Strongly agree with the sentiment, and I am also angry with race baiters on indigenous policy for another reason. They often use the idea that "Australia is not a white European country anyway because they stole it from the Aborigines" as an excuse to import endless amounts of immigrants and 'refugees', despite the fact that this is obviously not a good thing for indigenous and dispossesses them further!!

The need to keep aboriginals as perpetual victims is necessary to keep the thousands or possibly tens of thousands on the public purse satisfied. Usually it people who would not make it in the real world.

.

Dear John (the author),

.

Colonialism with its habitual panoply of oppression, inhumanity and injustice, including slavery and torture (irrespective of ethnicity and colour) and confiscation of traditional lands, was not worthy of proclaimed Christian values of the 16th to 20th centuries.

The Australian aborigines lived in perfect harmony with their natural environment for 60,000 years before Willem Janszoon discovered their existence in 1606 and the first batch of white convict-slaves were diverted to the new colony of New South Wales in 1788 as a result of the American War of Independence.

The clash of civilisations was probably inevitable given the huge difference of socio-cultural and industrial development between the black African tribes that migrated north to Europe and those that migrated south to Australia. The Northerners turned white and the Southerners stayed black. White’s opening move was devastating. It was a no contest.

What was not inevitable was the slavery, the torture and the confiscation of traditional lands and means of livelihood of the resident indigenous populations.

It might be argued that the 162,000 (British) white convict-slaves deserved their condemnation and deportation from their traditional homeland to the penal colony of New South Wales as slave labour. The infamous “bloody code” was in full swing in Britain from 1688 to 1815. That was official Royal Justice. Our dear Queen remains (in)justice incarnate still today, albeit in a purely symbolic role.

Despite the fact that they had committed no crimes, the aboriginal peoples were treated even more appallingly than their long-lost cousins, the white convict-slaves. They were even denied their basic human dignity. Indisputably, they were innocent victims of British colonisation.

In my opinion, John, the injustices of the past 227 years should not be brushed away with just a simple wave of the hand. It makes no difference if we happen to be right-handed or a left-handed. Our ancestors presumably acted according to their values and moral codes. Ours are different.

It is up to all of us, colonisers, colonised and free citizens, to accept our inheritance and work out the most equitable solution to the problem.

.

Well said, Banjo, inaccurate and unscientific, but well said none the less.

John Slater says that "...silencing your opponent by way of public character assassination seems to be an effective in winning an argument."

Yes. But only if the tormented has the same lack of conviction and character as his tormentor.

Our Prime Minister is not a man of conviction. He flips. He Flops.

Like most politicians, Tony Abbott has his eye only on the next election. He pays more attention to appeasing his enemies than he does to pleasing his supporters. He will give in, and the aboriginal problem will continue to fester in the foreseeable future, just as it is now and has done for the last 200 or so years.

Well said Banjo, accurate and scientific.

The British invaders of so many countries all those years ago probably knew no better at the time, as they were expanding their 'empire', but the Aboriginals of today are still paying the price.
Tony Abbott couldn't give a damn about Aboriginals, it is all about money of course.