I think a case can be made toward latent racism (against aboriginal peoples) in the text but you then proceed to speak of sexism.

In either case I think there are plenty of explicit examples of such and prefer to categorize those and leave the more subjective examples to the reader's judgement. But if other editors feel it should be categorized thusly I have little qualm with it.

The "sexism" was just on my mind, so I added it
And sexism wasn't quite the right word for it; it's more like a fear of women's bodies that this "vision" (concoted or actually experienced) of Berg's appears to express.

You can put that somewhere if you want, otherwise, just consider it an observation and an opinion.

And I absolutely agree with whatever decision you make regarding the categorization of the racism, but keep in mind that if someone was interested in exploring COG, and Berg's, racialist beliefs, failing to categorize this under racism would make it more difficult for that person to find this source material, which goes beyond subjective racism, in my opinion (you're entitled to differ in opinion from me; we aren't the COG, after all!)

To quote (from http://www.exfamily.org/pubs/ml/b5/ml0980.shtml, a more complete version of the text):

" 3. IT WAS A BATTLE, HONEY, BUT WE WON IT! We agreed together & we won it! It was a real big bad black Australian devil! I wonder if that was his name? (Maria: I was wondering the same thing.) Goolagong! (Maria: Whoever it was, rebuke him, Lord, in Jesus' name!) It was all like a bad dream, but we won! See, you have to pray about everything, even grabbing a tape recorder, or the Devil can really make you make mistakes. I didn't know what it was talking about, those funny words I'd never heard before.

9. JUST LIKE EVERY ONE OF THOSE FLIES WAS A DEVIL, & every one of those poisonous creatures is a demon of Satan, & they've got to watch out! They can't just brush'm away like they're not important. It's a dangerous country to live in, it's full of devils & demons that turned those Aborigines into savages! They weren't like that when they first went there. They got like that from those devils, those demons & their devil-worship, you know? Like the Africans. They're a lot like Africans.

10. THE AFRICANS WEREN'T LIKE THAT AT FIRST. They were Noah's own son & grandson! And the Egyptians were a high form of civilisation, very intelligent & brilliant, scientific, powerful, beautiful, & look what they degenerated into--those African savages! Isn't that horrible? Just like the Australian Goolagongs! Goolagong. Goolagongs. I wonder if that's a tribe or a name or a name of their god, one of their demon gods? I think maybe it is. "

I don't have time right now to read the whole thing so there may be more; it's lengthy and I'm not used to reading this sort of nonsense, but I could give it another try later.

It's still not in the racism category
'Hong Kong Goolagong' is still not in the racism category. Like I said earlier, I think it would be easier for people looking for racist material in the cog publications to find it if it was categorized as such.

If you don't want to bother to do it then how can I get editing privileges so I can do it? I think it's important to expose and identify racism so people can understand where this sort of misguided thinking can lead.

I'm somewhat torn on this issue. I agree with Craven that there are numerous more explicit examples of racism in Berg's writings, and I would personally prefer that perhaps excerpts of the Hong Kong Goolagong Mo Letter be highlighted in an article on racism. What do the other editors think about categorizing this ML under Racism?

(Currently, the only information about becoming an xFamily.org editor is posted here.)