Dear Ipso Fatso,

My understanding of democracy is that it means rule by the majority and also recognition of the fact that certain parts of the population have been treated unfairly in the past. We cannot magically erase the past or do anything for those who are no longer with us. However, the descendants of those treated unfairly are still with us. The effects of the unfair treatment of their ancestors still linger. One way to make up for the effects that the treatment of their ancestors is to give them a voice. It is an imperfect solution, and I believe there is no perfect solution. However, I think it is the best option.

A nice bit of Goebbelism there, associate Aboriginal people with chimpanzees and wild dogs. Why not just refer to them as non-human and be done with it. Like some others here, I do not pretend or profess to have intricate knowledge of Aboriginal society and culture pre-colonisation. Regardless of whether it was primitive, or sophisticated, there is no justification for the genocide perpetrated for 200 years under colonialism.

IF, simply wanting to apply some kind of collective amnesia is the game, then it doesn't wash. As I've said truth telling of past history is important if we are going to learn from past mistakes. Recognition of the First Australians in the overall development of the Australian continent is paramount, and needs to be constructively recognised in the modern Australian Constitution.

Well david, you started off asserting that it was wrong to absorb the aboriginal people into the empire since they were already a free people. Then I point out that they weren't free and you hurry to accede to that point. Yet, somehow, even though your reason was shown to be false you hold fast to your original assertion. Logic takes a holiday.

Paul on the other hand talks of "collective amnesia" which is pretty funny since he insists on ignoring anything that puts the natives into anything other a perfect light.

mhaze,

Other than your own prejudice, what is the basis for your claim that in pre-colonial times; "(Aboriginal) women had no power and no freedom. They were chattel belonging to their male elders, who could be beaten, raped and sold as needed. Equally, children had no freedom and lived at the mercy of the leadership with young women being especially endangered." I say you as I, have no knowledge of such, and your claim is a biased assumption on your part. It might have been so, but then again it might have been entirely different. Care to offer some evidence?

None of you know what it was like 250 years ago.
You weren't there then, and neither was anybody else who is alive now.
So it is mostly conjecture?
And they already have adequate representation in parliament.
About eleven members if my memory serves me correctly?

If we each look back in our family tree, I am certain we could all find someone we thought was treated unfairly.
That is life.
And such trouble should not cast a long shadow.
I cannot, and should not, live my life with some long distant family dispute being the cause of disquiet today.
I cannot live life under that kind of cloud.
And it is all so uncertain.
Time to put it behind us.
Time to live life in the present.
History is informative, but otherwise of absolutely no consequence.
Useful information and solid infrastructure are the only things which should stay with us from the past.

And I remind you again: I am older than most of those making these false claims.
They are the newcomers.
I want them to comply with the law and cease agitating for something they don't need or deserve.
Otherwise, I want them to get on a boat and sail away.
Get out of MY country, and stay out.
I don't want you here causing trouble.

Paul,

This is now the 5th time you've asked me for evidence of my mentioning that aboriginal women were simply chattel and could be and were sold by the males in their group. Each time you profess ignorance of this and assert that no evidence exists.

On the previous 4 occasions, I've provide the evidence via all sorts of historical records. On all 4 previous occasions you've then ignored that evidence and either dropped out of the thread or sought to change the subject.

I don't propose to go through the effort to provide you with evidence all over again which you will then ignore and promptly forget or memory-hole. If you want the evidence go back to one of the previous threads where you asked and I answered.