If people, black or white, don't commit crimes, they will not be incarcerated. People in jail are not there because they are black or white; they are there because they are criminals

the ongoing disproportionate rate of incarceration of indigenous people in this country.
Bill Culcutt,
Simple looking into the situation will reveal that there is a disproportionate rate of crime committed by indigenous also so, it's only logical that their representation in custody is following pace !
btw, you too obviously made a career out of stirring this pot ?
Most of us acknowledge the wrongs of the past hence the focus & work on trying to close that gap that the indigenous want to stay open. The reasons are as obvious as Day & night !

If people were to spend 2 days in many Aboriginal communities (that white academics and activist insist must exist and be funded) they would see clearly why so many are incarcerated. Domestic violence, child abuse, drugs, truancy, stealing, pay back is rampant. To go to prison is a part of becoming a 'man' for many of the young guys. The author here just adds to the problems for again failing to address any of the true causes of incarceration. The blackfellas in many cases are far less troubled about being in gaol then any of us are. I would estimate over 90% of aboriginals are brought up without their biological father. As the late Bill Leak highlighted many don't even know their father. White academics love to rewrite history and pretend that pre settlement was a lovely place for the first people. I doubt any young girls set aside for uncles would agree. THe myth of paradise will continue and real issues ignored.

BLM.?

Stop deluding yourselves!

Dan

Runner.

On the mark with a qualifier.

The outcome you so correctly highlighted, is never more sheeted back to aboriginal culture, than recognising the last tribe of Aboriginals without prior contact with white settlement, was located in the Western desert of SA in 1964.

The remnant tribe consisted of women and children; no men at all.

The question was asked of them through an interpreter, where are the men?
Answer: the men were on walkabout scouting for other wives.

So what has changed, and what is likely to change? Obviously nothing in regards to monogamy.

Dan

Bill Culcutt thinks that white Australian society he chooses to live in, which is based upon Christian values, democracy, and fee markets, is absolutely awful. Even though it is so awful that every single year, around two million people clamour to join us through immigration, whether we want them or not.

1. The reason why "aboriginal" people are jailed more than others, Bill, is because they commit so much violent crime. Instead of blaming white Australia, why don't you tell aborigines to try and behave themselves?

2. The coming of the British was the best thing that ever happened to indigenous people in 50,000 years, especially aboriginal females. If Australia had not been settled by whites this would jut be another bankrupt, black ruled basket case nation holding out the begging bowl to the rest of the world.

3. The White Australia Policy was the correct policy and if Australia had a non discriminatory immigration policy, we would now be looking at a civil war, which is now brewing in Europe and the Divided States of America.

4. There will always be inequality because people are simply not equal. They are not equal in trustworthiness, loyalty, brains, responsible behaviour, or maturity. If you want absolute equality,Bill, then lets dispense with all licenses for everything.

5. With one Labor Muslim politician sacked for taking Red China money and another now under investigation for espionage, thinking that immigrants totally dispense with their tribal, ethnic, racial, or religious loyalties the instant their big toe hit Australian soil is insanity.

If you believe in Human Induced Climate Change, Bill, all you have to do is prove it exists. Most Australians do not want "refugees" (actually, illegal economic migrants) and that was why Labor was unceremoniously turfed out in the last Federal election. The HREOC organisation is as politically partisan as the ABC. It is chock a block full of socialite socialists like you, who have adopted a barmy and already failed ideology that is going to destroy Australian society.

After you have wrecked Australia, Bill, where are you going to run to?

I don't suppose we will get anyone writing about the Indian female Cambridge academic who tweeted 'White lives don't matter', confirmed her racism when she was called out, and had the university back her right to freedom of speech - for the Left only.

In handing down her findings, NSW Deputy Coroner Harriet Grahame said the over-representation of Indigenous people in prisons could be "accurately described" as a "national disgrace".
She then went further; in a blistering rebuke of systemic failures she had observed.
"Almost 30 years after the [Royal Commission], we have failed to appropriately reduce the shockingly disproportionate incarceration of Indigenous people, or to properly grapple with the underlying factors," she wrote.

The most common underlying factor is Aboriginals inability to obey the law.

DAVID

Although I find the views on other topics of many of the posters here, repugnant, I have to concede that Black-on-Black violence is disproportionately high. As a consequence, incarceration of Indigenous people is unacceptably high.

So whose job is it to remedy this situation, if not (a) the people themselves, and (b) their leaders ? How is it anybody else's primary responsibility ?

No matter what unspeakably dreadful things may have happened in the past, they can't be un -happened. We build on the past, either a mountain of grievance, or a path around it.

The reality is though, that maybe a majority of Indigenous people are taking the second option: around half of all young Indigenous people - much more in the cities - are enrolling at some time or other at universities. That has been the case for around fifteen years now. Around three thousand graduate each year, making a total of around fifty thousand Indigenous university graduates. Anecdotally, very few of them seem to get into trouble with the law.

So perhaps, on the other hand, there is some sort of tenuous connection between marginality and incarceration.

Joe

Who knows? I wasn't here and the very first of the first Australians were driven ever southward by succeeding waves of new indigenous settlers. The most recent about 12-14,000 years ago when they brought their hunting dogs and fire sticks with them.

Moreover, this was not a peaceful place but many tribal wars, as some tribes engaged in wife hunting.

And these controlled with a level of domestic violence. Not assisted by the introduction of alcohol!

Much of the decimation was down to the introduction of diseases for which as elsewhere there was no natural immunity among native peoples.

Yes, there were massacres and none more evident than in Tasmania where the native population all but exterminated! As forced transportees fought for arable land/survival in a new and terrible, hostile land.

Other posters have highlighted the fact that to be incarcerated? One must first commit a jailable crime! And the deaths in custody may well be less than the women who are killed by violent partners. And again massively over-represented in aboriginal communities? And we need to exclude those who die of natural causes or at the hands of other prisoners.

What we need is a truth and reconciliation commission and a treaty. plus a long overdue and politically resisted, bill of rights.

Then a referendum for inclusion, equality etc-etc.

We cannot change history nor can we tolerate 3% of the population being a tail that wags the other 97% Or claim sovereignty that can not be substantiated by anything other than highly unreliable, oral and often highly exaggerated history. Nor as preferred by some shite stirring urban activists, reverse apartheid. And should alleged sovereignty exist only for the very first, first Australians?
Alan B.

Alan,

" .... the very first of the first Australians were driven ever southward by succeeding waves of new indigenous settlers. .... "

Why on earth do you think that ? The first arrivals would have had all sorts of advantages over any new-comers, and - given that they would have settled the country fairly comprehensively - would have greatly out-numbered them.

Yes, there might have been new groups which were incorporated into the existing populations, perhaps from the Torres Strait islands, or from the PNG mainland, most likely individual women traded between groups.

As for dogs, they were probably brought here in the last four thousand years or so by Austronesian sailors and traders. Check out Peter Bellwood's "The Austronesians".

Yes, by all means, there should be a comprehensive Truth Commission, with firm definitions of terms and thorough investigations of any claims. We all should know our collective history as thoroughly as possible.

Joe

NSW Deputy Coroner Harriet Grahame is party right when she said that the over-representation of Indigenous people in prisons could be "accurately described" as a "national disgrace". It is a national disgrace for aboriginal people, that despite getting double the welfare payments of anybody else, they are still so prone to violent and criminal behaviour.

Then she opined, "Almost 30 years after the [Royal Commission], we have failed to appropriately reduce the shockingly disproportionate incarceration of Indigenous people, or to properly grapple with the underlying factors,"

Isn't it funny how it is all up to the white guys to prevent aboriginal people from committing serious criminal behaviour? Sounds racist to me. But she is right in one aspect, other than low intelligence, the primary reason for aboriginal dysfunction is alcohol. Aboriginal people were once banned by law from drinking alcohol because the smart white administrators knew what would happen if aboriginal people were given the right to drink.

But goody two shoes like Harriet Grahame demanded that human rights must be applied to aborigines, so if aborigines wanted to drink alcohol, that was their human right. The seeds for tragedy and farce were sown. Now aboriginal people drink alcohol and it is destroying their communities.

People like Harriet Grahame never learn. They created the "underlying factors" with their insistence on a completely inappropriate "universal" moral ideal, and when the predicted mayhem eventuated, they then blame the people who tried to prevent the implementation of their wacky moral ideal in the first place.

Now we have the ludicrous situation of white teachers, administrators, and tradesmen working in aboriginal tribal areas being forbidden to drink alcohol while the tribes drunks go to Alice Springs or any other white town so that they can get shiit faced and make a nuisance of themselves.

The world has gone mad.

Lego, alcohol is the scourge of the white community as well as the blacks. Back in 1962 and later before the referendum, I lived at Batchelor and spent a bit of time in both Darwin and Alice and I don't remember that aboriginal incarceration was a problem. In later years I had a friend who lived in Alice and he told me that blacks killing blacks had become a real problem. We did them no favours allowing them free access to alcohol.

More recently I spent a bit of time following the misdeeds of the white community in the Latrobe Valley court. I recall a conversation with the chief magistrate and I suggested to him that if it wasn't for drink and drugs, he would be out of a job. He agreed.
David

I have spoken to a couple of old missionaries who begged the Government not to let grog into the old mission stations (taken over by Government). The virtue signallers of the 1960's and 70's 'moral superiority' won out. Peoples wracked by dysfunction. The virtue signallers of today have the same spirit. But we know, just like the kkk founders in America (democrats) the 'progressives' always know best. At least it keeps the rivers of gold flowing in their pockets.

"The reason so many people misunderstand so many issues is not that these issues are so complex, but that people do not want a factual or analytical explanation that leaves them emotionally unsatisfied. They want villains to hate and heroes to cheer." (Thomas Sowell, black)

"If they really want to help make things better — which, of course, they don’t — footage of black-on-black violence, of child abuse and community dysfunction would be a catalyst for conversations about the need to address real problems rather than largely notional ones". (Anthony Dillon, part Aboriginal).

The author being from the Intelligence community does not show much
insight into the terrorism community. It would seem that the Australian
intelligence community has been infected with the namby pamby attitude
to terrorists that has been the British equivalent.
Any stabbing gets brushed off as "Mental Illness".
Islamaphobia in the UK is now a criminal offense. Anyone who does not
have some self preservation Islamaphobia is not in the real world.
The hundreds of Christians and farmers being murdered each month in
various parts of the world get virtually no mention in our media.
How many here have heard of the situation in Nigeria ? BLM ?
It is a dirty secret that must not be spoken about.

Bazz,
Yep, the 'Intellectuals' have excelled in flexing their ignorance !

Too much political correctness.

Runner, I had the opposite experience. I was travelling on the old Ghan from Marree to Alice Springs with a lady from Hermansburg mission just a short while before the referendum. She was adamant that the natives would be able to handle their introduction to alcohol. I assured her that she was wrong but to no avail. My boss at the time came from South Africa. He told me that the natives there were good blokes to work with but during the weekemds they got on the Kaffir beer and they were downright dangerous.

The do gooders need to go to the NT and see for themselves and talk to some of the older women in the camps and get the true picture of black on black violence.

David

"70% of incarcerated indigenous people have been incarcerated for acts of violence against their own family members."

Jacinta price.

Jacinta Price would know all about that as she has been campaigning against it for many years as has her mother Bess Price before her.

David

I don't know how more people other than black or grey that won't get their heads around the reasons for all the problems with the blacks and grey.
Now I obviously do not know, but the elephant in the room has just about had enough of this PC crap.
It is a matter of fact that the whites have tried to better the lives of the blacks, now as another matter of fact and quoting the truth, the "blacks" that have been given a "leg up", by being given the opportunity to go to uni has nothing to do with the way it's reported.
ALL these so called, blacks, are in fact grey, they are not pure bloods, so we have a problem in that we are getting false stats and that includes those incarcerated.
I find it perplexing that if someone has both black and white blood in them, that they are allowed to go around calling themselves black.
And I absolutely don't care for those who go around saying they "identify" themselves, or whatever, as black.
Utter rubbish.
You are what you are, end of!
There is no doubt that the intentions of the white man were good, but the greed and averace and the feeling of disenfranchisement by the blacks has caused them to rebel against literally, "the hand that feeds them".
Personally, I don't care to throw any more money at them, because the only ones who are benefitting from the handouts and payments are those black and white mongrels who administer the whole thing.
As far as I am concerned, we are ALL Aussie and the sooner we start accepting that one section of the population is no more special than the other, the sooner we can start to see some normality.
The sooner we will start to see the reduction of blacks and greys being incarcerated.

As I have said a number of times, at the rate the number of near white
aborigines is increasing in another two hundred years only DNA tests
will be able to tell if someone has any aboriginal blood.
That being so what to do about the Constitutional referendum ?
Really it just becomes a nonsense as the whole matter should be.
We are born here, we grow up here, we go to school here and live our
lives here. What is the point of all this "my country" business ?

The aborigines are in a different situation to the Africans.
The Africans have for good reason, always been in an inferior position
which is why the phase "White Pivilage" or more correctly "White Advantage"
has struck a chord in the USA.

