1) "Skin colour might be a joke to some of us white folks." Most, but not all. "It isn’t a joke to Aboriginal and other people of colour" To most, but not all. Some genuinely don't care about their race and it is absolutely no-one else's business.

2) How many faults need to be discovered in the work of one historian before people stop discussing the work of Henry Reynolds as though he is a credible source of Australian history?

3) Everyone has been ridiculed at some point, including white people.

To walk into a shop and have people look at you as if your going to steal something, to constantly be asked “what nationality are you?”, to walk down the street or into an organisation and be surrounded by people of a different ethnicity, for people to be surprised when they find out you have a job or are going to university, to be seen as exotic or a novelty within your own country - this is what it is like to be non-white. White privilege gives a barrier which often equates to ‘normal’ or ‘not visible’. whiteness it's self encourages it's members to not see themselves as a race/culture/group/membership, but the norm to compare everything else to.

Well said Tillyj

To your list I add:

The automatic entitlement that is accorded to those for just being white - is so pervasive that only those who are not-white have the necessary perspective to see it.

Also, bullying & name-calling does not make a man a man - just a thug.

White people do know what it is like to be discrimated against when they visit or live in countries where their skin colour is not the majority or where women are viewed in a different light. White people in non-white nations are also looked on suspicioulsy or as exotic. Sometimes the attention is not always negative but one of natural curiosity and interest.

White people who are disabled,obese, men/women, homeless, skinny, old or young, or of a different religion or who are just plain in appearance might also face discrimination.

"Many Australians couldn’t see why the American singer Harry Connick Jr was grossly offended. This includes a large proportion of contributors to this online journal."

Many could see why he was grossly offended in the context of his experience of American history, but not within the context of Australian humour where the culture is to take the mickey out of everyone including ourselves. It was a skit about the Jacksons, the Jacksons are not white and they have (or had) thick hair in the prime of the Jackson Five. If you are going to do a Jackson skit, and you leave the actors as white, this would be hugely inappropriate and would beg the question what is wrong or insulting about portraying a black person as black.

There is no denying throughout history, skin colour has been a factor in the prejudices and fear of ignorant people, including spawning abhorrent organisations like the KKK. But we need to move on (which is not the same as forgetting).

It is when we don't see a skit like this as racist that we know we have come full circle and no longer view someone's colour or hairstyle as either a negative or a positive, but simply a physical trait.

" The basic, fundamental, essential, core, bare-bones, hardnosed point here is that we hold different expectations of our elite sportspeople to those we do of other folk. For example, we expect ordinary citizens to behave with decency and respect towards members of the opposite sex, whereas with footballers we pretty much consider it a win if they return a girl’s underpants within six to eight weeks of an assault. Likewise, we expected ordinary citizens to refrain from calling other ordinary citizens black c#&ts as much as possible, but given how much footballers have on their minds — scrum moves, 40-20s, memorising Footy Show skits — it is surely no hanging offence if occasionally they forget such details.

And really, hasn’t Johns performed a useful service for us? Isn’t it good we’re all talking about issues of racism now? Everyone’s having a frank, healthy discussion about the problems that beset our society and sporting landscape, and that can only be a good thing. After all, if nobody was racist, we would never discuss racism! Do we really want that? No. We need racists, because without them, we’ll never get rid of racism.

We certainly don’t want our children going around thinking racism isn’t a problem just because nobody is racist. YOU might want your children to grow up as fragile sheltered albino hothouse flowers, but I want more robust world. I want more racists being courageous enough to come out and speak their minds, creating a non-judgmental space where we can thrash all these complicated issues out, and come to an understanding with our racist brothers and sisters.

So thank you, Joey. Thank you for coming out of the closet and sparking some much-needed debate. Racism is a real problem, and it’s one we’ll never solve unless racists everywhere stand up and say, "Yes, I am racist, and I have something to say!"

In this, as in all things, footballers lead the way. God bless them all. "

http://newmatilda.com/2010/06/16/why-racism-choice-champions

This has been done to death for days. In League there is no evidence whatsoever of any racism in selection, in fact indigenous players are probably overrepresented in some teams and at representative level.

League attracts many players from lower socio-economic backgrounds. Generally speaking that has been recognised as a good thing, giving many a youth something to do and pride in himself where he could otherwise have been involved in mischief.

However it can also be expected that such players will also continue to act as people do in their social groups and among other things that includes the common use of profane and vulgar language. For some, everything is 'f' this and that and anyone, friend or foe can be an 'a', 'b' or a 'c' and there are other letters of the alphabet used too, with an increasing number of 't's' and 'p's' . Maybe the author has had occasion to visit poorer areas or perhaps he has ventured past building sites. For myself I can say that swearing and the 'c' word are now far from uncommon among women and especially girls, as any traveller on public transport will affirm. It is revolting and part of the raunch culture.

