IF PAUL Henry's fall from grace is a warning about the perils of casual racism, maybe we might also pause to consider the perils of too casually alleging racism in the first place.
I hasten to add that there is no doubt Henry's blurt on Breakfast was offensive, and that some racial dynamic was involved in causing that offence. What interests me is where we draw the line between crassness, idiocy, thoughtlessness or whatever else characterised the remarks in question, and outright racism.
This is a very good column by Macdonald; probably the first time we've ever said that! We're not going to paraphrase it any further; rather, we commend it to our readers as well worth the investment of a few minutes of their time today. After a week in which there has been a feeding frenzy in the media as they seek to devour one of their own, Macdonald might just be the voice of reason.
3 comments:
Why don't you agree often with Findlay? He is intelligent and honest and sees things more clearly than most.
Very well said by Perigo: "All things being equal, a furore such as this should be settled simply by repairing to the prerogatives of the parties concerned. In an ideally free world, what action if any was taken by Mr. Henry's employers in response to the clamour to have him sacked would be over to them, within whatever parameters they and Mr. Henry had already freely contracted.
"But the current controversy is muddied by the fact that TVNZ is state-owned. Sundry dregs, such as Cabinet Ministers, Members of Parliament and the two female Fijian-Indian-Kiwi airheads now asininely whining that they have been 'stripped of their identity' by Henry's remarks, are emboldened to imagine their calls for his head should carry statutory weight, given their supposed shareholder status within TVNZ. These creatures, who should get lives, have no respect for, and probably no knowledge of, the statute that says, 'Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and opinions of any kind in any form.' (Article 14, NZ Bill of Rights.) They want the state broadcaster to be a vehicle for their own totalitarian agenda. Observe that it was communist John Minto who led the recent demonstration against Henry. A regime following Minto's strictures would ban free speech outright under the fashionable guise of protecting minorities from having their feelings hurt. If TVNZ were to sack Paul Henry, their action would be a giant leap down that slippery slope—which, as it happens, we're already on."
"Fashionable guise" = undermines own words with a blindness to irony. Glass houses etc... Sorry Manolo and Lindsay. Foot in mouth.
Post a Comment