I'm relieved the government 'gets it' because I don't.

Marlene (whose hands don't work any more) has asked me to type a few words.

Tassie, in order to truly change or fix something, we must grasp it. We must take responsibility. We must take ownership of it truly.

This is not some kind of woosy philosophical concept, it is the essence of human existence.

So we watched the ceremony on TV and felt a kind of pride and hope for this nation that we haven't experienced for years. It's not just about the indigenous people - its about all of us.

- it's been a long time between drinks.

The Government has got it alright – bad!

The wishy washy Opposition is infected for the sake of appearances and the fact that they don’t have the guts to resist political correctness.

Aborigines have had it confirmed by the silly sorry performance that they are pathetic mendicants, content to rely on grand gestures and handouts (they also want more money).

This person seems to have got the wrong script. He says that the government’s sorry should be on behalf of Australian society; but we have been assured by Rudd and all the apologists for saying sorry, that the Government is apologising on its own behalf, not for society or individuals.

Continuing along the different stories from different people vein, there is a story going around that the woman who did the welcoming in Canberra had no right to do so as she doesn’t even come from there.

The author does, however, have a more rational view than 'many' people on the numbers of Australians who agree with the sorry nonsense. He says 'many', not 'most' like the over-confident bull artists trying to bolster their own beliefs

This is possibly the only moment in my life when I can say I'm proud of my government.

The dispossession of Aboriginal land, of their children, of their wages and the consequences that followed are something that needs to be fixed.

Aboriginal people have a life expectancy of under 60 years, 25% less than average. The rate of rheumatic heart disease is 5-10 times the national average and responsible for 1/4 of all deaths. They suffer 4 times the average incidence of Type II diabetes, 8 times the level of kidney disease, 5 times the level of drug-induced mental disorders, 20 times the level of chlamydia infection and 20 times the level of gonoccocal infections.

Less than 40% of aboriginal Australians complete year 12, compared to the national average of 75%. Only 22% have vocational or higher education qualifications compared to the average 48%. A mere 4% have a bachelor's degree, compared to the average 21%. Aboriginals are 11 times more likely to be in prison and make up 1/5 of Australia's prison population. They are twice as likely to be victims of violence, they have 3 times the national unemployment rate, they are 6 times more likely to be homeless and 15 times more likely to live in improvised dwellings.

The speech is an excellent start. Now the real change begins.

The PM and Leader of the Opposition spoke very well and there was little any fair minded person could take issue with. However they have very high ideals and high goals. A two party Commission to fix everthing in 5 years?

I am no expert on aboridginal matters but am aware of human nature and to acheive the goals, it would mean a complete makeover of current aboriginal culture. There will be much resistance to giving up alcahol abuse, child abuse and violence, not to mention going to live where work is and to ensure the kids go to school each day. The stated goals put a lot of responsibility onto aboriginals to play their part.

I hope the scheme is successful and in fact am quite prepared to give up the proposed tax cuts if more money is needed to ensure success. However, at this stage, I have strong reservations about the outcome.

Banjo the same could be said about many non-indigenous Australians!

I had no problem with an apology, but the apology Kevin Rudd gave was delivered with invective. The apology started off with good intent but degraded into a patronising and offensive rant. When explaining why he said sorry, Rudd used an example of the christian religion being forced on the indigneous (but never clearly explained the importance of saying sorry). There were indigenous ministers sitting in parliament listening to him. Very insensitve Krudd.

Rudd's speech was, for what it was, brilliant. He captured the mood of those who wanted to Apologise, and his words seem to have been mostly accepted by members of the Stolen Generations. I don't presume to speak for everybody, but judging by the mood of the crowd gathered at Federation Square in Melbourne, this impression seems reasonably accurate.

It is possible, of course, to take issue. In a 30-minute speech, it is always possible for individuals (and in large numbers!) to take issue with particular aspects. I was a little disappointed at the occasional party-political barbs clearly directed at the Opposition. Yes, there is intense frustration with the Liberal Party for its obstinate refusal to acknowledge the issues for the past decade. Yes, it needs to be formally acknowledged that they are Wrong. But I did feel the party-political stuff could have waited until tomorrow.

What most concerned me with Rudd's speech was his proposals for future action. To pledge that all 4-year-olds be enrolled and attending schools, by itself, is no guarantee that the injustices of the past and present will not continue. In my view, what he should have said on that issue was something like this:

"This government pledges that, within five years, all four-year-old Indigenous children will be enrolled and regularly attending educational institutions which cater for the child's own cultural life and background. As well as learning the tools to get by in the modern 'western' world (education to which ALL children have the right) - the ability to read and write in English, the ability to do math, knowledge of ancient and modern international and national history - all Indigenous children have the right to learn about their own customs, their own culture, and learn their own languages. Indeed, ALL Australian children, whether Indigenous or not, have the right to learn the Indigenous history, culture and language(s) of the place where they live. It is not "them" who need to learn "our" ways; it is "us" who must learn from Indigenous people the values, traditions, customs and languages of this place."