For myself, I really wonder if Johns intended a racist slur at all coming from his background. For Johns and there are many like him, he could equally have been giving the greatest compliment possible to his opponents. Maybe it wasn't the actual words that were used, but something read into his manner and delivery by Tahu. It is how it is read by the offended person that matters and that makes it all the more confusing, given the similarity in the background and experience of the two men concerned and their familiarity with each other.

contd..

contd,

The author is right to wonder why men who have spilled blood together can't share their innermost concerns and emotions. That is a heavy load for anyone to carry yet many if not most men do it daily. No wonder men are so subject to stress related disease and for some, outbreaks of frustration and violence.

It is a very great pity that the clamour over racism, although reprehensible and a priority for change, has also managed to drown out the second serious lesson of the Tahu incident, which is that Tahu had obviously been suffering great personal stress for a long time but the stereotyping of men did not allow anyone to see, or if they did see, to reach out a hand to help him.

That is the elephant in the room isn't it, that Tahu was suffering emotionally and there was no-one to see because he is a man. Any signals of distress would have been studiously avoided by all around him, men and women, because and boys don't cry do they? It is fine to belt Johns over the head and maybe he is due for it, but I get the feeling that society is over-willing to do that rather than accept that there is something very wrong with the stereotyping of men and the way we raise boys.

Cornflower and Severin make some interesting points while coming at it from slightly different angles.

Again context is important. Calling someone a "black C..." holds no mystery as to intent and lack of respect for a fellow team member or his culture.

As Cornflower posited, it does say something about expectations on boys to 'man up' (whatever that means) when really those who are closest to you within the spirit of team or mateship, should be the very same you can go to with problems.

It really comes down to treating others as we would be treated regardless of race, gender, class etc. It is not really that complicated.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10563#173815

Benk, true, white men from British & European backgrounds know more about discrimination & disadvantage than anybody. Being "enemies of the state" as the radical, extreme, loony, left, lesbian, fauxmanista paedophiles have been, painting us that way for 5 decades now.

A friend of mine was being knocked back for legal aid funding once when he noticed that the female staff member was middle aged, south American, barely able to speak English, let alone use the computer.

I wonder many white, educated, boys were knocked back for that job?

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10563#173843
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10563#173845

Cornflower, excellent work, how did you ever get involved in the Red/green/getup/labour coalition? Some of your comments are first class.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10563#173825
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10563#173835
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10563#173838
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10563#173842
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10563#173846

Tilly J, Severin twice, Pelican twice, If there was no Racism, Sexism, Ageism, etc, etc, etc, there would be no need for Loony, Left, humanities academics, would there?

Rent Seekers will always find some justification for their Grant.

Enjoy the fun while it lasts, after 2010, never again the education & public sectors will be completely different places from what they are now. Reform can sometimes be extremely popular with the proletariat.

It is a gross generalisation to think that the inappropriate actions of one simian ex-ARL footballer somehow relates to the rest of us.

Go talk to Andrew Johns. Its all about him not the rest of us. But he'll get off scot free and continue to earn megabucks while the rest of us will be wringing out hands forever about what went wrong.

Again context is important. Calling someone a "black C..." holds no mystery as to intent and lack of respect for a fellow team member or his culture.
Pelican,
Again context is important. Calling someone a "white C..." holds no mystery as to intend and lack of respect for a fellow team member or his culture.

Formersnag,

you don't have the slightest clue what you are talking about: being knocked back over something is nowhere near being treated contemptuously as if you are nothing, and are knocked back.

You don't have the slightest understanding that to humiliate someone is one of the worst things you can do to someone, especially if both you and the person humiliated have grown up in a social environment where it represents a constant, covert but ever-present threat to that person. Seriously, humiliation can kill: it can be a threat to a person's very existence. It may not affect white people, like you and me, that way - we associate ourselves existentially with 'cultures of power' but it certainly does not seem that way from the point of view of people who historically have been without much power.

As TillyJ puts it so well: 'White privilege gives a barrier which often equates to ‘normal’ or ‘not visible’. whiteness itself encourages its members to not see themselves as a race/culture/group/membership ...' People from groups which have been subordinated certainly cannot see themselves in the same way.

Up to a point, yes, let people say what they really think, Severin, but as long as they wear the consequences.

Joe Lan

I have to say I was stunned to read the Capt. J. E. Schooley quote "were not race conscious here at all".
A great old mate of mine fought on Kokoda in WW2. After being wounded twice he returned home to a hero's welcome; ushered into the local RSL he had drinks bought for him all night, and had the best time of his life.
The next day, after visiting his family and friends, he thought he'd go back again.
Only this time he didn't wear his uniform. The doorman took one look at him and said “what do you think you're doin' Jackie Jack? You know you can't come in here without a white man to hold your hand.”
He went home, got his medals and threw them in the river. To the day he died, he never had another thing to do with the RSL, or ANZAC day.
As to Cornflower's comments, I worked construction sites for years. I also rode motor bikes and 'hung out with the wrong crowd'. To call a mate a 'C... of a man' is almost a term of endearment. To call someone a 'black C...' is a racial slur, and no one I would call a mate would ever do it.

individual
I am not sure what your point is - Johns did not call Tahu a "White C...".

