A special thanks to Anthony Clancy Salvatore Saiu and Christopher Zieske for their input on my equality research report.

Anthony Clancy

A special thanks to Anthony Clancy Salvatore Saiu and Christopher Zieske for their input on my equality research report.

Anthony Clancy

My Pleasure Morgan Spencer !

For a scholarly article, I would look at how racism is defined in other scholarly articles. That can be the jumping off point, and then your historic example can be put into the context of the definition. The more you can tie the example to prior scholarly work, the better.

Paul E. Spector Thank you for your response! I will take that on board!

Kind Regards,

Morgan Spencer

Morgan...some 'flights of fancy (not fantay) on Racism and my experience and observation:

Racism has become a piece if steel shrapnel in the cat-o-nine of fashionable power broking. There's a sort of super-sanctimonious pious movement in that which ignores the reasons some make decisions and have outlooks or make statements perceived to be 'racist'. For example if one 'attacks' Zionist Israel and is called anti-Semitic..it is a very successful "Racist' characterisation which is based in convenient ignorance of the word 'semitic'. That its present PM, using a faked name and faked nationality carries on the savage genocide which has been going on since the creating of Israel in 1933 and accelerated massively and non stop since 1948 is conveniently ignored owing to the mesmerisation of allied lies and propaganda.

Australia:

It is quite acceptable however to nominate as terrorists, Palestinians trying to protest and survive. No racism there....but there is in the AJN, an example of the worst bigotry in Australia, but never pulled up...one might be called an 'anti-semite' or a 'self-hating jew'..or a 'Jesus-jew' by the AJN..but that's ok. It's ok to sneer at long term ancestry (or not having any idea anyway) Australians as 'convict past and 'sons/daughters of convicts'...but woe betide calling a Vietnamese a descendent of Pol Pot or some other stupid comment.

The despicable aspect of "Australian" racism is that the Australian Government introduced and continues policies of multiculturalism without the 'older' community permission, and the greatest opponents I have met to migration of nationalities is there own community...who came out earlier and had to work hard to succeed.

Embedded in what we call 'culture' is the climate immigrants experienced in their own background. The solutions to problems, the attitude to killing, 'honour' sex, marriage, 'religion' dispute resolution business, commerce, honesty, conspiracy, fear, reaction, drug importation, gang membership for examples. Asked about what good things migrants bring to Australia rarely we get past 'food' and 'hardworking'...yet the great attraction of Australia has been manageable oppression, decent pay and a relaxed lifestyle. We don't want frenetic work as though serfs of the new order. In my view there is nothing 'racist' or 'sexist' about making strong representations against the intrusion into or assault on a national climate by such practices/malpractices.

Where racism arises is when an individual is, without enquiry deemed to be one of the malpractice- immigrants. The hatred from (so many I have met) Croats to Serbs is frightening as is their undercurrent and demonstration. One can feel the tension on building sites when races which hate each other and have had it as family group and national expectation for centuries are on the same project...and we as supervisors/managers have to fix it.

We have a fast track education system now...in my opinion a disaster...which sees migrants with 3 months training from places much lower in wages and freedom than Australia quoting lower prices that places which do 'proper' apprenticeships. There are grievances and unable to locate and target the responsible individuals...which will always include an Australian Minister...irritated people might attack the group 'bearded bloody Pakis' are taking over the service stations'....Koreans the tiling....Indians the commerce...Asian the cafes...Chinese the productive dairies, ports and allowed a 'personal' airstrip in WA and so on...allow people to fear for what 'is really going on here'.

Applying anger frustration or inability to understand situations especially when unemployment is always about twice what the governments state

I recall Asian Granville residents telling Parramatta residents (and conversely) they have no right to be in "our suburb'.. Hey pal it isn't YOUR suburb it's an Australian suburb...this is Australia...if you don't like it...go home..it's not us it's YOU making the place a hate centre'...Is that 'racist'? All cultures and climates have a right to protect themselves...BUT they should be in constant examination of their own development.. but not by characterisation..by explanation, inclusion and firmness.

