RACISM TELEVISION COMMERCIAL
Have you seen the latest ad on television by the Human Rights Commission touting, soliciting and drumming up business for the racism industry?
For those that haven’t seen the ad it depicts two women running for a lift.
For the first, a man holds the doors open with a friendly greeting. For the second, he lets the doors slide shut in her face.
The difference? The first woman is white, the second is a woman of colour.
Now let me make this perfectly clear. This scenario is totally fabricated.
This elevator scenario depicted in the ad simply doesn’t happen AND Tim Soutphomassane of the HRC hasn’t presented any evidence that it does.
It is false and misleading advertising and racist in itself as it is depicts ALL white people as racists. It is a lie and simply a case of looking in every corner and crevice across Australia for racism, real or imagined. Looking for the worst in everybody, looking for racism where it doesn’t exist, and when you can’t find it, making it up to justify your own existence.
The HRC but particularly that sneering, purse lipped condescending, Tim Soutphomassane is trying to develop and then exploit the idea that any slur or slight, any sideways glance or misplaced word, real, imagined or accidental is an example of unconscious bias or blatant racism.
And he’s done this before.
He’s now trying to expand and redefine its meaning by referring to “casual racism” and of course with this new and improved version it’ll be an opportunity to attract new customers (victims) who didn’t even know they had a problem in the first place and it gives him further opportunity and reason to justify his job.
To these professional chip on the shoulder, grievance mongers of the outrage industry, racism is a product and the new “casual racism” is just another turbo charged version not dissimilar to the upgrades in your IPhone. And five will get you ten they’ll come up with even more new, improved and innovative ways for you take offence and feel aggrieved.
It is about creating an Australia where people are encouraged to see themselves as victims.
It’s about the politics of identity, victimhood, division and grievance.
I have a rule of thumb that people promoting themselves as one thing often do what they accuse others of doing.
For example, the Antifa group in America which promote themselves as being anti-fascist are in fact violent, heel clicking, jackbooted fascist in the tradition of Hitler’s Brown shirts themselves.
In the case of Southphommasne he would be the first, as demonstrated with this television commercial to make the accusation of racism against and entire group, white people. Whilst at the same time conjuring and dog whistling a brand new constituency via a totally fabricated non-existent scenario that simply isn’t true and simply does not happen.
All in an endeavour to justify his job, for which by the way this 34 year old former Labor operative and hack, this Godfather of grievance, this overlord of the outrage industry, is paid $340,000 a year ($6000 a week)
Listen to these staggering stats. Between 2001 and 2005 of the 979 complaints finalised by the Human Rights Commission almost three in 10 were declared trivial, vexatious, frivolous, misconceived or lacking in substance BUT fast forward and in the same period 10 years later, under presidents Catherine Branson and Gillian Triggs, the proportion dismissed as insubstantial was less than one in 20.
I don’t know how many of you watch The Drum on the ABC but an instance a fortnight ago featured one of those insane, but very telling, “bell the cat” type brain explosion by Eric Jensen the editor(or should that be social justice warrior and activist) of the left wing Saturday Paper. He was responding to a point by The Daily Telegraphs James Morrow that, on the AHRC’s own figures, complaints of racial discrimination are declining in Australia. Well, Jensen went right off declaring that the fact The Drum’s panel was on that particular day was white, provided an example of casual racism. BUT THEN he said talking to James Morrow:
“..Racism is the reason you have a job. Racism is the reason I (that is Jensen) has a job. Structural privilege, he said predicated on racism is the reason we all have jobs. Everyone on this panel has a job because they benefit of some kind of racism..”
I remember reading an excellent column in Quadrant in August last year, headed up “The Oh-So-Easy Habit of Taking Offence” on the Bill Leak cartoon by Anthony Dillon, who identifies is aboriginal and a commentator and researcher on aboriginal affairs and his father Colin Dillon, was the first Aboriginal policeman in Australia
“…Offence’ is entirely subjective. To use my favourite example, consider that two people can hear a joke. One laughs and says, “That’s hilarious!” while the other cries and says, “That’s deeply offensive.” Obviously, the joke does not choose to offend one listener and tickle the other. One chooses to laugh, the other suppresses that reaction and, in so doing, manifests not the honesty of the individual but the authorised and “shocked” response of the group…”
As you can read and with Dillon’s own background, neither he was n’or his Aboriginal father were offended by the laser accuracy of the Bill Leak cartoon.
Coincidently also in August last year this high priest of misery and grievance, this overlord of “offence taking” in an interview with the Financial Review said that:
“If someone says to me they’re not even going to try to pronounce my name, that doesn’t necessarily send a good signal, it says that they’re not even bothered to treat me with respect. How would they feel if they were told that every day — that people weren’t going to even try to pronounce their name?”
My goodness. We do take ourselves seriously, don’t we.
Only 4 months ago in June this year, he wrote that:
“..The arts must consciously question the status quo, this has always been the role of the arts: to challenge, to disrupt, to speak truth to power…”
Fine and noble sentiments. But of course you have to be the right kind, the politically correct and approved artist.
You see these sentiments weren’t afforded to the likes of the late Bill Leak whose cartoon of the policeman and the feckless Aboriginal father and his son did indeed speak a thousand words.
No liberty for Bill Leak to “question the status quo” or “challenge, to disrupt, to speak truth to power”.
On that occasion, just like the current television commercial, in another example of what can only be describes as, and understood as soliciting or touting for business, Soutphommasane urged anyone who suffered hurt feelings or was offended by the Leak cartoon, to lodge a complaint under the controversial section 18C.
If that’s not touting or soliciting then perhaps he’s redefined those words as well.