Gough Suppressant posted:

or idk maybe don't make a character whose major defining characteristic is his race and then brownface yourself to play him

bell jar posted:

e: forgot this wasn't gbs

bell jar posted:

No but you see it's not "racist" because its "satire". Its "satirising" the "idea" of "brown" "people", or something.

e: forgot this wasn't gbs

Nibbles! posted:

Been funny would have helped too.


Jokes on them, I would say I was Muslim to get the paper for $1

Laserface posted:

It's just he chose to play a Tongan one that makes it bad according to auspol.

Lid posted:

Laserface posted:

Every grade at every school has a kid just like Jonah that acts out because they are struggling with identity and maybe lovely parents. White, Asian, Lebanese, it doesn't matter the race, they all act similarly and it's something most young people can relate to. gently caress, friendlyjordies 'yilmaz' is the same thing but Turkish.

It's just he chose to play a Tongan one that makes it bad according to auspol.

For the record my grades Jonah was Greek.

EDIT: and its not bad at also pointing out that these kids quite often struggle with family related issues that contribute to their behaviour which is a good thing to point out to the people watching who just think their schools Jonah is a dickhead.

I mean he is, but theres a reason for it.

webmeister posted:

Anyone with a crikey sub able to post the latest Grundle?

quote:

Rundle: Hockey’s suicide machine successfully alienates every single voter
Poor people with cars are the latest segment of the voting population to be attacked from on high by the Coalition. How is the party getting so repeatedly wrong?

Suicide machines is how Bruce Springsteen described cars, in one of his 937 songs about them. The description would be better attached to the Abbott government, which appears to be engaged in a systematic process to alienate every section of the public who might consider voting for it.

What’s impressive is the bases that it covers. Starting with multicultural Australia via the new bigots’ rights movement, moving on those genuinely looking for work, and then to all women — with the abortion/breast cancer finagle, and Education Minister Pissy Cryin’s suggestion that women will pay less HECS because they study to be nurses. That last one came at the end of a week so error-filled that most of us didn’t even have time to pick up on it.

Now it’s low-income people with cars. Let me repeat that — low-income people with cars. If ever there were a a low-income group that could be persuaded, by sheer false consciousness, to vote Liberal, it’s surely young people with cars.

If ever there were a rural group who might be persuaded to shift from the Nats to a Cathy McGowan-style independent, it’s people with fuel costs eating their income. There is an IDF-quality to the appearance of precision given by the Abbott government disaster squad — it’s as if they ring people five minutes beforehand to tell them they’re about to lose their vote.

Joe Hockey’s latest is a masterpiece, though, a sort of portmanteau error, combining all errors in the smallest possible space. It’s an error with something for everyone: basic category confusion, bad reasoning and inherent contradiction with their own policy direction. It’s an error for the ages. They should have it bronzed and put it in the foyer of their headquarters.

Kick the tyres! Let’s start with the basics, as briefly as possible, because most people with year 10 know them anyway. Hockey’s remark that the rich pay more than the poor for driving is firstly to use raw figures rather than proportions. The rich pay less as a proportion of their disposable income than the benefits-dependent poor, and even low-income waged workers. Figures from the Greens leader’s office show that the poorest 20% of households spend 6.3% of their weekly income on petrol, compared to 4.6% for those in the highest quintile. Indeed, the bottom 80% all pay more than the top 20%. Even if you take the top 40%, they pay less — 5.25% — of their weekly income than the poor.

And that of course disguises car journeys foregone — nothing on the dial! The second basic error is that of mistaking aggregate measures for real conditions. The “rich” and “poor” don’t get together and collectively budget. They are made up of millions of individual life circumstances, in which the aggregate load makes no appearance. Yes, I assumed it went without saying, too. Apparently not.

That one contains some fantastic errors of reasoning. It’s true that the poor own fewer cars than the rich, but that doesn’t add up to less driving, unless one assumes that multiple-car households drive all their cars at once — or that low-income people don’t make multiple trips to family and friends without cars. (It brings to mind Mitt Romney’s remark about his wife at his disastrous NASCAR appearance in ’12: “Ann drives a couple of Cadillacs …” Simultaneously, presumably, balanced between them, stunt-style. That’s Hockey’s ideal rich driver.)

