July 08, 2004

FICKLE DAVID

The Guardian’s David Fickling -- Dickens himself couldn’t have devised a finer name -- delivers some moral instruction to lowly Australians:

Australian racists hate to be told they are racists. When an Australian recommends the forced eviction of Aborigines from their own land, it is presented as social welfare. When an Australian advocates imprisoning Iraqi and Afghan refugees in secretive detention camps, it is presented as border control.

When Fickling looks at Australia, he sees evil.

So when Australian racists first raised objections to the building of a small Muslim prayer hall in the Sydney suburb of Annangrove last year, they used a typically weaselly complaint. The problem with the hall, objectors argued, was that 80 men and women turning up to pray twice a week would irrevocably change the purportedly semi-rural character of the area.

To reinforce the non-racist point, last month attackers desecrated the building site with a bucket of blood and three pig's heads on sticks. Abbas Aly, the developer of the site, it used to such responses and takes it on the chin. When a planning application for the hall first came before the local council in late 2002, it was turned down by a vote of 10 to two. Baulkham Hills council had received 5,180 letters objecting to the prayer hall - an average of around 10 letters from each of the 530 addresses which submitted complaints, although one diligent household managed to mail out 260.

Fickling blends the reasonable objections of many with the clearly racist actions of a few. Such is his way.

Councillors might normally be expected to stand up for rational clearheadedness in the face of such hysteria, but after Australia's 2001 federal election the views of a racist minority have acquired a new sanctity.

It’s all John Howard’s fault.

There is an important point here. In the wake of September 11 and the Bali bombings, Islamophobic attacks in Australia have a particular resonance and importance, but they are far from unique. Indeed, what is often most striking in Australia is how common such racism is and how little it is remarked upon.

You know what is little remarked-upon? The rise in Australia of anti-Semitism. Fickling doesn’t mention it, possibly because this rise is driven by the Left.

It is hard to know what to make of this, especially since Australians are for the most part a pretty tolerant bunch.

Patronising scum. Fickling -- previously examined here -- should be skinned, boiled in spider venom, then deported.

Posted by Tim Blair at July 8, 2004 01:08 AM
Comments

"Patronising scum. Fickling -- previously examined here -- should be skinned, boiled in spider venom, then deported."

Is that cock-knocker actually here? Where's my burning torch and rope? See you all outside Enmore's Castle Ficklingstein.

Posted by: Craig Mc at July 8, 2004 at 01:49 AM

So Islam is a race again? Odd, I thought it was a religion....

Posted by: Crusader at July 8, 2004 at 01:50 AM

It's 'cuz of them swarthy looking Ay-Rabs, Crusader...

Posted by: Roger Bournival at July 8, 2004 at 02:34 AM

Trouble is, this kind of condescencion is all too common in the British press these days. A few examples:

The Times of London prints a really, really long article complaining about conditions aboard an American aircraft carrier, the USS Abraham Lincoln. Are conditions better aboard Royal Navy vessels? Recently there was a mutiny aboard a British nuclear sub off the Scottish coast.

The Spectator prints a really, really long article by Sir Max Hastings complaining about how those clumsy, unsophisticated Americans are carrying on in Iraq. Never mind that Britain had had to remove most of its troops from Iraq last August, unable to maintain them. Never mind that the British drew the boundaries of Iraq in 1923. Never mind that our troops were busy doing the job. No irony there.

The British tabloids howl about President Bush having had the nerve to carry out his state visit to Britain last year. So gauche! So clumsy! So unwelcome! Never mind that Buckingham Palace had invited him. The tabs go on to complain about intrusive security arrangements and their cost (1.5 million pounds). The US spends $150 billion yearly on NATO alone. Ingrates.

I'm tired of snotty, condescending blowhards in the British press. They should fix their own damned island. There, I feel better now.

Posted by: Butch at July 8, 2004 at 02:41 AM

Fair enough too Butch. I just can't understand why Uncle Sam doesn't withdraw that 150 bill and tell the the Eurotrashians to look after themselves.

