Paul1405,
Very fair assumption ! Is it absolute fact, who knows ! One thing is for sure, as time went on many societies changed due to learning from experience via mistakes or discovery !
The other undeniable fact is that the better a society had it the more it fostered stupidity & their eventual downfall proved that point. Those who were conquered or occupied adopted the easier ways offered & eventually went down the gurgler like so many others ! Now it is the Wests turn again ! The Aborigines were like a broken record stuck for a very long time & due to the climate here there literally was no need to become inventive in the sense of technological achievement & planning for the future.
It is interesting though to witness how they now demand every bit & more to have a slice of the cake but without the effort & too many of the fake refugees are of the same mentality ! And, that is what brought about the necessity of a group of people such as One Nation. This party is literally the last hope to save the Indigenous & the society as it was until it began to fracture from 1972 onward. Fifty years of indoctrination for progressive regress is more than enough evidence & reason to stop the rot !

The claim that Hanson is being attacked for was that the so-called First People (they weren't the first people but let's play pretend) were the MOST primitive on earth in the 18th century.

Primitive is one of those things that can mean different things to different people and can be manipulated by people like 15TrillionPaul to hide the truth.

But consider this. Aboriginals had no writing or any other way of recording events, knowledge or transactions while most other parts of the world had those things for at least the previous 12000 years.

Aboriginals had no idea or means of making pottery. (There were some pots found in the Torres Strait but these were likely from more advanced New Guinean peoples). Peoples in Asia and Europe had been making pots for 20,000 years and in America and Africa for 10000 years. Pots were the first step toward civilisation and the Aboriginals were no closer to it in 1788 than they were in 20,000 BC. Lack of pots meant that the transport and processing of many food sources were unavailable to Aboriginals. They couldn't even boil water to make a cuppa - how primitive is that?

Some aboriginal tribes had forgotten or never learned how to make fire which had been a human trait for at least 50,000 years.

They weren't just primitive compared to Europeans. They were primitive compared to pretty much every other peoples on earth and were it not for the discovery of Australia by outsiders, they still be the most primitive people on earth. Hanson's point was that trying to teach our kids that these people were worth studying or admiring is sending our kids down the garden path. The only reason to study aboriginal society is to discover how societies fail

Pauline Hanson is starting to slip. She has apologised for telling the truth about the most miserable, ignorant race of people ever. Unfortunately, as always, the right side of politics doesn't have the mongrel in it to survive for long in Australia. The combined forces of Labor, Liberals, Nationals, Greens and the mainstream media looks like prevailing. That single, unnecessary weakness will bring Hanson down.

I can't see what was looking like hope lasting the two years until the next election.

Albanese's “march of populism” might be occurring in some parts of the world: just not in Australia, where the population doesn't want to face reality.

I have to admit that I have believed the polls, but should have known better. When push comes to shove, and Australians are faced with the real poll, all but a few will vote the way they always have. I also believe Pauline Hanson's apology will end her. Her backdown will further embolden the hyenas.

By any definition, the aborigines encountered on the continent that was to become Australia were PRIMITIVE.

Mhaze,

I think the argument is that they had all manner of science, technology,law and culture as advanced and sophisticated as anywhere on earth, so gained nothing from the Brits arriving. Essentially it's a put down of western civilisation.

Hi ttbn,

Well, give us your definition of "primative".

Hi Trumpster,

No put down of Western civilisation, pointing out different civilisations. As for success Aboriginals were very successful in their adaptation within their environment, and had no need to change. If Western civilisation was an "advancement" then why were 93% of Aboriginals dead within 80 years of European arrival, considering they had survived successfully for 60,000 years?

Hi Fester,

Put it this way which is advanced and which is primitive, a crocodile or a whale? Crocodiles unchanged for 250 million years, whales which have constantly evolved over only 50 million years. By some measure one could say the crocodile is more advanced than the whale, so advanced there is no need for change. Then by some other measure the whale is more advanced, and the crocodile is primitive.

Other than a few exceptions on this Forum, Neanderthal Man become extinct and Homo Sapien Man survived and prospered, not because Neanderthals were primitive, and Homo Sapiens were advanced, the two groups were most likely as intelligent as each other, but Homo Sapiens adapted to the environment better than Neanderthals.

p/s Neanderthals today are a protected species, and we guarantee their survival by supporting them with aged welfare. Smile!