When it comes to the horrors of say honour killings and genital mutilation one would expect Australian refusing to accept it, expect protestation...stop it. Instead they get wish-washy stories about 'accepting other cultures' and the high court recently would not convict people who inflicted genital mutilation, in general terms because 'that was their culture'....but hang on....if I tell a girl she looks pretty I can be confronted legally, if I say I don't agree with homosexual marriage I'm a homophobe, if I prefer to employ a woman over a man I may be labelled sexist, If I have a go at an Imam or 'Muhammad to 'the wrong bloke' I might have my throat cut or at best be labelled a religious bigot...but if I accuse the Pope of paedophilia or Christianity of depravity or urinate on the crucifix or dress up lasciviously in catholic nun's regalia for the 'mardi gras' that's ok. It's not acceptable to call an aboriginal an 'abo' or 'blackfeller'...a term they themselves use but it is OK to be called a 'whitey'. The hypocrisy of 'racism' is in part derived from a failure in the 'appalled' to comprehend the issues and devise solutions which are not trite self righteous characterisations.

The underlying general problem in allegations in Australian racism is the reasoning behind immigration, suiting government and opportunists in business, rather than trying to make a good mix in the various races...not communities. When schoolchildren study Japanese, Chinese for example 'to succeed in business' but can't properly speak English isn't that real racism?.

The underlying individual problem in 'racism as well as narcissistic, self-righteous, sometimes sanctimonious wanting to be empowered and considered 'a good egg'...a is a lack of widespread education, biased education, overactive guilt, low confidence, narrow-band communication, a confusing of perceptions.

I say it stems from complete failure of governments to work with the existing general...not just activist and migrant...communities in the migration numbers, background and potential in merging. We now have Australian Governments and selected media interviews purporting to migrants, before they get here...that we are 'a racist nation'...an absurdity but worse, a cruel and vicious slur.

The statement hear increasingly as an excuse for not listening to community anxiety is "Australia is an immigrant county' is puerile...The issues an tribal circumspection with post WW11war migrants I recall very clearly and was quickly overcome They were initially 'Wogs and Dago's however they were 'European'...'like us'...'had been oppressed'...helped our boys'. We quickly came to terms and friendship. The Lebanese show 'wog boys' was not howled down by the sanctimonious and government....it was ok for "Lebs" to call each other 'wogs' but not for anyone else to do it... "Just-a-bit screwed up??"

Post Vietnam saw a different scenario. The tensions post WW11 were very small compared with 're-imaging' Australia post 'Vietnam'. Perhaps naturally as well, people immigrant employed quite evidently their own nationality, excluding locals (not always of course) owing to language, discipline, job and 'hours' requirements, OHSE and pay requirements. Communities became their own governments until 'sprung'. We had to deal with workers who wouldn't or pretended-to not understand English.

I personally paid for all the OHS gear for my workers at one migrant company which spent tens of thousands taking prospective clients to topless restaurants...and then not paying the fines....as well as undertaking a variety of pay scams. I offered to personally pay worker's mortgage if under threat of eviction owing to their employer failing to pay them. The union delegate was a drug dealer. I took extraordinary steps to keep the workers safe and afloat. My ultimate reward was being ripped-off and given an open-ended death threat. There is evidence that such an approach is culturally inspired in that nationality. Is that a 'racist' statement.

It's a sort of 'universaI conundrum ' I acknowledge ..in say France where Brits have virtually taken over a village doing what we always did' becomes the norm irrespective of French laws .or in say Durban where Afrikaners cannot compete with Indian conglomerates. The Afrikaners come sometimes to Australia and are very good people and businessmen...given the chance. They resent the Indian dominance but is that 'racist'..Some Indians have said to me '''Afrikaners' problem is they don't want to work as hard and long as we do'...well...is that racist?....Is it not 'racist' to disturb a working culture when coming from extreme poverty or a great desire to be wealthy and respected? and then making that the 'competition'. Why should easier-going workers have to compete with alien cultures rather than the aliens 'fit in'. The French have raged against the numbers of "Westerners" migrating to France, disturbing their culture.

I recall a village between Carcassonne and Castelnaudry (broadness intentional) with just one French person remaining...a very rich man who was generally at Paris. I said 'you should change the name to "Little London"...

I have felt the damage done by pro-active racism. Thirty years ago I had learned French to Alliance F. level 8, packed my entire possessions...more than 2 containers and bought a house in a French Village. I intended to, with agreement from Chambre de Metiers employ two apprentices and commence a business.

Within a week I found the racism fatiguingly entrenched … they didn't want a non French person in the hameau and made my life a misery ...no lie too great...no slur too damaging...no action to wicked that I gave the idea away...I don't have the time to fight 'jaques'. I never breached French law in my 3 years in France, bought French products, spoke only French and helped my neighbours including getting dairies up and running during 'la grande vente' but irrespective of my communal aid the underlying racism has never dissipated.

I love my place...I can go there without even a suitcase so much is it a fully contained second 'home' yet I must sell it...and rue the day of my 'great idea'. Having felt serious racism doesn't prevent me from understanding it and criticising its supposed 'cures' and 'punishments'..