Kevin did a fine job of saying sorry. Well done.

To those who don't 'get it', you never will unless you open up your mind and your heart, and who cares if you never get it.

The rest of Australia will move forward while you wallow in your ignorance. I really don't care if you get left behind as a dinosaur of a bygone era.

I can't resist this though - Leigh it is your meanspiritedness and unabridged and ill informed vitriol that should be used as an example of the past attitudes that belittle Australia as a nation.

Lets celebrate this wonderful day in Australia's history.

Kipp,
Yep, its human nature. Many a new years resolution to lose weight or give up smoking start with good intentions but fail in a few days.

Believe me I would love to be proven wrong and see the whole problems in aboriginal communities fixed. But one has to consider the track record before placing a bet, so I think my money will stay in my pocket.

As I said, forego the tax cuts and use it to build schools, medical centres, police stations and other infastructure. Employ teachers, nurses, doctors and police officers. Start work projects and apprentice schemes and whatever else is required.

Even if the new Commission employs accountants and auditors to supervise the expenditure, I still doubt if I would bet on more than a partially successful outcome.

Nelson's speech was nothing short of abominable. I was shocked to my core to hear the same prejudices, the same ignorance, the same defences, the same rejection of the central importance of Indigenous people to this nation, and the same comforting myths about non-Indigenous history come through on an occasion as significant, memorable and historical as a National Apology.

This was not the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Library. This was the Lower House of the Federal Parliament, on a day on which not only the nation but the world was watching, listening and documenting.

The crowd at Federation Square had signalled its overwhelming appreciation of Kevin Rudd's speech. They had quietened down to hear what his counterpart had to say. Nelson could have continued the mood of the day - reconciliation, learning, confronting harsh historical facts, healing.

Instead, he chose to emphasise that while bad things obviously happened, they were done (by successive Parliaments and governments) with what were often "good intentions". Obviously the devout Christian has never been told what hell is paved with. The thrust of his talk was that the nation must not forget that what happened in the past was done with what was considered then to be good reason, and that the consequences were only discovered later.

Even if this were true, it would be unacceptable. The point of today was to drop the contemporary excuses for past wrongs, to recognise that they were wrongs, and to apologise for them. But Nelson wasn’t even speaking truth. If he’d spent half an hour researching primary source documents he would realise that very many people recognised how wrong these policies were even as they were being proposed.

Nelson’s speech left the impression that neither he, nor his speechwriter, nor anybody who’d checked over its content before it was delivered, had done any historical research (which made ironic his plea that our responsibility was to “understand what happened”). By not doing the research, he displayed an utter lack of respect to those he was addressing.

And that is why we turned our backs.

The issue of acknowledging wrongdoings seems to be a global one.

Past wrongs have been admitted by countries around the world in recent years:

* Formal colonial power Germany has apologised to African states that were victims of slavery and colonial exploitation (some 12 million slaves were shipped, locked and chained, from Africa in the 400 years of human trafficking until the 19th century).

* Germany has apologised to Jews for the Holocaust.

* The British government has said sorry to the Irish for failing to help those who suffered during the potato famine.

* The US government formally apologised to 80,000 Japanese-Americans interned during World War II.

* In 1998 the Canadian government issued a Statement of Reconciliation to its indigenous people.

As I've stated in previous posts on this Forum - an apology to the Aboriginal people is a sign of maturity, of a willingness to face mistakes that caused suffering. It heals divisions between people, shows a deepening understanding of the life of a nation and reflects humility and honesty. The acknowledgement of guilt is not to be confused with personal guilt; rather it acknowledges a historical responsibility. In the case of indigenous Australians, many of whom lost family, culture and tribe, it helps to soothe the anger and frustration of those who feel affected.

I am proud of our Prime Minister for the way he has acted in relation to this issue. It has strengthened his moral authority immeasurably.
It was the right thing to do, and - I congratulate him - for having had the courage to do it!

Banjo what sort of moron are you? a few loser's do not define a community, because if so lets apply that principle to the number of rapes, murders and antisociable behaviour committed by whites each day as reported in the media.

As for leigh you like to mock Indigenous people and issues whilst benefiting from our land, taxes and our defence of its borders. You whites that think like you sit in the comfort of your homes, whilst my two sons and those of other Indigenous people are at the front lines fighting the Taliban.

