"All players aboriginal & non aboriginal should boycott the anthem & start changing Australia's ignorant mentality...lets move forward together yo."


How are we expected to move forward if he keeps returning to the past....yo!

Jesus @wombatgc do you really think racism and the plight of indigenous Australians is a thing of the past?? I don't know what to say to you.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...its-worse-than-you-think-20160925-groai2.html

That article is three days old. Took me about 30 seconds to find. The only thing I can suggest to you is travelling through outback NT and WA and seeing the 3rd world conditions some Aboriginal people live in. It may be an eye opening experience for you.

 

[The Quirkster]

Thats how the left operate - unless they are in a perpetual state of victimhood railing with mock outrage against every perceived injustice, what have they got? Just sad, empty lives.

We all outrage over injustices. The perception of the injustice is subjective. We all need a target to bend our anger towards. Left, right, up, down, all people find offence at something. And every injustice requires a victim/victims.

None of us has a claim to higher ground.

 

[Rex]

Ok rex. Primary school stuff there. Anyone who reacts to being called racist must be a racist.

If you were called a German, and you know you are an Aussie, would you react?

Why would anyone secure in themselves react? If you react it is because you are not secure in yourself. Yes?

 

[Pablo]

If you were called a German, and you know you are an Aussie, would you react?

Why would anyone secure in themselves react? If you react it is because you are not secure in yourself. Yes?

....lol? Bad comparison.
Being mistaken for a German isn't offensive.
Being presumed a racists redneck is.
Hence the different reaction.

 

[Rex]

The only thing required for stupidity to succeed is for sensible people to remain silent.

So let me get this correct. In your opinion, anybody who excercises their freedom of speech to disagree with Mundine's opinion is a prejudiced, scared sh1tless redneck controlled by Murdock?

Is it any wonder I think you are lick your own arse looney.

You aren't getting emotional are you Rex. Haven't been forced to room with a fella called Bubba that wears his cap backwards at the facility recently?

Freedom of speech is about tolerance, not agreement. You get that distinction, don't you?

It is entirely possible to disagree with what Mundine said without being personally offended, reactive, attacking.

And if that is how you reacted, then what he said could be intelligently analysed. Instead you resort to your usual emotion-triggered comebacks like "lick your arse looney". That reaction just shows YOU believe you've lost the debate.

 

[Rex]

....lol? Bad comparison.
Being mistaken for a German isn't offensive.
Being presumed a racists redneck is.
Hence the different reaction.

Then you are an emotional puppet to anyone who wants to control you.

Secure people know who they are, and don't worry much what others think.

 

[Rex]

We all outrage over injustices. The perception of the injustice is subjective. We all need a target to bend our anger towards. Left, right, up, down, all people find offence at something. And every injustice requires a victim/victims.

None of us has a claim to higher ground.

Outrage means domination by emotion. When we are dominated by emotion our higher order thinking shuts down. The higher the emotional reaction, the greater the shut-down.

Emotion is valuable, even essential, in its place. And emotions out of place are notoriously destructive and counterproductive. Putting aside certain genuine life-threatening situations, a cool head consistently trumps Hopoate-style emotional reactions in effectiveness.

 

[Hamster Huey]

As Murdoch knows all too well, it is so, so easy to control the emotional reactions, and behaviour, of right-wing rednecks.

Why? Because they are scared sh*tless.

If they weren't scared sh*tless, Mundine's thoughts would be simply ignored.

Keep lining up and outing yourselves boys.

As the Left knows all too well, it is so, so easy to control the emotional reactions, and behaviour, of left-wing victims.

Why? Because they are scared sh*tless.

If they weren't scared sh*tless, Bolts thoughts would be simply ignored.

Keep lining up and outing yourselves comrade.

😉

 

[ManlyMatt]

Labelling someone left or right wing is dismissive and the best way to derail what would otherwise have been a productive conversation.

 

[Pablo]

Jesus @wombatgc do you really think racism and the plight of indigenous Australians is a thing of the past?? I don't know what to say to you.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...its-worse-than-you-think-20160925-groai2.html

That article is three days old. Took me about 30 seconds to find. The only thing I can suggest to you is travelling through outback NT and WA and seeing the 3rd world conditions some Aboriginal people live in. It may be an eye opening experience for you.

Pretty sure we're all aware places like that exist. And I'm sure we all agree their plight is far from over. Those communities aren't whats being discussed here.
Mundane is on about the regular Joe around town in our communities being racist and keeping his people down which is what I and others are calling out as BS.

 

[Pablo]

Agree. What if someone called you a paedophile - if you object you must be one based on Rex's "logic"

Nah you're just supposed to say ' all good man' make a peace sign and smoke another bong.

