Sorry Kartiya Jim

I have about as much respect for Australian aboriginal myths and superstitions as I do for those of any of the other religions - i.e. zero.

I'll take the scientific method any day, along with rigorous debate, to attempt to discover the nature of the world around us. Aboriginal Australians might have some nice creation stories but please don't ask me to take them seriously, in the scientific sense.

And by the way, the dust of my ancestors lies beneath Australian soil too. I am sorry for the way Aboriginal Australians have been treated in the past but I was born here too.

Howard-hating is a badge of honour amongst many blackfellas that I know. I wonder if Kevin Rudd had come up with these proposals, whether the chorus of outrage would be the same? In fact, he has pretty much "me-tooed" everything Howard has said (in order that this not be used as an electoral tool); where is the chorus of outrage directed at Rudd?

I wonder what happens when Howard is voted out (possibly very soon) - who are the sociologists/anthropologists going to nominate as their next target to blame for the ills of indigenous Australia?

If a Rudd prime ministership issues an apology forthwith, what then? More of the same? Consultation? Self-determination? A bloated bureaucracy that looks after its mates and is manifestly unaccountable because of white guilt?

Something needs to be done out there in the red centre people - let's debate what exactly that is, but please, not more of the same.

King Canute,

Genetic studies should provide stable answers in the next 5-10 years. Not only for/about indigineous Australians, but for/about all humankind. The National Geographic Study you lampoon is important science.

Malevolent psychological prejucies are a bad thing, stop. Both sides [for want of a better word] too often habour these thoughts. Neither remnants of British overlordship, nor the exclusiveness of Aboriginal kinship systems help. Both must face globalisation and cannot be insular.

Folk stories: Cultural anthropologists "would" place significant weight on folk stories: But like the Roman Mystery Cults can be categorised. I suspect most aboriginal peoples were/are more in touch with creation accounts and other ideologies than are those in the Western thread of history.

As animists, Australian aboriginals are perhaps more aligned to the Japanese or first North American clans. The art of latter is remarkably similar to that of earlier Australians. Also, I can't see that animists can "own" Land, as this means they own the spirits. Guardianship over? In the Western thread of history, 6,000 BP, in Sumer, Land, owned by God, was administered by the then priesthood. God owned the Land. This early Western history is one stage removed from animism... "Estate" in land was thousands of years away. The Crown or State has powers over so-called absolute ownership.

Kartija jim,

Thank you for your post. I have not had the opportunity of reading Strehlow’s work. From what I can glean from your post, there are similarities between Aboriginal and Japanese animists. The Emperor of the Chrysanthemum Throne must have through his familial associations and origins in a particular geophysical area.
Many religions believe they have a “special” relationship with their god(s), especially tribal communities: e.g., the Hebrews. The traditional Chinese are ancestor worshippers; there is a spirit world, however, the distinction between the presence of a family member between life and death is not strong. Pragmatically, land was often owned by independent farmers. The Chinese feudal system failed c. 300 BCE.

JohnJ,

My fingers and mind were out of synch. I meant to type "before" 8,000 BP. I looked at the abstract but could find a free full copy by using a university database. [The Proceedings go back to 1915!]. My read of the abstract is that the posit is, there was an extra migration in history much closer to the present than 50,000 years ago and minimal technology transfer took place. Think Wells uses non-combinate Y chromosome DNA. I don't have the book with me. My understanding is there were waves. How big? I don't know.

Afraid your ancestors were Irish immigrants, as were mine, on my matrimonial side. Albeit, on the patrimonial line, Norseman-French Scotish.

I feel no reason to proud [or otherwise] of my ancestors. They happened and I am. Why should I? We are separated by time, social systems, political systems and economic systems, at the very least. Some of my Scotish ancestors were historically significant, but that is only a curiousity to me.

c. 40,000-60,000 seems cross-verified as the first wave. Mega-funa extinction means more than the demise giant wombats. It is an indicator to human arrival. DNA suggests later migrations.

We are all descendents of emigrants from Africa.

Oliver says: "We are all descendents of emigrants from Africa."

Suppose we agree - so what? What does that say about how we should have acted in Australia between the beginnings and 1788, and between 1788 and now, and how we should act in Australia beyond 2007?

The old logical fallacy seems to be getting another airing.

But IS does not equal OUGHT.

Those who put an onus on "we" are exclusionary and lump all whites en mass for "blame" for the recent history of "Them". We are not all of the "We" even if we are white and the "Them" hold responsibility for their current "They". Running back to 1780 to lay the foundation for blame is nonsensical. The "white" invasion aside. In 2007 the U.N and a couple a hundred NGO do gooder's would be swarming Australia to bring the Aboriginal into the 21st century. Not to mention foreign fisher trawlers, Muslim and Christian reformers, the tourista, geological hunters and a dozen more kinds of "invasions". There is no going back and there is no staying the same. The romantic idealisation of primitive and innocent Australia is tribal myth and grist for guilt trippers who have to blame someone or something rather than accept that it is a matter of an accumulation of many things over the passing of Australian history beginning with the Aboriginals themselves.
Whites or any government are not to blame for Aboriginal alcoholism and child abuse anymore than all whites or the government is responsible for white alcoholism and child abuse. "If (we) never came all would be well." Ha. Piffle and more of the quilt trippers self-loathing being passed onto their own kind.

aqvarivs,

wriggling out of responsibility is a trait of those that don't really care .

THe attitude of so many is ," If they can't help themselves , send in the troopers" .

We now hear on the ABC [AM] today that the child care and community budget for Mutujulu has been underspent by some $300 thousand dollrs and that the Community is now penniless .

Great work John and Mal after 10 years in Government.

Back to the Article.....

Unfortunately probably most OLO posters would not realise that the word and phrase "SORRY" and "MY SYMPATHY" have very similar meanings for Aboriginal Society.

GRIEF and SYMPATHY expressed collectively and individually in Aboriginal Communities can be described as "SORRY BUSINESS" when people come together for funerals or to give bereaved families comfort and support.

Howard's inability to countenance his Government saying SORRY ,with it's much deeper meaning, is a sad reflection on his indifference , our education system and so many other basically apathetic and Culturally illiterate white Australians.