That noise is just the hum of a fine, fine engine! Beyond that is a whole and more embedded realm of wrong. Recall that this government announced it was going to be a “government of roads” — and promptly stripped infrastructure funding from state public transport projects, including Melbourne metro and Sydney rail projects, funding instead the East West Link and WestConnex. The base figure used by transport planners are that every dollar spent on roads adds only 25-50% of the journeys that would be added by public transport spending. For people in the outer-eastern and western suburbs of both major cities, the diverted funding will ultimately produce up to 160,000 public transport journeys/day less than would have been available — thus forcing low-income people into increasing reliance on cars.

This emphasis on roads goes hand-in-drivers-glove with the spatialisation of poverty, and denial of services. For decades now, the pattern of inner-urban development has been to simply let capital have its head, with an absence of any interest in shaping new, post-industrial, inner urban neighbourhoods as mixed income areas, of public, affordable and market-price housing. The result is a reversal of the conditions that obtained in the post-war era, when many of the poor did live in highly-serviced areas. Once those areas became favourable, in a changed culture, the poor were excluded and exiled to outer suburban areas.

The result is a double squeeze. Public transport in vast swathes of our de facto unplanned outer-urban sprawl is practically non-existent — buses twice an hour, none after lunchtime on weekends. Such lack of service drives the rents down — relatively — so they become areas of low-income habitation. In Melbourne, as an example, low income areas like Kilsyth/Noble Park and the outer parts of the Dandenong corridor in the east, and Laverton/Brooklyn in the west, are “public transport deserts” in which non-car mobility is more or less impossible.

So the sump fell off. Who needs a sump! These gaps — together with whole areas, like the central Mornington Peninsula, which have no public transport services at all — make petrol a crippling cost for those who work, a real disincentive to work at all, and thus a self-fulfilling source of “entitlement-dependency”. For low-income people in rural and urban public transport deserts, all things considered — unsubidised childcare being another factor —  there is often a compelling, rational case not to work.

But wait, we’ll throw in a paint job! For those who are on benefits in public transport deserts, there are often compelling costs — multiple medical visits, for one. Since government free clinics will suspend services if clients miss multiple appointments, a car becomes an essential part of maintaining health. The same for the unemployed put to the work test — who can be breached and have their benefits suspended for missed interviews. Or who can have their benefits delayed if they are sacked for negligent behaviour — i.e. persistent unpunctuality. Who would rely on public transport in Doveton to do anything, from anywhere?

The issue is not the fuel excise per se, whose costs are small. The bigger issue is the one that Hockey is utterly oblivious of — the necessity for many Australians of a car they can ill-afford to run — or essential journeys forgone, because no alternative exists.

Call urban and transport planning what it is — a war on the poor and low-income, nothing else. It is simply one feature of the neoliberalisation of Australian life — let private developers shape cities, define services as a public cost, thus essentially privatising the profits of social development and socialising the losses. The result is to build relentless service decline and inequality into the system. When that is underway, slug the poor inequitably for costs produced by the system you’ve imposed on them. When you’re embedded in the logic of that system, as Slow Joe and his advisers are, you don’t see its contradictory nature. You don’t see the poor either, marooned in low-service suburbs, or dying towns — except when you’re targeting them. But they see you. Suicide machines indeed.

Laserface posted:

Every grade at every school has a kid just like Jonah that acts out because they are struggling with identity and maybe lovely parents. White, Asian, Lebanese, it doesn't matter the race, they all act similarly and it's something most young people can relate to. gently caress, friendlyjordies 'yilmaz' is the same thing but Turkish.

It's just he chose to play a Tongan one that makes it bad according to auspol.

For the record my grades Jonah was Greek.

EDIT: and its not bad at also pointing out that these kids quite often struggle with family related issues that contribute to their behaviour which is a good thing to point out to the people watching who just think their schools Jonah is a dickhead.

I mean he is, but theres a reason for it.

Laserface posted:

Every grade at every school has a kid just like Jonah that acts out because they are struggling with identity and maybe lovely parents. White, Asian, Lebanese, it doesn't matter the race, they all act similarly and it's something most young people can relate to. gently caress, friendlyjordies 'yilmaz' is the same thing but Turkish.

It's just he chose to play a Tongan one that makes it bad according to auspol.

For the record my grades Jonah was Greek.

EDIT: and its not bad at also pointing out that these kids quite often struggle with family related issues that contribute to their behaviour which is a good thing to point out to the people watching who just think their schools Jonah is a dickhead.