 

[Rex]

Prejudices? Strong word to reflect on people that don't see Mundine's comments as positive to developing reconciliation or treating each other with respect, Rex.

Not a strong word at all HH. We all have prejudices, every single one of us. That is how we are built. That is how emotions work.

Studies have shown that not just conservatives (rights), but also liberals (lefts) were implicitly prejudiced - and acted in discriminatory ways - against people they perceived as black - even when the contact was only by phone. Belief in egalitarianism, and a belief in not being racist, were not protection against unconscious racism. And a belief that you or I are not implicitly racist is only a belief, nothing more, nothing less.

If what the posters I responded to had said was they "don't see Mundine's comments as positive to developing reconciliation or treating each other with respect" - as you now wish to paint them - then that is one matter. Now back to reality ...

 

[Rex]

Agree. What if someone called you a paedophile - if you object you must be one based on Rex's "logic"

If someone called a secure person a paedophile, and they weren't one, they'd know it was untrue. There may be actions to take. But they'd act sanely and coolly.

If someone called an insecure person a paedophile, and they weren't one, they'd be an emotional mess. And act insanely and erratically.

Same accusation, different interpretations, different responses.

 

[Hamster Huey]

You're an educated man, Rex. You know very well that your use of a stronger term such as 'prejudice' was no accident. It was over-reach in the assessment of others and the context of there disappoint in Mundine, but you obviously don't mind using such techniques, even if just for your own amusement.

 

[Rex]

Wow - thats brilliant. So its now open slather on slanderous insults, and the slanderer also gets to make a judgment call on how the person responds as to whether he is guilty as charged. Is this how the law works in your socialist utopia? Are you familiar with 18C of the discrimination act btw?

Did you even read what I said? Or too caught up in the emotion?

I said "there may be actions to take". Legal action may an action if the situation calls for it. And if so, as stated, the secure person would take that action sanely and coolly.

 

[manlyfan76]

Labelling someone left or right wing is dismissive and the best way to derail what would otherwise have been a productive conversation.

I'm a top!

 

[ManlyMatt]

Pretty sure we're all aware places like that exist. And I'm sure we all agree their plight is far from over. Those communities aren't whats being discussed here.
Mundane is on about the regular Joe around town in our communities being racist and keeping his people down which is what I and others are calling out as BS.

I'm not sure any of that is true. I'm sure many Australians don't know about the lack of access to clean drink water many Aboriginal people face. I'm also not sure Mundine is singularly referring to bigotted insults from the "regular joe around town". Mundine is sharing statements originally made by junkee.com in a video. The video touches on systemic racism such a third world conditions and disproportionate prison representations. Barely a mention of name calling if there was one. Making it about Mundine is taking it away from the original message which is an important one. Anything other than the original message is BS In my opinion.

 

[ManlyMatt]

Actually, left and right wing are well accepted terms referring to where someone stands on the political spectrum. Its only dismissive if you think your stance warrants it. Me, I sit proudly and unashamedly on the right, comfortable knowing that I am absolutely right in everything. Calling someone a racist redneck bigot must be considered more dismissive, and more likely to derail a debate, I would think.

Don't actually me mate lol! It's called unspeak. look it up. By labelling somebody left or right during a moral conversation/debate, you are labelling them incapable of forming their own judgements on the subject and ultimately incapable of changing their oppinions due to bias. All without actually saying it. This is due to the connotations that come with those political biases and how they have been increasingly perpetuated over the last decade or so.

 

[The Quirkster]

Outrage means domination by emotion. When we are dominated by emotion our higher order thinking shuts down. The higher the emotional reaction, the greater the shut-down.

Emotion is valuable, even essential, in its place. And emotions out of place are notoriously destructive and counterproductive. Putting aside certain genuine life-threatening situations, a cool head consistently trumps Hopoate-style emotional reactions in effectiveness.

If someone called a secure person a paedophile, and they weren't one, they'd know it was untrue. There may be actions to take. But they'd act sanely and coolly.

If someone called an insecure person a paedophile, and they weren't one, they'd be an emotional mess. And act insanely and erratically.

Same accusation, different interpretations, different responses.

Our emotions are subjectively aroused. The circumstances involved colour our behaviours.

If a wife or husband accuses their partner of paedophilia out of spite, and the resulting outcome would mean that you are no longer allowed to see your child, I find it difficult to see a person remain cool and sane. But if you were seen to remain unruffled by such accusations, rather than vigorously deny them, in front of a judge, it may be detrimental to your situation.

Yet, if I were to call a random person a paedophile, as I was walking down the street, I would imagine that I would receive a more secure response from them.

Ideally, we would try to always maintain a calm demeanour. But we don't live in an ideal world. There are appropriate times for outrage, and appropriate times for remaining cool.

The hardest part is determining when to respond appropriately.