So that phrase should never be heard in Australia.

When someone without a drop of indigenous blood can become indigenous Australian of the year then it's clear that the whole show is just a bandwagon !

Indy, surely not.
Who are you referring to?
It sounds awfully like that con-man who reckons he black heritage, and the govt believed him, even though it has been proven more than once that his ancestry is British.
No black blood in his lineage.
Yet somehow he is considered black, because he said so.
And they wonder why we get angry.

Individual,

Who are you referring to?

Ash Barty won the young Indigenous of the year for 2020.
She has Indigenous blood on her father's side.

Is that who you mean?

I have no trouble with regarding someone who may be very pale as Indigenous IF they have been raised by an Indigenous parent, usually a mother, and whose only known relations are similarly Indigenous - IF they've also always thought of themselves as Indigenous.

Nobody wanders around with a colour-code in their pocket. Move on, for Christ sake.

Joe

Joe,

There are three criteria that must be met according
to government regulations if someone's applying for a
grant as an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person:

1) You have to be of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander
descent.

2) You identify as an Aboriginal or a Torres Strait Islander.

3) You are accepted as such by the community in which
you live or formerly lived.

All of these things must apply.

The way you look or how you live are not requirements.

Hi Foxy,

Yes, thank you, sometimes I do forget how to suck eggs :)

Genuine Indigenous people take for granted, without thinking or analysis, that they are Indigenous like their significant parent or siblings, and cousins, and uncles and aunties, and grandma and grandpa and most of the people they have grown up with. At least, the people I've mixed with take all that as given.

And conversely, they can tell very quickly when someone is a phony, who claims they are Indigenous, who claims they have Indigenous descent (usually from some undefined group or area, often far away, i.e. so that they can't be traced or checked out,) and who can throw a few names around if they had to, also far away, to make out who they are related to.

Or of course, they talk about not knowing because their mother was 'stolen generation'. That's always been a good one. I recall one bloke who tried to get into an Indigenous study program that I was responsible for in the early nineties - he claimed that his family was from a fairly distant area where his parents had met; I said that my wife's auntie had come from there, did he know the family ? No, his mother has been taken away as a stolen generation child.

Later I found out - and had a yarn with his lovely mother - that yes, his parents had met out there on the Overlander line, one from Austria and the other from southern Italy. Back in those days, sponsored migrants had to work for two years out in the countryside, which they has done. So I asked him to fill out a family tree form, so he got into another Aboriginal program, where he became their Scholar of the Year and went on to as senior policy position in Canberra.

So tell me all about Indigenous identity, Foxy.

Joe

Joe,

I was merely quoting what the government criteria
was for people applying for government grants
as given on their site.
But if you want to suck eggs - who am I to stop
you.

.

Dear Bill (the author),

.

.

Dear Bill (the author),

.

Of course, black lives matter. Lives of all the colours of the rainbow – plus white – matter.

All life matters (from an achromatopsic point of view).

.

I still remember people who used to object being referred to as indigenous 40 years ago. They were staunchly Malay, Japanese, Samoan, Caledonian etc ancestry but rapidly adopted themselves even more staunchly indigenous when Labor kickstarted the indigenous benefit bandwagon !
Can someone please explain why someone with one ounce of indigenous ancestry is Indigenous instead of say, Pacific islander or European etc when they are of a clearly more discernible non-indigenous Gene background ?Surely, it is complexion by which we identify each other & not by how we decide to feel ? After all, we're always referred to as White even even we were born in so-called black countries !

Indy, I have asked this question again and again, but to no avail.
We all know the answer, as you also have indicated, but you won't get anyone to succumb to telling the truth, for fear of it exposing those we speak of as frauds.
There are those on OLO and in the world who espouse being virtuous and charitable but most of all, honest.
Well it is now officially on the record, that the grey people are anything but.
They will hold strongly to this view and woe betide anyone who attempts to correct them or challenges them.
The truth is more likely what you suggest as the main driver of this fallacy, but there is also the cult image which some of these grey Aussies, I fear, are attempting to attain in a pathetic attempt at trying to make themselves "cool" or relevant or stand out in the crowd, and get some benefits and handouts along the way.
These are selfish, greedy, people with an emotional problem that either can't stand who they are and think that by labeling themselves as part of a current social trend will make them someone or are just plain arrogant promoting themselves as something they clearly are not, still claiming the benefits it comes with.
I don't care for anyone justifying their lies with another lie that they "identify" with being black.
Bullsh!t!
I for one am not colour blind, or about to facilitate a bunch of opportunistic deviants and social deficients.

There are all sorts of people pretending to be something
that they're not. For example - tolerant, God-loving,
Christians. Peaceful Muslims. Upstanding citizens of their
communities. Educated subject specialists. Tolerant
religious leaders. Dedicated politicians. Kind and
merciful priests and nuns. And the list goes on.

You'd have to have a very big heart to hate them all or
even to be able to judge them all. You'd have to remember
to be perfect yourself in order to do that.

As for our ancestries? People of all sorts of colours
pretend to be something that they're not. So why single
out just the few who do that among our Indigenous people
when there are so many others among us who also try to
rort the system. Any system.

Finger-pointing is easy - but intellectually lazy.

Surely we can do better.

Foxy, sorry but we are not talking about something we can't see.
Someones religion is like politics, it is a subjective belief or following, at times fanatical.
Neither come with a picture or billboard identifying the person and their beliefs.
It is subjective.
Where-as if you're grey, you are neither black nor white.
Even more ridiculous and fraudulent is someone who is clearly white trying pass themselves off as black.
If there were nothing to gain by doing so I would have no cause to comment, but unfortunately, even social standing or status is a "gain" to some people.
I wonder, do you know the difference between a lie and a belief, both are still untrue, and both were promoted with passion and conviction, but ultimately, in their own way are, lies.
You ask, why single out the black/grey when there are so many others rorting the system?
Because they are the topic of conversation, so stop trying to deflect as you continually do.
Furthermore, stop with the pathetic cliches and your attempts at being witty.
Not wanted/needed, nor a good look and only adds to your already tarnished standing in this community, friends aside.
Oh, and BTW, for the record, I am PERFECT.
Unfortunately it takes another perfect person to recognise someone of similar standing.
Now you see, you can't argue or comment because you don't know me, and as I am the only person that does, it therefore means that my assessment stands.

Dear Foxy,

Please have a look at this article:

http://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2019/10/why-alice-cant-get-ahead/

While I was reading it, I could see every person mentioned as if I already knew them. Please take it seriously.

Love,

Joe

ALTRAV,

Self praise is no recommendation.

It may give you warm and fuzzy feelings but to most
people kisses on the mirror are signs of insecurity.

Some things sound better if they don't come from you.

It would appear that you've got the Trumpism virus.
No vaccine available. Please keep yourself in
isolation. We don't want it to spread. It needs to
be contained.

Dear Joe,

Thank You for the link.

I did read it.

Very, very, sad.

Foxy, again you fail to make a case or score any points.
If you have to quote cliche's instead of responding to the comments, I think it shows you have finally met your match and reached your limit of reasoning and ability to respond in a measured and mature manner.
I suggest you have a rest for a while as you too, like Paul, sound a little stressed and losing your train of thought.

quote cliche's instead of responding to the comments,
ALTRAV,
You've hit the nail on the head with cliché, it's the most apt term to describe most of the Leftist do-gooder rose-coloured posts with which our personal experiences are constantly disputed !

ALTRAV,

You insecurities are loud and comments
are irrelevant.

Individual,

Try again.

Try again.
Foxy,
You mean till eventually you get it ? I don't think patience is designed to last that long !

Sorry kids, BTT:

The Closing the Gap targets are being revised - those relating to education are being revised upwards (Australian, pp. 1 & 7). The government wants to set a target of 70 % of ATSI youth having tertiary qualifications (i.e. Certificate III and higher) by 2028.

At the last Census, there were just under a quarter of a million ATSI people in Australia between 15 and 39. If we fiddle with the figures a bit, cutting out all those under 20, and over 40, and use the residual figure as a surrogate, this means about 181,714 people.

In the last Census, 48,704 ATSI held university-level qualifications; 70,939 had completed Certificate III and IVs, making a total of 119,643 out of a rough population of 181,714, or 65.8 %.

The proportion of that population with university qualifications was around 26.8 %.

From the last Census to this next one, next year, ATSI university graduate numbers will rise by about 40 %, to about 68-70,000. By the 2021 Census, the relevant Total ATSI population (20-39 years) will have risen to about 212,600. So about 32 % of ATSI aged 20-39 will be university graduates by the next Census - i.e. effectively by the end of this year. Perhaps as many as 90,000 will have completed Certificates III and IV.

So close to 160,000 ATSI will have 'tertiary qualifications' out of a population of 212,600 young ATSI adults, or 75 % (and close to a third of that population with outright university qualifications).

My dear late wife wrote about 'Two Indigenous Populations' back in 2006 or 2007, and with the equivalent of three-quarters of the young adult population having tertiary qualifications (she would be over the moon !), I would respectfully suggest that the other quarter have plenty of role-models to emulate, if they can put the effort in and make the leap across that growing Gap.

Joe

Individual,

What I mean is for you to actually say something
of relevance to the topic. At present you seem to be
thinking "by infection". You catch opinions like colds.
Not a good look.

So as I told you previously.

Try again.

All by yourself.

Joe

personally I would prefer far more Indigenous and other Australians did apprenticeships than useless arts degrees that often just teach pure garbage such as victimhood and 'white' privilege. They then get rewarded with jobs in HR departments in order to spread their poisonous garbage through gender diversity, affirmative action and other performance destroying rot.

Runner,

About a fifth of all Indigenous university graduates - 10-12,000 - have completed teaching degrees. Almost as many now have completed health-oriented courses such as medicine, nursing, physiotherapy, podiatry, even vet science. About 20-24 % of graduates have also completed post-graduate studies.

Of those who have enrolled in the arts and/or social sciences, perhaps a couple of thousand have by now graduated as lawyers.

Most of the rest would have graduated in engineering, architecture, business and administration, sciences and agriculture. But I'm sure if you try hard enough, you can find something there to grumble about.

Hi Foxy,

A friend sent me this article which I strongly recommend for you:

http://webmail.internode.on.net/index.php/mail/viewmessage/getattachment/folder/INBOX/uniqueId/15036/filenameOriginal/Northern%2BTerritory%2BIntervention%2BPublished%2Bcopy.pdf.pdf

I would be very interested in any comments you might like to make on it :)

Cheers,

Joe

Joe,

Sorry. I can't seem to be able to access your link.

Hi Foxy,

Try this one:

http://webmail.internode.on.net/index.php/mail/viewmessage/getattachment/folder/INBOX/uniqueId/15036/filenameOriginal/Northern%2BTerritory%2BIntervention%2BPublished%2Bcopy.pdf.pdf

Or if that doesn't work, look up:

http://eprints.utas.edu.au/22870/1/Northern%20Territory%20Intervention%20Published%20copy.pdf

or check out

Mitchell Rolls, "The Northern Territory Intervention: The Symbolic Value of 'Authentic' Indigeneity and Impoverishment, and the Interests of the (Progressive) Liberal Left" in Coolabah, No. 13, 2014, pp. 136-155, on Google Scholar.

Actually a very refreshingly original paper.

Cheers,

Joe

for you to actually say something
of relevance to the topic.
Foxy,
my comment was actually dead-on to the point of your cliché quips to everything someone says that you know nothing about !

Individual,

Yes. I believe that that's what you believe.

Hence you stay as you are.

Joe,

I managed to access one of the links.

Our nation does have unfinished business. And there are
lost of opinions out there on how we traverse law, history,
and culture to map the path to change.

Mitchell Rolls wrote an article - "Why I don't want to
be an ethical researcher". To which Frances Peters Little
made an interesting response.

"While there may be no such thing as ethical history.
There is nonetheless such a thing as non-ethical history".

Anyway - I guess there are two aspects to Indigenous
disadvantage and disempowerment.

One aspect is personal and communal responsibility.

All individuals must take responsibility for their
circumstances and behaviour. They must send their kids to
school, abide by the law and contribute to a safe and
productive society.

There is no disputing the importance of personal responsibility
in adddressing disadvantage- Indigenous or otherwise.

The other aspect to Indigenous disadvantage is structural.

No person or community can take truly take responsibility
unless they have power.

If government calls the shots through top down policy,
uninformed by local views and preferences then people are
disempowered.

There is a structural and constitutional dimension to
persistent Indigenous disadvantage .

Until we address this dimension, the gap will not close.

The current system is not working. It does not produce
good results. The systemic and structural failure of policy
making is perpetuating disadvantage.

If we agree that the current system is not working, we
should want it reformed.

Responsibility requires two things . That people are
willing to take charge of their problems, and that
governance structures ALLOW and empower them to take
charge.

See you on another discussion.

Foxy,

"The current system is not working. It does not produce good results. The systemic and structural failure of policy making is perpetuating disadvantage."

Yes, indeed - there are large sections of the Indigenous elite who don't want things to improve - after all, they live (and thrive) off the welfare population.

