A DISCRIMINATING MAN
Harry Richardson is a long-time student of Islam and author of best seller, "the Story Of Mohammed - Islam Unveiled', http://thestoryofmohammed.blogspot.com.au
Did I ever mention that you should take notice when people change the meaning of words? Changing words may seem like an innocent academic pastime. Don’t be fooled however. This practice can have devastating and unpredictable consequences.
No word today is as unpopular as the word “discriminating.” I doubt if any word in the English language is as hated, vilified, abused and despised as this one.
Being a great champion of the underdog, I am compelled to stand up for this poor old word which is so friendless and down on its luck.
The word “discriminating” was not always so hated. There was a time when it was regarded as a mark of distinction.
A man described as “discriminating,” was regarded as a gentleman of impeccable taste. This was the kind of man who wore fine suits and expensive cologne. He was the sort of chap who dined in the best restaurants and kept impeccable company. A man who was described as discriminating had excellent manners but suffered fools badly.
Pretty much all nations were discriminating too, especially in their immigration policies. Australia was no exception. It pursued a Labor Party White Australia Policy.
This policy was wildly popular with ordinary Australians at the time. Labor Party leader Arthur Calwell (above) summed it up as recently as 1966 when he said:
“Labor believes that our policy of assimilation and absorption is the only sensible policy for Australia to pursue. It is determined to continue to oppose, for many obvious reasons, any attempt to create a multi-racial society in our midst. We can, and do absorb migrants from Asia as well as from Europe and we shall continue to do so, but a policy that avoids the tragedies of Ceylon, Fiji, Indonesia and Singapore, to give but a few instances, is one to be supported.”
It has been a while since a Labor Party leader showed support for such views (excepting Mark Latham of course.)
Thanks to the efforts of Walter Lippman (above), the refugee from Germany however, the Australian Government threw the concept of “discriminating” under the multicultural bandwagon. Lippman loved his new country and decided it was far too good for its current owners to keep to themselves.
Echoing the discredited work of Franz Boas, Lippman persuaded the Government that all men are exactly equal, excepting the depth of their suntan of course. According to Lippman and his supporters, the policy of discriminating had absolutely no benefit. Further, it was one of purest evil which would lead inevitably to White Australians shovelling Jews into gas ovens.
While Lippman waged an almost “one man campaign,” he had the advantage of being the head of the Melbourne Jewish Youth Council, a delegate to the Victorian Jewish Advisory Board, honorary secretary of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, President of the Victorian Jewish Board of Deputies, the head of the Australian Jewish Welfare and Relief Society, the head of the Victorian Jewish Social Service Council, and the head of the Ethnic Communities’ Council of Victoria, and held senior positions in the Federation of Ethnic Communities’ Councils.
As head of all of these ethnic bodies and advocacy groups, he was able to offer politicians a sweet deal. The politicians would get support from all the ethnic groups. In return, all they had to do, was to declare war on a word.
So poor old “discriminating” became public enemy number one. It has since then been shunned, hated and friendless for all of these long years.
But now, the citizens of Arthur Calwell’s old electorate of Melbourne are finding out an awful truth. They are discovering that there is a price to be paid for not discriminating. They are finding that there are consequences for not exercising judgment.
There is a crime wave hitting sleepy old Melbourne, and it isn’t coming from the fruits of the White Australia Policy.
County Court Judge and chair of the youth parole board Michael Bourke let slip some rather startling statistics. At least they were startling if you live in a suburb called Denial. Apparently, 40% of the places in youth detention centres are taken by Aboriginal, Pacific Islander and Sudanese youths. I don’t know what percentage of the population these people represent but I’m picking that it is way short of 40%.
He also said in the board's annual report: "There has been offending of growing seriousness, albeit limited to smaller numbers than the nature of some media coverage conveys. It appears to me that the response and public discussion has been without sufficient reference to serious long-term factors and the now urgent need for action directed at those long-term factors."
I wonder what “long-term factors" he might be talking about? Perhaps he is referring to the policy of handing out Australian passports to random people in Sudan? After all, that’s a pretty long-term factor.
Some people might think that deporting some of these criminals might be the answer. Of course, we can’t do that, as that would be discriminating.
Liberal MP Jason Wood (above) suggested a system should be implemented where letters would be sent to criminals hoping to apply for citizenship to warn them against re-offending.
Pardon me, but I seem to remember that when I applied for citizenship of Australia, it was made very clear to me that having any kind of criminal record would have my application terminated with “extreme prejudice.”
Why then are African youths allowed to repeatedly re-offend and still gain citizenship? Isn’t that discriminating against English people?
Of course not, silly! Discriminating against white people isn’t discriminating at all. It is the exact opposite in fact. That is why it is known as “positive discriminating.”
Besides, sending these people back to live in Sudan among Sudanese people would be to “send them into misery” according to Sudanese lawyer and community spokesman Kot Monoah (above). “You are also sending them to death zones and condemning them to death sentences.”
Frankly, I couldn’t agree more. Living among Sudanese people appears to be an extremely dangerous pastime. A 59-year-old Melbournian woman found this out when a group of men, who might have been of African appearance, smashed their way into her home. They robbed and assaulted her before smashing the place up.
I wonder how this poor woman was reassured by the Victorian Police who said that, “the majority of arrests were Australian-born people, with the 'small percentage' of African-born offenders often having 'underlying issues driving' such behaviour.”
A not too shabby Sudan nation
Not very reassured, I would guess. Yet I still think it unfair of Donald Trump to refer to countries like Sudan as “S#*t holes.” Sudan is not a S#*t hole. The country has lots of wonderful features. It has vast fertile plains, wonderful rivers like the White and Blue Nile, enormous rainforests and a long coastline on the beautiful Red Sea.
If the country was the problem, then bringing people out of the country would be a viable solution. Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem to be. The problem was summed up by the Sudanese man who explained to Jason Wood that in Sudan, “breaking into someone's house and stealing a car is not a big deal.”
“Where they come from they've seen worse and experienced worse” said Wood. I guess he’s right of course. If you come from a country where genocide and mass rape are normal, then violent car jackings must seem like jaywalking to the average Australian.
So, what is the solution?
Well, for a start, I think that we need to return to being a little more “discriminating” with our immigration policies once more. Then perhaps, we can look at our deportation policies.
Wouldn’t that be a good “long-term” solution?