Citenzship is earned not aquired by the colour of ones skin, and we have shed far too much blood for this country to be ignored and mocked. Hopefully today makes a change for the better and I can finaly wear my medals with pride at anzac cove this April.

YINDI ITS sad you have no heart that what the stolen generation went through such as rapes and abuse by the very people who took them ,and who were to take care of them

ALSO WILL YOU say that about the forgotten australians that were raped and abused by those who ran these homes and institutions of where the goverment of australia placed the vulnerable children of which the goverment and all states had control of

THE GOVERMENT IS STILL COVERING UP THE RAPES AND ABUSE THAT WE ALL SUFFERED ,
I AM WHITE AND I AM A VICTIM OF THE RAPES AND ABUSE THAT OCCURRED THROUGH OUT THE HOMES THAT ARE MENTIONED IN THE SENATE REPORTS , SO IN YOUR EYES THESE PERPERTRATORS ARE ALLOWED TO WALK AROUND WITH THEIR HEAD HELD HIGH SO THEY CAN CONTINUE THEIR ABUSE ON THIS DAYS COMMUNITY ,YOU WOULDN'T LIKE IT IF IT HAPPEND TO YOU OR ANY OF YOUR FAIMLY OR FRIENDS WOULD YOU ,AS YOU WOULD BE THE FIRST TO WANT THEM DEALT WITH ,


WE ARE VICTIMS OF THE MOST HORRIFFIC CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN , IM A FORGOTTEN AUSTRALIAN AND WE WILL NO LONGER BE FORGOTTEN

HUFFNPUFF,

LEAST THE PRIME MINISTER SAID SORRY THATS A START , MORE GUTS THAN THE PREVIOUS GOVERMENT

I agree with the reservations expressed about 4 year old children to be in pre-school...if one learns about recognizing signs and symptoms of an emotionally traumatized young children...ie 6 and under...and which does not take long to learn...most of our young children are exhibiting the said signs to different degrees...on the streets, kinda and schools...so when we are struggling to get this addressed how can we effectively help the little aboriginal ones...only difference generally is our kids seem to have a stronger ability to compensate...aboriginal children go on to a destructive cycle as they get older...

For a start...before billions get thrown at this for benefit of the 'contractors' with little practical effect...I suggest identifying population groups, numbers and migration patterns...then build a nice swimming pool at carefully identified locations that we maintain with particular care...the water is just a magnet for those children in the desert...chlorine cleans wounds and skin infections...and they get the happy interaction exercise in a safe and monitored environment...almost guaranteed that any child within walking distance will be clamoring to be brought here...then around this build a clinic...in another carefully planned and workable step an school...etc with police to maintain the law and peace around the children...

cant see how this wont at least help if not work...only problem is how do you get the water there and keep it there in that heat...that is now the engineers problem...

Sam
Ps~if there is a lesson in all this it is that we must look at each other first as the person...then issues of skin colour etc all become less relevant...so using terms as 'you whites' implies you first see yourself as tribe/skin colour etc above all else...and which defined as a racist...and which just as ugly what ever the skin colour or heritage of the person acting that way...hope you understand...

What does the author mean when he says 'white' Australians? It is typical of the racism of aboriginal people to assume that we are all the same race because we look alike. I am a sixth generation Australian of Irish(Celtic) ethnicity and my ancestors were brought to Australia in chains against their will. Why do aboriginals put the blame on 'white' Australians for the 'occupation' of their land? If anyone is to blame it is the British government.

My people(the Irish) have suffered a lot more and for a lot longer from British injustices than aboriginals, yet I don't need any apologies. I think the aboriginals should be thoroughly ashamed of their racist behaviour.

Today I feel a very proud Aussie Pom, Like most on here I am an immigrant.

No matter what Aussie generations we are, we are immigrants and I am beholden to the Kaurna people, for allowing me to live on their land.

I enjoy a quality of life, I would never have had from whence I came.

To those who accept their quality of life as taken, just think! It came at the expense of others.

To all those who make positive comments about today's events (and this excellent article) - my heart felt THANKYOU!

As one notable human being once said:

"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.”

Although some many criticise the Rudd Government for not including the words "evil," or admitting any wrongdoing that could cause legal liability, one must say that this gesture is remarkable and unprecidented in over 200 years of Australian history. The official apology reflects that morality and conscience will triumph over greed and selfishness. The Howard government has exhibited shameful greed and selfishness not just in refusing to give an official apology to the aboriginal community, but also in offering government legal assistance to "defend" the dignity of Communist Chinese leaders Jiang Zemin and Luo Gan, facing lawsuits in the NSW Supreme Court, accused them of massive human rights abuses. Australia is a democratic country that historically had opposed communist tyrany and promoted democratisation this is just so un-Australian. Let's also not forget that "dignity" also carries a meaning to uphold human rights.