Sometimes I'm so disgusted by the venality, incompetence and self-interest of so much of the Indigenous elite that I really do feel like migrating.

On the other hand, I'd estimate that half of the Indigenous population is trying to do the right thing, and not live off the taxpayer OR live off the population living off the taxpayer. Many decent Indigenous people don't want to be part of that dirty alliance.

We forget that, under Apartheid in South Africa from 1948 to 1994, some, not many, Africans did quite well out of it all - bureaucrats, politicians, the army and police. I hope that I'll never ever be a part of anything so rotten, so anti-Indigenous.

Joe

Joe,

I don't for one moment doubt that your heart is
in the right place.

Take care.
Stay safe.

Joe,

Thanks for those links - tremendously informative and compelling.

In pursuit of a workable and respectful resolution to disadvantage, whilst protecting and retaining culture and heritage, I am drawn to suggest that, in addition to providing and promoting provision of all the essentials for a reasonable and acceptable quality of life in remote and marginal communities - housing and services, health, education, employment, sport, recreation, safety, communications and whatever else it takes - and, importantly, a centre for cultural learning and exchange, and, additionally, establishment of a cultural exchange "program" whereby townie/city indigenous youth and adults may spend time in the remote community so as to properly acquaint themselves with their "roots" and heritage.

Coincidentally, youth, and possibly some adults, from remote communities may exchange places with such townie/city "students" - to familiarize themselves with life on the other side of the cultural "fence". (Something like the student cultural exchange programs running for some students of the language and culture of some of our neighbours.)

Maybe the divide can be bridged without any loss of identity, culture or heritage, by providing a greater impetus and facility for the retention and development of those vital cultural assets, history, language, respect for the land/territory and familiarity with its resources, its life, its materials and their use, and awareness of the seasons and cycles and areas of special interest and heritage values.

Later, with observation of due respect, some tourism potentials might also be explored - both as a source of income, and as a means to further bridge the cultural divide and acquaint interested outsiders from other cultures/ethnicities with the wealth of cultural understanding and heritage understood and preserved for the benefit of future generations, and for assured retention of what is, after all, a part of our national heritage.

I do not pretend knowledge of this complex issue, but I am distressed by the current situation, and by the vexatiousness with which so many are approaching resolution, and, with the misinformation and politicizing associated.

Maybe?

(Treaties, Voice, Reconciliation, class actions, High Court challenges, UN intervention and Reparations notwithstanding.)

Hi Saltpetre,

Thanks for, that your heart is in the right place too, but your suggestions are just a little impractical.

I don't know what might work. Maybe nothing will, a desolating thought. When it comes down to it, it's up to the people what they do with their lives, nobody else can sort of reach over their shoulders and move their feet and hands and lips for them; nobody else can think for them.

Example: my wife came from a mission on Lake Alexandrina, the eldest of ten kids, left school at 15. She worked her way up to be in charge of the Indigenous Student Unit at the Uni of SA, three hundred students across six campuses and five off-campus Study centres around SA.

In 2003, she was desperate to get a Study Centre (cum- information centre, homework centre, women's centre, historical centre, etc.) at her home community where she knew that a dozen or so young people were enrolled in a do-nothing TAFE course, each writing the same identical two essays each year, one each semester (one girl had done that three years running: it was called 'Aboriginal TAFE') She asked them if they wanted to do something at uni. They asked, could they also get CDEP (i.e. unemployment benefits) as well as study grant ? No, she said. Bugger it then, they said. She was devastated.

At the time, that community had a brand-new dairy, run by her brother. He had a bad accident; they closed the dairy. 12,000 acres of good land, now running a couple of hundred beef cattle, nothing else. People's choice; and people's consequences. But I don't think that anybody there cares two hoots.

The best-laid plans of mice and men, Saltpetre .......

Joe

Joe. I am part way through reading the paper by Mitchell Rolls. His comments concerning the gulf between the urban aborigines and the bush blacks are right on the mark. It appears to me that the "gap" is mainly between these two entities. The white community at large which includes parliamentarians, takes too much notice of the urban blacks to the considerable detriment of the advocates for the bush blacks like Bess Price and her daughter Jacinta.

The paper by Rolls should be required reading for anyone with an interest in the subject.

David

Hi David,

Well, there is a huge variety of 'urban Blacks', from (a) the ratbag fringe which doesn't even support a treaty or reconciliation or anything but a return to a pristine traditional Australia (somehow), right through to (b) a welfare-oriented, more-or-less culture-free population on one hand, and (c) an education- and employment-oriented population, also mostly culture-free, on the other hand.

I think that down this way, people replaced (rather than 'lost') their cultural practices with an amalgam of Aboriginal and 'Western' cultural practices very early, well before 1900. i.;e. whatever worked best, as they saw it.

Language, for example, was more or less replaced - and voluntarily - by English by then, except for the everyday, 'kitchen-table' language - local words for man, woman, child, dog, house, food, drink, eat, sit, sleep, etc. Most certainly, the hunter-gatherer vocabulary was put on the back-burner by the early generations and not learnt, or forgotten, by the next, in spite of the efforts by missionaries to keep it going. [Leftists: discuss, with outrage].

People are getting on with life in a modern, western society, some choosing welfare and/or crime, some choosing effort, education and work. Pretty humdrum, really.

Joe

Hi Joe,

Not everything is pretty humdrum for some.

In our area in suburban Melbourne, in a great bushland
setting and park we had a wonderful Aboriginal gallery
that for decades offered shelter to Aboriginal artists,
musicians, dancers, actors, poets, story-tellers, sculptors,
emu-egg carvers, didgerido woomera and boomerang makers,
providing a supportive environment and a venue to create,
distribute, and showcase their diverse Indigenous talents.

It included a cafe, and school visits were a regular
occurrence, as were tourists and of course the gallery
was strongly supported by the locals.

It was a social enterprise operated by the Aboriginal
Artists Development Fund Inc. A not for profit organisation.
The AADF was established to create sustainable independent
revenue streams for Aboriginal artists and their families.

Parks Victoria closed it down in 2013. With no explanations
given - except that they had another client interested in
the gallery. Colin McKinnon Dodd, the founder of the Gallery
fought hard to keeo it open. As did the locals. To no
avail. Parks Victoria was culturally insensitive and gave it
the boot.

There were 1600 year old canoe trees there carved by the
Wurundjeri people which had been there for thousands of years.
The closure was heartfelt by us all.

The Gallery was left in disuse.

Colin McKinnon Dodd died on Nov. 20th 2014. Age 55.
A great man. He and his Gallery - a great loss to the community
and to Indigenous artists and people.

Foxy, NO, loudmouth is right.
All that you describe IS, for all intents and purposes,
Pretty Humdrum!
You might have some empathy for what you have described, but everyone else really couldn't give a toss.
I for one am just one of the majority of people who are sick and tired of having all this over-inflated virtuous adoration of something so completely inconsequential and therefore undeserving of special and focused treatment, such as the venue you so lovingly describe.
If you feel so moved and taken by such things, well good for you.
I just hope you weigh up and realise their relevance and importance in the greater scheme of things and how the greater majority of the population rate them.
Certainly no-where near your level of fixation.

ALTRAV,

We all have different viewpoints on many things.

That is as it should be. It all depends on our
values, our social environments, they way we were
raised. What we were brought up to believe in,
and also of course our own experiences.

As the story goes - two men looking out of a window,
one sees mud, the other sees the stars.

It's all a question of perception.

And the story I told Joe - was merely to illustrate
and make the point that we don't all view things in the
same way.

Of course, you have never been to the gallery that I
describe or seen the work that was being done there.
Therefore your viewpoint is even more narrow not having
experienced what I did.

Foxy,

I always wish ventures such as Miamia well, but I wouldn't expect that many Indigenous people visit them or are even aware of them. But well-meaning whites think they're great :)

Joe

Joe,

Mia Mia Gallery survived for close to twenty years.
School-visits were a regular thing. As were tourist buses.
The cafe was always crowded and the art works sold very well.
It was very valued and a big loss to the community.
It was not something that should have been allowed to close.
And it was a great pity that it did. The Gallery is now in
disuse and rotting. A sign of stupidity and waste.

Joe,

By the way Colin McKinnon Dodd, the founder of the
Gallery was Aboriginal and the company was run by
and for Indigenous people and their families.

Just thought you should know.

Foxy, that's my point, what you experienced might "turn you on", but me aside, I KNOW that the real majority of the population could not give a rats, and you will find that, that has more to do with it's closure than anything you might be imagining.
I don't know why you refuse to see the world for what it is really like, if you are afraid, I can understand and you would not be alone in that.
Whatever the reason, you must come to terms with the real world, or you will live a fictional life of lies and make belief.
There has been far too much praise and cordiality afforded the blacks and it has been tolerated for too long.
The greater majority of Aussies it seems, are beginning to demand a re-assessment of the benefits and status of the blacks, by bringing them back down to the same level as everyone else.
There is no point in expecting everyone to get along if some are unjustifiably treated as being more special than others.
I remind you and everyone else, that throwing money and all these meaningless social artsy-fartsy programs and offerings at them is NOT going to help them or their well-being and therefore their future.
And it certainly will not help them to accept this Australia of today.

Joe,

I'm afraid I'm with Foxy on this.

We all know it's hard, it's a struggle, but maybe from small acorns some mighty oaks might be fostered. The problems are not going to go away without some serious attention. You know what I mean.

Following up our previous brief discussion on this thread, such a gallery precinct, and others, both urban and in remote communities, might provide an avenue and facility for the cultural interchange of experience, ideas and potentials across the 'Urban' and 'Bush' communities, to the ultimate benefit of all, and potentially to seeds of reconciliation.

As Foxy has identified, we are all different, unique, and the variations are wide, cavernous even, and there can be no simple formula to overcome all problems and concerns.

Ok, not all can be suited to academic pursuits, or even artistic ones, but efforts need to be made to find an effective and fulfilling place for everyone. Ok, total success is not possible. We know this from the 'white' experience already. But, we also know that the problems are not going to go away by themselves.

I accept your assessment that what I was, and am still proposing is somewhat impractical, but surely something constructive has to be attempted for the benefit of those remote and regional communities which are exhibiting distress or dysfunction - and I am not suggesting that this could only be of their own making - but resolution must be at their direction, if possible, and where appropriate (for we accept that it will be a hard slog for those where anger, social disintegration and unruly disturbance are most prevalent).
(TBC)

Continued:

As you, Joe, have already clearly identified, a pure emphasis on 'education' can't work - even if the services are very broad, including art, sport, trades, music, design, food sciences, drama, fashion, as well as STEM. It seems possible that all has to be approached from a culturally sound and sensitive basis. Or else, I cannot identify. I am at a loss, and it will take some with true cultural experience, expertise and deep understanding to find the right threads and lifeline, and I believe people like yourself, Joe, might be able to help with this, with a guiding hand.

All I am able to assess is that 'townies' should not have too great a say in the future assistance services provided to those truly in need. And, maybe, some suitable immersion of 'townie' youth in a genuine cultural environment, might help to correct some of their misunderstandings about 'cultural' life, and about what is truly important in the search for cultural identity and personal success and fulfillment.

Here's hoping.

Saltpetre, I wonder if you are starting from a higher base than the actual bottom or the root of the problem of assimilation or integration.
Firstly what is a 'deal breaker' is the handouts or leg up's the blacks enjoy.
Secondly, and equally important is the utter disdain and dislike the white's have to endure, and at street level.
Thirdly, the blacks absolutely have to drop this arrogant, "we were here first" BS.
Then after they get their own minds and priorities in order, they can begin to accept this is what it is, and we aren't going anywhere, so suck it up and move on.
I understand the true blacks have been exposed to a world of totally different values and ideals.
To that I say, I understand, but instead of trying to change yourself and your own personal culture, don't, but instead carry on living the lifestyle and live in the bush, as you and your ancestors did.
BUT, if you want to live in harmony within and around a multicultural environment and all the benefits it offers, you must accept it and not fight it.
The ones who are causing the majority of problems and dissent or are actively engaged in all the unsociable and unsavoury practices which we find un-acceptable and abhorrent are the GREYS!
There are not enough words or time to describe how they are causing the greater majority of the problems, from the overseeing of monies directed at black causes and assistance to in-sighting anti white sentiments.
I don't expect the pure bloods to change their life or lifestyle, but the greys, as far as I am concerned, they know very well what they are doing, and it has to stop!
I would suggest the greys lose all their benefits and instead be directed to take up some kind of employment or apprenticeship, that will lead them towards a self sufficient and contributing life.
And I make it quite clear, they are NOT to handle their own anything, which involves their own culture.
This must be practiced outside the govts involvement or finance.

Saltpetre,

I don't think that any Indigenous people are living a substantially 'Bush' life, and going back to the first contacts, I think that from the beginning, most people quickly cottoned on to the new opportunities, offered by the ration system on the one hand and the work/money system on the other.

