Racist attacks in Australia

[GracchusBabeuf]

.

[Mujer Libre]

Thanks for starting this thread.

It really is disturbing- so much so that I've started to feel worried about my personal safety walking around at night. Difficult when you're Indian and on night shifts around the corner from where many of these attacks have happened (St Albans) and have to use public transport!

The response to these attacks from the Australian public has been interesting. Some people, who have their heads screwed on, acknowledge that the attacks are racist, and that Australia has a long history of racism that is basically hushed up in the national consciousness.

Others have expressed regret about the attacks, but insist that Australia is "not a racist country." Yeah right, give me a break. I think this is a predominant view out there and, while it's good for people to be condemning these attacks- I think people in Australia need to face the facts. This is a racist country, and that is perpetuated by the fact that nobody talks about race. And this silence only serves to maintain the white hegemony in this country.

I grew up in South Africa, and I have experienced more personal racism (particularly of the unspoken, assuming that I don't speak English/am a quiet, docile, passive Indian woman) in Australia than I ever did in SA. I think that is because nobody ever challenges Australians to confront their own racism.

And of course finally, are the people who deny that these attacks are racist at all. Then why only Indian targets? Why hurl racial slurs? Yes, there is an element of opportunism in the sense that these are also robberies, but seriously, when a group of guys are heard in the Footscray McDonalds talking about going "curry bashing"- how is that not racist?

Then there's the writer from the opinion pages who said that the fact that these attacks are perpetrated by people from a variety of ethnic backgrounds, that basically exonerates white Australia from blame.

What about the overwhelmingly white cops who have ignored the whole thing, and indulged in the lowest type of victim-blaming?

:rolleyes: Australia really needs a good kick up the arse.

[Bilan]

It's weird, when I was in melbourne a few months ago, I was being told about stuff like this from my friends little brother, who just so happens to be a lad of sorts.
Apparently, "lads" have been targeting Indian men and teenagers at train stations, because it's believed they have a lot of money.
That was a few months ago, though. It seems like only now people are stating to take notice of it.
Though, racist attacks here aren't totally uncommon anyway.

[Mujer Libre]

The first I heard of this was in September last year when former-AMA president Mukesh Haikerwal was bashed (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/30/2378048.htm?site=melbourne) in Williamstown, but yeah, it's been out of the media till lately.

[progressive_lefty]

As an Australian, I think we should be a bit careful as to how we approach this. The media is quite obviously going about its usual business trying to make money. I'd hate to see Indians look to the Australian media, as if its there friend. There is no doubt that racism exists in Australia, but I think its a mistake to suggest that all of these recent attacks were race-related. It has already been noted that not all of these attacks were based on race.

[Bilan]

As an Australian, I think we should be a bit careful as to how we approach this. The media is quite obviously going about its usual business trying to make money. I'd hate to see Indians look to the Australian media, as if its there friend. There is no doubt that racism exists in Australia, but I think its a mistake to suggest that all of these recent attacks were race-related. It has already been noted that not all of these attacks were based on race.

Both Mujer and I are Australians as well.

[Niccolò Rossi]

The response to these attacks from the Australian public has been interesting. Some people, who have their heads screwed on, acknowledge that the attacks are racist, and that Australia has a long history of racism that is basically hushed up in the national consciousness.

Others have expressed regret about the attacks, but insist that Australia is "not a racist country." Yeah right, give me a break. I think this is a predominant view out there and, while it's good for people to be condemning these attacks- I think people in Australia need to face the facts. This is a racist country, and that is perpetuated by the fact that nobody talks about race. And this silence only serves to maintain the white hegemony in this country.

... I think that is because nobody ever challenges Australians to confront their own racism.

[...]

Then there's the writer from the opinion pages who said that the fact that these attacks are perpetrated by people from a variety of ethnic backgrounds, that basically exonerates white Australia from blame.

[...]

Australia really needs a good kick up the arse.

I'd be very cautious about what you are saying here. "Australia needs a good kick...", "white Australia", "Australians ... own racism", "national consciousness". These all pander to bourgeois ideology, trying to unify the identity and interests of the antagonistic classes which make up society under the banner of the Australian nation.

Yes, these are racist attacks. Yes, the concerns being raised by those affected (particularly Indian students) are legitimate. However what is needed is not pandering to bourgeois ideological conceptions but a challenge to them.

