I think Paul1405 perhaps has a bias against Anglo-Australian's and White people.

mhaze,

You asked a question, and I said it was impossible to know the answer. You used the word "think". Its as silly as asking do you "think" Foxy likes chocolate ice cream? When I have no evidence or knowledge to base an answer on, then what I say is immaterial. When it comes to Aboriginal behaviour in relation to massacres over 60 millennia its the same, no evidence, no knowledge. Maybe it did, maybe it didn't.

Your crap that you claim its "fascinating", (you are easily amused).... "that the aboriginal apologists, (ever who they are) constantly tell us, (who are us) that their society remained unchanged forever (swoon swoon genuflect, swoon)" is stupid. All cultures are dynamic and not static and change over time. Except in your case and a couple of the other forum Old Farts who are still trying to relive the glory days of the Third Reich, I see the Kudos Kid has arrived with his usual guff, and he hasn't mentioned the "communists" slipping!

YOU, can't even supply examples of any year since 1788 where Aboriginals were massacring each other at a rate of 1:270 (your figure). That's why YOU are full of it! Hint; with a population of 800,000 1/270th is about 3,000. What's the running total for this year, man of knowledge?

Dear mhaze,

Ouch. Pretty average replies from you. Given up?

You said “Well I did demonstrate the facts of the matter as regards WW1 and that the normal deaths per year in aboriginal society equated with the deaths in the worst period in European history.” No you didn't. Go look at the posts.

You said: “As to life expectancy, I was talking about life expectancy at birth. This is going to confuse you but this means we look at life expectancy at birth not life expectancy at 2 or 5 or whatever number you think might suit your purposes.”

It isn't my purposes you twat. You were the one who introduced the 5 years old not me, remember? “Even if every person who got to age 5 lived into their 70's, life expectancy wouldn't have exceeded 35.”

As to infant mortality there is no doubt that indigenous people lacked the tools of our modern society to effect abortions. Economic necessity in some developing countries see quite high abortion rates to live births.

“Vietnam has one of the highest abortion rates in the world. A study conducted by the Hanoi Central Obstetrics Hospital found that 40% of all pregnancies in Vietnam are terminated each year."
Wikipedia.

But for you to be diving back into Quadrant for your material after I had dealt with Blainey's myopia is a little disappointing.
http://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2020/10/life-and-death-in-pre-contact-aboriginal-australia

This really does seem to be your go to rag on this stuff. It is unsubstantiated, cherry picked rot for the most of it and you would do far better finding your own sources than rely on the nasty, agenda driven, unsubstantiated garbage that emanate from its pages.

"It is unsubstantiated, cherry picked rot for the most of it and you would do far better finding your own sources than rely on the nasty, agenda driven, unsubstantiated garbage that emanate from its pages."

So when you can't argue the point, throw a tantrum.

Unsubstantiated? Well, the well-read would know it is very much substantiated.

Cherry-picked? The claim from those who don't want it to be true, but can't work out how to discredited it.

better finding your own sources?
Well, as I've demonstrated, I have plenty of my own sources such as to confuse the 30 sec researcher. But they aren't digitalised and it much easier to quote from digitalised sites that use the same sources. Have you ever read Krzywicki? If you did you'd realise why he's not been digitalised and why his findings are largely unknown to the 'woke'. He wrote from a time when history was the search for truth rather than a political exercise.

Paul wrote: "where Aboriginals were massacring each other at a rate of 1:270 (your figure). "

Well actually its Blainey's figure. That was made clear a few days back. Do try to keep up. If you read (and understand) Blainey's work and the extensive discussion he has to arrive at the 1:270 figure, you'd understand where the number comes from. But that would require a desire to get the truth rather than the mythology and well....it's Paul.

Dear Shaggy Dog,

My parents did work very hard and they did manage
to give better lives to their children. Our families
have prospered and thankfully continue to do so, and
I trust will continue to do so. However, this is not
the case for everyone - as realistically we all know.

Of course -
Australian politicians, interest groups,
and political and social commentators have long drawn
on the idea of a "fair go." However, the reality is
not the same for everyone in this country.

A disproportionate burden is placed on lower income families
in the country's budget. We have never ended poverty in
Australia. There isn't equality of opportunity as many
can testify. A child from a working class family may be
disadvantaged because their school does not have access to
what a rich kid gets in their education.

Single parents, people with disabilities, the homeless,
our elderly, and of course our Indigenous people can testify
to the fact that not everyone gets an equal slice of the pie.

Still, despite all this - I would not live anywhere else.
I love this country, and am grateful for what my family has
achieved thus far. I look forward to even more achievements
especially from our younger generations and their generations
making their contributions.

We try to pay our dues where we can - and this time we have
been given the rare opportunity to give our Indigenous
people what they are asking. A Voice in policies and
laws that affect them - and a chance to improve their lot.
It would not be a "fair go" to deny them this opportunity.

mhaze,

You are yet to provide evidence of large scale massacres by Aboriginal people perpetrated on each other, post 1788? Any large numbers of mass graves of women and children, who were obviously massacred, that you can identify to support your supposition?

You used Blainey's figure as proof of your belief, so it became YOUR figure.

What is your interpretation of Thomas Pamphlet's first hand account of how Aboriginals around the Moreton Bay region dealt with inter tribal hostility in 1823. Pamphlet was an eye witness to one such event, and he described it as more or less postulating than outright violence. Although one person blood was spilt, and that seemed to satisfy the belligerent group.