I would suggest that, both in the 'south' in the nineteenth century, and in the 'north', the 'Bush' as you call it, Saltpetre, this would have been a feature before the first generation of contact was over. By the second generation of contact, the people were actively replacing their traditional language with a combination of local versions of English and the useful components of traditional language, and spears and boomerangs with muskets, rifles and shotguns.

In SA, the Aboriginal Protector was asked in 1884 or so by his Victorian counterpart if he could buy some fishing spears for the Melbourne Exhibition, their fiftieth anniversary. He was surprised to find that nobody knew how to make them any more.

Of course, the current urban myths fostered by well-meaning whites would deny this, and so much else, that everybody was still 'cultural': would that it were so.

Joe

Dear Saltpetre,

From small acorns some mighty oaks do indeed grow. Thank You for
putting things so beautifully. Again it is a question of our
level of perception.

Regarding the Mia Mia Aboriginal Gallery - the Gallery operated by
the Aboriginal Development Fund displayed artwork, conducted
education programs for thousands of students and was a local tourist
attraction.

Centers like these help bridge the gap of understanding between
Indigenous and non-Indigenous people. With the Center hosting
two or three school groups a week hundreds of thousands of
children have been educated through the center's education programs.

Most people I know like learning about other cultures and people.
That's why we have languages, history, and geography, being
taught in our school. That's why people travel - to broaden
their outlooks. Different experiences are part of life. That's
how we learn and grow.

And here we had this wonderful Gallery that was closed - even
though it was very successful and did a great job.

My point was that for many Indigenous people that sort of
behaviour against them is the norm. Our governments talk a great
deal about "closing the gap". But sometimes their actions do
not match their words.

Foxy,

Good0. But for many Indigenous people, all of that it utterly irrelevant.

When are you going to realise that Indigenous people are in the same world as you and me ? That they have been raised with much the same influences as you and me ?

If you cut an Indigenous person, will they not bleed ? If you tickle them, will they not laugh ?

Joe

Loudmouth, you may not particularly like me, and you would not be alone, BUT, I had to step out of the shadows for a moment to say that I have followed you or your comments from the beginning and found that you have proven your worth and status on here as one of the, very few, well informed with the and about the black fella's.
I am not sucking up, but I thought someone should give you a word of acknowledgement and appreciation for all the hard work you did in researching and collating your fifteen thousand page essay or work on indigenous people in the early years.
So you can imagine my annoyance at having to watch while the mis-informed have attempted to disprove, question or doubt your version of events.
Personalities aside, when your right, YOUR RIGHT!

Thanks, Altrav. Whoops, there goes all my lefty cred :(

I'm a great follower of Oscar Lewis, the Marxist anthropologist (1912-1971), brother-in-law to Abraham Maslow, and his (I think mis-named) Culture of Poverty explanation. I'd prefer Culture of Marginality or Marginalisation. For thirty years, he studied out-groups, what we might today call the under-class or lifelong welfare-class, in Cuba, Puerto Rico (La Vida) and Mexico (Five Families).

He thought that Castro's socialist system in Cuba might help to incorporate and integrate those groups into an inclusive Cuba, and did a huge research study there from 1968. But he found that it was far more resistant to change, so Castro stopped the project and threw him out and he died a year later.

Noel Pearson has proposed a full-employment model - stay with me, it's connected :). If Lewis was alive now, he would probably point out that the marginal groups, who have devised a multitude of ways to avoid work, and therefore the skills required, especially in modern economies, may actually be further behind the play now than fifty or sixty years ago, when there was plenty of unskilled work if people wanted to do it.

But the problems are that (1) there isn't so much of it now (fruit-picking ?); and (2) people may not want to do it. And most importantly, they have found ways to circumvent the need for work AND still survive (get on a bus to or from a welfare-oriented suburb and listen to the phone conversations about money, how to get it, who owes who, who's chasing it, when the rent's due).

In the process, the need for education is also circumvented - and therefore, given the cultural reproduction role of the family (or at least the mother), they bugger up their kids' chances in the next generation.

[TBC]

I think you are on to something there Joe. I once thought that the cause of the black plight was because they were of lower intelligence. I see now that description may not apply at all or perhaps I might have been right all along and it is the Hybrid vigor of the brains of those gray black university graduates who are advising them that is helping to devise all their work less money making strategies. Either way, it would seem that any strategies that the government might devise to close the gap will be futile.
Economics in general works in a similar fashion. When the government introduce new laws to plug loopholes in the tax system, smart accountants devise work arounds to defeat them.
In either case, the government is on a hiding to nothing.

David

Hi Joe,

My post was about the closing down of a successful and
fully functioning Aboriginal Art Gallery that gave
Aboriginal artists a chance to sell their works and to
teach their culture to anyone interested. And, believe
me, many were. The Gallery was successful.

I merely questioned its unexplained closure by Parks
Victoria. It shall be interesting to see what happens to
the Veneto Club (Italian), which stands here in Melbourne
in the path of the proposed North-South Link that the
government is building. Will it be demolished? It is a
popular spot for the Italian community and has many members.
We'll have to wait and see I guess.

In any case, regarding the Mia Mia Gallery and seeing as you
chose to paraphrase Shakespeare I shall leave you with a
quote from the same play:

The Quality of Mercy

"The quality of mercy is not strain'd
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath. It is twice blest:
It bleseseth him that gives, and him that takes.
'Tis mightiest in the mightiest; it becomes
The throned monarch better than his crown.
His sceptre shows the force of temporal power,
The attribute to awe and majesty..."

[continued]

None of this may be deliberate, although I have heard one Aboriginal parent almost boast that none of his kids were going to get a better education than he did. But marginality or marginalisation is solidly inter-generational. In fact, perhaps it gets more entrenched with each new generation: so much for anybody riding in on their white horse with a Brilliant Idea;)

How to cut that Gordian Knot ? Then along comes the 'Left' and encourages Aboriginal people to stick with their marginality in the name of 'culture'. So what chance do they have ?

Yes, yes, I'm an assimilationist. Not a supporter of Apartheid by any name. And 'self-determination' may have been effectively just that, locking people out of genuine opportunity, justifying that lock-out, and condemning perhaps a third of all Indigenous people to lifelong welfare (and short lives at that), and dependent on a parasitic elite to justify their existence.

Joe

Foxy, just a thought, instead of taking a stance of indignation, and waste your time bleating about something which ultimately, it appears, and contrary to your perception or wishes, was NOT a good or viable idea.
Try and research the WHY, not repeat the OBVIOUS.
You can simply start with the obvious, and that is, it was mis-managed.
If you find that that was not the case/fault, then keep looking.
But my guess, knowing what the sentiment is on the ground, or at the bar, it just was not something people cared about.
Your assertion about it's viability, is obviously over-rated or exaggerated, because firstly the school children attendance, you say was one of the largest group of people visiting the centre.
School children don't count, as there has been an extremely large push on for all things to do with the black fella, over the past few decades, as part of their education syllabus, but more importantly or relevantly, is the overarching fact that they were NOT there by their own choosing, but part of a school agenda.
If it was up to them, I KNOW that would be the last place on earth they would want to be.
I think you will be surprised as to why it was shut down.
I and millions of others are not.
As for the Italian club, HEEEEEY, atsa mada foryu, you don't know us wogs very well if you haven't figured out, by now, that they have already done the back door deals and money, er; sorry, brown paper bags are changing hands, as we speak, or more likely have already changed hands.
BADA BING, BADA BOOM, and that's what WE wogs, call progress!

Hi Joe,

Surely it doesn't have to be "All or Nothing", that
people either assimilate, that is they - totally adopt
the ways of another culture and fully become part of
a different society rather than they integrate with
individuals from different groups into a society as
equals, still maintaining their own culture.

By asking people to give up their cultures all you than value
is their labour. And what makes your culture so superior to
theirs?

I am an integrationist not an assimilationist. I guess that's
the difference between us.

You say things must be this way. I ask - why?

Things seem so black and white (pardon the pun) to you.
White - superior. Black - shyte.

We're already a country of many different cultures. Greeks,
Italians, Lithuanians, Chinese, and many others. We are one
yet we are many and from all the different lands we come ...
Or words to that effect.

Why can't people maintain their own cultures and still be part
of the mainstream? Others have done it. We're living proof.

It doesn't have to be - either or. It can be - both.
And we'll be the richer for it as a nation.

Dear ALTRAV,

You know you're cute when you're angry.

Despite you really pissing me off at times. I can't help
liking you. Especially the BADA BINGA - part. You made me
laugh out loud and spill my coffee.

You are a sweet man after all and please accept my apology for
my at times stupid comments. I didn't mean them.

ALTRAV, (and really for Joe also),

I know I'm probably flogging a dead horse (or maybe a white one), but I wrote it, I think it's fair, so here goes.

I accept you have a valid perspective, but we cannot ignore the fact that they, the Indigenous peoples, were here first, and we must accept accordingly that they have a valid claim for due recognition of that reality. Possession has standing in our 'culture', and must therefore be afforded similar merit in their legitimate claims to 'inheritance'. Wrangle and obfuscate as we may, ignoring factual reality is not an option. ‘Terra Nullius’ was and is ‘fake news’. The problem, as I see it, is how such recognition may reasonably be applied. I don’t think just saying ‘thanks mate’ will fly.

You mention 'integration' and 'assimilation', and these have indeed been the subject of quite some considerable endeavours in the past, but, apart from 'fitting in', no such direct demands are made on any of the many other cultures invited to join our 'happy band' in more recent times, and few, if any, obstacles to retention of the ‘cultural histories’ of these recent arrivals would have been experienced by them or are now imposed on them. The multitude strands of Indigenous history and culture will have taken an extraordinary beating since white arrival, and much will be beyond retrieval, but what may be recovered has value, perhaps akin to that afforded the Rosetta Stone or the Dead Sea Scrolls. Extraordinary efforts have been and continue to be made to maintain and to study the histories and culture of virtually every other strand of humanity on this planet. Do our Indigenous deserve less? Or, in the circumstances prevailing, much more support?
(TBC)

Cont'd:
There is a justifiable case for active retention of their cultural history and genuine cultural traditions, as far as may now be possible, and a legitimate claim that these have been significantly impacted by changes imposed on them through no fault or active pursuit of their own.

'We' have, after all, been able to retain and practice our various legitimate 'traditions' - so long as acceptable under the law - and many of our 'traditions' have been actively taught in our schools for very many years. 'They' have really had no such benefit until much more recent endeavours in this regard.

I would submit there have been considerable detrimental demands and impositions placed on our Indigenous peoples over a considerable time, particularly in the early years of our shared history – for their own good, and well-intentioned, no doubt - but the detrimental impacts of the experiences caused and suffered cannot be ignored or wished-away.

The 'Aussie' fair-go should be applied fairly and inclusively, and there are many problems which may not be wished-away, or resolved simply by shouting 'shape up'.

We know there are those who have unrealistic aspirations or expectations, but beyond the 'noise' of the relatively 'assimilated' mob, there remain those who have been truly left behind and who quietly seek or dream of a better chance, a chance at least for self-expression and dignity, who deserve the opportunity for their own ‘reformation’, quietly, on their own terms (and not a wrenching with blunt force trauma) into a new ‘dawn’.

There are also those who have been able to successfully keep a toe in both waters, maintaining vibrant communities with a minimum of outside interference, and maintaining important cultural traditions. Could this not be a model, which, with their assistance, might light the way for other truly troubled communities to find their way from trouble to coherence and successful new beginnings?

I prefer wishful thinking to despair and chucking-in the towel. Hoping I am not alone. (Also hoping I am not totally misguided and foolish.) A new dawn and new aspiration, or Paradise Lost?

Dear Saltpetre,

Thank You for your input.

I think that we can all agree that to ensure change the system
must be reformed to encourage and indeed, mandate responsibility.

Policies to address family violence, truancy, suicide and alcohol
abuse in Indigenous communities would be improved with input from
the people they are intended to benefit. The success of the Native
Title Act would be greater if government
could better hear Indigenous peoples' ideas
to remove red tape and make their land
more economically productive.

What many people don't realize is that parliament
makes specific
laws and policies about Indigenous people.
There is no native title act for Lithuanian-Australians
like myself, because my
ancestors were not dispossessed of land in Australia.
The same goes for Italian-Australians or Greek-Australians.
Nor has there been a Lithuanian-Australian
intervention. Nor an Italian-Australian Intervention,
nor a Greek-Australian Intervention.

When parliament makes laws and policies about
the First Nations of
the Northern Territory, as they did with the
Northern Territory Intervention,
the First Nations of the Northern Territory
should have a fair say. Whether you agree of
disagree that the Intervention was necessary,
there is consensus that it was poorly implemented,
without proper consultation, and not as effective
as it could have been. The Intervention failed
to achieve its aims.

Had local First Nations been empowered
to take responsibility in its formulation,
the Intervention would not have been discriminatory.
It would have been better accepted by the communities
and more effective.

The First Nations have a right to take
responsibility. They should be empowered with
a constitutional voice in their affairs, so they
can always participate in decisions made about them.

Joe, as a champion of responsibility, should support such a reform.