In Australia also there is an obsequious fashion for stating which tribe of aboriginals once inhabited an area (e.g.the ABC, Parliament House ) ...raised in Parliament as daily recognition. It is no slur on aboriginals that for me it is a divisive practice...forever reminding every generation that 'we took their lands' ...is not 'apologising to' aboriginals. One doesn't have to be an apology machine. .after a short time the apologies become wearing and trite. No one questions whether one person or numerous previous inhabitants were absorbed or exterminated in that range of 40-60,000 year, said, habitation. They have been made a model for political and moral powerbroking

We have created a fiction about aboriginals and it serves us badly. Their behaviour was not idyllic, their cohabitation not utopian, they were not unified...with at least 250 tribes, more likely 500 tribes encompassing say 300,000 people. They (some) engaged in the same social crimes as did we 'whiteys' and gave summary punishment...in fact they were very much like us morally.

In my view we should be drawing them to us whilst enabling their language and fascinating cultures....they are the best actors of any 'black' race I have seen, amazingly talented. English language should be made as important for them as for us whilst maintaining their dialect or language to hasten equality...equity (not equality) as long been a process. How does 'special treatment' for Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders aid mutual affinity? How does treating them as abused people help them to achieve dignity. Some of their elders are just brilliant people with amazing insights...Some of their worst enemies the mixed race activists. Is it 'racist' to want them to engage in our success yet not 'become us'?

Is it 'racist' to see obsequious political commercial and community 'recognition' of a factual past as an exploitive past. Is the sanctimonious piety perhaps personal sustenance in an exploitation of the aboriginal mindset, fear and hopeless feelings.

Is it racist to wonder why recognition of non-aboriginal ancestry component is not voiced? Is that a racism...that perhaps aboriginals do not want to admit the mixture? I've spoke with Paul Coe, Aboriginal services people, I also dealt with the Judge who sentenced the Anita Cobby killer-group to 'without parole' for their heinous, claimed as religiously based, crimes, but be extraordinarily kindly and expansive in thinking and interlocutory, with an aboriginal offender, not on his first offence.

Am I 'racist' for seeing defects in both sides and in 'the 'system' which ultimately spring from 'culture' but also ignorance, bias, exploitation and herd behaviour?

In closing the riots in USA today are similar to a different form of racism...not confused racism...or misplaced racism... or characterisation of racism for empowerment but a manic group which will take any success-factored action to feel empowered...even feel 'loyal' to their nation.

There's no possible 'true life' argument-win (as opposed to a debate) that Australia is not dominated by alien cabals and internal cabals (political parties) however movements based in local/world domination which have only exclusion and violence as their methodology are as dangerous a 'racists' as a drunk bashing an Indian student he runs into in the dark.

Criticism of racial propensity, culture or behaviour and refusing to' fit-in' by deliberate choice, for example from the Australian' 'Weekend years ago' interviews with Chinese people here for 20 or more years saying 'why should we learn English'...We have even contrived a 'China-town' as well as suburbs becoming so 'spot the Aussie' as to have been given mocking name variations.

Australians so fashionably accused of 'racism' as a group are themselves suffering racism. It's not the same as individuals or gangs setting onto migrants on public transport or walking the streets or driving Uber cabs. I find migrants will often admit to their own flaws when we admit to ours. Unfortunately we have 'anti-discrimination' organisations which employ people with 'chip on the shoulder' bias. A national debate' is not the best answer...just 'sounds good' Government recognising that there was no better culture than ours say fifty years ago would be a start and then looking to restore all the good in it, not replace it with pious slogans.

Is it any different anywhere else? If you want productive change, don't just speak to people as equals, we must, if wanting 'success' as opposed to sanctimonous 'victory' , see them as equals and expect them to act as equals.

Voila.

There is one kind of racism that is the most obnoxious existing: racism through surgery: sexual mutilation, which is supposed to bring a moral superiority:

"A non-circumcised is not a man."

"A non-excised is a whore."

https://www.academia.edu/42121156/Between_barbarity_and_exclusion_ritual_circumcision_the_greatest_crime_against_humanity_an_artificial_discrimination_the_worst_of_apartheids_masked_behind_religion_tradition_culture_and_folklore_a_catalyst_of_fanaticism_violence_to_women_terrorism_war_and_genocide_updated_03_03_2020_

Racism has power being partially flogged by ‘power brokers’**** Anthony Clancy

Dear Morgan Spencer Racism has its roots in fear of the other. It arises from atavistic fears towards what is unknown and cannot be controlled, and which therefore would endanger one's existence. In racism, there is no openness to the other, but the fear of the other that is built on preconceived bases. The difference between the races has a hierarchical order and identifies the upper and lower races, from the biological point of view and from the moral and spiritual point of view. The first victim of racism is the racist himself who, by avoiding confrontation with the other, precludes the possibility of realizing himself as an individual. The racist is condemning himself to live a limited and obscure an existence based on preconceptions.