Dear Rainier,

One of the great problems facing Australia's rulers since the arrival of the First Fleet had been the question of how to deal with the country's original inhabitants.

Unfortunately, the solutions developed had little basis in understanding and were founded on ignorance. It is hoped now after
this apology that all Australians can at last acknowledge the depth and strength of Aboriginal culture so that our culture and theirs can co-exist far more justly, peacefully and productively in the future than it has in the past.

Blackfella, whitefella
It doesn't matter, what your colour
As long as you're a true fella
As long as you're a real fella
We need more brothers if we're to make it
We need more sisters if we're to save it
Are you the one who's gonna stand up
and be counted?

....... Warumpi Band.

Leigh, it looks like you and me might be standing alone, but that makes the debate an even bout.

Banjo “I hope the scheme is successful and in fact am quite prepared to give up the proposed tax cuts if more money is needed to ensure success”

Speak for yourself Banjo, when it comes to “spending money” I know I do a better job of it than government.

I would observe for all the rhetoric the statement which leads the article

“This does not make the current generation responsible for past policies but acknowledges that many Aboriginal people suffered.”

It might not presume we are “responsible” but it still presumes we will be burdened with the financial responsibility.

A healthy future for Australia lies in assimilation and not racial segregation through differential citizen rights or entitlements.

Oh Foxy, based on your last post it sounds as if you agree with me.

We are all individuals and whilst I might have been born in UK I am, by choice and by being tested and accepted, an Australian.

What a great day. I was cynical thinking this would be all show from the ALP as a substitute for action. We shall see. It is the first step.

But the emotion, the sense of hope;it was just fantastic. All those years of activism, agitation and struggle have now borne fruit. And what a great victory over the irrelevancies in the Opposition and their bilge barnacles on this website.

Let's go further down the road to reconciliation. Recognise the genocide and recompense those generations we stole. Recompense the descendants of those whose land we stole. Stop the invasion of the Northern Territory.

Don't give us tax cuts. Set up a reconciliation fund, and put in the $31 bn. And add future tax cuts to it.

Foxy, yes, i think thats the general idea. I wish brother George Burrarrawanga was still with us, especially today.

Passy, Yes, today standing with my Aboriginal and non Aboriginal brothers and sisters, people I have known for over 30 years in some cases, it all made the struggles worthwhile, certainly much more than at any time before.

"The official apology reflects that morality and conscience will triumph over greed and selfishness" Well put Richard!

Kipp, you're my kind of Ozzie, good on ya!

RussellMarks, Yes his speech was a shocker! Just shows how out of place weasel words infused with mean spiritedness are on occasions like this. It was a good reminder of why we tossed Howard out.
I wonder if he (Howard) watched the broadcast? Prehaps it would have been too much for him, poor thing!

To Marlene, Chris,Aka, Lev, and all above, thanks for your inspiring words. This day was about people like us and all the people we care about.

You and me and the Administrations. We have an opportunity to do something relevant. It is difficult when a society has been divided as we have.

It is not negative to see hear and feel the diversity of our nations feelings.

It is what happens when you don't face the pain. A pain that has been brewing under the skin of everyone, be it they support the present governments directive, or not.

I have lived here in Cape York. I am serious about the conditions, and the need to do things progressively, to build capacity upon a solid platform.

In terms of community we have to start all over again.

Our social and cultural economic capital was hung out to dry. (no community resources) The blame is with us, as citizens, for allowing it to happen.

This trust we need is a numbing sensation. The one we fear... as the issues have been "circled" so many times previous.

Can we focus as a nation to get to the "basic" core.

Can we succeed "together" without sabotaging ourselves?

I deeply appreciated Mr Rudd Governments work.

I appreciated the descriptive parts of Mr Brenden Nelsons speech, and flinched where "some" of those sentences failed.

I felt for those who turned there back, as I felt for Mr Nelson "the person" ... knowing how much it took to continue.

I am glad in principal that many (out of line) on both sides got into trouble... for their less-than-conduct or sensitivity.

We can not run before we walk... we need to learn. as a nation and this is the "problem". It is @ ground level with those having the experience..

I say lets not be scared of voices... we can't afford to smoother the goodwill.

We need to hear eachother, have some courage and learn to practice "learning" with respect... so we can extract confidence, without oppressing the marginal peoples within this country, we all say, WE LOVE.

http://www.miacat.com/
.