A friend of mine has recently bought an 8 acre block. The Tax department allows him to claim 5 acres for his house and garden. They expect him to make some amount of imputed income from the other 3 acres which he does by running a few goats and selling the offspring.
Can someone tell me whether the tax department similarly expect aboriginal groups who own land out in the boonies to be treated similarly. How does the imputed income they receive affect the hand outs that they get from the government.

David

Foxy,

I suppose I'm more of an integrationist (of course) than a supporter of assimilation (which I think is simply impractical, and certainly anti-democratic); sorry for that - I was posing assimilation /integration against Apartheid.

My point was that unintentionally, self-determination in practice verged/verges on Apartheid, with few of the benefits, or even the possibilities, of integration. It didn't have to be that way, but that's how it's panned out over fifty years.

Can I make a dreadful confession ? I don't believe in 'community' any more. Again, of course there ought to be the full flowering of 'community' (and maybe there is in some places, I don't know) but I think that, over fifty years of experience now of Indigenous 'community', there are few positive signs of its flowering. We forget that 'community' is not an Indigenous concept - family is, clan is. But not 'community'. That's a well-intentioned whitefella imposition, which people have (of course) taken up, it sounds better with bureaucrats than 'family'.

Joe

Joe,

The following link is interesting:

http://www.theconversation.com/the-government-is-committed-to-an-indigenous-voice-we-should-give-it-a-chance-to-work-126683

Foxy, Saltpetre, both your comments are very poignant and I see you are both very passionate about the plight of the blacks, BUT, (here we go, she says) the devil is in the detail, and like the devil, it does not bode well when debating with emotion rather than reality.
I have a few points that I have mentioned previously which puts doubt and question on the status and claim to this country, in the current context and narrative.
First and foremost, the blacks have from the beginning said that they don't "own" the land, because the concept was foreign to them and it is a matter of record, that when an attempt to buy the land from them was arranged, they stood in bewilderment wondering what these white fella's were trying to do or say.
So I personally have always rejected ANY discussions which suggested that they owned this land, even on the basis, they were here first.
They were here before us, and someone was here before them and so on.
The custom was and always has been, once taken over a land, it then becomes the property of the claimant, usually by force.
Australia was taken by force, as shots were fired, spears were thrown, blood was shed and people died, all the criteria and elements of a war.
Heck it's still going on today.
The other point which enfuriates me is that if the blacks have been here, as they claim, for 60,000 years, I would have expected to see something, anything.
Everyone goes on about a culture, what a language or more like 40 or 50 languages?
There is more to question and refute the current situation we have regarding the blacks and yes, I do expect them to assimilate and integrate.
We must recognise that this is now a Commonwealth country and as such we are beholding to the Queen of England, not the king of the blacks.
I cannot justify, handing over Australia, scott free to someone who now sees potential and wealth and expects it all for nothing without any justification.
NO!

Foxy, once again I remind everyone, this is ONE country with MANY races and cultures.
It is unacceptable to single out one race over all others.
It will not unify the country, it will divide it even further.
Self interest, greed and averace are at the root/core of this push or proposal.
I hope all thinking Australians will sooner than later see what this is.
I can tell you what it is NOT.
It is NOT what Wyatt and his cronies say it is.
IT NEVER IS!
NO! We are one country, that's it, and we are not going to give in to special groups or favour anyone just because they have someone pushing their agenda in parliament.
If that's the way it's going to be then I have a few things that I want done.
Yeah, I can see that happening.
This is wrong and I feel like I am in a country full of mental patients, all walking around like zombies mumbling nonsense and telling each other they are being virtuous by giving the country to those it never belonged to.

I have a few points that I have mentioned previously which puts doubt and question on the status and claim to this country, in the current context and narrative.
First and foremost, the blacks have from the beginning said that they don't "own" the land, because the concept was foreign to them and it is a matter of record, that when an attempt to buy the land from them was arranged, they stood in bewilderment wondering what these white fella's were trying to do or say https://greatcasino.com.au/.
So I personally have always rejected ANY discussions which suggested that they owned this land, even on the basis, they were here first.
They were here before us, and someone was here before them and so on.
The custom was and always has been, once taken over a land, it then becomes the property of the claimant, usually by force.

PavelVu, what's your point?

The point is that there is no other point.
You and Joe have made all the points that need to be made.

David

Good Afternoon Gentlemen,

I believe that what's facing us is a fundamental moral
problem that has been with us since 1788. And that is - how
do we create a fairer relationship with the First Nations of
this land?

Indigenous people were not represented in the constitutional
compact that made the Commonwealth. The Constitution has not
ensured fairness and equality for Indigenous Australians.

Our Constitution confers upon parliament special powers to
racially discriminate. The High Court has confirmed that
equality is not in our constitution for the Indigenous
people. There are already race clauses in the Constitution
that divide Australians. Therefore ensuring First Nations
people to merely have a voice in their affairs - would
create a fairer relationship. It would help prevent
discrimination. It would unify, not divide.

I believe that these people should have a say when
parliament makes changes affecting their distinct rights and
interests.

It is a moral choice. It is about acknowledging that there
are people in this country whose pre-colonial heritage gives
rise to distinct rights and interests in their descendents
and these people should have a say in policies that affect
them.

This needs to be done to complete their union with their
fellow Australians. These things are not incompatible.
The First Peoples not have have "special" rights. They have
"inherent rights".

It diminishes no one to to acknowledge
and protect that unique status, in keeping with the spirit
and limits of our constitutional democracy.

All that is being asked is the recognition of the past. An
acknowledgement of what was before. A voice in matters that
affects them.

Other nations have acknowledged their first people. Australia
should be able to do the same. We should be able to make
a fairer relationship with our Indigenous People and have
renewed appreciation of an ancient culture.

We need to traverse law, history and culrture to map the
path to change.

And it looks like the current government is interested in
making that happen. Better late than never.

http://www.theconversation.com/the-government-is-committed-to-an-indigenous-voice-we-should-give-it-a-chance-to-work-126683

The problem is that the Minister Wyatt is only listening to the grey blacks, not the black blacks.

David

Hi David,

Perhaps they can lead the way.
Others may follow.

David,

I have to say that I find that sort of characterisation of mixed-ancestry Indigenous people incredibly offensive. That's my wife and kids you're slagging. Christ, as if they haven't had it bloody hard enough always trying to do the right thing.

And why do you think of them as one co-ordinated and corrupt mass ? Where's your evidence that mixed-race Indigenous people are any more corrupt or misguiding of governments than anybody else ?

Joe

I cannot imagine anyone after reading what the Uluru
Statement from the Heart was asking could find it
unreasonable. Or objectionable.
The mind boggles:

http://www.smh.com.au/national/what-is-the-uluru-statement-from-the-heart-20190523-p51qlj.html

Loudmouth, in David's defence, may I please try to explain, as I too have trouble more often than not, in trying to make a point, and because of my lack of linguistic skills, I fail miserably.
It's probably easier if I used a familiar phrase or quote as an example.
I believe David's message was similar to the phrase; "all terrorists are Muslim, but not all Muslim's are terrorists".
That's my take on his message.
If it is otherwise, I might ask if he could clarify.
Foxy, YOU may not be capable of imagining anyone finding the Ayer's Rock Statement unreasonable or objectionable, well the mere fact that you have voiced your surprise, demonstrates that there clearly are those that find it objectionable and unreasonable.
I am but one of many more.
Apparently, common sense and reason does not exist in this demand for rights and privileges by one group over the rest of, (must I remind everyone about) the MAJORITY of Australians!
Every time I see this type of egregious attempt at self righteous, self serving, money/power grab, I make sure it is exposed for what it really is.
I am not afraid to say it and keep saying, THE BLACKS ARE NOT ENTITLED TO ANY SPECIAL TREATMENT OR OFFERINGS OVER AND ABOVE THE REST OF THE POPULATION!
This, so called minister, and his band of thieves and blaggards, are determined to promote further division, violence and hatred towards the blacks.
People have been a witness to all the benefits and assistance thrown at them, only to be unjustly abused.
And still they push for more.
Enough, already!
The public has tolerated this BS for far too long and I predict trouble of the kind that will not end well for the blacks if this agenda is allowed to continue unchecked.
If they wish to make a statement, for the record or posterity as a gesture of goodwill and acceptance of the white fella and the overwhelming debt of gratitude they owe us, by all means, make a plaque and mount it on a stone monument somewhere, that's all!

Foxy. The grey blacks are only interested in themselves. They couldn't give a stuff about what happens outside their own comfy world. If that were not so they would be marching to bring notice to the domestic violence in the black versus black community.

David

ALTRAV,

From your posts it appears that you don't have
even the very basic understanding of what is
being discussed here.

It's about constitutional reform. That's what all
the delegates who came together in Uluru - made a
united call for. Constitutional reform.

They asked that all parties must now sit down together
and talk calmly and agree on a path forward.

You can't speak on behalf of all Australians.
Our government can on our behalf,
and they want to fix things. They want to find a rightful
place for Australia's original people.

They will decide how Indigenous Australians will be
recognised in the Constitution. They will show what
constitutional recognition means, and it will make possible -
a political voice, a fairer relationship and a renewed
appreciation of an ancient culture.

Our government will traverse law, history and culture to map
the path to change.

As all other nations around the world have done.

Foxy, really?
Are you standing for election?
I didn't know there was an election coming up.
Your last post was a marvel of satirical hogwash.
Why would anyone but those benefitting from this whole fiasco, even be interested?
Don't answer that, it's a rhetorical question.
The govt is NOT fixing anything, they never do, and if they fall for this, yet another virtue signalling attack on this bunch of gutless, amoral and clearly not looking after the best interests of the majority, but pandering to the minorities.
AGAIN!
There is no justification for wanting to be recognised for ANYTHING!
If they are going to be reckognised then there are many more white fellas who are much more worthy of note, who were actual pioneers of this country.
Constitutionally, the blacks MUST be recognised as Australians, and as such are no more special or righteous than the rest of us.
If they believe they have special rights due to who they are, is NOT a reason for special treatment.
Let them have their cultural centres and places of worship, just like any other people on earth, but nothing to do with the constitution.
As for needing special recognition and how they are perceived in the constitution, etc, etc, are all irrelevant or moot points.
They MUST NOT be consecrated or singled out in the constitution, because there is absolutely NO GROUNDS for doing so.
Just because some arrogant, greedy, conniving and opportunistic snakes want to take advantage of a lay back, naive, indolent Australian public, only confirms the fact that this is an affront of extreme proportion and demonstrate, what an absolute gall

ALTRAV,

" THE BLACKS ARE NOT ENTITLED TO ANY SPECIAL TREATMENT OR OFFERINGS OVER AND ABOVE THE REST OF THE POPULATION!"

Well, debates going on all over the place would suggest otherwise.

Nothing wrong with a simple, nothing fancy or provocative, addition to the Constitution - meaning it should not offer some special place, powers or entitlement to added 'rights' over and above that/those applying to all Australians.

Voice in Parliament (which smacks of Representation/Representative(s), ie MP(s)) is a much more worrisome (vexed) question.

Joe,

You seem to reject the idea that some remote communities are maintaining a closeness to cultural 'roots' (as far as is now achievable or generally supported within said community) not really evident in various 'camps', say around Darwin et al, and certainly not (from appearance) in what I have referred to as 'Urban' communities (terminology "bush" and "urban" gleaned from one of the link documents you provided some little while back on this thread).

I am without direct knowledge of any of this, but I did see some episodes of a documentary with Miriam Margolyes called "Almost Australian" presented on ABC TV. In this she visited some 'communities' and chatted with women and children there (no males present anywhere - except in one episode where she went with a father and son to their 180,000 or so square kilometre property ('3 Emus', or something like that) somewhere up north, NT I think, - which property the father's father had purchased with winnings from bets on a couple of big thoroughbred races).

I was impressed seeing Miriam interacting with the womenfolk at one or two communities north-west, I think, out of Alice Springs. In one segment the women had taken a bunch of kids out to a dry riverbed for games and to give the kids some introduction to the land and to some cultural practices and ideas. Nothing heavy, but very caring, low-key and made to be enjoyable and fun.
(TBC)

Cont'd:
In another segment Miriam went with some female and male elders who maintained an evening 'patrol' in their area, collecting youths out after dark and taking them in the patrol bus back to their individual homes/camps. The housing in this area was pretty poor to atrocious.

Contrasts all over the place.

An acquaintance has two sons who have done quite a lot of work on stations 'up north - NT and Qld - and he told me there are some communities (camps?) where outsiders, including the police, daren't go for fear of your life. True or false, I cannot say. However, in Taree NSW, about 100 Ks from me, there is a 'suburb' called Purfleet, which has an Aboriginal Council, and where police are not permitted without express permission - as I understand it. Now, once I gave a lift to one fellow for about 2 ks towards Purfleet. Now, he wasn't 'hitching', I just stopped and offered him a lift. Did he show any thanks, any gratitude for saving him quite a bit of a walk. No way. He wouldn't even look at me - except when getting into the vehicle. So?

