@Paul1405

You said: I note from your above post a blinked and pessimistic view of Aboriginal people.

And I note your prejudice projected onto my comments. Firstly, there are no Aboriginal people and never were.

There were in 1788 more than 300 groups of very different people, descended from different waves of migration, without a common language, who were not unified at all.

Today, we have thousands of different groups of Australians with Aboriginal Ancestry, descended from the original few hundred, with varying amounts of Aboriginal ancestry from full, not many, to less than 20%, most and even some with less than 10% or less than 1%, none of whom would be Aboriginal people even if such a category existed.

Fully Aboriginal people I have met in remote communities have absolutely nothing in common with quarter Aboriginal people,living in cities, descended from mostly Anglo-European ancestors. Indeed, fully Aboriginal people in WA have nothing in common with fully aboriginal people in far north Queensland, beyond using the label Aboriginal for their ancestry and living in a remote community.

And where did you pick up pessimism for those with Aboriginal ancestry? Most such Australians are doing absolutely fine, many better than most which includes me. The tiny, tiny minority still struggling are mostly in the delusional in concept, but very well intentioned, remote communities.

I believe all human beings, give or take natural gifts, are equally capable and having Aboriginal ancestry, a lot or a little, does not predispose anyone to inferior function as you seem to suggest.

To be continued.

@Paul 1405

You said:

In response to; "is the difficulty of first getting Aboriginal Australians to train for employment and then getting them to continue in the job....because no-one wants to do the work, or simply abandoned because everyone has wandered off. " my answer is; WHY SHOULD THEY.

Why should they? Because they asked for help. Because they asked for training. Because they asked for jobs. Because they demanded mining companies and Governments do something for them.

WHY SHOULD THEY? Because it was what they said they wanted. WHY SHOULD THEY? Because that is how one functions in a modern world as a capable human being.

You said: In typical sarcastic fashion you refer to "regular walkabouts", it would do you well to really understand what "walkabout" is and its significance to Aboriginal people, it is not simply as some uneducated think, nothing more than wandering off.

I was not being sarcastic. I was stating fact. And sorry mate, walkabout is about as relevant today as hiding menstruating women in huts far away from everyone else. Both practices from a primitive and long-dead past.

And since there is no Aboriginal people per se: and the only reason they went walkabout was to hunt for food, and they have it handed to them and no longer need to hunt, then they no longer need walkabout.

No, I don't have formal qualifications in archaeology, history, anthropology or sociology but unlike Pascoe I don't claim to be an expert nor do I seek to rewrite history.

As an experienced book reviewer, I am however, more than capable of assessing his work more than most.

As to taking Dark Emu apart, I believe that would be worth the doing. I have just moved house and cannot as yet, put my hand on my copy of his book but I will do so. Thank you for the suggestion. I have grown weary of Pascoe being waved as a fantasy flag on this issue.

@Paul1405

If you are suggesting walkabout was or could be a spiritual practice and no doubt this may have been the case in some instances, then, all I would say is that all human beings have expressed spirituality in various ways, often involving periods of isolation and indeed, they continue to do so today. But, THEY DO NOT EXPECT, DEMAND OR GET, time off work to do so.

It was again, well-intentioned, but wrong of mining companies and Governments to factor in 'walkabout' time for workers who had Aboriginal ancestry because it was not only patronising it was an is racist.

And, as we can see, it did not work. Encourage people in their indulgences and you get, yep, indulged and inefficient people and staff.

Having said all that, I would add, there have been exceptions and some of those with Aboriginal Ancestry have relished learning and thrived in their employment. Sadly, many have had to leave communities and family behind to do so because, as the myth goes in Africa, if you try to climb out of the pot, the rest of the tribe will pull you back in.

You see, there is really nothing in human nature and practice which cannot be found in all humans. The best and the worst of us.

Hi Rhross,

You suggest that " .... many have had to leave communities and family behind to do so .... "

I'm not so sure: at least in South Australia, the migrations from settlements in the forties and fifties and into the sixties, was followed quickly by a follow-up migration into Adelaide in the sixties and early seventies. After that, the movements tended to be just to local towns.

So the people in Adelaide tended to stay in the city where there was work and education, and those in towns stayed in towns where there wasn't so much. In a way, the Aboriginal population is now very much city-based and town-based, with very few (at least in the south) staying in communities.

But it seems as if there is now more movement into the city, or more accurately out of the remote north-west into towns like Coober Pedy and Port Augusta, as well as to Adelaide. Of course, those poor buggers have little English, no work skills and few connections to city people.

So the city population seems to be threefold:

* one, largely city-born, perhaps the majority. who are dispersed all over the city and more likely to be working;

* another, more likely on welfare and living in the lower-cost suburbs;

* and the third, from the north, some in public housing and hostels, and quite a few living rough around the city centre.

Maybe the earlier exodus from southern communities is also being reproduced from more remote communities ?

Since SA is a sort of microcosm of Aboriginal society to a large extent, maybe something similar is going on across the country ?

Cheers,

Joe

@Joe,

Sorry, I should have been clearer - I meant Australians in general have had to move to where the work was. Why should it be different for Australians with Aboriginal Ancestry?

I cannot really see much difference in moving to where the food is and moving to where the work is when I think about it.

We had ancestors moving from State to State, and of course, across the world, in the 19th century, following the work and a future. It is the eternal story of humanity.

Hi Rhross,

Yes, you're right there. And better TV reception in the cities :)

Joe