Not "a long history of racism that is basically hushed up in the national consciousness", but a long history of racism hushed by the ruling class.
Not "nobody ever challenges Australians to confront their own racism", but racial divisions must be combated and overcome in and through the struggle of the international and multi-ethnic working class.
Not "Australia really needs a good kick up the arse", but the proletariat must kick the racist ideology of the bourgeoisie.

With regard to the struggles recently and currently being waged (particularly) by Indian students (and I borrow from the recent article on the situation in Iran put out by the Turkish section of the ICC) it is not enough for communists to merely uncritically cheer on struggles from afar. It is necessary to analyse, explain and to put forward a perspective. The struggle reflects a need, a reaction to real racist violence and injustice, however at the moment the struggle is still confined to an atomised and de-classed, ethnic and community terrain. What is important is the need for the movement progress, not to remain caged behind the demand for better police protection or to decent into racist gang thuggery, but for the multi-ethnic working class to challenge racism through unity and solidarity in the class struggle.

[benhur]

I don't know about these particular incidents. But generally, violence is never racial even when it appears that way on the surface. It's essentially sexual, as most things are.

I really hate it when leftists look at everything through the prism of economic determinism. The human mind is a complex thing, and not every event can be reduced to socioeconomic factors.

This is why leftists need to give up their arrogant 'know-it-all' attitude and admit the possibility that there's a world beyond politics and economics, which might shape human behavior.

[Invariance]

I don't know about these particular incidents. But generally, violence is never racial even when it appears that way on the surface. It's essentially sexual, as most things are. What in hell? :confused:

[Black Dagger]

^^^^^ I know right?


I don't know about these particular incidents. But generally, violence is never racial even when it appears that way on the surface. It's essentially sexual, as most things are.


Okay, but followed by...



I really hate it when leftists look at everything through the prism of economic determinism. The human mind is a complex thing, and not every event can be reduced to socioeconomic factors [BD note: but reducing it to 'sexual' factors is cool?].

This is why leftists need to give up their arrogant 'know-it-all' attitude and admit the possibility that there's a world beyond politics and economics [BD note: So like the 'sexual' world?], which might shape human behavior.

I'm not really sure what any of that means, but you seem to be replacing one reductionist POV (economic determinism) with another (sexual determinism)? :confused:

[Il Medico]

I find the rash of out breaks across several first world countries disturbing. There has been many similar attacks here in the US. It seems like the economic stress brings out the worst in people. Nazis and the like have always taken advantage of economic decline, and continue to stir hatred. However, leftist can also make gains in these times. We must actively campaign against these type of attacks. In times like this people are less likely to dismiss us off hand. The more support we have the better we can effectively battle racism and fascism.

Love,
Captain Jack

P.S Stay safe Mujer Libre!

[benhur]

^^^^^ I know right?



Okay, but followed by...



I'm not really sure what any of that means, but you seem to be replacing one reductionist POV (economic determinism) with another (sexual determinism)? :confused:

Economic determinism has failed in almost all cases, which is why leftists still haven't convinced the masses (despite economic crises and all). Sexual determinism, on the other hand, seems to be solid because man is essentially a sexual being. His every act, at least on a subconscious level, is determined by sexuality.

All people are basically sadomasochists. Either they enjoy torturing others, or they enjoy getting tortured by others. Why else do you think some people want power at all costs? It's because they're sadists and by capturing power, they can abuse 'little people' and derive sexual pleasure thereof.

And these 'little people' are not every innocent either. They're masochists, and they too derive the same sexual pleasure by suffering at the hands of their leaders. This is why we often see slaves cheering for their masters, no matter what. It's because they enjoy being at the receiving end, it fulfills them sexually.

For instance, if you argue in favor of communism, you'll be attacked by workers, of all people! Even though workers are exploited by capitalism, they're the ones who defend capitalism. Poor people go to war in order to protect the rich people! In other words, the man who suffers is willing to defend the people who're making him suffer!

How else can one explain these inconsistencies in human behavior? Lack of class consciousness isn't the issue. To know that one is being exploited and abused...you don't have to be a genius to figure that one out. So it's obvious that people know that they're being exploited. They just don't mind as long as the exploitation satisfies them sexually.