Racism is socially constructed, so it is only when you experience it, then it happens. Technology has allowed us to capture those moments it happens, regrettably, resulting in violence and fatalities. The latter protests worldwide send the message that RACISM could no longer be tolerated and must be eradicated, bringing those who have used it to commit crimes to feel the full brunt of the law.

Debra

If only we could understand the multifaceted nature of racism itself, then perhaps we could make it illegal in itself. Thank you Debra Sharon Ferdinand-James and Salvatore Saiu for your input it is much appreciated.

The common point of all "racisms" is discrimination.

In my modest opinion, racism is based on a socio-anthropological and sociocultural construction, which has taken root in society in different ways. The clash of cultures and peoples, (civilization) in many cases, gave rise to beliefs of superiority and inferiority in one people or culture over another. History allows us to observe strong examples in this regard, the case of the encounter between Europeans and Americans (Indians of America) Europeans and Africans (north and south), Europeans and Asians clearly illustrate the cultural and social differences between peoples and cultures.

Another point, of extreme delicacy, the teaching (education) / pedagogical process over time, made between societies and the younger generations. The educational bases have a weight, in the qualification of the person by means of race, skin colour, physical structure, etc. creating certain barriers when it comes to relating as people, we always start “I am A, B, C and D, I was born in E, F, G, H, my generation has blood A, B, D etc,” we are born to dominate, win and conquer. Therefore, the others may, starting from this assumption, feel close or distant, of belonging or not to that group, collectivity. Consequently, what is taught / educated throughout the ages is a profound mark in the understanding of racism, its roots and perhaps, the way of overcoming this mentality, which violates the dignity of the human person.

Historically, there are several occurrences, from the smallest act (gestures) to the largest, all at some point experiencing racism, within the groups in which they are introduced, or in society itself, and in the institutions in which they work or provide some service. For example, how do we classify, the barbaric acts that historical memory keeps for hundreds of years? In Brazil (the relationship between peoples) in South Africa (apartheid), Australia (Aborigines) in the USA (Amerindian peoples, Afro-descendants, Euro-descendants), Germany (Nazism), Italy (Fascism), India (diversity of peoples and castes)?

In this sense, construction is socio-political, political leaders, often, with the purpose of dominating and overcoming their interests of domination, use racism to reach power, and obtain support from a majority, who believe they are superior to others, members in the social. The Power goes through a consecration of race, origin, language and culture as pillars for the exercise of political power. see Will Kymlicka (1989, 1995), Jean Burnham (1975), Philip Gleason (1982), David Long (1992), Richard Mills (1974), Garcia Martinez (2004), etc.

Therefore, racism is associated with a process of socio-anthropological, socio-educational, socio-cultural and socio-political construction in different ancient, modern and current societies, taking on various faces (economic, financial, commercial and technological). However, we cannot ignore the problem of racism in the contemporary world, so that it can jointly change the mentality "that we are all equal as a human person and with the same dignity". But the challenge remains, we must overcome, the preconception of racism, to have a world in which everyone can live and live as human persons.

It's an interesting discourse so far. Joao puts it well that racism is based on a socio-anthropological and sociocultural construction, which has taken root in society in different ways. The clash of cultures and peoples, (civilization) in many cases, gave rise to beliefs of superiority and inferiority in one people or culture over another. Unfortunately we are not nor will ever be " all equal as a human person and with the same dignity". That is not the way of nature.

Debra is firm that "must be eradicated, bringing those who have used it to commit crimes to feel the full brunt of the law."...'Brunt of the law' means revenge and were Debra's desire to come to pass not only nations we see as dark and evil, religious lulu's and utterly corrupt brutes and mass murderers as requiring 'the brunt' but those we tribally regard as friends.

I will get into that later as it involves hypocrisy and ignorance and concocted fairy-tails on origin and friendship, particularly by the allies post WW11 when they took over, under Operation Paperclip' furthering the propositions which the Reich had envisioned and engaging in various conspiracies (e.g. MK Ultra and MK Delta) the CIA creating, grotesque experimenting, using for assassination and distributing of LSD as well as pretending to create "Israel", a racial genotype based in discrimination whilst purporting 'inclusion' Governments 'play the race card' because they need fear for the population to self-manage and stay disputative at the local level so government can get on with 'the real business' of government...international conspiracy.