QUESTION: Is a Fickling a baby Fick?

New Zealanders: discuss.

Posted by: CurrencyLad at July 8, 2004 at 03:00 AM

"Abbas Aly, the developer of the site, it used to such responses and takes it on the chin."

Is it just me, or isn't that a strange way to put it? In American idiom, at least, "taking it on the chin" means getting a pasting or getting knocked off your feet, not "taking it in stride".

Posted by: Phil at July 8, 2004 at 08:14 AM

"Abbas Aly, the developer of the site, it [sic] used to such responses and takes it on the chin."

Right, Phil, I'd rather take it in stride than take it on the chin. And doesn't the Guardian bother to employ copy editors?

Posted by: Butch at July 8, 2004 at 08:31 AM

Meanwhile Fickling can not walk down a street in London and hear english being spoken and his kids can no longer celebrate the Nativity at school as the Muslim parents object. So get to fuck fuckling!

Posted by: Dog at July 8, 2004 at 09:19 AM

Tim B. quotes a study showing a greater incidence of anti-semitic incidents:

The Stephen Roth Institute...reports that last year Australia recorded 625 episodes of anti-Semitism – "the highest annual number of reports of anti-Jewish violence, vandalism, harassment and intimidation since the commencement of national record keeping in 1989".

And then promptly blames it on the Left
One reason for the boost in numbers: unlike in past decades, when Jew-hatred was led by the lunar Right, these days the crazy Left is in on the action...this rise is driven by the Left.

But apart from quoting "several ­correspondents" from the Lefty SMH, Tim B. provides no evidence to support this astounding conclusion.

In fact, the higher frequency of anti-semitic incidents is associated with the higher pace of Israeli and US military operations in the ME. Opposition to the IDF's actions in the Occupied Territories may well be Left-ideological, but is shared by many Jews within Israel. This Left opposition is based on human rights and national interest grounds. It would be absurd to call Jewish anti-war dissidents anti-semitic.

The current uptick in Western anti-semitism most likely stems from Western-based ethnic groups identifying with ME nations currently not enjoying good relations with Jews. The evidence provided by the Roth institute indicates that Australian anti-semitism is most likely Islamacist-ethnological, rather than Left-ideological, in source. This is clear from a key passage in the report which Tim B. omits to quote:
A proportion of hate material could be identified as promoting the views of extreme right-wing antisemitic groups ...Another significant proportion seemed to emanate from, or be inspired by, Islamists.

Tim B. links to an article dealing with the Australian Grand Muftis sectarian comments supports this interpretation.

The much higher frequency of anti-semitic incidencts in France stems from the large Arabic speaking Islamic population in France, which vents its anger over actions taken by Israel in the ME on local Jewish targets. The Washington Times also comments that there is a conspiracy of silence over the Islamacist origins of the upsurge in Western anti-semitic activities:
"The European Union's racism watchdog has shelved a report on anti-Semitism," the newspaper reported, "because the study concluded Muslims and pro-Palestinian groups were behind many of the incidents it examined."

Western anti-semitic agents are mostly promoted by ethnic, not ideologic, groups. Islamacist groups are sectarian whereas the Left is secular. It is false, and indeed ludicrous, to call this "Left racism".

Tim B.: Say it three times before breakfast: the Western Left is, in general, not anti-semitic.




Posted by: Jack Strocchi at July 8, 2004 at 09:30 AM

Oh fuck, the Strocchi bore is back. Time to start banning again.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at July 8, 2004 at 10:43 AM

I can't say I'm too eager to get into a "discussion" with Strocchi, but what the hell, let's take one point, anyway, namely the following, approvingly quoted by him, excerpt:

"The European Union's racism watchdog has shelved a report on anti-Semitism," the newspaper reported, "because the study concluded Muslims and pro-Palestinian groups were behind many of the incidents it examined."

How the above is supposed to disprove Tim Blair's contention that "this rise [in anti-semitism] is driven by the Left", that's rather unclear. I guess it's of no concern to Jack that the Left plays willing cheerleader for these groups and thus very much drives the rise in anti-semitism, even if they (so far) prefer not to get their own hands dirty, instead employing Muslim rage to do it for them.