I was able to avoid most of the hooha portrying sorry day as something akin to the second coming, but I did notice rude,ignorant black women turning their backs on Brendan Nelson simply because he told the truth that some (most, I would say) children were removed for their own good. Charming people!

Well, Mr. Nelson. That's what you get for me-tooing on something that should never have happened. These people will never be satisfied.

Bill02 - I agree that in reality it is the British Govt. that is at the heart of the issue and should also issue an apology. Also they sent the worst of the Military to guard people that in reality, performed some of the lesser crimes. These agents of the British Government rode roughshod over the original inhabitants, while the British Government itself, under the British Monarchy's reign of King George, made absolutely no attempt to forge alliances with the original inhabitants. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's apology, on behalf of the Paliament and the Government was right. But apologies are needed from the Monarchy and the British Government as well. It is unfortunate that we will probably never see this.
However Bill02, like you, my ancestors came in the 1st and subsequent fleets. Not all were convicts. Some were agents of the British Government. I accept that some of them were not blameless.
I do not accept that what was done was done with 'best intentions'. There were many enlightened people who worked against evil notions that were rampant, but were often derided or humiliated for doing so. So the means to avail oneself of actually doing better were available. On behalf of this wrongdoing my ancestors may have perpetrated, I too, offer my apologies.
The government and landholders stole the wages of the original inhabitants. Some of it was put into Internal Revenue but not used for the benefit of the original inhabitants. Does the white community owe them? Yes. Spend the money, Mr Rudd, on anyway you can to improve services and outcomes to the original inhabitants.

It's instructive that the anecdote the author gives is about Rob Riley, who is not one of the stolen generation. He was voluntarily given up by his mother over fear of an alcoholic abusive father, and she then refused to even visit him where he was being cared for at Sister Kate's.

The stolen generation is mostly a myth created by a biased historian and promulgated by the self flagellating left, yet when they are asked to actually produce a list of aboriginal children stolen from their parents on the basis of race (and not social welfare grounds), the sorry examples of intelligence seem to struggle to find even 10 names.

Lying to the aboriginal people and telling them that the Australian government accepts responsibility for a massive policy of evil that didn't exist will not help. It will only continue to breed the particular strain of victimhood that has kept the aboriginal people in drunken and abusive communities for years.

Col Rogue,

The current generation may not be responsible for past policies, but they've certainly benefited from the massive dispossession of aboriginal land and the consequences that have arisen. For that reason, it makes sense that the financial responsibility is borne by those who have benefited. Further, respecting the self-determination of indigenous people means that they will make their own choices between the continuum of independence to assimilation. You might think assmilation is the best path, but that's not a decision for you to make

Yindin,
What sort of a moron am I? Well firstly, I am a cynic. I've been around too long to blindly accept what any politicians say. My cynicism cuts in when they start saying what they are 'gunna do'.
I'm cynical about both their intentions and their ability to carry out what they say. e.g. Am sure you know 'No child shall live in poverty' Bob Hawke and 'Never, never be a GST' John Howard. and 'Tax cuts are L A W law' Paul Keating.

Secondly, Im a bloke prepared to forgoe the promised tax cuts if there is a reasonable chance a proposed scheme will dramaticly lower infant mortality, and the incidence of child physical and sexual abuse and get the kids attending school each day, in aboriginal communities.

Thirdly, there have been report after report stating the high infant mortality rate, the abuse and neglect of kids and alcahol abuse in aboriginal communities. Anyone not acknowledging this is in denial.
The 'Bringing them Home' report has many stories of mothers devastated by the removal of their kids. Things have changed these days with modern welfare. I do not accept that any parents really love and care for their kids if DOCS have to remove them for neglect,or they are disease ridden and malnourished, or they do not ensure they go to school daily. I know of some mothers that only have kids to get extra welfare benefits to be spent on drugs, grog and smokes. Not only in aboriginal communities either!

If these views make me a moron in your view, I'm happy to wear that label.

Col Rouge, I was speaking for myself and expressing my view. I respect you have a right to a differing opinion. I think the only thing that could work is a NT type intervention on a far greater scale. The cost of this would be enormous and how to find the resourses and staff to cover all states is a question. Must not forget the ruckus this caused last year. Many would oppose.

Lev,
I agree with you. Taking babies from their mothers was a harsh but accepted practice. Young white mothers with illegitimate babies sometimetimes had them taken from between their legs before even having seen them. The ABC series 'The leaving of Liverpool' showed how harshly British children were treated even after WW2. The fact is that many practices which are now unacceptable were seen at the time as the right thing to do. It is complely pointless to judge previous generations by todays moral standards.