I agree with Salvatore also that tribalism is based in fear...and even today, often enough fear with reason. It is an ancient survival reaction. The excess occurs when that reaction is excessive even uncontrolled. When encouraging immigration the embedded hatreds of various tribes for each other is inadequately re-educated (and unlikely to be totally successful when honour and history and 'remembering' are culture.).

Michel makes a good point on 'mutilation' but as I see it as a tribal paranoia and male self-righteous hypocrisy through removing female pleasure zones' ...Male circumcision has no such effect and in cleanliness, good reasoning and I' felt no ill effects from mine… Female circumcision is just another excuse for blaming women as to blame for men's offences against them...not in provocative dress but in women seeking sexual satisfaction with such passion that men are dragged-down. If there is inequity/inequality/ wrongdoing it is dominantly found in the concept of male dominance over women. It then does go further into dress where it is a woman's fault for attracting men so she must cover every part of herself and suffer even death if she does not... ..not men's licentiousness even arrogance.

Until realising Catholicism is not just 'associated with judaism' but is in fact a very obvious jewish subset, not the independent way of Jesus', did I think of circumcision as anything 'religious'. We may not go 'the whole hog' with a foreskin as did they however....I can't agree with Michel on his point of it being the most racist (tribal). I do however despair that recently the Australian court refused to punish the perpetrators in one mutilation case prosecuted, the court citing it as 'cultural'...in a 'multiculture' one must accept such horrors.

For me, to continue my disagreement with that point of Michel, genocide is the ultimate racism or tribalism. It is permitted to occur with millions exterminated and Israel is the worst 'Western-'democratic' offender and the most established hypocrite..supported so far in some $400B in US funding since WW11, and given US weapons of mass horror, one of the worst for ongoing murder and mutilation particularly of inquisitive and playing children (and livestock) being cluster bombs

"The West" isn't alone... Rawanda, for example was diabolical, as was the invasion of Iraq after its years of circular demonization, deception and 'deep penetration' by Israel.. Ruining that advanced nation, which has never recovered and is 'left to rot' by USA and its allies , and executing its leader freed ISIS to replace bin Laden as the instrument for 'our own politics of fear'...ISIS leading to the invasion of Afghanistan and Syria.. nations Israel plagued USA for decades to invade.

Some decades earlier conspiracy over the USS Liberty (to pretend Egypt had attacked her and thus see America attacking the Arabs) saw some 1000 Egyptian prisoners laid on the ground run over by Israeli tanks and the balance made to dig their graves and be executed to fall into them. How extreme is the racism (tribalism) there? This gets no press, because of the global conspiracy for a NWO and one world government under bankers and 'the elite'.

.Tiananmen Square, however, is readily reminded owing to the political desire of USA. People who think that comment 'racist' … bigoted' or 'anti-semitic' (a manufactured and inane vilification ) or 'just plain stupid' might find their opinions changed through greater research....or might not of course. I am not going to cite the research. This is not a new research project for me.

From Australia in 2013 'Ben' Zygier was murdered by Mossad as he was believed to be going to reveal the secrets about the Mossad passport rort in Australia. Passports provided by some of the Zionist community were used to protect the Mossad assassins carrying out an assassination of Hamas operative Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai.

A Chinese 'lost' passport scam some years earlier was used to bring illegally, Chinese into Australia...a Triad scam still based in Vanuatu. We 'the great unwashed' are kept occupied and regulated, it seems, whilst higher level rorts are permitted to function until 'going too far'. I should add that Vanuatu is also a haven for crooked Australians...another one of our tribes.

Media quickly backed down after Mossad's concocted and fantastic 'Zygier suicide' story. Totally out of the pathologically intrusive Australian norm, no media interviewed Zygiers pro-active Zionist parents in Victoria, nor did they make a fuss over the murder. Rudd weakly sent home one person from the Israeli Embassy and the matter was hushed up, other than 'outraged' Zionist abuse of Rudd for taking action against Israel-of-Australia....clandestinely engaged in his sudden reversal of intentions to stand again for election. Actively anti-Christian religious and tribal intrusion into Australian culture, creating a different climate perhaps deserves greater, not less, exposure. So also should the injustice of attacking and characterising individuals be given a greater exposure for the injustice and counter-productivity it creates. We are not acting as a community here but as tribes and there has long been a dominant tribe. To not expect it to react to what it sees as aggression is a puerile as expecting that the aboriginals would welcome colonial occupation.

