JD wrote "You see - I can ejaculate words onto a page too"

Arrh yes, but very few of us can do it from the top of one's head.

Thanks all for an interesting read, to all fairness I only got halfway on the posts and gave up on the verboseness of academia.

So is it correct to retrospectively use the word 'Genocide' when it was never around prior to Hitler's Jewish solution?

The fact is yes, as inflammatory as some may see it.

I am currently studying Indigenous Studies at Uni as part of my Bach of Education.

Yes our terminology for past Imperialist and Colonialist actions may be 'post' however ... to some extent 'So what' if the term makes it clearer what's the problem? K.I.S. (Keep It Simple and we'll drop the last S to make the term less labelling!) It's all growth in enlightenment! (grins)

I would be interested, in light of the topic, if anyone is aware of details of the first intended Governor for South Australia. I saw a TV program (I would love details on this program) which stated he refused the appointment in England unless the new colony of S/Aust was recognised as having pre-existing inhabitants (the indigenous) so that he could utilize the Crown's Laws to protect the indigenous as the Monarchy's representative. The program led to believe this issue was debated in English parliament and recorded in Hansard. His request was refused and so he refused to accept the appointment.

Regards to all, Ausdriver.

Set aside your bickering over who can use the biggest words and argue the most. When I read some of your comments, I thought to myself 'who the hell are you to be arguing what indigenous Aboriginal people need' and how dare you use an issue as important as this to compete with each other. How could you possibly understand what they need?

All of you sending retorts back and forth, save the petty arguing for the school yard and start thinking about what the people involved want instead of what YOU think is best for them.

So the point of this great argument is that neither James Cook nor Joseph Banks or Governor Philips had ever heard of ‘terra nullius’?

So what - the poor fellows are not alone!

Carl Linnaeus, Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, Thomas Malthus, Charles Darwin and Herbert Spencer, the whole lot of the poor buggers died without having ever heard the word - ‘Social Darwinism’

Are we then to argue that ‘Social Darwinism’ never existed?

Poor Adolph Hitler hardly lived long enough to hear the word ‘racism’ and he definitely never herd the word ‘genocide’ So according to this argument we will have to argue that he was not a racist and he never committed genocide?

Few colonials ever lived to hear the word ‘Colonialism’

Few of the romantic poets ever lived to hear the word ‘Romantic period’

How many in the renaissance was aware they were living in the ‘renaissance’?

All of the ‘Golden age’ painters trotted happily about their business without ever knowing that they painted ‘golden age’ paintings!

Millions of people were equally walking around ignorant to the fact that they were living in ‘pre history’, ‘Stone age’, ‘Bronze age’ or ‘Iron age’ – we could carry on and on with similar examples of descriptive terms we as historians use to explain phenomena in the past.

Thank God no one new they lived in the ‘dark ages’ – or – may God forbid - perhaps we are experiencing a recurrence?

And this is what Connors writes a whole book arguing - or what?

Or are he going to tell us that terra nullius – that fact that Australia land was classified as no mans land and that no bit of land taken up by the invading Europeans without anyone ever paying for it – is all nonsense?

At least ‘redneck’ below did not live out his live without hearing the word ‘redneck’

Perhaps Michael Connor is going to live out his life without knowing the meaning of the letters 'LOL'

Music to my ears Mr Ristinge, music to my ears.

May I add that

"If the land had not been terra nullius in 1788, then the only two legal alternative means of acquisition available under British and International Law, were conquest or cession. In either of these two cases the Crown would then have been obliged to negotiate with the Indigenous peoples with regard to compensation for the loss of their lands." http://www.kooriweb.org/foley/essays/essay_2.html

Craig.. point taken (impact) but in the bigger picture of history, I'm thinking the best solution is absorption :)

Ranier... better to be absorbed and assimilated to an 'us' than remain as a 'them' ?

In the long run, we are all people.. and have to make the best of life as the cards are dealt to us.

Look at the racial background of probably most of us here and you will find we are a right mix of many.
cheers