If he did we would still be talking context. Racism is not confined to any one race.

Racism is not confined to any one race.
Pelican,
that's precisely the point ! It's even more pronounced in non-white society.

Yeah well, I just watched the State of Origin game, and the "black c#@%s" certainly showed the folly of Joey's idea of team bonding via assumed shared racism. Served the Cockroaches right, I reckon :P

Racism can be found in all races and cultures all over the world.

We all look at people who are different and are either curious about them or threatened by them, depending on our upbringing and our life experiences.

I was brought up to take each person as they come- regardless of their country of origin or the colour of their skin.

What I don't like is when I dislike someone of a different race than me, for example because they are violent towards another person, and that person then says I don't like them because I am racist!

As to the offending comment 'black c...', I was working in an Aboriginal community and heard the manager call one of my patients a black c...,
When I expressed disgust at this swearing I was told it is fine for one Aboriginal to call another Aboriginal this endearment, but definitely not from a person from any other race!
Go figure!

Geez some of these big tough football lads need a spoonful of cement and advice to harden the 'bleep' up!
Frankly I don't care if they call each other vile names with or without racial overtones. I'm over it.

Far as I'm concerned any decent Australian takes umbrage at foul language and fouler name calling even among the generally sub-normal humanoids passed off as elite sportsmen. Overpaid, over-rated and definately not heros or role models!

As for Tilly J - what a crock! My business has customers from all walks of life. Come into my premises clean, groomed, walking & talking straight, NOT reeking of alcohol, paint, petrol whatever and I will view you as a potential valuable customer worthy of my respect and efforts to fulfil your needs should you choose to purchase from me or not. I don't care about your colour, race, religion, sexuality, marital status, the brand of your toilet tissue etc, ect. One exception - no customers with concealed faces.

However - come into my premises dirty, dishevelled, stinking, substance affected and regardless of your colour, race, religion, sexuality and whether or not you use toilet tissue I am going to 1) Regard you with instant suspicion, distaste and concern 2) Ask you to leave and have you removed if you refuse.

As for asking people their 'nationality' - it's a common question since products and services I sell often involve overseas travel or international usage. More often than not the customer is white with an accent. Sometimes though, when encountering someone with an unusual name or whose name and appearance seem at odds, I ask about ethnic origin simply out of curiousity or as a conversation starter. Not surprisingly everyone I've ever asked has been quite happy to tell their story. People like talking about themselves and it aids understanding.

Tilly - I suggest if you present well - in a manner that reflects pride in self and respect for others that is how you will be regarded. Check your mirror on the way out for starters.

Further to my last post, it was particularly good to see Greg Inglis score the first try - after about 2 minutes :D

Also, it's clear why the AFL wants Israel Folau, given the number of classic "marks" he made in the game. I've heard that he was referred to as a "coconut" as part of the same bonding strategy to which Timana Tahu objected.

Apparently Tahu didn't turn up to training with the Eels. Maybe Cornflower's right that he's undergoing some kind of crisis, but it certainly seems that endemic racism in the game is part of it.

Tahu was grist for the mill for a media and sections of the public who crave sensationalism and reduce complex issues to oversimplified and grossly incorrect stereotypes.

When they have extracted any worth for themselves and under the guise of helping him and making him 'hero' of the moment they will discard him and then he and his loved ones will have to put their lives back together.

For people who claim to have had Tahu's good at heart it was an astoundingly insensitive thing to do to hold his distress up to the limelight and hound him, his family and friends for anything, no matter how small, that could be sensationalised to garner a bigger audience. Anyone notice how careful the media and other 'concerned' commentators were to cast Tahu as a 'hero' to disguise their own abuse of his misery?

Of course there was and is a real possibility that this man could be suffering from a condition that was triggered or made worse by the stresses of life, elite sport, match preparation and the obscene remarks of a friend and comrade in arms who did not (along with others) have the sensitivity to recognise his hurt and help.

I am all for countering racism wherever it raises its ugly head but I do not go along with those who would victimise the victim in his suffering along with his family and all under the guise of helping. If anyone had wanted to help they would have heeded the advice given in Beyond Blue - the national depression initiative:

http://www.beyondblue.org.au/index.aspx?

Help him first and foremost and above all do no harm.

Very well said Cornflower, and I wouldn't mind betting you are right.

These big strong men who are football players and are out in the public arena are probably the least likely in our community to admit they were in trouble and ask for help.

I too hope all is well for Tahu, and Andrew Johns

suzeonline,

Thank you.

It's all in the upbringing and socialisation. We take the capacity to be in touch with their own feelings away from them as wee boys and we teach them not to seek help. I'd say that the lobotomy to separate boys from their emotional feelings is largely complete by grade 5 of primary school.

The League does a lot to educate players on what is expected of them and how to behave, but without the self awareness as a foundation, that is like giving someone the road rules and safety briefing without first ensuring they can ride the bike.