Bottom line, all conflict -- from street fights to international politics -- is sexual in nature. Else, there will be no motive to fight. Even if one argues that the motive is money (rather than sex), why does one need money? It's because money can buy sex. So even though money (or any other factor, for that matter) seems to be cause of conflict, it's only an apparent one, a secondary one. The real cause happens to be the desire for sexual gratification.

[Bilan]

I don't know about these particular incidents. But generally, violence is never racial even when it appears that way on the surface. It's essentially sexual, as most things are.

What the fuck are you talking about?!



I really hate it when leftists look at everything through the prism of economic determinism. The human mind is a complex thing, and not every event can be reduced to socioeconomic factors.

Umm...It's not economic determinism, you contradicted that by realizing 'socioeconomic factors' rather than simply 'economic'. The fact is that humans are born into particular constraints - structrual, social, moral, etc - and act within them - these shape their consciousness, and they act within them.
This doesn't undermine the complexities of the human mind, but realizes that the origin of these conflicts is social, as is their manifestation.



This is why leftists need to give up their arrogant 'know-it-all' attitude and admit the possibility that there's a world beyond politics and economics, which might shape human behavior.

If that's why - i.e. a vague, ambigious argument - then no argument of 'leftists' needs to be dropped, especially not because of meaningless counter-points.
Are you implying that social issues are not created through the structures and creations of a society?

[Bilan]

Economic determinism has failed in almost all cases, which is why leftists still haven't convinced the masses (despite economic crises and all). Sexual determinism, on the other hand, seems to be solid because man is essentially a sexual being. His every act, at least on a subconscious level, is determined by sexuality.

You can not be serious. You think that the failings of the Communist movement is derived from it's lack of sexual analysis, or even sexual determinism?! That is ludicrous!



All people are basically sadomasochists.

Well researched.



Either they enjoy torturing others, or they enjoy getting tortured by others. Why else do you think some people want power at all costs? It's because they're sadists and by capturing power, they can abuse 'little people' and derive sexual pleasure thereof.

That is a blatant generalisation, with no basis in the development of human consciousness or human society, and is indeed merely a fetishism of the image which appears. Bad socialists are like bad artists, they try to finish the picture without finishing, or even starting, the fundamentals of the work. Your analysis falls into this category, in that it has no empirical basis behind it, but is merely an assertion on what appears.
You've no regard for why things (domination, power, etc) appear the way they are, or what their root is, but instead assert that it is because it is, and is thus universal.
That is nonsense.



And these 'little people' are not every innocent either. They're masochists, and they too derive the same sexual pleasure by suffering at the hands of their leaders. This is why we often see slaves cheering for their masters, no matter what. It's because they enjoy being at the receiving end, it fulfills them sexually.


That is fucking ridiculous. The assumption of 'sexual pleausre' remains unsubstantiated, and merely presumed.



For instance, if you argue in favor of communism, you'll be attacked by workers, of all people!

I've never been "attacked" for it.



Even though workers are exploited by capitalism, they're the ones who defend capitalism.

No shit. Without the working classes subordination to capitalism and its ideology, capitalism could not remain. That is not because of sexual domination, and is not determined by sex, or anything of the sort. It's basis is in ideological hegemony.



Poor people go to war in order to protect the rich people!

That is not realized. That is not why people think they go to war. They go to defend their country. This, in actual fact, is defending the interests of the ruling class, but that's not why they do it. Their belief in defending their country is ideological, and stems from the ideological hegemony of the ruling class.



How else can one explain these inconsistencies in human behavior?

That is on par with the poor explanations of crime by nationalists.
"Why do black people committ crime?"
"Cuz they're BLLACCCK"

You've proved nothing, just made assertion, after assertion, after assertion without any basis whatsoever.


Lack of class consciousness isn't the issue. To know that one is being exploited and abused...you don't have to be a genius to figure that one out. So it's obvious that people know that they're being exploited. They just don't mind as long as the exploitation satisfies them sexually.

No one said you had to be a genius. Having to be a genius would undermine it anyhow.
To realize class consciousness is not just to realize that you're being exploited, but that you're part of a class who's exploitation is what capitalism survives off of, and that your degradation fills the pockets of the rich; and that this class in which you're a part of possess the ability to over throw the existing structures.


Bottom line, all conflict -- from street fights to international politics -- is sexual in nature.

You've not proved that. Just said it.



Else, there will be no motive to fight.

Nonsense, and there's a million sociologists and political scientists who rip that ludicrous position to pieces.