I raise these issues as there are vastly more important tribal-abusive issues hidden behind the allowing of justifiable protests....I think it fair to say most people I meet with sexist/racist angst have no idea of what else is going on in the world on a vastly grander scale than the unforgivable murder of 'people of colour' who connect as a tribe globally, owing to colour. They also do not see Palestinians (for example) as racially (tribally)abused people, not one or five hundred but thousands murdered numerous and deliberately targeted as toddlers.

Reverting to questioning the preparedness of 'organisers' of protests and the readiness to loot and pillage or put others at risk through breaching (however novel, uncertain and 'boring' the restrictions on gathering ought to be more closely examined. So also ought 'indigenous' claims.

Setting aside what constitutes 'indigenous choice' as to who is indigenous and UN definition of indigenous, the British success over Chinese, French Spanish and Dutch as possible invaders of what became 'Australia' is that the first fleet also brought scores of children claimed as '7' years old...the age religiously observed as 'understanding off sin'. All nations discovered already or un-discovered had been made 'available to Spain and Portugal 'for plunder 'by Pope Alexander in 1494 (Treaty of Tordesillas) so long as they were not catholic.

The land mass we now know as home to perhaps some 500 indigenous tribes...on the basis of dialect... had been discovered by China it seems, well before the Pope's decision. It was only 26 years after the treaty until claimed Portugese discovery and 112 until certain Dutch discovery. Sooner or later that land mass would be invaded. Under which nation would that best occur is moot. Without reviewing the morals and ethics of the indigenous or the invaders, the indigenous...realising this was not a passing visit fought the invaders, in some cases tried to befriend them some attracting the vilification of 'jacky jacky'..a sort of treachery.

Most of the invaders were not on a pleasure cruise but convicts dumped here, having to survive and bewildered, find their way. Tensions justifiably arose and terrible crimes committed against the indigenous, bringing retaliation and so the wheel turned. Mixed race children were born leading to the eventual 'stolen children' as white religious tried to save them from 'savagery'...leading unfortunately to common-place..but not universal.. sexual, psychological and punitive abuse. Setting aside the community reaction particularly to Chinses migration there were now intrinsically three tribes...indigenous "Blackfellers" , mixed race and "New-Chum Whities'. Inequitable class struggles and memory of abuse and murder are sill with us carried by an internal resistance by the first two classes to assimilation into what became the dominant class .In some activists in all classes satisfaction feels most distinct from initiating dis-satisfaction and emphasising difference and promoting guilt, some reasonable some not..

My own adverse reaction was anger, at the murder of "an African American" ..was no less than hearing of aboriginal killings and suicides...Floyd's was at the desire of a policeman, of whom 'comment-in-passing' was made the victim had worked-with as a security person. The behaviour of the 4 policemen is inexcusable, worse, complicit in felony and cowardice in not dragging the murderer away from the victim within a minute. There was not obvious resistance by the victim as there is in some killings. The world wide 'disobedience' campaign...setting aside the appalling destruction was so ill timed and global (owing to the virus ) as to be irresponsible but as far as sincerity...the 74 year old white man seriously injured, his head striking the pavement observed by the perpetrator and other police and left bleeding by police has not been given similar prominence to Floyd though he was not even under arrest. Recalls the old "San Franciscan Nights" song of my teenage years "Cop's face is filled with hate...Heavens above, he's on a street called love...When will they ever learn?....Old cop, young cop, feel alright... On a warm San Franciscan night

I had discussed the issue of 'white and black' (itself a tribal expression with insinuation) with Aboriginal Paul Coe some decades ago and we had similar views. There is more to the matter of racism and 'deaths in custody' than peak-reaction perennially at its occurrence.

In recent years, although there are practical restraint options other than taser and pepper-spray...police have murdered also white people having mental dysfunction rather than take up the options which would save the life of the afflicted person. Thy put themselves knowingly into a position where they can claim 'fear' and kill the affected person/offender. The police do not think of these people as of the same tribe and class as themselves but as 'threats to (their) society'. Cheeky, arrogant, drunk or violent aboriginals get a similar reaction and bring out the wort in some people and police.