IMHO men need someone they can respect like General Peter Cosgrove to lead and champion a re-examination of masculinity by men for men, with partners being welcome to take part after the men have achieved some headway and awareness. Leave the academics out.

I agree with most of what Cornflower has stated above. However, not all men respond to military types like Cosgrove (although I do admire him). Men are no more a homogeneous block than are women and as such require a variety of role models. Particularly for indigenous men.

However, while diversity encourages lateral thought, a return to the 50's model of (white) masculinity by promoted by Marsh and his brethren is part of the problem and therefore has no place in the solution.

We need men who can think for themselves rather than follow dogma.

Be that as it may, nothing prevents all of us from taking the personal initiative of treating boys differently from here on, which is mainly about showing them love, understanding and respect, without boundaries.

It is about accepting, respecting and valuing boys and which includes recognising their essential differences to girls as normal and reasonable.

Why is always white men dictating what, when and who is racist?

Maybe white men should put a sock in it.

Being a female I have been subject to sexism from men so I know what it is like. My first husband was vile, a refugee to boot. However it will be white man who says it is racist of me to complain.

Still a white mans world for sure.

Cornflower: << It is about accepting, respecting and valuing boys and which includes recognising their essential differences to girls as normal and reasonable. >>

I don't think I'd be alone in having raised my son in exactly that way. However, he's 20 now and doesn't refer to Indigenous people as "black c@#%s", "cannibals", or "Abos". He also respects women and treats them as equals.

I think there's a bit more to racism and misogyny in football than just poor upbringing and socialisation of boys. My son played football (the real kind) until a year or two ago and didn't display any of the unfortunate traits that have brought the other codes into disrepute again recently. Mind you, he played in a very cosmopolitan competition where most teams had both male and female players.

C J Morgan

That is a narrow interpretation of my meaning. However if you can find a better way to reduce problems like racism by means other than by modelling behaviour that accepts, respects and values others, go right ahead, the floor is yours.

Psychologists know that behaviour generalises, yet government appears unwilling to accept that in social policy and that is despite the feedback received from youth - as if any of the parties listen to youth.

There is the short game on issues like racism, if you think Joey Johns is a racist and there there is the long game, which I have been talking about. Both have a place. However even the most ardent supporters of blunt weapons like racial and religious vilification laws and commissions like HREOC would have to admit their limitations.

Pelican: >>"Many Australians couldn’t see why the American singer Harry Connick Jr was grossly offended.
Australian humour where the culture is to take the mickey out of everyone including ourselves.<<

Pelican I have travelled extensively on work related contracts that would find me in another culture for months at a time.
My Aussie sense of humor coupled with the informality of our culture is not initially appreciated by the majority of countries I have been to. Another issue was the "call a spade a spade" mindset that the Aussie culture has endowed in me. Even if the outcome is evident I find that many cultures require the truth spoon fed to them, and they seem to take umbrage if you get to the heart of the matter without beating around the bush.

Pelican to your point as to whether we are racist. I suggest that when being derogatory about someone the basic physical characteristic slur is good enough for the laconic Aussie. Examples of common Aussie slur speak.

the fat bastard
the ugly bastard
the skinny bastard
the ranga bastard
the big eared bastard
the bald bastard
the stupid bastard
the smart arsed bastard
the wog bastard
the chink bastard
the arab bastard
the poufta bastard
and the worst of all....
the lying bastard.....the others pale into insignificance compared to this one.

Our culture is unique, for the fact that this type of dialogue is free from any mindsets; the uttererance of the words is of itself is the entire slur, no threat to violence, and with no ongoing connotation. The "fat bastard" of yesterday could be a mate today. That is what we have in Australia, as much harmony and acceptance as you will find anywhere in any society possibly because we do not go for the gun when someone “has a go”.

The isolation from society that our indigenous brothers and sisters feel is certainly real. Look at the mortality rate for indigenous kids under five, and look at the life expectancy of the adults...absolutely third world statistics...shameful.

I blame successive white governments up until 1976, from then on I blame the white government and the land councils. Humans within both these bodies plundered and mismanaged funds that would see our indigenous citizens not only economically prosperous but prosperous through pride of identity.

The mortality of children under five has to do with Third World hygiene contributing to diarrhoeal diseases especially. The only solution is better hygiene and why it isn't done God only knows because WHO already has a well-tested program read to go. See here:

www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/wwdreportchap4.pdf

Sonofglobin,

You cannot blame whitey for Koori kids dying. Well you can if like me, you think any child, from any culture, should be taken away from parents that are incapable of rearing children.

I predict this generation of prison destined Koori males will sue for NOT being taken. And why were they not taken?

Because the racist left-wing elitist Anglo's think Koori's are animals to be looked upon as dogs, not care what happens to them - only care how they feel yuk about breaking up a family (even though that family might be rancid!).

It ALL comes down to the left wingers - most people don't even see yet that they are the enemy of good policy.

I feel sorry for Aboriginals because I have known quite a few and they ALL form their ENTIRE identity around their skin colour.

