BEN QUILTY AND THE WAR AGAINST WHITE MEN
I saw the new racism at the Sydney Contemporary: Ben Quilty's paintings attacking Father Christmas as a white man, boozed, passed out and peeing in a pot plant. Quilty says he'd have painted Christ instead, but nothing was more physically dangerous these days. My editorial from The Bolt Report.
Do I like Quilty's work no I think his deconstruction of Santa is too obvious and is said better and explained with words?
Andrew Bolt's Santa is from Spain and surrounded by Black Pete's who the Dutch call helpers but others slaves. Bolt's Santa is fanciful and Quilty's Spirit of Xmas Santa with a bottle drunk and lewd more realistic and a more relevant statement of today's meaning of Xmas. Quilty's Santa can be seen at the myriad of office parties around the country trying to touch up women and drunk as skunks pissing in flower pots. Yes, Santa also has coloured slaves generally Asians making his toys. As offended as Bolt is Santa is white and has been seen roaming around the city an seen in burger shops trying to sober up.
Bolt's offended and in his editorial defence of Santa, he raises him and himself to the status of some spiritual leader a Christlike holier than thou figure which allows him to bear the slings and arrows, unlike those Mahomedans that don't have a St Nick. Bolt's tolerant and allows Quilty's his art, his new kind of racism that victimizes white men like Bolt and puts them on the cross of bitter resentment. Yes while it's offensive it's an allowable expression of free speech and is to be tolerated. Bolt then goes on to run any number of cut and paste snippets to show how the ABC is like Quilty intolerant and anti-white men which he then calls the "new racism" rather than the old tried and true " resentment".
However, there is nothing new here Reverse Racism doesn't exist but Real Racism in Australia has been with us since Invasion Day and our inglorious past colonial history is evidence of it. Racism arrived in Australia, it's white and it's not black, and while it's resented and denied by most Australians it's here and it's culturally embedded over time. It's reflected in what comes out of the mouths of people like Andrew Bolt who claim all's fair in love and war and misguided black resentment needs to be tolerated and understood with Christian sympathy. St Bolt while offended rides the flurry of the racist punches of the Indigenous and white left who victimize him. Bolt, after all, is the Christlike image of the tolerant Christian. He's Saint Simon shot with the arrows of pagans.
Unfortunately, however, statistics prove otherwise the historic patterns of our behaviours and the culture justifying them are structured and have been since white people arrived in Australia and they prove otherwise. If your an indigenous Australian the opportunities offered have never been equitable but closed and every social metric indicates just that.
White men like Andrew Bolt prefer to deny that truth of history and the social structures that developed. They deny they were ever to blame for racism or carry it with them today. If accused of stereotyping or punching down using they declare their views are just descriptive truths, not racism even when data proves racism exists. Facts show it's inherent in all our social structures and when those same obstacles don't apply to white men it's racism. It's why Bill Leek's and Mark Knight's Art is racist and Quilty's isn't and why Reverse Racism doesn't and can't exist. Resentment is normal when white is privileged.
17/09/2018
Just because Teena Mc Queen wears a skirt doesn't mean the Liberal Party is a Party of equal opportunity. The Party certainly doesn't reflect that in the case of women with only 25% of women and that number falling as we speak when compared to 48% of women in the ALP and rising. McQueen's words are simply echoing the voice of men and the traditional excuses that it's merit that's risen to the top and it will always reflect that through society. That it's the ALP that's abnormal not the Liberals "Why can't women be more like a man" is from the Liberal songbook and they will readily tell you. It's certainly not " Why can't men be more like women"
Democracy is adversarial politics another explanation often heard and our system is the best yet for a decade we have suffered MPs being paid but doing nothing the Abbott government being the prime example. It's not the case in Socialist democracies where more equity exists and statistics are indicators of just that.
Conservatives refuse to allow any change simply because change generally threatens privilege and status quo. The only changes allowed are those that protect self-interest and don't threaten it. Inheritance is the fundamental that needs protection wealth and power it's intended and accumulated consequence. They are something sacred to be handed down and it's always been through men that it's been achieved with women behind them and not the other way round.