Not to mention that the report was shelved by politicians on the left (it's the EU, after all) who apparently didn't want a light shone on the cockroaches. But no, they're not quietly supporting Muslim anti-semitism....naah, couldn't possibly be.

But wait! Jack follows it up with the argument to end all arguments:

Western anti-semitic agents are mostly promoted by ethnic, not ideologic, groups. Islamacist groups are sectarian whereas the Left is secular.

Yes, just like the nationalist, secular Baathists couldn't possibly work together with Al-Queda in post-war Iraq. Please update your talking points, you're still stuck in 2003.

All in all, nothing new from Jack...just wordiness, boilerplate rhetoric, and lying by omission. Say, didn't you once have your own blog? What keeps bringing you back here...addicted to the verbal beatings you're bound to receive? I'm truly puzzled.

Posted by: PW at July 8, 2004 at 11:26 AM

I thought there were only four racial groups- caucasian, asian, negroid and australoid; silly me- caucasians who follow an archaic and atavistic belief system are another race, and objections over erecting a building where some tin-eared ratbag squawks tunelessly four times a day for twenty minutes are based on racism, not preservation of amenity.
'Aint I stoopid?

Posted by: Habib at July 8, 2004 at 11:30 AM

My favorite is how Jack will say at the head of one of his portentious paragraphs "Tim B links to the article..." as if it was some great point to link to the article Tim already linked to and to state that Tim linked to it. It's like having to listen to a speech that goes like this:

Mr. Smith: "The sky is blue."

Mr. P. Boring (in a drawling, sneering manner): "So, Mr. Smith says the sky is blue, yadda yadda yadda."

Meanwhile listeners are saying to themselves "Yeah, you dickwad, we just heard him say the sky was blue. Can you get to the goddamn point before we come to the end of our natural span already?" This is what English Composition teachers call "padding"; and it's a useful technique for getting a passing-grade essay out when you realize it's due tomorrow and you've barely done any research. Jack writes like he never left this state of existence.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at July 8, 2004 at 11:51 AM

"it's easy to forget that you're living in a rich country where ..... and where the government lies to the people to win elections..."

I'd like David Fickling to name one country where politicians don't lie.

Posted by: Mike Hunt at July 8, 2004 at 12:49 PM

"QUESTION: Is a Fickling a baby Fick?

New Zealanders: discuss."


CurrencyLad, now that's comedy!

Posted by: Jamie at July 8, 2004 at 12:52 PM

You're right Jack. Generally speaking, lefties are way too nice to be seen to be racist.

So they pay other people to be racist on their behalf.

Maybe they're not nice at all. Maybe they're just total hypocrites.

(And did I say they pay? What a silly error. They get the taxpayer to pay!)

Posted by: ilibcc at July 8, 2004 at 12:55 PM

Fickling will be happy about proceedings at Victoria park in Sydney.Clover Moore allows Aboriginals to camp during the inquest over the impaling of that humanitarian TJ Hickey .Problem is they are now staying period.Well done Clover the Naive.

Posted by: gubbaboy at July 8, 2004 at 02:05 PM

Out of deference to those in the commentatorariat who have limited attentions spans, I will keep it short and sweet.

FACT I: There has been a large up-tick in anti-semitic acts in the West over the past few years.

FACT II: This is co-incident with the US/IDF actions in the Middle East (Intifada II/Operation Iraqi Freedom).

FACT III: The highest frequency of anti-semitic acts in the West has occurred in those areas with a high ratio of Islamic persons esp France.

CONCLUSION: The upsurge in Western anti-semitism is being driven by Islamaist-ethnic, rather than Left-ideologic, groups. It is largely a West-based Islamist response to US Army/IDF actions in the ME.

This is in no way an excuse for acts of incivility or violence by militant Islamists. Nor is it meant to smear the vast majority of law-abiding members of the Islamic community who do not approve of the strife created by their more militant co-religionists at home or abroad.

