I tried an experiment with a few of my adult grandchildren, all of whom are obviously aboriginal and all of whom have close connections with their tribal land and in most cases, have lived at times on that tribal land.
I posed a situation where Australia was split up into two physical nations, indigenous and white, both self supporting, with their own laws, government etc.
I then asked the kids to choose which nation they would live in, given they had rights to both.
Joe will immediately know which one they chose. Do the rest of you know, and why?

Doog, your post just confused me more than ever.
Just exactly what is it that aboriginal people wish to do with regards controlling their lives that they cannot do now?
Do they want to have 10 year old promised wives? Do they want to be able to spear someone in the leg rather than put them in prison for three months? Do they want to put deceased people up in trees or on burial platforms rather than burying them?
Perhaps they don't want to be obliged to sent their kids to school, or wear seat belts. Who knows, because I certainly don't. I cannot imagine anything that complies with human rights that aboriginal people can't do now.

No Nana I do not know. Anything I say would be a guess.

However I am going to do the equivalent of swearing in Church.
How would we define what is an aborigine ?

Not so simple a question I think considering it has to be in force
for perhaps a thousand years.
After just 229 years it has already caused arguments about blue eyed aborigines !
This point is already a legal description for people claiming to be
of aboriginal decent. Has anyone been convicted of making a false claim ?
Are we going to insist on DNA tests before someone could sit in the
aboriginal assembly or whatever it is called ?
Is there even a way to determine what percentage aboriginal a person
is by their DNA ?
Should aboriginal descent be above 50% or perhaps 66.666% ?

See what a mess you are generating !

Thanks Big Nana,

Doog, do you ever read what other people have posted ? Do you ever think through what you have posted ? Ideally, before you post it, but I suppose we can't have everything ?

Here's a probably-dumb idea: before any proposals are put to the Australian people as a whole, why not - once a full list of demands have been put together - run them past the Australian Indigenous population in a plebiscite ? Then, whatever demands gain, say, a 50 % support from the TOTAL Indigenous electorate, i.e. a majority of all Indigenous people on the electoral roll, can be put to the Australian people as a whole ?

Then the Australian population can decide: whether they agree to a path of separation for Indigenous people, or to the notion of an inclusive, single Australia, with equal rights and opportunities for all ?

After all, seriously, what could be in a 'Treaty' that Indigenous people don't have the benefit of already (and therefore be somewhat redundant and pointless), because otherwise wouldn't a 'Treaty', enunciating different rights and presumably demanding 'sovereignty', etc., lead inexorably towards separatism, a separate State at first, then a separate country ?

Again: who would go there ? 80% of Indigenous people live across our towns and cities, 70% inter-marry, including the elites: would they leave for the bush ? Christ, for some of them, have they ever seen the bush except from the air ?

Joe

And Joe, how would you define who was an aborigine ?

Hi Bazz,

Very simply, anybody who can demonstrate a link to an Indigenous ancestor, ideally an unbroken link, i.e. mother or father or grandparent who knows them and has cared for them, i.e. a family-cultural link. Not a distant genetic link before living memory, but ideally a 'living' link.

Ideally also, someone who has known of their Indigenous status all their lives, not just since they were a teenager or, worse, an adult: if it was up to me in my absolute-dictator role, such people should do an 'apprenticeship' equal to the time they didn't know of such links. Wearing a black hat even with the colours, growing a ruly-ruly long beard (and that goes for men too), taking an Indigenous name, or wearing a dot-painting shirt, won't cut it.

I have no problems whatsoever with very pale, blue-eyed, blonde Indigenous people who have been raised by their Indigenous mother and so on, way back before living memory: after all, who else would they be able to count as an ancestor ? In their honest view, what else can they be ?

Cheers,

Joe