You are ridiculous. Dear, oh dear.

[Pogue]

Economic determinism has failed in almost all cases, which is why leftists still haven't convinced the masses (despite economic crises and all). Sexual determinism, on the other hand, seems to be solid because man is essentially a sexual being. His every act, at least on a subconscious level, is determined by sexuality.

All people are basically sadomasochists. Either they enjoy torturing others, or they enjoy getting tortured by others. Why else do you think some people want power at all costs? It's because they're sadists and by capturing power, they can abuse 'little people' and derive sexual pleasure thereof.

And these 'little people' are not every innocent either. They're masochists, and they too derive the same sexual pleasure by suffering at the hands of their leaders. This is why we often see slaves cheering for their masters, no matter what. It's because they enjoy being at the receiving end, it fulfills them sexually.

For instance, if you argue in favor of communism, you'll be attacked by workers, of all people! Even though workers are exploited by capitalism, they're the ones who defend capitalism. Poor people go to war in order to protect the rich people! In other words, the man who suffers is willing to defend the people who're making him suffer!

How else can one explain these inconsistencies in human behavior? Lack of class consciousness isn't the issue. To know that one is being exploited and abused...you don't have to be a genius to figure that one out. So it's obvious that people know that they're being exploited. They just don't mind as long as the exploitation satisfies them sexually.

Bottom line, all conflict -- from street fights to international politics -- is sexual in nature. Else, there will be no motive to fight. Even if one argues that the motive is money (rather than sex), why does one need money? It's because money can buy sex. So even though money (or any other factor, for that matter) seems to be cause of conflict, it's only an apparent one, a secondary one. The real cause happens to be the desire for sexual gratification.

This is probably the funniest thing I have ever read on this forum :lol:

So when workers do and have fought back agaisnt oppression, as they have done countless times, this is them abstaining from sexual pleasure?

You really think the sweatshop labourers of India and China, the Nigerian casual labourers forced to live in slums and the Indian strikers who are beaten half to death by the police gain sexual pleasure from their circumstances? How do you explain why countless people have struggled, sometimes at expense of their life and liberty, against capitalism, the state, sexism, racism, in short, all forms of oppression? Surely they were all enjoying their sexual pleasure from their exploitation?

[Niccolò Rossi]

Could a mod split the irrelevant 'economic' and 'sexual' determinism discussion. The original issue being discussed in this thread of is very great importance and shouldn't be sidelined with this irrelevant crap.

[ls]

It's weird, when I was in melbourne a few months ago, I was being told about stuff like this from my friends little brother, who just so happens to be a lad of sorts. Apparently, "lads" have been targeting Indian men and teenagers at train stations, because it's believed they have a lot of money.

Well "lads" are usually been thought of as the "kind of people" in any place that are most likely to attack people in any way - always a good brush to use in tarring working-class people as all being the same.

Anyway working-class unity is what's needed against both the reactionaries carrying out the attacks and the bourgeoisie (esp the media) making out that "lads" are synonymous with racist attacks/Indians cause trouble by "not belonging here".

[Bilan]

Well "lads" are usually been thought of as the "kind of people" in any place that are most likely to attack people in any way - always a good brush to use in tarring working-class people as all being the same.


I don't know if we're referring to the same type of lads (only because you're from the UK, and "Lads" here refers to a group more like "Chavs")

[ls]

Lads are just young (mostly) working-class males though.

[Bilan]

Certainly, but here it's a very specific term, not for "working class males" or anything, but for people who adhere to a certain image, and are usually associated with violence.

This is the only image I could find :

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/5190/ladms6.jpg

[ls]

Alright, so there it is about equivalent to chav. That there and chav here are both thrown around by the bourgeoisie to stereotype working-class males negatively and should be combated as being irrelevant terms.

[benhur]

This is probably the funniest thing I have ever read on this forum :lol:

So when workers do and have fought back agaisnt oppression, as they have done countless times, this is them abstaining from sexual pleasure?

You really think the sweatshop labourers of India and China, the Nigerian casual labourers forced to live in slums and the Indian strikers who are beaten half to death by the police gain sexual pleasure from their circumstances? How do you explain why countless people have struggled, sometimes at expense of their life and liberty, against capitalism, the state, sexism, racism, in short, all forms of oppression? Surely they were all enjoying their sexual pleasure from their exploitation?