INDEPENDENT TEST: This inference is confirmed by the EU report which cited Islamic ethnic groups, rather than Left wing ideological groups, as the source of anti-semitic acts in the West.

PARTING SHOT: Given that the New Right has been consistently wrong about threats emanating from, or on behalf of, ME militants (eg bogus WMDs caches, bogus Baathist-Al Quaed 911 plot) I would have thought a little more caution would be justfied before going on another wild goose chase.

One would hope that the War on Terrorism is not going to be hi-jacked to service the New Right's domestic political agendas (settling scores with the Left, or shoving through high-end tax-cuts).

The war-party's logic needs a valve job, it is clogged up with ideo-logic.










Posted by: Jack Strocchi at July 8, 2004 at 02:26 PM

Very nice reasoning, Jack. But you missed one point.

If the left shares many of the objectives of Islamist groups (and they do), the left and Islamists may not ideologically related, but the effect is the same as if they were. It's called "collaboration".

To rephrase an old saw, "The friend of my enemy is not necessarily my enemy, but they damn sure ain't my friend."

Posted by: The Real JeffS at July 8, 2004 at 03:30 PM

"The upsurge in Western anti-semitism is being driven by Islamaist-ethnic, rather than Left-ideologic, groups. It is largely a West-based Islamist response to US Army/IDF actions in the ME."

The Left and Islam: they both do things by submission, they are complimentary.
The Left sets up muslim outrage (especially in France) by agreeing with their line of logic about the way things are. Allah-Marx, what's the difference?

Do try to remember that the true left-right spectrum is defined by the relationship of the Individual to the State.

Far Left Wing - complete submission to their collectivist ideas, exactly like Islam. The group is greater than the individual.
Examples: Socialism, Islam (Hitler, Stalin, Muhammad.)

Far Right Wing - complete individualism and rejection of the State as a means of solving problems.
Examples: Libertarianism, Anarcho-Capitalism (Hayek, Bastiat, Madison)

When I read that fascists are attacking the 'working class', you are reading the same Leftists fighting each other, cause working class is an abstract theory, only the individual actually exists and is quantifiable, you ignorant losers!

Posted by: Jamie at July 8, 2004 at 03:44 PM

God, Andrea, please ban Strocchi again before he proves that black is white gets hurt in a crosswalk.

Posted by: Sortelli at July 8, 2004 at 04:10 PM

'commentatorariat'

Even his words are longer than anyone else's.

I'm sure that seven-syllable word should have only five, but which two to cut? (And don't try to pronounce it aloud, you might bite your tongue off.)

Posted by: ilibcc at July 8, 2004 at 04:23 PM

One problem with your long winded argument Jack is that Tim was talking about Australia and you start blathering on about the West and specifically France.

Bait & switch anyone?

Further you should know very well the difference between correlation and causation so your "conclusion" is how shall I put it? Bullshit.

Posted by: Just Another Bloody Lawyer at July 8, 2004 at 05:18 PM

Done, Sortelli. It's for his own good -- we can't have him getting carpal tunnel from all that typing now can we.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at July 8, 2004 at 08:57 PM

Fickling has obviously been ditched by some aussie shiela on a work visa.
Thank god she came to her quick senses in time before her into a self flagellating , self hating, guilt-ridden version of himself.
thank god for the antipodes!
STAY AWAY FROM AUSSIE SHORES leftoid pomwits!

Posted by: davo at July 8, 2004 at 09:11 PM

Jack Strocchi. Say it three times before Dinner : The left is not antisemitic, it has long ago transformed it into Anti Israeli hatred for PC purposes.

Posted by: davo at July 8, 2004 at 09:51 PM

Jack Strocchi: "I will keep it short and sweet."

Well, the arguments that followed were the usual Leftist Alternaverse nonsense, but that opening joke was great. Perhaps Jack should seek a career in comedy instead of political commentary. (Or political commentatorary, as the case may be.)

Posted by: PW at July 9, 2004 at 02:03 AM