Given nothing has been done since Abbott won office isn't it time we recognized the fact that more was done by a woman when she ran the country than men? Gillard passed 113 more Bills than Abbott at a rate that almost set a record and she ran a minority government that says something and nobody treated her as a man they slagged her off bullied her because she was a woman.
DRUGS: SHOULD WE SURRENDER, NOW THAT WE'VE LOST?
Two people die and 700 need treatment, most after taking drugs at Defqon, essentially a drug festival with music. So do we give in and test pills - sending the dangerous signal that it's safe and almost OK to take them? I'll always fight this drug culture, but do we need to accept we've lost already? My editorial from The Bolt Report.
Does Andrew Bolt really think his audience are thick as brick moralists as much as he is? The question of drug wars was resolved decades ago and the results revealed in the statistical and comparative analysis between the countries that have not legalised but decriminalised the personal use of drugs boosted public health and education compared with those that haven't. Data and information that Andrew Bolt simply ignores for a personal message add nothing to the arguments already answered elsewhere like Portugal.
Comparisons between Countries such as Portugal, the Netherlands and Australia indicate a laydown mizzaire as far as the plusses go where drugs have been decriminalised not legalised when it came to deaths, crime, and improved health statistics. One wonders why Bolt is even hesitating when facts are compared between countries. Usage has been reduced and deaths minimized.
Bolt's an idiot legalisation isn't even in question decriminalisation is and Bolt is sensationalising here what in many places is no longer even exceptional. What is is the question why didn't we do it so much earlier.
Bolt even he says "that's just me" as he rattles on about morals rather than any substantive facts collected over a long period of time in different countries showing the consequences of both obvious and unintended results of decriminalisation compared with what we know here over the same period of time. In Portugal usage dropped knowledge was expanded and people like Bolt shut up and had to applaud the changes that occurred.
Can we afford to have the media become the pulpit for moralists who after all only display their ignorance when trying to influence us? Did Bolt bring on any experts that could have done a comparative analysis and shown Bolt off for the fool he is?
25m
"It began some weeks ago when Mr Turnbull and Kerry Stokes, the chairman of Seven West Media, began discussing what looked very much to the then-prime minister like a campaign to oust him by News Corp."
Probyn's article says a lot more than what Bolt suggests that the ABC has blamed The Australian only. There is always more to the picture when you look at what Bolt doesn't say when addressing an argument.
He believed it was being led by The Australian newspaper and the Daily Telegraph, egged on by 2GB's Alan Jones and Ray Hadley and Sky News commentators after dark"Probyn So it's not just the Australian as Bolt would have us believe it's News Corp and 2GB
Does Bolt always address or answer a question by flipping the argument to blame the questioner? Yes, Reverse Genderism turns men into victims of sexist women. Reverse Racism makes white men the victims of Indigenous Australians and on it goes. The Australian and News Corp is the victim of the left-wing collectivist media we know as the ABC. Bolt simply never actually addresses the question that's in the frame he deflects and redefines the narrative never debating but avoiding the issue where the reality remains unchanged.
If Murdoch said " "We have got to get rid of Malcolm. If that's the price of getting rid of him then I can put up with three years of Labor."...
" News Corp's The Australian had been unabashed in its advocacy for an end to the Turnbull prime ministership."
To what extent did Murdoch assist in getting rid of Malcolm? Bolt's not denying Murdoch said this at all, is he? He is simply attacking Probyn's character which is irrelevant to the issue. News Corp's The Australian wasn't the only News Corp banner doing this the whole stable was. Nor does he mention Murdoch was here to celebrate the IPA's anniversary. Murdoch's ambition to rid the Liberals of Turnbull was patently clear and it's why Abbott is still in politics telling us how young he is. If the ALP is elected after the next election Abbott believes he will become the next opposition leader and a sock puppet for Murdoch and the IPA.
So the issue of whether Murdoch's News Corp assisted the removal of Turnbull is significantly different from whether it was just The Australian. Did the Telegraph, Herald -Sun, Courier Mail, etc etc Sky News and Murdoch himself support a campaign against Malcolm then the answer is a resounding yes. The ABC description correct.
No comments:
Post a Comment