On a conscious level, no. But most of our actions come from the subconscious. For instance, a person (at least his conscious mind) would never admit that he enjoys getting punished. But when he's asleep, he has no conscious control of what he thinks, which is why he cannot control his dreams and all kinds of weird things occur in dreams.

This is because the subconscious is acting without any restraint, without the conscious mind suppressing its true desires and motives. That's why a person may say (in the waking state) that he loves his dad. But he may have a dream where he kills his dad and enjoys it! What he said in the conscious state is false, because in the conscious state it is easy to suppress one's true motives. It's easy to lie about anything. But in a semi-conscious state where there's a lack of volition (and therefore no ability to suppress the truth), the hidden thoughts of that person come to the surface in the form of images and dreams.

That's why dreams, rather than waking state experiences, are often analyzed, because only dreams can reveal the true nature of a person (since there's no suppression involved).

Bottom line, if you tell a person he likes to kill his dad, he may think you're crazy. But he may dream about it every night, which is proof that deep down he DOES have such desire. But because the conscious mind has suppressed the desire, it's now appearing while he's asleep (and incapable of suppression).

Therefore, the answers to your questions may appear illogical to the conscious mind. But they are very relevant when you consider the hidden motives of man, motives which he has suppressed right from birth.

[Black Dagger]

Split off-topic posts.

[AntifaAustralia]

Once these rights are secured, the "leaders" get sufficiently integrated into the capitalist system to eventually forget the old struggles. Such a thing can be fought if such small struggles become working class movements, led by working people, in the broader sense of fighting capitalism.

You do make a good point of hypocrisy.

The recent protests in melbourne and sydney have been very indian community centred.

Yes i agree on your point of working class movements. tHe indian student community cannot fight nationalism and it's friend capitalism, and especially all alone.

All minorities and oppressed peoples must unite to counter this discrimination.

But some capitalists might use this for globalisation opportunities, So workers and UNIONS MUST ACT in solidarity! :cursing:

[Comrade Blaze]

Hi

Yep Australia is racist, I should know I live there, a lot of people I knew from high school believed white is superior and people I know out of. Disgusting is what it is and really sad :(

Comrade Blaze

[Comrade in arms]

Hey i'm australian, and am still in highschool. I was bullied once but my friends who were white (I'm indian) helped but in retaliation you could say that the person who bullied was white. People at my school aren't racist, and if they are they haven't shown it yet, I'm not afraid of sticking up for myself lol. But saying this I still agree that a lare porpotion of Australia still lacks the knowledge to acknowledge other races as their equals. And no people don't attack people of the same sex because of sexual implications unless they have a hormonal imbalance.

Regards
me:laugh:

[Comrade Blaze]

Hey

Yes you're right many do simply lack the knowledge to acknowledge, but that is still no excuse for violence against others, many simply refuse to see and desire to remaim ignorant.

(I am not giving you stick xD)

Comrade Blaze

[retaxis]

I am Also an Australian and i see Indians as hardworking and etc. Heck i worked with them in many different places since i am still in Uni but many of them are no doubt much easier targets and carry more money then the usual folks.

[Comrade in arms]

Hey

Yes you're right many do simply lack the knowledge to acknowledge, but that is still no excuse for violence against others, many simply refuse to see and desire to remaim ignorant.

(I am not giving you stick xD)

Comrade Blaze

True violence is not an excuse, but this wouldn't have even happened if the government educated its citizens more about tolerance. It could also have done more for the poorer people in the country which would have decreased the attacks by a certain %. But saying that there are sadists out there who beat up people for the fun of it, I personally can't stand such people. If you are going to fight make it for something important.

[Comrade Blaze]

True violence is not an excuse, but this wouldn't have even happened if the government educated its citizens more about tolerance. It could also have done more for the poorer people in the country which would have decreased the attacks by a certain %. But saying that there are sadists out there who beat up people for the fun of it, I personally can't stand such people. If you are going to fight make it for something important.

Right on Comrade, I am with you there this government is fucked its not that its only Capitalist (bad enough but we already know that :)) but the PM seems intent on not making any decisions, just getting more popularity.
Social Democrat my ass.

Disgusting :cursing:

Comrade Blaze

[Comrade in arms]

I know, look at the scandals in his office. One man shouldn't have so much power. A group of common workers and the middle class should be the ones who should decide. I included the middle class because if only one class started to rule everything would be screwed up.:(