How horrible! BUt don't blame us for being tribal.

Grow up, forget your clans and gangs that hunted on this shore or that village, and become members of the human family.

Benjam1n: >> I feel sorry for Aboriginals because I have known quite a few and they ALL form their ENTIRE identity around their skin colour.<<

Ben this line made me smile, it implies that you pity them for having come in contact with you (grammatical error).

I agree with your overall view but I do not believe you are comparing apples with apples when you make value judgments’ as to "where" in modern society indigenous people should have risen to, especially given the huge cash and land resources dedicated to their betterment over the past thirty years.

I do not believe that a hunter gatherer society could assimilate physically or psychologically to European colonization in a handful of generations. Consider other indigenous societies that were culturally and technologically some 40,000 years advanced of our indigenous peoples. These societies have failed to acclimatize to European culture and have the same psychological assimilation issues as our indigenous.

Ben as you said the bleeding heart "left" has a lot to do with the problem being ongoing, and with no foreseeable end. Before 1976 the govt controlled the indigenous funding (what there was of it) and achieved nothing. After 76 we gave "billions" of dollars to land councils, governed by people from the lowest socio economic group in Australia, and the expectation was what? That they would direct the funds towards building infrastructure and civil housing, invest the funds in businesses that would produce an ongoing return on capital for future generations, obviously the white bleeding hearts did. But It did not work.

The politically correct lobby and their ethos of indigenous self determination, including the management of billions of dollars is the core flaw in the money chain that flows in and out of the indigenous community. When you give an aboriginal who lives in third world conditions in a first world nation control of billions of dollars, then the first call of philanthropy would be himself and his kin.

Guidelines for the funding were corrupted by the "any cause is a good cause for me" bleeding hearts.

sonofgloin
I take your point but I was referring to the skit on Hey Hey specifically, of which I did not read as offensive (intent and context is important), just as I wouldn't if a dark-skinned person dressed up as me, with white face powder and a brunette/red wig and sang like me (which is pretty bad as nature would have it).

In Australian culture this was just a skit, in the US it would be seen as Harry CJ saw it given their sensitivities and experiences.

When I have travelled I am always wary of other cultures and usually adapt to the social norms pretty well. Americans are quite different depending on which state they hail from, some less understanding of our humour and directness and others more so.

There are some parts of the US one wouldn't mention they were an atheist or supported equal rights for same sex couples just for example.

I personally would not use any of those phrases you listed by calling anyone a *&^ bastard even in jest but I have heard it used affectionately eg. you old bastard (said with a laugh in context of the conversation). Again probably easily misunderstood by someone from another culture.

Pelican:>> I take your point but I was referring to the skit on Hey Hey specifically,<<

Pelican, thanks I understood that, I just took the opportunity to ramble on and on and on.
A perfect example of cultural diversity was when Bert Newton said to Mohammed Ali in an avuncular fashion "I like the boy" at a Logie night 25 years ago. The look on Ali's face is pure incredulity, but you can see that he is reasoning with himself that there must be a cultural misunderstanding regarding the inference of those words to an American Negro.

I'm with you on the hey hey skits, Harry was the only one out of the entire cast, crew, and audience to consider it as racial vilification. Given that we do not think in those terms is it not plausible to suggest that we do not identify with race as readily as other cultures, we are innocents compared to Harry.

Sonofgloin,

'I do not believe that a hunter gatherer society could assimilate physically or psychologically to European colonization in a handful of generations. Consider other indigenous societies that were culturally and technologically some 40,000 years advanced of our indigenous peoples. These societies have failed to acclimatize to European culture and have the same psychological assimilation issues as our indigenous.'

Wha ?! 25,000 Indigenous people in this country are university graduates, and the total could reach 50,000 by 2020 - that will be one in every seven adults.

Aboriginal children in mission schools during the nineteenth century (at least here in SA) were achieving at similar levels to white kids in their regions, if not better. In fact, in 1872, in SA, a third of white kids (and probably half of their parents) were illiterate, while almost all of the Aboriginal children and their parents on missions were literate. But when the time came (in 1908-1910) to contemplate universal public secondary schooling, Aboriginal kids were barred and their previously-comparable primary end-point was dumbed down to Year Four level - right through to the 1950s. So, by the 1970s, thanks to segregationist policies, very few Aboriginal parents on missions had had any secondary schooling. Nothing to do with 'hunter-gatherer societies', just plain old racism.

But for all that, some 70,000 Indigenous people have now been to, or are currently enrolled in, university education across Australia - that's better than one in every four adults. The vast majority of those 25,000 current graduates completed their undergraduate studies in the last twenty years. A quarter of them have gone on to post-graduate study.

Joe Lane
Adelaide

Loudmouth, "But for all that, some 70,000 Indigenous people have now been to, or are currently enrolled in, university education across Australia - that's better than one in every four adults."

Any break-ups available on the degrees and study areas? If it is mainly humanities maybe they are destined for academia and the public bureaucracies, or there could be a lot of unemployed and dissatisfied grads around.