Now that the government's said sorry we might expect the debate to shift from what whites haven't done to what black people can do to help themselves. Unfortunately, this won't happen. There will be more excuses about why 'black' Australia is disadvantaged. Whites will naturally be to blame. There will be expensive studies commissioned. They will be conducted by people who are 'sound' (to quote Sir Humphrey from "Yes Minister"). The studies will advocate a 'sound' response: more money, more social workers and more aboriginal autonomy. Bodies will be set up.....

Passy “All those years of activism, agitation and struggle”

You make it sound like a laxative, used to facilitate a bowel movement.

As for “Don't give us tax cuts. Set up a reconciliation fund, and put in the $31 bn. And add future tax cuts to it.”

Speak for yourself. My vote is for me to spend what I earn where I see fit. Not where some here today, gone tomorrow politician with a misplaced sense of appeasement thinks it will get him elected.

Ultimately, the outcome of a strategy of paying aboriginals the modern equivalent of “Dane geld” will be massive resentment on the part of non-aboriginals and thus more divisive politics than there are now.

Assimilation works, appeasement does not.

Legal equality works (and is the foundation of our legal system), social enablement does not.

Individualism works, socialism does not

Keep ‘em coming Passy. Like I said, I not only know all the feeble socialist jingles and lyrics but I also know all the responses and counter arguments and if I ever found one I did not know, I can always reason it out. One of the merits of capitalism, we are encouraged to be rational, even in this emotional world.

Leigh “That's what you get for me-tooing on something that should never have happened. These people will never be satisfied.”

Yep. only encourages.

Appeasement, it never satisfies. It encourages the belligerent to greater belligerency and greater (unjustified) demands, until what was once a difference of opinion, ends up as a full scale war.

Lev “Col Rogue”

At the risk of seeming pedantic, My logon is “Col Rouge” and I will respond when addressed as such

I suggest you wait patiently for response to your insipid observation from “Col Rogue” himself.

Banjo “I was speaking for myself and expressing my view”

Of course and I will defend your right to do so.

However, my suggestion in no way limits your right to disburse any increased net income (from lower taxes) on whatever philanthropic agendas you choose.

Nelson's speech was nothing short of abominable.
RussellMarks, you must be one of those poor kids who were denied an education if you really believe your own words.

Sometimes I wonder at how people have to politicise absolutely everything in life. The fact that Rudd yesterday proposed a bipartisan thinktank was for me perhaps more important than the apology itself. Surely by this act he doesn't intend to take full credit for any findings or actions - the problem is bigger than any government.

As for the rest of the small minded, mean spirited people that couldn't see yesterday for what it was...shame on you. Go back to your plasma TV screens, knock back your Coronas ($7.99 each), and don't forget to polish your nice SUV before your drive into work tomorrow morning.

col rogue wrote 'Individualism works, socialism does not'...Im not sure what you mean by individualism...is it an alternative word for capitalism...in which case it does not work either...not sure who said this but if tomorrow one could redistribute all the wealth equally among all people...come back some time later...the rich today would most likely taken over and controlling inequitable amount of wealth then...meaning the drive for wealth/power/control overrides the need for balance in 'daily life requirements'/society/environment and other relevant material areas that make up the whole to human-earth history...

So 'unbalanced individualism' is the enemy to 'sustainable survivable development'...almost every major destructive environmental act in this century is closely linked with select individuals/groups having 'benefited' in terms of gaining power/control/wealth in short period of time...while the resultant 'destruction' that is always associated is rejected by said people and attempt to disconnect the accountability to it...if this makes sense...

'balanced individualism acts' will work...and the parliament saying sorry can essentially be brought to be understood as the parliament was stating to its people where the 'middle ground lay' for all of us to aim to act towards...how successful/disregardful each of us/group are is a different issue...as is what should be done to get more of us to act towards 'balanced individualism acts'...

not meant to be a new method of governing...this stuff is all ancient knowledge eg far east philosophy 'annalects of confuscius' talking of 'humaneness'(no direct writing of confucius exist but this in one of the oldest and closest to original teachings)...and if I have to guess at why it has not been successful to date...the skill/deceit/'organized wealthy power' of the 'unbalanced individualism' has been calling the shots so far...until moments in history of great upheavals to bring back some balance eg ww2, french/russian revolution, s.africa...except now a survivable earth is becoming the predominant issue...we are running out of time to establish and maintain the balance for survivability...

Sam

I occasionally log into Online and am constantly revolted by the opinions of Leigh. This person is a toxic wasteland. If you think aboriginal people have had it so good, ask yourself whether you would like to change places with one of them. I guarantee the answer would be no. You, like your great hero John Howard, are mean little men with absolutely no compassion for anyone. Go fly a kite Leigh and stop infecting the internet with your viruses.

