While the political left in Australia continues to promote its absurd and pointless cause celebre - the identifying of the man behind the Grog's Gamut blog - as somehow a threat to the freedom of the media in this country, it continues to ignore the real threats:
The trial of Andrew Bolt begins on December 13 with Justice
Finkelstein of the Federal Court presiding. Bolt has been charged under the Racial Discrimination Act for two articles he wrote last year. [See
here and
here] One of the articles was headed “MEET the white face of a new black race— the political Aborigine”. Like Nicholas Shakespeare, who “looked away, frustrated by my [his] inability to understand”, Bolt has been charged for telling his readers of his inability to understand what is going on when the mind is apparently expected to defy what the eye sees— and questions that conflict.
Many Australians have also questioned (to themselves or to those who they feel confident in trusting their politically incorrect thoughts) the apparent enigma of people with obvious European features claiming to be Aboriginal. But only Andrew Bolt has had the courage to go public with his doubts and to have questioned the notion that certain “indigenous Australians” have the right to select from a smorgasbord of ethnic ancestors, and expect the public to accept this proposition without asking serious questions.
It is a bit like the science of human-induced climate change—we all are expected to follow the line that the “science” of picking your ethnic background is “settled”. Well fortunately, thanks to Andrew Bolt the issue isn’t settled, and the Federal Court is now having to answer this question. Like the Oscar Wilde trial though, the nine “Aboriginal claimants” might regret that they have taken the legal advice from Joel Zyngier of Holding Redlich. If they don’t win, what is the standing of “designer ethnicity”?
No comments:
Post a Comment