Any idea how many are destined for 'real' work - completing trades skills through apprenticeships? That is where government keeps saying the skills shortages are. Any numbers available on the break-up by gender?

Joe - too right, as usual. The fact that Indigenous people are just as intelligent as anybody else still seems to rankle with some.

Cornflower - what is the motivation for your disingenuous questions? You're as capable as anybody else of using Google. Why don't you read up a bit and make a case instead of engaging in snide insinuation?

C J Morgan,

You are stirring as usual.

I put the questions out of genuine interest and would like to read what Joe has to say about things, thanks.

Thanks, CJ.

Cornflour, you work late :) You aks:

<<Any break-ups available on the degrees and study areas? If it is mainly humanities maybe they are destined for academia and the public bureaucracies, or there could be a lot of unemployed and dissatisfied grads around.>>

In the period 2005-2008, when officially five and a half thousand Indigenous people graduated from universities in Australia, about 22 % of the graduates were in education (mainly primary teaching), 18 % in health (medicine, nursing, podiatry, raidology, etc.), 40 % in humanities, social sciences and arts, 10 % in business (marketing, human resources, accounting, etc.) with - as you infer - barely 10 % in sciences. But this rising generation will move much more into the sciences.

The unemployment rate of Indigenous graduates does not seem to be any higher than that of non-Indigenous graduates. Yes, currently, a high proportion find employment in publicly-funded positions: schools, hospitals, government departments, Indigenous organisations.

Two-thirds of Indigenous graduates are women. There is a huge task for genuine leaders to involve men far more in education, right up to university level, but they are probably too busy with things like Treaties, and the Stolen Generation.

<<Any idea how many are destined for 'real' work - completing trades skills through apprenticeships? That is where government keeps saying the skills shortages are. Any numbers available on the break-up by gender?>>

TAFE is a fraud: of seventy thousand Indigenous students in TAFE courses around the country, barely 1500 are in Diploma-level courses, and annual graduate numbers are barely in double figures. A very high proportion of Indigenous TAFE students are in NT communities, and have been for many years - yet the shockingly low skill levels of people in remote communities !

[TBC]

Joe

Cornflour,

The Indigenous future does not seem to involve some quiet, patient, move up the occupational ladder - as manufacturing declines, Indigenous people are not moving into working class jobs, or skilled trades jobs - they are leap-frogging over those traditional pathways into professional positions:

- Over the period from 2005-2008, the equivalent of around 20-22 % of the entire 24-year-old age-group (to choose a surrogate age-group for comparison) graduated from universities. This is likely to rise to 25 % by 2015, and perhaps 30 % by 2020.

In other words, more than a quarter of all young Indigenous people in the future - more than a third of all those employed - will bypass the traditional working class route and move directly into jobs with longer shelf-lives. And given the government's tacit policy of employing as many unqualified Indigenous people as qualified people, we could be talking about close to three-quarters of the entire Indigenous workforce by 2020, a professional-led economic miracle.

Is self-determination working ? Yes, at the individual level, for those who take theeducational route, but no, not the community level.

Is economic self-determination working ? Hell, no. Is it likely to work, ever ? Doesn't look like it.

What then will drive Indigenous futures ?

Will Indigenous people go back to the bush, as the CAEPR and the unions (the AEU, etc.) so ardently desire ? No. Every year, 1 % more of the entire Indigenous population moves to the cities: let the pseudo-left middle-class choke on their skinny soy lattes over that one.

[TBC]

Cornflour,

To conclude:

The Indigenous population is 75 % urban, and becoming more so. Jobs in the cities tend more and more towards the professional, rather than the trades, sphere. And that's where Indigenous success currently resides. Is anything else working ? I don't think so.

The situation may certainly improve in remote communities, thanks to Noel Pearson's faith and hard work, and federal government policies. But the urban people are showing the way - not the communities, not the welfare population, not the rentier economy. And in the forefront of that push are the Indigenous professionals.

And by 2020, there will be twice as many as there are now, and much better qualified. And more coming through the sciences - the hard sciences :)

Joe Lane
Adelaide

sonofgloin
I like your humour. Me too, on the rambling bit (envious of those who can say exactly the same with less words).

The M. Ali/Bert Newton piece is a good example of what I was attempting to express but you did it far more succinctly. :)

Loudmouth:>> Wha ?! 25,000 Indigenous people in this country are university graduates, and the total could reach 50,000 by 2020 - that will be one in every seven adults.<<
>> . Nothing to do with 'hunter-gatherer societies', just plain old racism.<<

Joe I am not referring to the ability to complete tertiary education, and therefore I am not referring to IQ. I meant the ability to culturally assimilate with a vastly more complex European society, as I said no indigenous peoples have been able to assimilate culturally.

The issue is environmental and psychological.

Environmental from the fact that these pre modern cultures end up in the lowest socio economic strata of the community, being environmentally challenged to achieve the perceived strata of opulence or accreditation that the European culture holds in admiration.

