[Cont.]

Of course, people are trying to recover, or revive, or resurrect, traditional cultural practices, particularly art, music and language. But those who are not particularly interested are not any less Indigenous for that. It certainly is not the business of any non-Indigenous people to judge them - Aka, you're right there.

But the point is that a person is not any less Indigenous if he or she does not have much, or any, traditional knowledge. That's a bit difficult, after all, if people have been dispersed away from their land, and from each other, and if it has become impossible to live in traditional ways, or if 'modern' ways have been preferred: it can happen. But people also have access to a wealth of historical knowledge, social knowledge, from parents and grandparents and relations, from books and the media and many other sources.

So yes, on the one hand, culture can 'make' people (and in turn, is shaped and changed by people) - but also history can 'make' people. You can't merely adopt somebody else's history, or memories, or family stories, and usually you can't simply drop your own. People are shaped by both their culture and their history (and, of course, by each other). People may have been separated from their land, but they have not necessarily been separated from each other, or from their shared history, which in turn has to be continually learnt and up-dated.

And surely those factors, and their implied choices, are for Indigenous people to evaluate. It's for Indigenous people to decide who is, what makes people, and what does it mean to be, Indigenous. That's called empowerment, self-determination, agency :)

Joe

What is with your attitude Joe? Does it bug you that I can not only write, I can think and use a computer?

This talk about 'traditional' bugs me. Believe me, the use of others' interpretation of what is traditional, and the challenging of indigeniety is so annoyingly common. On things like hunting, there is a common call that only 'traditional methods' and tools should be used - that is precolonisation era tools and methods.

Would the same questions be asked if you decided to live a 'traditional' lifestyle of 250 years ago? People may think you were nuts, or a hippy, but they would let you do your own thing. Would anyone bag you for driving a toyota?

I realise from your posts that you consider yourself something of an expert on Indigenous issues, but in your haste to air your knowledge you forget that SA had a somewhat different colonisation history from the rest of Australia.

You think its fine to crow about the number of Indigenous graduates, yet you slag off at those who have achieved,referring to these people as elites. Sure not everyone is altruistic but why should they be? Your double standards and snide remarks say more about yourself than about the point you are trying to make.

It is intersting that while you are happy to play the expert role, you become quite nasty if an Indigenous person dares make a comment on this forum.

choose to continue their traditional stories, art, music, language and lore being allowed to, or are these aspirations being thwarted by the management of Indigenous affairs currently being imposed?
Alan Austin,
It is close to impossible to live a traditional lifestyle nowadays. Where could they practice that ? There's no land left to do that. Art, music etc is not thwarted by indigenous affairs, it is already hijacked by Raggae & electronic music. What we got to accept is the fact that everything has been altered including the mindset. Not having a traditional lifestyle anymore is not only due to the choice having been eroded but it is also by choice of the indigenous themselves. It does come in as a very convenient point of argument (excuse) but that's about all. I couldn't imagine an indigenous family giving up a 5 bedroom house in favour of a gunyah. No-one would want that. So far as culture is concerned it is up to the indigenous themselves to perpetuate it. No government grant can realistically do anything positive towards that. There are many examples throughout the world of displaced people retaining their culture & at times even make it stronger. As I said it's up to the people which path they want to take. One can accept the argument of people having been displaced & disowned but culture can not be erased if it is considered worthwhile.

Would the same questions be asked if you decided to live a 'traditional' lifestyle of 250 years ago? People may think you were nuts, or a hippy, but they would let you do your own thing. Would anyone bag you for driving a toyota?
Aka,
that just about sums it up, yep !

Not sure if there were all that many Toyotas around 1250 years ago, Aka/Individual ;) Apart from that, I'm a bit too thick to understand what you are getting at.

I apologise if I wrote anything nasty, Aka: can you tell we what, exactly ?

And, with respect, you were the one who raised the straw man argument about 'traditional' ways and identity: I don't have the slightest trouble with the notion of Indigenous people not living in 'traditional' ways, and still being Indigenous: what else are they supposed to be ?

I don't know much, but what I've learnt, after 40 years of involvement, shapes what I have come to believe. It's bound to be localised, distorted and particular, but that's how one's knowledge usually is. I've learnt what I've learnt, warts and all, and limited as it is. I wouldn't claim to know anything about the Torres Strait Islands, for example, or desert settlements. So I know that what I write may not relate to them, and usually make that as clear as I can.

About 'elites': the vast majority of the 25,000 graduates work and contribute and are making a difference. But some, and not only graduates, seize positions, big-note themselves, crush and expel anybody who is not 'loyal' to them and their bunch of cronies, and generally stuff up whatever organisation they can control, to the point where it is no longer doing anything useful. Perhaps you have experience of these sorts of situations ?

So as far as I am concerned, the more graduates the better, because diminishing the influence of these blow-flies can only be good for Indigenous people as a whole, in my snide view. Thankfully, tertiary education has been a mass enterprise, not an elite pursuit, for some time, and will be much more so towards 2020. Those wonderful masses of graduates will go a long way towards 'closing the gap' in so many ways, a gap which I have come to believe those corrupt and incompetent elites want to maintain.

I welcome your comments on this, Aka :)

Joe

250 years ago,
Loudmouth,
What it boils down to is that one group constantly raves on about how the european arrival has destroyed some nirvana & the other group constantly raves on about how much the european gives & it is not appreciated/taken advantage of.
250 years means that even if anyone would want to revert to those standards it is not possible because society/regulations won't let anyone do so. Both have valid arguments re the past. Neither have a valid argument re the present & we all have a duty re the future. The indigenous australians' problems are that blame is an easier strategy to obtain funding but that track is leading them to self destruction. (see the last 30 years). The european australian' problem is that they simply are not giving it one thought as to how their imposing attitude hinders the establishing of a cohesive society. (see Public Service). On one side the hand that feeds gets bitten & on the other hand the hand that had to give up got bitten. Meanwhile the bureaucrats are becoming so useless that hopefully they become extinct soon.