Racism(tribalism) is one expression of fear, abuse and attack an unacceptable expression of the fear. Racism (tribalism) is not only from "Australians' to migrants or o/s students, it comes also in my experience increasingly from (some) immigrants prompted by 'anti-discrimination' empowerment. One can argue that we should all be able to work out 'what's going on' for ourselves but unfortunately emotion and ignorance stop that happening and the fault lies in government which dumps decisions onto 'several generation' citizens without a clear and accepted plan. The battleground of Granville Asians against Parramatta Lebanese or rural Australian townies and aboriginals... with fault on both sides.... raises the tension levels of men and women with a propensity for violence. It is the propensity to violence in my view, which needs and will be far ore successful in overcoming tribal reactivity than 'exterminating' racism.. which will never happen, even in the nightmare or fantasised utopia in 'globalisation' and a 'one tribe world'.

Intact peoples can only hate the crime against humanity of circumcision and its obsessive eugenics, which violates (literally according to articles 222-23 and 222-26 of the French penal code) the physical integrity of the child. Freud approached that legal justification but limiting it to children:

"... little boys hear that the Jews have something cut in the penis - a piece of the penis, they think - and that gives them a right to despise the Jews." [1]

Contemporary legal thought has developed a great deal on the right of the human person, especially the child, to that integrity. To the point that, in the name of that integrity, the Parliamentary Assembly of the European Community, on October 1, 2013, adopted a resolution condemning circumcision in the same way as excision. But already, by prohibiting "eugenic practices, in particular those aimed at the selection of people", the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union [2] of December 7, 2000 formally opposed sexual mutilation.

We are therefore in the presence of an open conflict between religion (culture, tradition and folklore) and human rights. Such a conflict is a great source of racism.

[1] Le petit Hans. 1909. Paris : PUF ; 1993. O.C., X, p. 31, n. 1.

[2] http://fra.europa.eu/fr/charterpedia/article/3-droit-lintegrite-de-la-personne

HI just as a closing point as I think I've said all needed....circumcision is not sexual mutilation ,it is not the same in degree or intent as female circumcision. I'm completely glad my parents had it done and it has nothing to do with Judaism for me. It has nothing to do with racism. If it has for you or others, then the charter will be a comfort to you...but it would not stop me having my son circumcised. On the other hand castration or female circumcision are an attack on a person which cause them damage. Male circumcision doesn't. .however done as a jewish or Muhammedan religious demand or any other religious ritual places a different complexion on it, as it is an expectation of the religious hierarchy presumably on some instruction from 'god'. The outcry on circumcision, such as 'the cruellest of cuts' and more so if done superficially anaesthetised borders on mania.

One cannot feasibly argue as one can for men that female circumcision increases hygiene potential. I can clearly recall back into my play pen as a just-toddler i.e. under a year old and I had no memory of any circumcision pain.

I'm fortunately past caring about the sanctimonious generations which promenade themselves over small things and leave the big ones intact. The recent riots taken up around the western world are an example of the tragedy and shame of an action being used to commit numerous criminal acts against people with no insurance and putting as may emerge or not a great number of lives at risk through C-19 and reactive Police and militia.

As well nine people were killed I believe...great outcome for the 'permanently ready to react' which introduce pillage and mayhem into 'peaceful' demonstrations'.. .something brown shirts did against communists in Germany... and communists do against democrats and all through the mix in USA. There was no demonstration about the serious injured white fellow which I saw....granted I could have missed it.

Unlike people who love 'reality TV and/or have brief concentration spans...I don't need days of rampaging and a plethora of signs, symbols and slogans to know what it right and wrong. In fact for m the riots were counter-empathy...So much crime was committed by activists and their stooges, taking others with them that Floyd's death became lost in relevance.

Similarly thought protest was worthy over the vicious maltreatment of a 'mouthing off' aboriginal youth in Australia...The risks introduced by 'consequential' wild demonstrators may have impressed themselves but not people who see that the increasing contravention of safe actions by footballers as well as protesters may affect thier own survival.

Let's say pick a number....5 people ...10 people 50 people die of the virus as a result of the demonstrations or the football....how is that justified in terms of 'entertainment' or maltreatment of aboriginal people. Will it gain sympathy?...or was the activist idea to essentially blackmail the community with threats of virus spreading?.. or even to deliberately punish the community?.. I don't know but it didn't make an iota or greater sympathy for the lad and revulsion towards the police than I had without the protests. As I also ask...where are they and the Media when Palestinians are being abused tortured bashed and murdered and have been brazenly for the last 72 years... How about 'nowhere to be seen'.

The foreskin is the specific organ for autosexuality. Its ablation condemns the hastily called infantile sexuality.

Circumcision is a mild form of sexual mutilation.