Psychologically in regard to the difference in the perception of "value” between indigenous and European cultures.
Time runs European cultures down to the minute, and our children accept that time dictates actions and move onto adulthood knowing that they must be at work on time, must keep appointments, be at a pre arranged place at a pre arranged time etc. Indigenous people view and value time in a different framework to Europeans. The term "walk about" is used to describe the Aboriginals inability to understand European time. When they have had enough they would walk away, usually regardless of consequence, "now" is the only relevant time to them at that moment. It is not choice, it is psychological makeup.

Joe you mentioned the fact that Aboriginal kids achieve scholastically, and as I said the denial of that was not my premise. What I refer to is the ability after the education to live on European time, with every second accounted for.

Please do not call me a racist based on a misinterpretation of my words

Joe (Loudmouth)

Thank you for taking the time to reply in full, it is appreciated.

Sorry, SonofGloin, I wasn't referring to you as a racist - my use of the term related to the exclusionist educational policies of the first half of the twentieth century, which were modelled on the colonial policies employed in Africa and elsewhere, under the rubric of 'culturally adapted education' - which in turn were modelled on the 'industrial' (i.e. grossly inferior) education foisted on Blacks in the US. Strange how the term (and the content) has entered the stage again, this time from the Left.

<<I meant the ability to culturally assimilate with a vastly more complex European society, as I said no indigenous peoples have been able to assimilate culturally.>>

<<What I refer to is the ability after the education to live on European time, with every second accounted for.
>>

I think the supposed inability of Aboriginal people to 'assimilate' (whatever that may actually mean) has been hogwash from Day One. Here in SA, when whaling stations were set up on the south coast, within months of the first occupations, Aboriginal people from the surrounding regions were involved from the outset. Admittedly, their needs (meat) were symbiotic with those of the Europeans (skin, bone and oil), so they may have thought that they were onto a good thing ,and not have even perceived that their country was elsewhere being invaded and occupied. But within five years or less, the people in that region had become familiar with money, clothes, tobacco, grog, flour, and the ability 'to live on European time', by which I'm guessing that you mean routine, punctuality, 'industrial time', as Marx would have called it.

[TBC]

Joe

SonofGloin,

Further on the subject of 'assimilation' (one day, there has to be a discussion about what the word means, in all its manifestations):

Economic and social 'assimilation': The first railway built in Australia ran through from Port Elliott to Goolwa (and vice versa: so versatile!): Aboriginal men would have been involved in its construction and unless my old eyes are deceiving me, one of the photographs on its opening day had an Aboriginal bloke sitting on the cowcatcher. People were certainly IN the general economy from the earliest times.

Aboriginal people across the south and east of Australia saw their first planes, cars, the Overland Telegraph (actually I suppose not too many white Australians have actually seen the Overland Telegraph) at roughly the same time as white people did. Most Aboriginal people are not all that exotic, but they ARE all human beings :)

My wife Maria was born in a small Aboriginal community on Lake Alexandrina. By the time her great-grandfather finished school there in the 1860s (all the kids could speak and write in English), the Overland Telegraph to Melbourne had been built, passing the mission by a couple of miles. By that time, there were four or five schools within fifty kilometres, a dozen taverns to cater for the overland traffic to Melbourne and the South-East, a dozen churches of most denominations, forty paddle-steamers going past on the Lake, post offices, stores, and a couple of police stations. Men worked up and down the Murray on the harvests, people went to and from Adelaide and the neighbouring towns, and Aboriginal people from other groups were moving to the mission to live and start families. Her great-grandfather took up a farming lease in the late sixties, as did many other Aboriginal men between then and 1900.

Call it what you like, but Aboriginal people were participating in 'Australian' life from the early days.

[TBC, yet again]


Joe

SonofGloin,

Where is Gloin ? It sounds Irish :)

What do you mean by 'cultural assimilation' ? You don't think that Aboriginal people all over Australia don't drive, watch TV, use ATMs and shops, play football, etc. ? Many paint, sing, rap-dance, and for all I know, collect stamps and rare coins. What 'cultural' aspects are you referring to ?

The reality is - and I apologise for the angst this might cause to all those, Black as well as white, who can't BELIEVE it - that Indigenous people are as able as anyone else to master the heights of our educational system, the universities. One in nine Indigenous adults is now a graduate, after barely twenty years of full-on involvement. Standard or mainstream higher education is part of Indigenous people's identity, part of their culture, part of who they 'are'.

Now for the hard part: getting used to that reality, Black and white: it's going to drive the future.

Joe Lane
Adelaide

Another fact Joe.

Our native people have been getting 'whiter' with every generation. I don't only mean they have been merging into mainstream Australian culture through education, employment and way of life but also genetically.

The Aboriginal gene pool is already heavily diluted and becoming more so. Right now there are many people who say they are "Aboriginal" but whose make up is at least 3/4 Caucasian and or other race/s. Some may APPEAR about as Aboriginal as Kevin Rudd. Others mistaken for Mediterranean, Middle Eastern or Latin descent.