Sam “not sure what you mean by individualism...is it an alternative word for capitalism”

thanks for asking

Individualism presumes the individual is the pinnacle of the social order, rather than the individual being a subordinate to some theory of “greater common good”.

Ownership of resources and the ability to direct and control economic activity being controlled by individuals. This provides overall superior results when compared to the public/state ownership of everything managed by some supposed all-seeing omnipotent planning committee.

Just compare USA versus USSR. The USA have some rich, a lot of middle class (moderately well off) and some poor people, USSR had all poor apart from a small number of ultra powerful who ran the central bureaucracy, without real elections.

Refugees are seeking access to USA and other modern western democracies. No one is beating at the door of China or Russia.

“almost every major destructive environmental act in this century is closely linked with select individuals/groups”

Because all acts are initiated by individuals.

and every enhancement to the human experience is, likewise, the result of an individual action or innovation.

The environmental standards observed in “state controlled” nations, are far worse than those practiced by nations modeled on individualism and capitalism (where government is the referee not the proprietor).

I disagree with what was intelligible from the rest of your diatribe,

“great upheavals to bring back some balance eg ww2, french/russian revolution, s.africa.”

Not sure about WWII in that context however,

French revolution overthrew a non-benevolent monarchy with a far worse system which defiled the term “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity”.

You will recall, initially the revolutionaries executed the aristocrats but that was then followed by the “Reign of Terror”, where Robespierre and The Committee of Public Safety executed anyone who might oppose their despotic view, aristocrat or commoner alike.

Russian revolution, followed the French pattern, re Lenin and the kulaks.

“balance for survivability...” easy, stop overpopulation, the rest falls into place.

Joana, Leigh has the same right as you to post.

Challenge his opinions by all means with reason. Calling him names merely illustrates your personal limitations.

To all the posters here with their brain and heart connected (you know who you are) have a read of this nice piece by Ben Pobjie.
Its a wonderful explanation of why the right wing nuttes here are finding themselves irrelevant to public debate.

Its because we have not apologised to them!

You'll discover why here: http://www.newmatilda.com/2008/02/15/andrew-bolt-please-forgive-us

Leigh wrote:
Well, Mr. Nelson. That's what you get for me-tooing on something that should never have happened. These people will never be satisfied.

You're right (for once) we won't be satisfied until grubs like you become land fill.

col...

capitalism... http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/capitalism and which is like your meaning of 'individualism'

to 'annalects of confuscius' heres a good place to start... http://www.hm.tyg.jp/~acmuller/contao/analects.html ...'humaneness' is at 1.2 ie 7th para...

and to 'Not sure about WWII in that context however'...lets take for example...nazi government take it upon themselves that they lost face and treated unfairly by treaty of versailles(before you ask http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/FWWversailles.htm )and took to attacking poland then france in 1939(ie blitzkrieg http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/blitzkrieg.htm)...and killing 'races' deemed inferior...but real daily effect was to develop an atmosphere of fear in the german population so easier to oppress and control...see the imbalance here developing for advantage of nazi government...for just a moment if nazi government considered achieving same advancement as germany has since ww2 before ww2...think about it...they could have if one considers their potential from how successful germany was in the first half of the war...when lot of battles they won was with far smaller numbers than the opposition...that still didnt make it 'balanced' did it...

And after reading above if my previous post is still a 'diatribe' to you...then maybe its not for you...

Sam

Captain Wordsmith Rudd strikes again. Nicely arranged sentimental sloppy affectations. Public loves it... all words, no action.
Redundant.

BUT... it feels oh so good. Thats what counts. As long as the words are used to service good vibrations, they dont need to make logical sense. As long as they rationalise an a prioir sentiment, its all good.

Apologising for the misdeeds of others thru the ages (based on genetics no less) is a bit nubulous, for it defines the very nature of history, which is being made by everyone at every moment. Thus, we effectively live a life of guilt striken apologism, driving the car by looking in the rear view mirror. Some of us dont wanna define our consciousness this way. Everyone suffers, its a base condition. Inherent empathy and compassion for that reality makes wordy affectation redundant, patronising, benevolent condascension.

The sheeple love sentiment. As long as the good feelings persist driven by apparently reasonable logical fallacies, then the un-changing wheel keeps turning, the basis upon which history is repeated.

Sure dole out a few billion, even several, over say 10 yrs. Chicken feed in the scheme of things, a few hundred dollars per tax payer pa (ironic that the tax dollars of the indigenous will go into compesation). Small price to relieve oneself from the bleeting and get our heads back into the sandboxes of our own self interested pursuits and feeewings.

