I just joined on this forum,,,and I would like to know where I can go on here to ask who is responsible and in charge for not letting Canadians participate on shows like Survivor, and the Amazing Race. Gee, our soldiers can go over and help fight wars,,,but we can't let the little ole Canadians try to win some money ? Yeah makes sense,,,NOT

It is no small irony that the much reported community consciousness and interrelatedness of blackfellas to their land does not appear to extend to recognising a community responsibility to their own young sniffers. The biggest, grumpiest fellas in the community could put a stop to this quick smart if they were given the slack they need to get a result.

Noel Pearson has correctly recognised that the last people they should rely on is the bureaucrats and do-gooders. For these people view blackfella problems as a "franchise", a sequence of career options, to be exploited and husbanded. The last thing they really want is for the problem to cease. And to suggest that Noel may have prostituted himself for any other purpose than the well being of his own people is a travesty.

Hi Perseus,
*with respect*

Yes it is a travesty that such an able Indigenous person like Pearson has adopted a neo con approach to everything and everyone that remotely suggests a rights agenda for Aboriginal people.

Never ending speeches that chorus the the mantra of 'it must be the grog (can’t be the Government)' and his sly and continual denunciation of Aboriginal people of Cape York leave me breathless.

David Martin who has worked extensively on Cape York makes the important point that; “it cannot be assumed that the pejorative view of dependency advanced in the welfare debate, grounded as it is, in no small part, on an ideological construct of the moral worth of the productive individual within the market economy, is necessarily shared by all Aboriginal people” (2001, p 6).

And he does enjoy a lot more Murdoch press coverage than any other Aboriginal in the nation. And you have to wonder when you see Janet Albrechtsen, Christopher Pearson, Piers Ackerman and Frank Devine and just about every right wing journalist living singing hyms of praise for his every utterance.

If there has been “a manufacturing of consensus” around any issue over the last 7 years its come from the love-in and heavy petting Pearson has participated in with neo con cheer squad in the Murdoch press.

Well perhaps I was too harsh in calling it prostitution as much of it has been openly consensual?

In other words, while he might be celebrated by the middle classes in the urbs for his eloquent explanation of ‘ahistorical poverty’ (is there such a thing?) And to an audience hungry for recalibrations and absolution of their own power and privilege, he enjoys no such traction in the 'remotes'. (shock horror!)

See Lowitja O'Donohues views on the Cape Crusader:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/clash-of-cultures/2005/07/29/1122144018106.html

Martin D (2001) “Is welfare dependency ‘welfare poison’? An assessment of Noel Pearson’s proposals for Aboriginal welfare reform”, Paper No. 213, Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, Canberra. http://www.anu.edu.au/caepr/Publications/DP/2001_DP213.pdf

Dear Ranier, You need to ask yourself why you must run every idea through a political spectrum before examining it's merits. For to do so appears to my eye as a form of prejudice, prejudging. But one thing we do know is that the only people going on about "neo cons" are the sorry old left. And last time I looked, even their own leaders came to recognise the extent of their own failure. This left/right bipolarity is an urban thing, it makes no sense in the bush. For it would put old Joh-BP as an extreme rightist but ignore the fact that he ran a free public hospital system (that didn't kill people) and declined his 17 years worth of parliamentary superannuation. Ditto Bob Katter who won't have a bar of selling Telstra because of the threat to community service obligations. I suspect urban blackfellas also need to demonise people in the bush who don't fit the ideological mould. The further into the bush one goes the sillier ideology becomes because it only gets its power from an echo. And out under that big sky it falls very flat indeed.

Dear Perseus,

You don't address anything in my response above directly. oh well.

Fact: Pearson doesn't live in the bush. But he is an ideologue. All I did was name which one it was.

I could go on about Aboriginal history and Joh (whom I knew) and his redneck ideologies and practices but I fear this might offend those Qlders who grew up learning Joh myths and not the facts of his fascist regime. Its understandable, even Hitler still has supporters in Germany.

As for so called "urban blacks", (popular quip of Johs for delegitimising any Aboriginal dissent) what are you suggesting? That Aboriginal people shouldn't have an ideological framework for anything and just be happy with what good old bushy agrarian socialism? C’mon!

Anytime you'd like me to show you around the Cape, let me know. But beware; us Aborigines up here have orthodox political views just like everyone else. (shock horror!)

On your way up you can drop into one of the more opulent suburbs of Cairns and have a chardonnay or two with NP (poolside of course).

The culture wars have proven quite lucrative for him it seems. Don’t know how we are gunner wean him off it?

lisamaree
"CoL Rouge
I disagree.... If the government insists on "helping" the aborigines in this way, then the government is, at the very least, partly "responsible"."

You might well be right lisamaree.

I was criticising Eleanor Hogans proposal to do more - certainly not assessing the level of welfare which is presently being undertaken. Any "welfare" or assistance which is based on gender, race, religion of other discretionary or genetically acquired attribute is bad. Any welfare which is openended and ongoing is wrong.

"Affirmative action", in any form, is as bad as segregation and as offensive to the worst aspects of the old-school or club network.

When people are treated "on par" with one another, the only distinction recognised being in their "individual merit" then we, as a country will be healthier than we ever have been and healthier than anywhere else on earth.