Usually white culture tends to predominate (If you can't beat 'em, join 'em plus whitey life tends to be more attractive) so in another 50 years or so I predict that assimilation will be pretty much complete.

Dysfunctional communities will inevitably dwindle into insignificence or die out when abused & neglected children are finally rescued and given education, support and training needed to live healthy independent lives, or at least the chance. They will lead the way for their people. Those beyond help will self destruct but without dragging the next generation into the morass.

So there's a bit of 21st Century dreaming for a better, healthier, vigorous future for all Australians ...

Yes, Divine Ms N, more than 80 % of Aboriginal people are now inter-marrying - which means that around 2 % of the non-Aboriginal population are being pulled out of the non-Aboriginal marriage pool. The children of an Aboriginal parent, male or female, tend to be considered by society (perhaps even by you, Ms Divine N) not to be 'fully' non-Aboriginal, and tend also to know their Aboriginal relations far better.

Currently, about 4 % of all primary school children in Australia are Indigenous - in ten or twenty years, when they marry, they will be sucking 3.5 % of the non-Indigenous population out of the marriage pool. And with the magic of inter-marriage on the one hand and social definitions of Indigeneity on the other, 7 % of that generation's children will be Indigenous. Twenty years on .....

But don't worry, Ms Divine N, you don't have to marry an Indigenous person if you don't want to. But you'll never know what you are missing ;)

Joe

Loudmouth:>> SonofGloin, Where is Gloin ? It sounds Irish :)<<

Joe the name is from a Tolkien character, who introduces himself as " Gimli, son of Gloin.

Joe during the westerrn cultural revolution of the sixties the "hippie" values of peace and love certainly influenced and supported humanitarian ideals in song and action.


Blue Mink ......Melting Pot

"Take a pinch of white man
Wrap him up in black skin
Add a touch of blue blood
And a little bitty bit of red Indian boy
Oh like a Curly Latin kinkies
Oh Lordy, mixed with yellow Chinkees, yeah
You know you lump it all together
And you got a recipe for a get along scene
Oh what a beautiful dream
If it could only come true, you know, you know

What we need is a great big melting pot
Big enough enough enough to take
The world and all its got And keep it stirring for a hundred years or more
And turn out coffee coloured people by the score."

Gotta love those hippies

Gimli,

Hot Chocolate, yeah ! Right on ! Won't our grandkids and great-grandkids be beautiful ?

Joe

Heh - when I was a young hippie, I loved that 'Blue Mink' song.

As it happens, now that I'm an old fogey with vestigial hippie tendencies, I have a couple of kids with Chinese/Anglo ancestry, a stepdaughter with Gambian/Anglo ancestry, and grandkids with Gambian, Anglo and Aboriginal ancestry.

I look forward to the day when pretty well everybody's 'coffee coloured' :)

CJ, I have five sisters older than me. So I was always at home to see the new boyfriends roll in and roll out. They came in all shades and nationalities, but most were Anglo Aussie.

The old man never commented about any of them, as long as they respected his girls he respected them. One of my sisters married a yank (her second marriage) and they went to stay with the folks when they came back to oz while they looked to purchase somewhere to live.

On the day that the family got together to meet the new groom, I my brother and the old man were in his garage chatting and he said "will you look at what she has brought home this time". My brother and I looked at each other and said "he seems like a good bloke", to which the old man responded "a bloody septic for god’s sake, a septic. Nothing more was added. I never knew he did not like yanks but my mum said later he could not stand them more than one at a time.

Thanks, CJ: Blue Mink - I'm happy to stand corrected :)

Yeah, don't you wish you could come back in a hundred years ?

Joe

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10563#174628

Dear Joe Lane, Loudmouth, i have a great web site for you, its by an aging hippie, Communist like yourself. All about what "Political Correctness" has done for Europe. Happy reading.

http://www.reich4.de/Begriffe/sittlichkeit/?lang=en

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8630135369495797236#

Hi Snag,

Well, the Communist church is an incredibly broad and fractious one: at every critical time, 1848, 1871, 1903, 1905, 1917, etc., etc., it has split off into factions. Not to mention the gulags, Czechoslovakia, the Khmer Rouge, on and on. I don't think there has been a single genuinely Communist government in the world for some decades, if ever. But that's just MY particular factional slant on things :)

Mother Teresa is supposed to have lost her belief in a caring god some sixty years ago, and yet she kept working as if he/she still existed and I empathise with her: as a sort of Grandfather's Axe Marxist, I keep trying to do what I think is best, according to my own lights, even though I struggle to positively evaluate Marx's hypotheses, or what's left of them. His universalism, for one thing, and his obvious concern for the down-trodden, for another. But his followers have not made it easy.

But to get back to the topic, it has to be said that from the thirties to the sixties, many communists in Australia were in the forefront of support for the equal rights of Aboriginal people. Some went off the rails in calling for separate republics (a long-standing right-wing initiative) but most saw the place for Indigenous people as being alongside, not away from or underneath, other Australians. And I'll stick up for that any day.

Joe