Dan,

My point was simply that spending money doesn't work. It's not money that will solve Aboriginal disadvantage; it's Aboriginals themselves.

We can't solve their problems; government can't. Only they can.

It's nice that we agree on the personal responsibility bit at least. We currenltly have indigenous policy captured by the left. The left are too proud and too vain to admit that current policies are an abject failure.

sara, what do you mean by
"conversion of CDEP jobs into real employment"?

by conversion, perhaps you mean wholesale dismantling?
when the NTER first came in, the majority of CDEP positions were destroyed, and people put on welfare, purely so that their income could be managed. Sure, some positions in some communities were a bludge, with people doing little more than filling in time sheets.
Many CDEP positions were real jobs in everything but payscale. And a few people had built up towards management roles, within the CDEP model, on a decent wage - which was overnight converted to 50% of the dole, and a greencard.

Of course, in some places, after the destruction of community infrastructure that enabled local people to invest their time and effort into building their own communities, interstate contractors were brought in to perform the same function at vastly increased cost. But in others, basic community services just went undone. And community infrastructure (eg lawnmowers bought by the community, with the proceeds of their own work in the community, in order to keep employing members of the community) simply disappeared.

As the few remaining CDEP positions are whittled away, the labor government's Stronger Futures package brings a new scheme, that turns its back on the community development component and enterprise development roots of CDEP, and instead follows the new ideology of forcing people into major population centres.

I really don't think that's the way forward. The insistance that community development is not 'real work', and that people should move to the nearest mining town, is so ideologically bound as to be hamstrung. I'm not certain where the new RJCP model came from; I'm guessing it was born in canberra, or sydney. not here. It's past time to start listening to people.

Dane your only point seem to be that ‘the left’ is evil and they did nothing good for the Aboriginal people. That is so much rubbish; don't be simple and a political stooge.

I’d say it was the conservative idea of Aboriginal people as stupid – less intelligent than white people – and their culture as rubbish, as having nothing to offer to superior white people, that was the most damaging, apart from the actual taking of their land and livelihood, of course.

It was the ‘left’, the anthropologists and psychologists who were interested in Aboriginal culture and admired them for their achievements that brought about the beginning of a change in our attitude. It was this new knowledge that created a climate in which we all see now that there is a problem that needs a great deal of work; the conservatives were happy for them to die out and smooth the pillow of a dying race.

It’s useless to criticize the extremes of each side. Conservatives, now that they can understand that Aboriginal people are valuable, can have some useful input into their resurrection as a fine and admirable people who had an awful lot of knowledge that we could have used to great advantage if we had been more intelligent when we ‘invaded’. Just think what sort of an agriculture we could have had.

It's possible, but I am suspicious of this new found 'caring' attitude toward the Aborigines from the 'right', it seems politically motivated to me, a great way to score even more points against the evil left, and increase the divisions between us; and Dane is evidence that this 'plot' is working. It's more clever wedging by the right.

I don't think conservatives will ever change their spots and start really caring about the likes of black and poor people.

Dane I was going to ask what you think should be done but you have NFI, do you?

I thought that Ted Egan's book 'Due Inheritance' was the 'best' and most practical thing I have read, what do you think Joe?

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/foraradio/ted-egan-due-inheritance/3152264

Hi Mollydukes,

I'm probably not the right person to ask about that. After being pretty dedicated to self-determination for the best part of forty years, I suspect now that it was really a fraud, that Aboriginal people in isolated communities (perhaps a self-selected population?) on the whole weren't interested in putting any work into their communities, but were more interested in whatever next the government would do for them. Even CDEP, at least where I was familiar with it, was a con-job, where people could duck work by getting paid just to mow their own lawns and for 'home duties'.

No, I don't hold out any hope for communities, on the whole. I'm interested in what people are doing for themselves in urban centres, particularly in the area of higher education, the key to the kingdom, the means for people to get into genuine employment at higher levels. I really don't care about 'communities' any more: they have made their own beds, let them put the effort in - although enormous amounts of help from outside are going to be vital, they have cocked up so much - to get out of the messes they have made for themselves.

Would I lift a finger ever again for 'self-determination' ? Not bloody likely.

Cheers,

Joe

Joe But Ted Egan isn't talking about self-determination, in the same way as the left is he? The book I read had lots of practical ideas.

Anyway, I totally agree that self-determination probably did more harm than good, and I think you are right that the aboriginal people were 'unwilling' to do what they needed to do to make the most of what was being offered to them and it was the left who should have known better how to implement their policies.

I think it is harder than we realise for aboriginal people who have not been raised with white people to understand what we value; like hard work. It just wasn't something that they ever did in their culture unless you needed food or shelter, and it was fine to expect other people to look after you.

It was expecting too much that they would be able to be like us without having a clear idea of what we want from them and why would htey want to be like us when their old life must seem in memory, to have been a paradise.

We are free, but we have to work for that and individuals and we are responsible for our choices; their culture was the opposite. All rules, all about survival of the group at the expense of the individual and all about keeping things the same; no new ideas or technology.

So it's obvious in hindsight that they weren't going to understand the concept of 'self-determination' which is totally alien to their traditional way of thinking in which the elders and the vast intricate complex of unwritten laws left them no concept of choosing a life; everyone knew who the baby was before it was born.

Anyway, although suspicious of the new interest and respect for aboriginal people's welfare by the right, I am pleased that it is happening. And its very reassuring that the CIS is supporting Sara and taking an interest in doing something that works.

Go Sara! I wish you all the best.

In regards to the Northern Territory intervention, whilst it has particularly had positive affects on policing, and teaching it still does not acknowledge what Indigenous people want due to inadequate consultation. In particular, the teaching has been improved, yet Indigenous schools still are not permitted, and bilingual learning is still not accepted. Then the intervention wants students to attend school, and if they don’t attend school their parents get their welfare payments cut. If the government wants students to attend school, they need to begin by accepting that some of these Indigenous students speak 2 or 3 languages before they speak English. School would be very difficult for students who cannot speak the language. Furthermore, increased policing and alcohol bans, have led to broken down families, as fathers in particular, are getting put in gaol more often. This has affects on families and develops attachment issues for children. I don’t condone Price’s views, but I think there are many flaws with the intervention leading to much more disadvantage, and better ways to approach this.