Hi Paul,
I'm not opposed to your suggestion, but I wonder if it's a double-edged sword.

Would recognition of past wrongs mostly by people long dead help end the animosity?
If we did that and changed the date of Invasion Day to sometime else would it ever be enough?
(Or would changing the date of Australia Day just piss the white Australians off more?)

Sometimes bad things happen and there's just no going back to change them.

I wish I could be more than skeptical there was a path to ending the animosity.

On the other hand will it just further permanently entrench their self-identity, feelings and status as victims.

Is there more to gain from this recognition than what there is to lose?
I think that recognising past wrongs are important for victims to heal from wrongdoing done to them, though this is not always possible..

You know, the perpetrators are all dead, just as all the original victims are, I don't know how you can heal or mend the fences with descendants of victims generations later.

The whole voice thing was a debacle.
I didn't support it, but I do think it would've been better if Albo hadn't have blown millions on that referendum, and just spent the money trying to do just a little more for these remote aboriginal communities so they can better help themselves (handup, not handout)

Hi AC,

You're probably right, we don't need a National Genocide Day, rather a NATIONAL RECONCILIATION DAY around May 27th ( National Reconciliation Week annually from 27th May to 3rd June) Both remembrance and celebration, significant enough to have a public holiday, a bit like New Zealand's Waitangi Day (Feb 6th). The vast majority of Australians want to move forward, but to do that we have to recognise the past, but not dwell on it exclusively, rather be positive for the future. Its not a matter of money, more so a matter of will power from both Aboriginal people and the rest of Australia to promote equality in everything from housing to health, whilst recognising culture.

When some old fart on this forum says; "Aboriginals should be thankful the British colonised Australia" that's like saying to an old Digger; "You should be thankful it was the Japanese who looked after you in Changi prison" extremely insensitive comments.

I remember Marcia Langton saying when a reporter asked her; "Isn't it remarkable that Aboriginal people are still here after 60,000 years?", she replied something like; "What's remarkable is that Aboriginal people are still here after the past 200 years". I think that summed it up.

More valid is learning from the past. Why is Kumanjayi Little Baby dead? Would intervention by child safety be regarded as child stealing or attempted genocide? Was a group of hundreds of rioters traditional justice or a lynch mob? And how is it that indigenous Australians get twice the funding of non-indigenous Australians, with many millionaires, yet very little of it found that poor kid.

The acknowledgement that is glaringly absent is that we are all human beings and need to be treated with an equal measure of care and respect.

Hi Fester,

It does you no good trying to use the death of an innocent child as a cynical political weapon.

The truth about Aboriginal funding; The vast majority (roughly 80-90%) of this expenditure is not Indigenous-specific funding; it is the cost of providing mainstream services (such as hospitals, education, and policing), driven by higher rates of health issues, lower incomes, and higher interactions with the justice system requiring more intensive use of services. A higher proportion of Indigenous Australians live in remote areas, where the cost of delivering services (health, education, infrastructure) is significantly greater. The Indigenous population is, on average, younger, leading to higher per capita spending on schools and childcare. Higher spending is generally required to achieve the same level of service access that other Australians are accustomed to, rather than indicating higher discretionary income for individuals.

Cynically you imply that Aboriginals who are millionaires have gained their wealth thorough government handouts, and not their own resources, are they incapable of that? Can we say there are white billionaires, and there are poverty stricken white people in this country. Why is that?

Hi again Fester,

You might find this interesting;

The Australian federal government has committed over $1 billion in loans subsidies, grants and tax concessions to companies backed by the billionaire Gina Rinehart, Australia's richest person. This includes $200 million from the National Reconstruction Fund and roughly $840 million in the form of subsidies and tax concessions! Well, well, Billionaire Welfare, anything to say my friend.

" (Mhaze with Britons and Vikings. FFS?)"

Aries,
Please try to keep up with the rest of the class. It was Paul who raised the claims about the Vikings. I was just at pains to set him right. But to be fair to you, I can see how you got confused. After all, after Paul had been exposed as having brazenly concocted his story about the Vikings, he's been trying very hard to pretend he never heard of these Viking fellows.

"if acknowledging the fact that the indigenous peoples were treated as non-citizens until the 1967 referendum"

Factually incorrect, but just another one of those myths that the left buy. The 1967 referendum didn't give citizenship rights. The aboriginals already had them.

Fester,
"Was a group of hundreds of rioters traditional justice or a lynch mob?"

I'm generally opposed to allowing aboriginals to practice their stone age cultural lores, but in this case allowing them to practice their 'pay-back' lore might have been acceptable. At least it would have saved us the cost of a trial and housing this waste of carbon for his natural life.