Curry violence
When I first met Indians I was at uni.
First of all, yes, I am racist or prejudiced to some degree.
At uni I met INTELLIGENT Indians. Of course, intelligent people go to uni. So I didn't think, “Indians are intelligent”. But all the Indians I met were intelligent.
Now FROM that sample of Indians I noticed that at least the INTELLIGENT Indians who chose to study overseas were all well-dressed, and ALSO were racist... well not necessarily. None of them seemed to have anything against people of other races, and in fact were happy to be friends with people of other races and accept them in to their group, but they GROUPED together. It just seemed that Indians AND Sri Lankans (didn't seem to be any difference there in terms of how they related to each other) ended up being friends with each other and generally not others. There would be a part of South Lawn (when I was there, it was the bottom left corner) that was basically only brown people.
Were they racist? It didn't seem like it when you approached them. They all seemed really nice and welcoming. But then why was it that everyone there was brown? Why, if they were not racist, were all their friends brown? Why had it occurred that brown people were friending brown people almost exclusively?
I use the word “brown” because they weren't black, even Negros generally aren't black, due to interbreeding with white people, however the word “black” in terms of race usually refers to Negros, so “brown” distinguishes between a dark-skinned person and a Negro.
The second thing to note here is that they don't call themselves “brown” people, or Indian or Sri Lankan, indeed they don't worry about the difference between Indian and Sri Lankan when identifying themselves. In an engineering lecture one day my friend Roger used the word “Curry”, and I know what curry is, but I didn't know what he meant in the context. He kind of laughed, as if I was dumb, and said that he meant Curry people; Indians and Sri Lankans.
So from that day I used that word to label Indian and Sri Lankan people. And no Curry had a problem with that. Although I said Curry once on an internet forum and someone kicked up a stink saying I was racist to use that word. They said they worked with Curries and they were all upset that I would use that word for them. I actually got my Sri Lankan friend Maria to sign up to the forums to post something in response explaining it, and he said that she, and any other Indian or Sri Lankan who was content with the word curry being used to indicate their race was racist or... what did he say... something like, (and this is not a quote), “they're just using the word because it's become normal so they're acting as if it isn't racist but in fact it is. If they use the word to describe themselves they're self-hating”. Again, those are not his words, but it was something to that effect.
I actually scanned part of the mX newspaper that said something about a “Curry comedy”, (ie. Bollywood), to show that in Australia, at least, the word wasn't considered bad.
I was told on the forums that the word “Curry” was bad because it said that all Indians and Sri Lankans eat curry.
Two problems here.
One: Um... what's negative about eating curry? Ok though, I get the point that even if you're saying something about an entire race that's neutral or positive, it's still racist. BUT it's not actually saying that EVERY one of them eats curry anyway. The area is well known for curry. It's a staple in their diet. It's no worse than associating Australians with Kangaroos. Yes, we have kangaroos here.
Two: I questioned what they thought of the country names China and Japan. Now I believe Japan has actually changed it's name to Japan (but I'm not sure), but China is not and has NEVER been, China.
Those names were made up by White people due to the things that were produced in those countries.
“China” was named by White people due to their production of china. Japan was named by White people because of their production of japan ware.
“China” and “Japan” weren't country names. They were the names of produce from those countries.
Zhonghua and Nipon are the country names.
China and japan are things that they produce.
India and Sri Lanka are no different. But he wouldn't accept that. No, I was racist for using that term. A term that I was TAUGHT by Curries. THEY taught me it.
Back to the original topic.
When I met Curries they were at university, SMART, hard-working, good people.
When most Australians meet Curries, they see this:
TELEMARKETERS calling them up FROM India when they DON'T want to be called.
Dealing with Indians through call-centres instead of people from mothertongue English-speaking backgrounds, who are often hard to understand.
DOOR-KNOCKERS hassling us about changing our gas, electricity, ISP, Foxtel/Foxtel IQ.
Now the telemarketers and door-knockers I DO have a problem with.
NOT because they're Curries.
Those things are WRONG to do.
BECAUSE they're wrong, people hate them. AND they respond angrily towards them.
PEOPLE SHOULD NOT DO THOSE THINGS.
Leave us the FUCK alone.
So unless you go to university, and I can't think of anywhere else, but considering the types of people who are thugs, they probably wouldn't be WORKING with these people, seeing that they end up being doctors, surgeons, engineers, what have you, they'll see Curries as being horrible people.