However, according to the French law, it is rape, aggravated by the use of a sharp tool, condemned to life criminal confinement by articles 222-23 and 222-26 of the criminal code.

Committed upon children, a whole category of the population, it is a crime against humanity.

1st October, 2013, the PAEC (Parliamentary assembly of the European Community) wrote:

"2. The Parliamentary Assembly is particularly worried about a category of violation of the physical integrity of children, which supporters of the procedures tend to present as beneficial to the children themselves despite clear evidence to the contrary. This includes, among others, female genital mutilation, the circumcision of young boys for religious reasons,..."

https://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-EN.asp?fileid=20174&lang=en

Now, ritual circumcision entails the worst form of racism, as shown in this article: https://www.academia.edu/42121156/Between_barbarity_and_exclusion_ritual_circumcision_the_greatest_crime_against_humanity_an_artificial_discrimination_the_worst_of_apartheids_masked_behind_religion_tradition_culture_and_folklore_a_catalyst_of_fanaticism_violence_to_women_terrorism_war_and_genocide_updated_03_03_2020_

HI Michel....(kindly said and with a smile) you maybe shouldn't so influenced by what you read.. Not all research is worth reading or sane. I have referenced thousands of papers but many even 'peer approved' are neither accurate nor scientific. That aside, on the 'barbarism' hysteria (barbarians were invaders of another's country) I thought we'd moved on a bit from gender and feminist hysteria and that reference looks like hysterical mania.. Even Germaine Greer has come back to earth and become quite conservative after a life of radical thinking. I just plod along without being a casualty to fashion and passion. I'm pretty experienced in research analysis but I don't live my life by it.

Perhaps one might argue on the 'leave intact' that we should leave the umbilical cord connected as well...push the afterbirth back....leave everything just as it was. For me, male and female circumcision are done for vastly different reasons and are a world apart in pain and ill effects. I'm not trying to convince anyone, I am just stating the facts and reality of my life experience and without a terminal itch. Life without a foreskin has been spot-on for me and if my mother hadn't organised it I'd have done so myself once able to organise it..

There's a process in preparing children for life ahead, I consider male circumcision done for reasons of hygiene to be a very caring operation. If pain it's for a big gain. I have not yet encountered anyone with circumcision psychosis or depression over 'something missing...I just don't know what' or has become a sadist owing to infant pain. My own son whom I looked after from birth showed no pain or ill effects from it. I add that I would not be waiting months for it to be done, get it done quickly and early.

It's the religious ritual aspect that I reject....it may be no different in nett effect from hygiene but it's the Jewish, Muhammadan and Christian identity aspect that demands it which bothers me.

All that said I'm not sure that I'd want some grubby 'Neanderthal' whatever the religion or none doing it with a sharpened oyster shell. I don't actually feel sorry for those who missed-out.. even if they have 'the envy' but I do especially if their mothers didn't keep at them about hygiene in that nice warm bacteria promoter.

Wrong; the one and sole reason for circumcision (male or female) is dominating the individual from infancy by a deep trauma.

Hygiene is mere pretext: https://www.academia.edu/2098235/Hygienic_circumcision_a_myth_or_a_reality_updated_09.10.2016_

Circumcision is the worst discrimination ever. Thinking that circumcision is responsible for all this makes ma sick:

https://www.mathilde-et-rosette.com/

One thing about the nature of racism that I think people tend not to always understand is that there is not just one way that racism can manifest itself, but many. There are certainly too many of these differing manifestations to focus on in this one answer, so I will here only discuss the two most common ones: "explicit" racism and "implicit" racism.

"Explicit" racism is what we usually think of when we hear the word "racism." It is a clear, unequivocal prejudice towards people of a certain race that even the person carrying the prejudice is aware of. This form of prejudice has a history of being opposed, but it still exists to some extent, even if there has been much effort to fight against it. It must be remembered that something that has such a long history as racism rarely dissipates in a matter of years—just as it had developed for centuries, it will take centuries to truly bring it down to a weaker state ( and even then we won't quite have completely ridded the world of it.)

"implicit" racism, on the other hand, can in some ways even more dangerous than explicit racism, as it is much more difficult to detect. It manifests itself in ways of treating people of a certain race differently than one treats most other people, of which the person carrying the bias is almost always unaware. This means that even one who desires to fight racism and help those of other races to reclaim their rights might still have some racial biases of which they are barely conscious, and which are highly difficult to get rid of.

My question to everyone else in this discussion would be, what can we do about implicit racism—that which is present in some of the very people who are working to end racism themselves—in a way that neither diminishes these people's humanity nor the severity of this subtle prejudice?