Indeed apologism is a global trend and its pure affectation. Make speeches, write cheques, sweep it all away. Glass half empty or half full of murky water?

Anyway, thats one more sentimental guilt trip outta the way.

Next.

lm a first generation australian of spanish/italian/christian descent. Therefore l apologise to... austn aborigines, the children of Abraham for thousands of yrs of systematic repression by christians and for being used by the romans as fallguys for that crucifixion, the wicka witches for the spanish inquistion, south americans for spanish plunder and all the decendants of anyone ever living under roman tyranny. Apologies too for lasagna and paella.

Rainier

Thanks for the link to Ben's brilliant article. I wonder what Albrechtson is up to these days.

Trade215, I'm sure you must feel better now that you have got all that off your chest, clearly you understand what a sincere apology is all about...

And now we may progress to being a truly humane inclusive nation... if only we could change Australia Day to a date that is truly meaningful for all the people who call this great land home.

Fractelle,

"And now we may progress to being a truly humane inclusive nation" is the kind of thing that inspired taking aboriginal children from their families in the first place. The stuff of Social Darwinism and Fabian socialists.

Sincerity of sentimentallity is not a precondition for rational contemplation of the intellectualised follies that doom us to repetition of past errors. The main culprit being short term indulgence of one's feelings of sincerity.

The road to tyranny and good intentions and wot not.

Sarcasm is very useful in exposing culprits complicit in their participation of folly.

Dont take it personally, l want a better world too. It helps to chuck out the sentiment that fogs this purpose.

ps. l also apologise for tapas bars.

Dr Antonio Buti is another lawyer who in my view has a problem understanding what is the proper legal way to go about things.
When one of my daughters was 2-year old (and in my sole care- being single father) and the police demanded that I handed over my 2-year old daughter because the WARRANT authorised them to do so, I made clear I refused to do so. The police still took my daughter of my arm, and as such executed the warrant. I requested immediately for my daughter to be handed back, this they refused. I consulted a lawyer who made clear I had hope in hell to get my daughter back. Still, 5-days later this my lawyer and a barrister attended to the Supreme Court and urged me to withdraw my case as otherwise I may never see my daughter. In Court the trail judge asked me what my position was and I made clear the WARRANT was unlawfully issued and I wanted nothing less then my daughter back. The judge agreed, set aside the WARRANT issue and ordered my daughter to be returned immediately. This was decades ago!
Now, are we to believe that none of those parents who claim their children were “stolen” didn’t know they could fight?
Single mothers of all races had their children removed. Why no apology to them?
Why is a half-cast an Aboriginal? What about saying then “SORRY” to the non Aboriginal parent?

Antonio Buti, could for example read up the so far in 3-part published postings of mine ( being a copy of an e-mail forwarded to Kevin Rudd prior to the “sorry” statement at “http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=6981” regarding “Knowing when to say 'sorry'” to realise that claiming International treaties on the basis of being an “Aboriginal” is constitutionally defective.
Perhaps Canadian and Asian Aboriginals may also desire a slice of the money-cake?
.
International treaties, no matter how much I may value them, do not and cannot override constitutional provisions and the application of constitutional provisions.
.
Personally I deplore racial discrimination but that does not alter what is constitutionally permissible!

Trade215

"And now we may progress to being a truly humane inclusive nation" is the kind of thing that inspired taking aboriginal children from their families in the first place. The stuff of Social Darwinism and Fabian socialists.

Wrong, Trade, it was paternalism, racism and the complete lack of respect for aboriginals and their culture that was the catalyst for dividing aboriginal families.

An inclusive nation means acceptance of many different cultures, do not try to distort my meaning just because you disagree. Offer your opinion by all means, however, your sarcasm simply makes you appear petty.

Cheers

Fractelle,

careful there, you are now distorting my position, which as you say is petty. Paternalism... indeed. Lets not forget the maternalism that was also present and one could argue is what drives short-sighted renditions of 'social inclusiveness' into the realm of foolish policies.

But that would be petty. Wot, spinning this down the gender path.

All are instrumental and all play their part, notwithstanding the contrivances of social classification. Which again is part of what drove the mentality to 'integrate' aboriginals.

Social inclusiveness does consistently demonstrate a very real danger, namely homogenisation. Again this is closely related to the mindset that stole a generation.

The problem with this term thats being bandied about lately (Social Inclusion) is that its undefined. It rests on mere conotation and inference. Its a bit pretentious actually. The terms is in sore need of definition and direction. l suspect this wont be forthcoming though, as a clear definition wont serve the tendency of govt to murky concepts which can be spun this way or that.

In fact, in an Orwellian sense, a public office titled "Social Inclusion" is likely to be anything but. Prolly more likely to be divisive.