Anyhow, I've tried not to judge and also not to get carried away with these issues, and with rights and wrongs, and what might be best. But, I see promise on one hand, including some of the education activities - language, culture, materials - in some locations. Genuine effort.

Other areas are terribly disappointing, to say the least.

Foxy,

I wouldn't hold up the plight of the 'Native Canadians' as any 'glowing example'. Many of the women 'disappearing', much prostitution and very little hope. What is going on there appears atrocious. (From a TV doco.)

Saltpetre, IF, as you say, debates are going on all over the place, it would be because those with a vested interest are pushing the debate and NOT because it is of any interest to the majority of people.
The usual suspects are the social media and the few who would choose to empathise, naively.
I stand convinced that this exercise has nothing to do with trying to get some form of recognition.
I'm pretty sure Australia recognises this push for what it really is, and we do not care for it.
As I have said all along, the blacks have made their position patently clear, but a constitution is not the medium to seek any form of recognition from, or with or through.
The constitution is a document acknowledging ALL Australians, and not to be used as a political tool to attempt some form of advantage over the rest of the population.
I don't know where Foxy copied all that drivel from in her previous post but, it's just words, meaningless words, attempting to make a superfluous, irrelevant and unjustified case.
If anyone wants whatever the heck recognition and for doing what, (just for getting up in the morning and going to sleep at night) then they have already forced themselves into and are extremely well entrenched and represented, in the annals and curriculum of the education system.
That is as far as any recognition should go, as it is already way beyond any reasonable level of unnecessary exposure in what is meant to be a place of education in preparation for a productive life of employment.
Like sports, there is no point or useful benefit, delving too deeply into a subject of no practical use, or forms part of the already abundant superfluous subjects in the financially, and generally, useless category, in a later working life and the purpose of which is to earn a living.

Joe,I didn't mean to imply that all the mixed race people were up to those sort of tricks but unfortunately that is where the group who work the system come from.

David

David,

Before you slag entire groups of people, perhaps you could make that differentiation a bit clearer. And, of course, clean up your racist language: Surely you wouldn't use that sort of insult in the case of Jacinta Price or accuse her of corruption or incompetence ? If anything, the only grey people around would be whitefellas on a winter's morning in Melbourne.

There is a very interesting article in today's Australian by an 'Aboriginal elder' on these subjects, which would ring all too true for most people with some basic experience of Indigenous organisations.

And also a very perceptive Letter to the Editor from Anthony Dillon, on self-determination and its limitations. And another article in today's paper, by chance uses the term 'Mafia' in relation to another Indigenous controversy.

Just coincidental :)

Joe

Jacinta Price would be the last one who I would poke a finger of scorn at.It is a pity that the ABC doesn't give her a better go when she is allowed to appear on one of their discussions. I wish there were a few more like her and her mother Bess. It is a pity that they meets with so much opposition from the people they are trying to educate.

Racism seems to be a misused term. If I say something criticizing a non white person then I am deemed to be a racist. On the other hand if an non white person complains about something I may have done or said, then that is OK, no one complains.

David

Dear Saltpetre, Joe, and David,

The Turnbull government appointed a Referendum Council, which
held dialogue meetings around the country, led by
Pat Anderson and Megan Davis. The result was the Uluru
Statement from the Heart, which called for a Voice "to"
(not "in") parliament. A "Voice" not a Veto.

The Voice was to be a body to represent all Aborigines and
Torres Strait Islander people and advise the parliament on
legislation that affected them. But the details were not
included in the Statement, and this remains a problem.

Prof. Marcia Langton remains hopeful that there will be
constitutional reform. "I was disappointed when Turnbull
dismissed the motion out of hand but Scott Morrison and
Ken Wyatt are still considering it", she says.

The group Prof Langton chairs with Tom Calma is working with
national and regional bodies towards a blueprint for a "Voice"
to Government, and will report to the minister.

Prof Langton believes "it's highly likely he will be able to
take a workable model to Cabinet. A referendum to change the
Constitution is being considered as a separate matter but Minister
Wyatt has said it won't occur in this term of government ".

Prof. Langton remains emphatic that the Voice must be enshrined
in the Constitution.

"We don't have a choice," she says. "If it is not enshrined in
the Constitution, another government will come along and say,
"I don't like the look of those Aborigines, let's get rid
of that. What we need in the Constitution is a simple, elegant
clause that recognises the First Peoples and guarantees that
there will be a mechanism for Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander people to have a say in the legislation that affects
their lives".

We all know that before 1967 Indigenous Australians were
excluded from being counted in the census for the purpose of
voting. We all know that the Constitution also empowered laws
and policies that denied Indigenous voting rights, property
rights, equal wages, and asserted protectionist controls.

What is being asked is not impossible to do. It's a simple
request for equal rights. And well overdue.

VK3AUU, those out there like myself, with an open mind and are well aware of the sentiment and agenda of the greys will understand, even though you are preaching to the converted.
Those who are emotionally challenged with a bias and short sighted view, will not as they refuse to listen to reason.
They see anything that THEY deem a harmful or uncomfortable experience, as a threat, and so they rally against it, completely ignoring the overarching reasons for the situation or decision, whatever it may be.
As for being called a racist, I agree completely.
I am many things and a racist is only one of them; APPARENTLY.
It is not the problem of the accused, but the absolute and complete fault of the accuser, as to who is a racist, if you stop and consider the accusation.
Giving an opinion about someone is acceptable to one group or mind-set, yet is completely abhorrent and un-acceptable to another.
So whether the jelly brains like it or not, PC people and other such morons and mental/emotional deficients and their opinions are irrelevant, as they are lacking many of life's basic abilities in relating to and understanding other people and the bigger picture.
So the question is; do we speak in accordance with what the listener wants, simply because they feel the need to be validated and not risk being offended, thereby expecting the speaker to say things which are not true knowing that if he spoke the truth it will offend the listener.
So the moral of the story is that we must lie, so as not to offend the sensitivities of the jelly brained, mental and emotionally deficient, neutered, gutless wonders of this current generation.

ALTRAV,

You're someone claiming to have an open-mind.

Yet you find it necessary to refer to
people you don't know, but apparently disagree with, - as being:

1) Emotionally challenged with a bias...
2) Short-sighted - refusal to listen to reason.
3) Jelly-brains - PC morons.
4) Mental/emotional deficients.
5) Their opinions - irrelevant.
6) Neutered gutless wonders of the current generation.

And you end up with the accusation that they are "lacking many
of life's basic abilities in relating to and understanding of
other people and the bigger picture".

Sadly, -

Your idea of an open mind indicates that your mind
is not "open" - but well and truly empty.

Foxy. If the constitution was altered so that all references to aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders are abolished, everyone would then be considered equal. People with Aboriginal ancestry and their supporters could still elect representatives in the government as they do now. Locally we could have a Gunaikurnai party. Actually we could have one now. The only difference would be that they would no longer get special treatment because of their ancestry. People who live in remote areas could still get special assistance which would be available to all people. What could be fairer than that. At present, people of mixed race who live in the cities can get special assistance because of their ancestry and that is certainly not fair.
I am quite prepared to listen to reasoned argument based on facts, not on bleeding heart nonsense.

David

'What is being asked is not impossible to do. It's a simple
request for equal rights. And well overdue.'

what nonsense Foxy. Why do regressives always use deceit? It is special rights they are after. Who do think is being fooled by this nonsense. By all means ask for special rights but let the people decide.

David,

That's interesting - Indigenous people in the cities believe that it's the "Bush" people who get all the benefits, like royalties. Maybe nobody does, or nowhere near as much as is assumed ?

Joe

Hi David, runner, and Joe,

Well so far nothing has worked.

Prof. Marcia Langton has a pulse on multiple areas of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander life. She's done
the hard yards. She has now be called upon to co-chair
the Voice Co-Design Senior Advisory Group with Professor
Tom Calma. This group that she chairs with Tom Calma is
working with national and regional bodies towards a
blueprint for a Voice to Government and will report to
the minister who she feels will likely be able to take
a workable model to Cabinet.

Before any of us make up our minds against this initiative
why don't we wait and see what the blueprint will be.

In any case as explained earlier - a referendum to change
the Constitution is being considered as a separate matter
but Minister Wyatt has said it won't occur in this term of
government.

Interesting times ahead.

Foxy

I doubt having such a divisive figure who portrays hatred such as Langton will add to bringing parties together. We would be far better off with someone like Jacinta Price who is willing to face up to black on black violence/abuse which is at horrendous rates. The 'elite' only ever seem to feather their own nest.

Hi runner,

Prof. Marcia Langton was invited along with Prof. Calma
to convene a Senior Advisory Group to ensure that Indigenous
Australians are heard at all levels of government - local,
state and federal.

The government is committed to an Indigenous Voice. Whether
it gets enshrined in the Constitution, we'll have to wait and
see. Small steps for now. However, we should at least give this
a chance to work.

See you on another discussion.

For me this one has now run its course.

FOXY, one has to have an open mind to even consider these self serving stupid demands.
After keeping an open mind on this topic, since it reared it's ugly head, I have drawn conclusions, based on an open and unbiased mind.
Where-as it appears that you and the supporters of this totally erroneous and arrogant affront and attempt at a "status grab", is fostered and promoted by those with CLOSED MINDS, because someone has conceived this bogus plan, and all those who stand to gain from it are behind it.
What I don't understand is those who appear to support it simply because it makes them feel good and all warm and fuzzy inside, so when they look in the mirror, as they do quite frequently, and like what they see so much, they give it a kiss, and tell themselves how wonderful they are because they (think they) helped some pathetic cause or other.
VK3AUU, is probably one of the most productive and acceptable comments on the subject.
I believe that the Australian public will not vote for this scam by the greys.
Changing the constitution is a major and devisive move towards losing control of this country.
And FOXY before you plead another attempt at pushing the point, must I remind you that this is the way subversion begins, then a systematic and focused plan of gaining even more ground and rights, till they have control through measures put in place along the way.
You naively think you are helping them gain their "rightful place and representation in parliament".
BS, that's not the agenda, that's the veil and the virtue seeking story, so as to suck in people like yourself.
I know Australia is a big land mass but, between foreign ownership and the blacks, I am convinced we are losing ground.
As an aside, just look at what happened to Sydney and it's Chinese Mayor, he could not even speak English.
Now if any of you morons say I'm a racist, before you even think about typing any rebuttal, DON'T, I have just quoted a FACT!

Around the world there are many Indigenous, First Nations, Indian or Native peoples who have it, and have had it, very tough indeed.

Earlier I made mention of a group of Native Canadians, from a TV Doco I saw - but there are quite a wide variety of Canadian Indigenous people, including the Inuit. Many of them, and many American Indigenous, are still doing it tough. Per 'Google' it appears Indigenous Canadians do not own the reserves where some live - though very many live in Ontario. Those who have a certificate are considered Canadian citizens. The plight of many in the city is atrocious.

We may examine the plight of the West Papuans under Indonesia, the Tibetans under China, the Brazilian 'Indians' under Jair Bolsonaro, the Argentinian 'Indians' where much of the country seems held by 'Spanish' or maybe 'Portuguese' descendants. Or, the Malays in Singapore? The Rohingya in Myanmar and Bangladesh, the Yazidis, the Uyghurs in China ...

From Foxy's post on Page 17:

"Prof. Langton remains emphatic that the Voice must be enshrined
in the Constitution."

"We don't have a choice," she says. "If it is not enshrined in
the Constitution, another government will come along and say,
"I don't like the look of those Aborigines, let's get rid
of that. What we need in the Constitution is a simple, elegant
clause that recognizes the First Peoples and guarantees that
there will be a mechanism for Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander people to have a say in the legislation that affects
their lives"."

I'm not sure it's so simple, but from a global perusal it might appear that Indigenous Australians may not have had such a bad deal - comparatively. However, I am still of the opinion that, irrespective of what other nations might be doing, we, in Oz can be bigger, more considerate, and can lift the game to ensure that every Indigenous Australian can feel they belong, can aspire to a constructive and fulfilling future, and can retain as much of their constructive 'culture' as may still be practiced in peace and harmony.

Saltpetre, you may feel a certain kind of empathy for the Aussie black fellas.
My advise is DON'T!
It is a well known fact that they are well catered for/to.
As for this farce of a pipe dream of seeking this imaginary special recognition in the constitution no less, well it can be part of the school curriculum, as they are deserving of no more, and even that is more than they are due.
The question I have, even if their story is told in schools, what is it about the blacks, (definitely not interested in the greys as they are irrelevant and the trouble makers behind this "status grab") that we are supposed to be beholding to them for?
They have done nothing of note, in fact I can't find ANYTHING to attribute any form of praise or worthwhile or special, either to themselves or the rest of the population.
All I keep hearing is that they seek a "voice" in parliament.
One that caters to their particular culture and heritage.
This is a nonsense, an absolute disgrace.
They attack, desecrate and generally abuse any white men of note who did good for this country and by extension, the blacks too, and after all that we have done for them, they expect to be enshrined in our constitution.
Arrogant to a fault, they are consistent at least.
This clown and his circus trying to push this joke through parliament must be brought to account, but for the fact that this country has more neuters and eunuchs then men with the stones to throw these charlatans (A most apt word to describe these people) out on the street instead of letting them voice their selfish and unjustified demands by allowing them to sully the great institution of our parliament.
NO! They must not be allowed to succeed in this egregious folly, as it is without justification and objective and sound reasoning.

