Saturday, February 18, 2012

What gets printed in the mainstream media

Race issues are once again in the news in Australia. Actor Jay Laga'aia, who is of Samoan descent (and is best known for his role in Star Wars), has accused Australian television of being racist after his character was axed from a popular soapie.

It's probably true that Australian TV has remained more Anglo than the general population. However, Laga'aia himself has done well out of the industry, having won roles on 20 or more shows.

But what really struck me were the comments on the story from readers of the Herald Sun here in Melbourne. A few of the comments attacking whites would not have been made about any other group of people:

Wolfie, Dubbo: As much as I can't stand his screen presence, he sort of has a point. Home and Away is pretty much heterosexual and white. That world doesn't exist anymore, thank goodness.

Really Wolfie? Substitute "black" for "white" and you'd land yourself in front of some sort of tribunal. And then there's this:

Svetlanababe: Whites on Australian TV should be portrayed as the drunken, tattooed bogans they so often are.

Again, would that get into a mainstream newspaper if it were aimed at any other group? The Herald Sun did, it is true, publish the other side of the debate:

M. Taylor: The average Australian is over all these racist claims being made by attention seekers. Laga'aia has done very well out of the Australian TV industry. He should be grateful instead of making such comments.

But even so it seems to be the case in Australia today that Anglos/whites are the one group who are "unprotected" in the sense that you can say in the mainstream media anything derogatory you like about them.


  1. Oh thank goodness I don't exist anymore.

    If you have always wanted to know how low a white liberal can go, how pathetic they can be. Pushing their suicidal, degrading politics.
    Then there is this story:

    Warning graphic reading not for the faint of heart etc.

  2. Anon,

    The item you linked to highlights how left-wing the Quakers have been. Quakers, it seems, played a role in launching the bisexual movement in America in the early 1970s. They also created a "Movement for a New Society" which dissolved in the 1980s for the following reasons:

    In 1988, MNS was dissolved by its members due to various factors, including its inability to achieve its objective of becoming multi-cultural, as well as difficulty adapting as an organization due to the self-imposed strictures of consensus decision-making. Other issues included conflicting ideas of the importance of leadership, as well as an excessive amount of time spent on internal anti-oppression work, leading to less time for world transformation work.

  3. There's little hope, white societies are long bisected and now sliding backwards to the vertex of confrontation.

    The ruling elite have bought into this moral drama, perceiving themselves as racial redeemers with everyone else getting a villainous identity imposed on them. The mainstream will enforce that narrative regardless of the casualties endured.

    It's a neglected topic, the intra-racial animus between white elites an those subject to them. I sense an unimaginable future coming, as there's an inherent contradiction in the current order.

    That being ultra liberal whites rely on very illiberal co-racialists to sustain their power. The armed forces, police and reserve cadres of white men remain the state's means of power.

    Consider if another series of jihad raids incite ordinary people to neutralize the ability of Muslims to move freely among us.

    It is more than likely the government will move to protect Muslims, that will be their point of no return.