Next thing: I'm not backing down on the fact that no one should cold call or door-knock. Those things are WRONG.
But why are so many Curries doing these things?
I'll tell you.
Because WE don't want to.
Because THEY are hard workers.
THEY WANT to work.
They don't slack off!
They don't come here and go on the doll.
THOSE, at least, are good attributes.
BUT, as long as they're flocking to such unethical positions, they'll be hated. It's not Australians' fault that the people who call us up trying to sell us shit are Curries. It's not our fault that the people knocking on our doors trying to sell us shit are Curries.
That doesn't mean that we should have any anger towards Curries.
It certainly does mean we should have anger towards THOSE people, but not the race in its entirety.
UNI students are not the problem! Australia SHOULD be a safe place for Curries to study.
It's not THEM that are the problem.
They're the ones actually trying to get a real job, not harassing people.
But while there are Curries flocking here to harass us, they will be hurt because people don't know the difference.
There are two issues here that can be solved.
Curries: STOP taking up unethical jobs just because they pay.
Companies: STOP hiring people (of any race) to do unethical things!
Side note (not related to Curries but related to immigration): We're going to have a big problem if we keep allowing immigration due to Aussies not wanting to do shit unethical jobs, because we know that 10 years ago we had enough water, now we don't.
Why? Hasn't Australia always had drought periods? We go through drought periods, it's normal. They say we should cut down our water usage. But um, that's not necessary. If we weren't increasing our population the normal amount of water would be fine. And who wants more traffic congestion? Who wants smaller land blocks? Who wants for people to be having to move further and further away from the city just to live in nice bushy Australia?
Our problem isn't water or lack of trees, it's over-population.
Yes, we have a lot of unused land. Because it's unusable in terms of our lifestyle. Think of it this way; if you don't want to cut your house in half (house size and land size), double your commute time, etc. then don't allow our population to double. And it will double, quite quickly, maybe, hm, 50 years? I'm just guessing with no research. But for every person we let in, we're decreasing the resources, water, landsize, housesize and amount of trees/vegetarion (remember most of Australia is arid, it only rains on the coast) per person. So think of your current lifestyle. And then halve it. Do you WANT that?
THINK.
First of all, yes, I am racist or prejudiced to some degree.
At uni I met INTELLIGENT Indians. Of course, intelligent people go to uni. So I didn't think, “Indians are intelligent”. But all the Indians I met were intelligent.
Now FROM that sample of Indians I noticed that at least the INTELLIGENT Indians who chose to study overseas were all well-dressed, and ALSO were racist... well not necessarily. None of them seemed to have anything against people of other races, and in fact were happy to be friends with people of other races and accept them in to their group, but they GROUPED together. It just seemed that Indians AND Sri Lankans (didn't seem to be any difference there in terms of how they related to each other) ended up being friends with each other and generally not others. There would be a part of South Lawn (when I was there, it was the bottom left corner) that was basically only brown people.
Were they racist? It didn't seem like it when you approached them. They all seemed really nice and welcoming. But then why was it that everyone there was brown? Why, if they were not racist, were all their friends brown? Why had it occurred that brown people were friending brown people almost exclusively?
I use the word “brown” because they weren't black, even Negros generally aren't black, due to interbreeding with white people, however the word “black” in terms of race usually refers to Negros, so “brown” distinguishes between a dark-skinned person and a Negro.
The second thing to note here is that they don't call themselves “brown” people, or Indian or Sri Lankan, indeed they don't worry about the difference between Indian and Sri Lankan when identifying themselves. In an engineering lecture one day my friend Roger used the word “Curry”, and I know what curry is, but I didn't know what he meant in the context. He kind of laughed, as if I was dumb, and said that he meant Curry people; Indians and Sri Lankans.
So from that day I used that word to label Indian and Sri Lankan people. And no Curry had a problem with that. Although I said Curry once on an internet forum and someone kicked up a stink saying I was racist to use that word. They said they worked with Curries and they were all upset that I would use that word for them. I actually got my Sri Lankan friend Maria to sign up to the forums to post something in response explaining it, and he said that she, and any other Indian or Sri Lankan who was content with the word curry being used to indicate their race was racist or... what did he say... something like, (and this is not a quote), “they're just using the word because it's become normal so they're acting as if it isn't racist but in fact it is. If they use the word to describe themselves they're self-hating”. Again, those are not his words, but it was something to that effect.