Altrav et al, what people don't realise is that a "Voice to Parliament" will be, just a voice of the grey mob. The black mob will be no better off than they are now, being exploited by their fellows. People like Jacinta can't get a seat at the table because she is concerned about the fortunes of the blacks. The majority of the grey mob are doing all right out in the white community and still they are clamouring for more rights. We are being conned.

David

Joe. The city mob get all the perks that go with Abstudy. These are fairly considerable if someone is studying at university. That puts them ahead of the bush blacks and the non aboriginals.
Foxy, I haven't heard any public comments from Marcia or any of the other leaders except Jacinta Price about the black killing black problem. It wasn't included in the Statement from the heart either.
David

David,

First I've heard of it. ABSTUDY is the same as AUSTUDY these days and has been for decades. As for perks, I recall remote students having two interstate trips each year, to and from uni. Fair enough.

But I can't think what perks city people would have got that weren't also available, plus others, to students from interstate and remote areas.

Joe

I think that the same people who voted for marriage
equality would vote for the Voice, because it's
obvious that Aboriginal people should have a say in
what's happening to them.

As Professor Marcia Langton tells us:

"I believe that Australia is at a tipping point -
that a representative body and eventually constitutional
recognition of First Nations people might be just a
heartbeat away, and could change the country for the
better".

"Why would you not want to have a modern Australia founded on
65,000 years of (Aboriginal) histories and societies,
then the addition of the British institutions, and then
multiculturalism? Australia will come of age when all those
things are recognised, and it will happen. You can't ignore
the obvious forever".

Can there be a way to change the direction and nature of 'the conversation'?

BLM is not really all that relevant to our Oz situation - save for the definite problem of the excessive/over-representative Indigenous incarceration rate - and moves are being made to correct this, from a judicial aspect at least. Rates of unacceptable bad behaviour are another matter, and is warranting considerable attention - white, black, orange or green.
The rate of deaths in custody appears no more significant than that of whites in custody, and with no indication of rampant abuse by 'staff' in either case - but still warranting corrective action, including more composure and understanding by police and custodial staff of individual circumstance, health issues and potential substance impacts.

We learn much from history, not always beneficial, but, Democracy and architecture from the Greeks, indoor plumbing, roads and aqua-ducts and more architecture from the Romans, numbering system and much scientific investigation and more architecture from the Middle East, fireworks, porcelain and much more from China - etc ad infinitum.

Would China be the same if not for Genghis Khan, Europe minus Attila the Hun, Britain minus the Vikings and Normans, India minus British colonialism, various Indigenous peoples minus Missionaries, or Indonesia minus the Portuguese, the Dutch and Muslim Traders?

Certainly Oz would be different if not for Cook, Phillip, British convicts and free-settlers, plus more recently so many others from a constellation of cultures, ethnicities, religions and skills.

How far back should we delve to find benefit or detriment? Perhaps all progress is not without some pain and disruption. So, how to assess ultimate 'benefit' - from the veritable kaleidoscope of individual perspectives, interests and 'heritage'?

A new conversation may be in order, with a broader, more inclusive, and less overly 'personalized' perspective.
Please, may sanity reign, the kitchen sink saved, the hatchet buried, and all parties content - if not leaping with joy.

Dear Saltpetre,

I think we are at the crossroads of a new conversation.
That's what is being attempted between the government
and the Senior Advisory Group. A whole new conversation
about inclusion not division. Properly understood -
what is being offered is a way forward.

We shall have to wait and see what if any - the outcomes
will be. But I am hopeful that this time something
positive will come out of all this for everyone.

The pointlessness of 'community' life:

http://ntindependent.com.au/father-who-bashed-partner-while-she-was-holding-their-infant-son-escapes-jail/

Perhaps someone can explain that in simple language. It would be interesting to follow this case to see if the bloke rehabilitates himself. Anybody want to put a bet on it ?

I wonder if this is happening in urban environments.

Joe

Joe,

This is happening in urban environments. It's happening all
over Australia. As Rosie Batty
and so many others can testify. Go visit any women's shelter in
any big city. It is an epidemic in this country. That's not
to say that all men are abusers, of course. But far too many
are.

None of us will ever know if this young man will rehabilitate
himself. Or if he's too far gone. The fact remains the judge
believed his remorse and was willing to give him a chance.
We can only hope for him and his son's sake.

I'm not betting one way or the other.

Just curious though Joe, what was your point in bringing this
up? Was the young man an Aboriginal - and only they commit
violence against women?

Just asking?

Loudmouth2, I'm sorry but even I can't stomach what I read in your link, and I thought I was used to this type of behaviour from my contact with those in the bush over the years.
I think I wanted to erase such visions from my mind, but after reading your link, it brought it all back, and in doing so added to my already heavily weighed negative opinion of such people.
And as for you Foxy, stop pedaling your rubbish, how many times do I have to remind you, you are not doing anyone any favours by trying to sugar coat these egregious demands.
The only reason anyone keeps blathering on about "having a conversation", is because they did not like what came off the previous conversation.
So they keep suggesting having a conversation as if it is the first one ever had, only the true agenda is to keep having a conversation till their demands are met, then, and only then will they stop demanding "a conversation".
The TRUTH is that many CONVERSATIONS have been had, and they are not satisfied with the outcomes, well T F BAD!
We are not stupid, we understand what is being said, (apparently you don't) and it might be a way forward for the greys, but it's no way forward for the blacks or whites.
BTW, we are not at a crossroad, we have been run off the road and hi-jacked and held for ransom at gunpoint, so stop continually posting stories that are supposed to make us feel as if we should comply or we are guilty of some serious social crime or in the minority.
As for those neuters and jelly brains who voted for the sexual irrelevants, I doubt they will be of any help this time, if it goes to a referendum.
This time we will see that a majority means "majority"!
I would hope that people are not all as blind and mis-guided as you.

Foxy, REALLY?

Why are you being oh so transparent?

Just asking?

The matter of the Voice to Parliament is something that
is not going to go away. The government is going to
decide the next step to be taken. And we shall have to
wait and see what that will be.

Just as people were unable to predict the outcome of
Marriage Equality in this country. We cannot predict
what the outcome will be for an Indigenous Voice to
Parliament.

The fact remains that our government is at the moment
considering the matter.

All we can do is wait and see what develops. If a
Referendum is called or a plebiscite is held - only
then we as voters shall be able to either vote on the
matter or not. Pro or against. In the meantime our personal
opinions on this forum don't really count for very much
at all. They are after all - just opinions. What will
matter is how we choose to use them when the time comes.
And in a democracy - its the majority who decides the outcome
as Marriage equality proved.

Foxy, fact check, you refuse to heel to the truth.
What have you got against the truth?
The truth is, that stupid decision was not a majority and you know it, and I'm not going to explain it to you once more, when I know full well you know the true numbers too, and it wasn't a majority.

I have come to a conclusion that I would not support a 'Voice' to the Parliament - not Federal, State or Territory - or Council, High Court, Local Court, football team or knitting circle. (However, an advisory group or groups, duly constituted with majority Oz-wide Indigenous constituency support, would be fine.)

Thus, I do not believe any addition or amendment to the Constitution should make any such inclusion - irrespective of arguments raised, lauded or shouted from the rooftops by Prof. Marcia Langton, the Prime Minister, Ken Wyatt MP, the Hon Anthony Albanese MP - or HRH Queen Elizabeth II, or the Archbishop of Canterbury, or Fred Flange.

Though, judging by some of the idiocy exhibited by and emanating from the Capitol Territory government (Territory, not Federal) I would expect that they, and the ACT populace in general, will support a Voice to every Aus government, Local Council and any other organisation they can get to share their delusion.

Joe,

It looks to me, from your link, that possibly the move to reduce incarceration rates has taken a dangerous direction - or just that some judges are bordering on some form of insanity or gross dereliction.

Whatever happened to the idea of training suitable 'offenders' on a form of 'communal farm', tending animals, growing food, dixie bashing, mucking-out the stables, and polishing the loo floors - and even learning some other useful pursuits like reading, writing, maths, or even mechanics, welding, plumbing, painting, and keeping out of mischief.

Somehow, discipline, personal responsibility, ethics, morals and a will to lift oneself out of the gutter has to be instilled - by Hell or High Water.
Conscription?
Anything should be better than jail or detention - or leaving them loose on an unsuspecting (or even suspecting) public.

Saltpetre, it gets better.
The latest thing I read was the govt is considering not jailing blacks for non-payment of fines anymore, because there are too many in jail for not paying or defaulting on their fines.
Some form of useless rehab or other instead.
Yeah like that's worked in the past, NOT!
It simply means the blacks get yet another get out of jail free card and a further slap in the face for the rest of us.
And people wonder why I hate this place and it's overlords.

Dear Saltpetre,

It makes sense that you support the Advisory Group.
It would be illogical to
deny a very basic and simple request that is currently being
asked. Because, it really won't make any difference to our
lives in the general scheme of things. It won't affect us at all.
All it will do is give the Indigenous people a chance to have a
small input on legislation that will affect them and their lives.

However - just a reminder - for those who are fearful and
don't want to see any changes made whatsoever -

There was once a time when
"God Save The King" was played in cinemas, meetings,
at outdoor events. And later this was followed by -
"God Save the Queen". We had to stand each time.
Then - pictures of the Queen hung from
office and school walls.

Gradually, this faded out.

Today we have an acknowledgement
of the original owners of the land at every government
function. Whether this will continue - or will also
fade away with time - who knows?

What we're arguing so vehemently about today - may also
not be relevant for any of us in the future. And certainly
not for our children or grand-children. Hopefully all these
hiccups will have been ironed out - when we realize there
was really nothing to fear.

The government is going to listen to the Advisory Group.
But apparently it does have certain restrictions planned.
There are things that will not be accepted. We shall have to
wait and see what it will or won't accept. Personally, I don't
think there's much to fear. And all this arguing is just a
storm in a teacup.

There have been a variety of Advisory Groups in the past -
and probably still are in existence. For example -
Medical Associations, Ethnic Affairs, Sporting, Environment,
Trade, and the list goes on.

If we can have Advisory Groups dealing with migration and others, why not
have one dealing with our Indigenous peoples
problems and what better than to get input
from the people themselves?

ALTRAV,

Regarding the Same Sex Marriage postal survey?

A majority voted yes in 133 out of 150 electorates. This
shows that yes was victorious. It reflects a wide variety of
Australian life.

This result becomes more impressive when you delve into
the data

Foxy,

There is already an advisory group, perhaps by another name - in fact, there have been such groups for nearly fifty years now, since at least the National Aboriginal Advisory Conference (NAAC) in 1973. Then the NAC, ADC and ATSIC. There is a Prime Ministerial advisory council now; and an Assembly of First Nations.

And of course, every Indigenous organisation, several thousand, each have voices, in every conceivable field of responsibility. If they all spoke at once, it would be deafening. Fortunately, they have many forms of media to get their messages across - TV and radio stations, newspapers, journals, etc.

As for the Constitution: I don't think any ethnic, cultural, religious or language group is singled out for mention now, so why should that discriminatory principle be introduced ?

Cheers,

Joe

Joe,

We would be here for a very long time if we were to go
through every advisory group and commission that has been
invented and ABOLISHED by Australian governments in
Indigenous Affairs. As Prof. Langton pointed out - it's
one of the reasons for the terrible closing the gap outcomes.
Therefore as she tells us "we have to draw the line in the
sand, find a model that will work, and stick to it".

As for the Constitution?

There are many who reject Indigenous Australians having
a guaranteed say in laws and policies made about their affairs
because " all Australians are equal".

This principle is the basis of our freedoms and a cornerstone of
the Australian Constitution. People argue that the proposals
would "divide Australians on the grounds of their racial
identity". That Australians should be equal and our
Constitution should unify, not divide. These are uncontroversial
propositions.

And -

Ours is a successful and an enduring Constitution underpinning a
fair democracy - for MOST Australians. The problem is the
Constitution has not ensured fairness and equality for
Indigenous Australians.

Because -

The Constitution confers upon parliament a special power to
racially discriminate. Joe I won't go into all the details here.
We've been over this in the past - covering the Race Power,
section 25, and so on. The fact remains that these clauses
and the constitutional history as confirmed by the High Court
has not ensured fairness and equality for Indigenous Australians.

I wish them luck with this latest Advisory Group. Hopefully
something good will come out of all this.

"You can be deterred from your pathway in life by the baying
of the hounds at your heels, by the constant hatred or you
can put up a shield and fulfill your destiny".

An ethos I've taught my children.