I mean he is, but theres a reason for it.

Doctor Spaceman posted:

Rundle

Gough Suppressant posted:

Can't wait for some idiot loving wet liberal to come and tell me how I am an idiot for saying blackface/brownface is racist

Splode posted:

This is great, I wish it wasn't behind a paywall so I could share it on FB. Gawd Crikey.

BlitzkriegOfColour posted:

Yilmaz is horribly racist. Hth

Splode posted:

Uhm I'd prefer it if you used the term face of colour, TIA

Splode posted:

Uhm I'd prefer it if you used the term face of colour, TIA

Mattjpwns posted:

Phelps just went full troll:

Gough Suppressant posted:

Gough Suppressant posted:

Let's look at some of Lilley's other stuff to see if claims of his work being racist are unfou-

Mattjpwns posted:

Phelps just went full troll:

Endman posted:

That's beautiful.

Nibbles! posted:

They've written their own constitution which totally erases our entire legal system and history

http://www.restoreaustralia.org.au/petition-ups/DraftConstitution%28Book2%29.pdf

It's enormous, but you can find some fun in there. 19.26 makes it illegal to possess any currency that isn't Australian.

quote:

The territory of Australia is defined as including:
...
n. That part of space (i.e. beyond the earth’s atmosphere) above the territory of Australia

quote:

61
Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders
3.92.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Citizens shall
be treated the same as all other Australian Citizens except
that some may choose to lead a traditional lifestyle in
designated areas of the outback away from mainstream
communities.
3.93.
The Parliament shall decide what areas shall be
available taking into consideration the national interest
and the wishes of the persons involved.
3.94.
Such persons shall be allowed to live such life styles
free from any assistance or interference by mainstream
agencies such as the Police, Welfare, Education, Taxation
Chapter 3 – Rights and Responsibilities
62
and Medical Services. Such persons shall have no access
to money, alcohol or drugs and shall be protected from
mainstream society.
According to the 2006 Census there are approximately 517,000
indigenous Australians; that is 2.5% of the total population. Of
these, only 26% or approximately 134,000 live in remote or
very remote areas; that is .6% of the population of Australia. It
is these people most likely to choose a traditional lifestyle. The
remainder of the indigenous population should be treated the
same as all other Australians.
Over the last 100 years many programs have been designed
and implemented to assist Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders
overcome perceived disadvantage. All have failed. In fact, as a
result of past policies Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders are
now worse off than they have ever been.
Past policies have failed because they tried to achieve
assimilation and segregation at the same time. Policies
have tried to give Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders the
advantages of Western society such as health and welfare
services and at the same time preserve traditional cultures by
allowing these people to live in remote communities. There is
no hope of creating viable, meaningful, Western culture jobs in
remote communities; so the people are condemned to welfare
dependency with no pride and no hope. Consequently, not only
is there a breakdown in law and order in the Western society
sense, traditional culture also breaks down.
On the other hand, many Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders
brought up and thoroughly integrated into western society
acquiring happy and integrated family relationships away
from disordered family connections have proved to be happy,
competent and contented members of main stream Australian
society.
Part Two – The People
63
The above policy gives Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders
a clear choice. They can choose to live a traditional lifestyle in
isolated country areas not otherwise required by mainstream
society or they can choose to live in mainstream society with
all the rights and responsibilities inherent in that. For this
policy to succeed, Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders and
main stream society will require help to overcome prevailing
cultural barriers.
Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders should be encouraged
to preserve their languages and customs in the same way
immigrants have preserved theirs.

quote:

22.3.
Persons invading Australia shall be repelled at
our borders. This provision shall apply whether or not
the invaders wear uniforms.

quote:

1.21. Common law shall have no place in Australian society.

Doctor Spaceman posted:

That's, umm...

E:


Literally trying to claim the Southern Cross for Australia.

quote:

3.28.
No person shall be forced to join or belong to a
religious community, to participate in a religious act, to
observe religious practices, to listen to religious noise, or
to follow religious teachings. Freedom from organised
religion shall be guaranteed.

3.29.
Religious teachings that are contrary to this
Constitution shall be illegal.

3.40.
The freedom of artistic expression shall be
guaranteed unless it contravenes moral standards.
Moral standards shall be set by society at referenda and
plebiscites.

Gough Suppressant posted:

Let's look at some of Lilley's other stuff to see if claims of his work being racist are unfou-