I actually scanned part of the mX newspaper that said something about a “Curry comedy”, (ie. Bollywood), to show that in Australia, at least, the word wasn't considered bad.
I was told on the forums that the word “Curry” was bad because it said that all Indians and Sri Lankans eat curry.
Two problems here.
One: Um... what's negative about eating curry? Ok though, I get the point that even if you're saying something about an entire race that's neutral or positive, it's still racist. BUT it's not actually saying that EVERY one of them eats curry anyway. The area is well known for curry. It's a staple in their diet. It's no worse than associating Australians with Kangaroos. Yes, we have kangaroos here.
Two: I questioned what they thought of the country names China and Japan. Now I believe Japan has actually changed it's name to Japan (but I'm not sure), but China is not and has NEVER been, China.
Those names were made up by White people due to the things that were produced in those countries.
“China” was named by White people due to their production of china. Japan was named by White people because of their production of japan ware.
“China” and “Japan” weren't country names. They were the names of produce from those countries.
Zhonghua and Nipon are the country names.
China and japan are things that they produce.
India and Sri Lanka are no different. But he wouldn't accept that. No, I was racist for using that term. A term that I was TAUGHT by Curries. THEY taught me it.
Back to the original topic.
When I met Curries they were at university, SMART, hard-working, good people.
When most Australians meet Curries, they see this:
TELEMARKETERS calling them up FROM India when they DON'T want to be called.
Dealing with Indians through call-centres instead of people from mothertongue English-speaking backgrounds, who are often hard to understand.
DOOR-KNOCKERS hassling us about changing our gas, electricity, ISP, Foxtel/Foxtel IQ.
Now the telemarketers and door-knockers I DO have a problem with.
NOT because they're Curries.
Those things are WRONG to do.
BECAUSE they're wrong, people hate them. AND they respond angrily towards them.
PEOPLE SHOULD NOT DO THOSE THINGS.
Leave us the FUCK alone.
So unless you go to university, and I can't think of anywhere else, but considering the types of people who are thugs, they probably wouldn't be WORKING with these people, seeing that they end up being doctors, surgeons, engineers, what have you, they'll see Curries as being horrible people.
Next thing: I'm not backing down on the fact that no one should cold call or door-knock. Those things are WRONG.
But why are so many Curries doing these things?
I'll tell you.
Because WE don't want to.
Because THEY are hard workers.
THEY WANT to work.
They don't slack off!
They don't come here and go on the doll.
THOSE, at least, are good attributes.
BUT, as long as they're flocking to such unethical positions, they'll be hated. It's not Australians' fault that the people who call us up trying to sell us shit are Curries. It's not our fault that the people knocking on our doors trying to sell us shit are Curries.
That doesn't mean that we should have any anger towards Curries.
It certainly does mean we should have anger towards THOSE people, but not the race in its entirety.
UNI students are not the problem! Australia SHOULD be a safe place for Curries to study.
It's not THEM that are the problem.
They're the ones actually trying to get a real job, not harassing people.
But while there are Curries flocking here to harass us, they will be hurt because people don't know the difference.
There are two issues here that can be solved.
Curries: STOP taking up unethical jobs just because they pay.
Companies: STOP hiring people (of any race) to do unethical things!
Side note (not related to Curries but related to immigration): We're going to have a big problem if we keep allowing immigration due to Aussies not wanting to do shit unethical jobs, because we know that 10 years ago we had enough water, now we don't.
Why? Hasn't Australia always had drought periods? We go through drought periods, it's normal. They say we should cut down our water usage. But um, that's not necessary. If we weren't increasing our population the normal amount of water would be fine. And who wants more traffic congestion? Who wants smaller land blocks? Who wants for people to be having to move further and further away from the city just to live in nice bushy Australia?
Our problem isn't water or lack of trees, it's over-population.
Yes, we have a lot of unused land. Because it's unusable in terms of our lifestyle. Think of it this way; if you don't want to cut your house in half (house size and land size), double your commute time, etc. then don't allow our population to double. And it will double, quite quickly, maybe, hm, 50 years? I'm just guessing with no research. But for every person we let in, we're decreasing the resources, water, landsize, housesize and amount of trees/vegetarion (remember most of Australia is arid, it only rains on the coast) per person. So think of your current lifestyle. And then halve it. Do you WANT that?
THINK.