Foxy, by all means lead your children astray, that's none of our business.
BUT;
All that you have said about the constitution and those it refers to has been hashed out a million times before and Joe and many others have given very good reasons why this new (or is it old) claim is not one that should be considered at all.
You and the promoters of this renamed affront on the rest of us is an old story, well worn and therefore run it's coarse and we are sick of hearing about it.
I have explained very clearly and simplistically many times before, especially so that those who are mentally and emotionally committed to set a ideology with a closed mind and eyes, and absolutely and totally committed to not considering other views, which in this case is and has always resulted in rejection, or a NO!
Why do you think it has gone on for so long?
Changing the name has not fooled anyone, "statement from the heart", big deal.
That is a sick and dirty attempt at virtue shaming anyone who does not agree with those unreasonable and self-serving leeches pushing this agenda.
We are all making statements from the mind and all with good reasoning, and the resolution has always been to simply give lip service to the idea and do what is right for EVERY Australian and not favour any one group over another, as is the case currently.
Oh, and BTW, it was not a majority and I'm not going to ,let you get away without pushing the point home, yet AGAIN.
It was a percentage of those who participated, which when calculated was not a majority of the population, but only of those who voted.
If you don't believe me go back and check the numbers yourself.
If you DON'T WANT to believe me; tough!
The truth is always the truth.

Foxy, the main reason that the GAP is not being closed is that there are too many aboriginal leaders who would come off the government teat if that were to happen.
As I have observed previously, there is already aboriginal representation in the parliament in approximate proportion to the greater population so what more do you wish for, more corrupt bodies like ATSIC? Give me a break.

David

Joe, this is some of what I was referring to.

https://federation.edu.au/current-students/starting-at-federation/scholarships/indigenous-scholarships

David

ALTRAV,

It was the Turnbull Government that
appointed a Referendum Council, which held dialogue
meetings around the country led by Pat Anderson and Megan
Davis (check who they are).

The result was the Uluru
Statement from the Heart, which called for a Voice to
Parliament. The Voice was to be a body to represent the
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and advise
the parliament on legislation that affected them.

But the details were not included in the statement, and that
was the reason it was dismissed. Now however the Advisory
Group is working with national and regional bodies towards
a blueprint for a Voice to Government and will report to
the Minister who will be able to take a workable body to
Cabinet.

A Referendum to change the Constitution is being considered
as a separate matter but Minister Wyatt has said it won't
occur in this term of government.

Those are the facts. What you or I think about all this
has no bearing on the matter. We will get our chance to
have a say - when and if the Referendum comes about.

Regarding Marriage Equality? - More than
60% of Australians who took part (the ones who chose not to
don't count) did cast a yes vote, with a turnout coming close to
80% of the record-high 16 million Australians on the
electoral roll. And as I stated previously - this result
becomes more impressive when you delve into the data.
Anyway, like it or not - that's irrelevant. The
legislation did pass.

Dear David,

Thank You for your civil and rational responses.

They are appreciated.

It will be interesting to see what if anything the government
decides to do regarding the Indigenous people. Scott Morrison
and Ken Wyatt have promised to work together to get a good
and fair outcome.

I think that the same people who voted for marriage equality
would vote for the Voice, because it's obvious that the
Aboriginal people should have a say in what's happening
to them.

See you on another discussion.

Take care.
Stay safe.

Foxy,

You write correctly, that " .... the Aboriginal people should have a say in what's happening to them."

Of course, of course, of course. And they already have those rights, through a multitude of organisations and media. And have had those rights and channels, for pushing fifty years, since the days of "New Dawn" and "Identity".

Not to mention a Minister who is also Indigenous. And his advisory council. And members of parliament, often ministers, in each State and territory, not to mention all manner of advisory committees in each state and territory.

I'm getting too old for silly and pointless arguments; sorry.

Joe

These are the very things I/we refer to when we talk about handouts and leg-ups.
The difference with my objections has to do with the fact that all of the applicants for these special assistance payouts, are not blacks, but the wannabees.
They are the fakes, who promote themselves as BLACKS when they are clearly, at best, different shades of grey.
Which under any scrutiny or assessment, overwhelmingly concludes they are of mixed race/blood, and absolutely not entitled to call themselves black!
So if we are going to have a discussion about blacks, lets talk about blacks, not some other race or mob who want to call themselves black because of some kind of gain, albeit financial, social or personal.
Those NOT lying or trying to con the rest of the Aussie people are well aware of the greed, averace and deceit these greys practice, even though they of course deny taking advantage of the system with stupid and absolute bollocks like, we "relate" to being black.
The fact that the rest of the country is actually letting these social rejects get away with lying and cheating is beyond me, but I shouldn't be surprised, when you get these mental and emotional deficients actually facilitating these social rejects, the greys, the majority, or the rest of Australia is fighting a losing battle, unless the same majority drop their complacency and voice their true feelings and the fact that they reject the grey movement as it is a simple cash grab, and as such completely unjustified.
And so it must stop, those benefitting from these payouts MUST be made to EARN any money they get, and then and only then will we have a fair and equitable system where we are all truly equal with no preferential treatment to one group over another.
And finally, the blacks have done NOTHING, NOTHING, to justify getting anything nor being held up as some kind of cultural wonders for us or anyone else to look up to or certainly NOT revere.
Remember 60,000 years, and they have done NOTHING, for themselves or anyone else!

A suggestion:

"This is the Constitution of the Nation of Australia encompassing all of its States and Territories operating as a democratic multicultural and inclusive society of Australian Citizens of many cultures including Australian Indigenous Peoples all cooperating individually and collectively in abidance with the Nation's laws as duly enacted and acting in the best interests of the Nation and of all of its citizens and welcoming of visitors acting in abidance with the Nation's laws and prescribed conventions."

"This Constitution of the Nation of Australia recognizes that various groups of Indigenous Peoples inhabited various parts of the Nation's now identified national territory prior to the commencement of non-indigenous settlement of these lands and these Indigenous Peoples and their descendants are recognized as the first Australian Citizens and are held equal to and indivisible from all other non-indigenous Australian Citizens."

"The legal ownership and possession of land and property and resources within the Nation of Australia is and will be as may be determined in accordance with Australian Law as enacted and prescribed."

"One Nation under the Sun equal and indivisible as the Nation of Australia."
(CTD)

Cont'd:

Now, to tors.

There are many needy Australians - as we are indeed NOT all equal.
Look around. Homeless, destitute, addicted, disabled, challenged, unfortunate, unemployed, unemployable, depressed, neurotic, psychotic, pathological, cunning, amoral, deranged, vicious, Alzheimic, antisocial, decrepit, off with the fairies, PTSD'd, uneducated, hopeless.

Hence, the need for social welfare services, public health services, public education, remedial education, NDIS, affirmative action, quotas, public housing, jails, detention, mental asylums, meals-on-wheels, aged care, employment services, police, lifesavers, volunteers, charities, NGO's, Lifeline, counseling services, Social Services.

Religion or wishful thinking can NOT solve all or even many of these needs, nor a swift kick. It takes services, many, many taxpayer funded services.

Are Indigenous peoples more needy? In some instances, yes.
We are all defined by our DNA, and this foundation of life varies according to individual evolution - and much evolution is founded on circumstance - survival of the fittest means the Inuit are designed to be able to eat a lot of whale blubber, and in fact it's a necessity for them, but would send many other's cholesterol through the roof and atherosclerosis infinitum. Japanese have a problem with alcohol, supposedly. A healthy diet and lifestyle depends on your DNA. Why is there a high incidence of renal failure and glaucoma in our Indigenous? DNA perhaps, combined with diet, lifestyle, and possibly disadvantage?

A moral, inclusive society has a responsibility for the welfare of the least of its citizens. Aus is one of the few societies which takes this seriously, and has the capacity to do so.

Saltpetre, your right IN PRINCIPLE!
But when certain groups are quite capable of supporting themselves, physically, yet don't because the system will come to their aid and support if they don't, well I'm sorry, but that's just plain wrong, and should not be even considered or enacted.
I hear people say, 'what a bastard, I would rather these people die than reach out to them'.
Well the people I am talking about; YES!
The records will show that far too many greys are 'stealing' the money and aid intended for those who are truly entitled to receive it, and not those who believe THEY are entitled, because they believe they are the 'entitled' ones in life, and should be catered to at any expense, without rhyme or reason.

Dear Saltpetre,

Our country certainly has the capacity to look after
all of its citizens and that it does do better than
many other nations. We certainly need to look after our
most vulnerable - regardless of colour, race, or gender.

Regarding our Indigenous people there are so many ways
that they have made and continue to make enormous
contributions to our country. Around 120 - 150
Indigenous languages remain in daily use. The broader
Australian vernacular is loaded with hundreds of words
from Aboriginal origins. Particularly names of our animals
and plants.

Wombat, kangaroo, koala, billabong, place names like -
Bondi, Canberra, Parramatta, and so many others. We know
the role of Aboriginal people in the exploration of Australia.
The help they gave in guiding and assisting our explorers.
The work they provided to settlers. They served and defended
This country. Their war service.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders served in the
Australian Defence Forces since 1860s - serving in the
Boer War, Both World Wars right through to service in
Afghanistan. They served on the ground, in the air, even on
horseback.

Today They contribute in so many areas. From Sport, Music,
Theatre, Art, Literature, Tourism, Politics, Television,
Education, and the list goes on.

Foxy,
You are getting desperate with your last posting.
Your attempt at making the blacks out to be something worthy of recognition and acknowledgement is beyond the pale.
All that you describe is nothing but 'house keeping', to put it mildly or to even give it recognition.
So WE chose to use some names to appease them, so what, big deal.
They have their own language, again, so what, big deal.
I prefer the names our European settlers gave, you would say so what, big deal.
I would say, yes it is a big deal, because they actually did something to deserve not only taking ownership of this land and naming it and it's various locations, but they put their lives on the line to lay the foundations, and set the wheels in motion in the direction and place we find ourselves today.
Now THIS IS something to be revered, acknowledged, respected, and held in the highest regard, NOT the rubbish you just hurled out in your previous posting and generally your feigned and inane attempts at glorifying and canonising a group of people for just waking up in the morning, doing nothing of note all day, then going to sleep at night.
Oh, and the best one yet; they speak 150 languages, HAH, yeah, sure.
Your testing our patience once more.
They are lucky to speak the language of their tribe or region, NO-ONE, I repeat NO-ONE black or white, but especially black speaks 150 languages, and your attempt at trying to puit one over once again is really getting boring.
But to clarify in your stead, because you wouldn't want the truth to get in the way of winning a point, what you're supposed to say is, because they were so tribal and they did not get along, they were isolated and each tribe, over time massaged it's 'language' to be specific to them.
Over time some of them became familiar with other tribes, but no-where near 150.
Foxy, your becoming less reliable with your postings and opinions, but that's OK, because this is after-all, an OPINION forum.

ALTRAV,

The highest form of ignorance is when you reject
something you don't know anything about. But the
ignorant are ignorant of their ignorance.

And as for your opinion?

You cannot imagine the immensity of the shite
I do not give.

Foxy, Foxy, Foxy,

Now I know I am getting through to you, because if you really did not give a shite, you would not have responded as you just did.
You will never admit it but, by continually correcting you, it is starting to expose a little of the part of you that just might want to consider other angles and possibilities, and less of the set ideologies you have been harboring since your indoctrination.
Ah, good to see there is hope for you yet.
Keep it up.

ALTRAV,

I shall repeat this for you.

Regarding your opinion:

You cannot imagine the immensity of the
shite I do NOT give.

You are a mental midget - with an IQ of
a fence post!

A holiday is one thing but life without purpose, even if one never has to work, must be numbingly boring after a while.

So no wonder this happens:

http://ntindependent.com.au/man-charged-for-allegedly-biting-off-womans-thumb/?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=email_this&utm_source=email

Perhaps a huge proportion of the violence in remote communities, apart from its cultural underpinnings, is that utter boredom.

So how to get people interested in work ? Not just for its intrinsic value, but at least to reduce brutal violence amongst lifelong unemployed ? First of all, to persuade people that they need some basic skills ? That they need some basic relevant education ? If not for themselves, then for the better (i.e. more fulfilling) future of their children ?

It may well be that you can lead the odd horse in the general direction of water, if it's so inclined, but what's to stop it wandering off on some other path ? Ah, apples might help. Incentives, in other words. But humans are much more sophisticated, so how to motivate people away from life-dependency on welfare ? What incentive, besides money which they may be already receiving ?

i.e. as Noel Pearson has pointed out constantly, how to persuade people to step down from the welfare pedestal (where reliable income is not much lower than a wage) in order to go through the process of gaining some basic skill, and taking on a job to match that level of basic skill. Which would necessarily be something either hard, boring, dirty, dangerous, or all of the above ? And for barely any more than lifelong welfare payments ?

What are governments supposed to do about that ? Or should it somehow be primarily the responsibility of the people themselves to stand up and contribute ? Or is it possible that some problems don't have solutions ?

Joe

Joe. they can't get any more bored than they are already, so there is no extra excuse for more fighting.
I recommend you watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLFtWTM63JE if you haven't already. Josephine Cashman is a very knowledgeable lady as is Warren Mundine.

David

Thanks David,

Yes, they are both straight-talkers, and very good value :)

Cheers,

Joe