.

Dear Is Mise,

.

You wrote :

« Do the learned authors not know the meaning of 'Nation'? If they think that, as they appear to, that Aboriginal Australians ever had, or constituted/constitute a nation then I consider their thinking to be seriously flawed »

The OED defines “nation” as follows :

« A large body of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular state or territory »

The Online Etymology Dictionary indicates :

« c. 1300, nacioun, "a race of people, large group of people with common ancestry and language," from Old French nacion "birth, rank; descendants, relatives; country, homeland" (12c.) and directly from Latin nationem (nominative natio) "birth, origin; breed, stock, kind, species; race of people, tribe," literally "that which has been born," from natus, past participle of nasci "be born" (Old Latin gnasci), from PIE root *gene- "give birth, beget," with derivatives referring to procreation and familial and tribal groups.

« The word is used in English in a broad sense, "a race of people an aggregation of persons of the same ethnic family and speaking the same language," and also in the narrower sense, "a political society composed of a government and subjects or citizens and constituting a political unit; an organized community inhabiting a defined territory within which its sovereignty is exercised." »

The historian, Kevin Blackburn notes in his article : “Mapping Aboriginal Nations: The Use of the Nation Concept by Late Nineteenth Century Anthropologists in Australia” :

« From the late 18th century to the end of the 19th century, the word ‘nation’ underwent a change in meaning from a term describing cultural entities comprised of people of common descent, to the modern definition of a nation as a sovereign people. The political scientist Liah Greenfeld called this shift in the definition of the word nation a ‘semantic transformation’, in which ‘the meaning of the original concept is gradually obscured, and the new one emerges as conventional’ » :

http://press-files.anu.edu.au/downloads/press/p73361/pdf/ch0648.pdf

The terms “First nations” and “Aboriginal nations” should be understood in the original anthropological sense.

.

Issy,

You might try this word instead;

NITPICKING; engage in fussy or pedantic fault-finding.

Joe; The definition of a Maoist; Someone who makes flags?

Although I give credit to Mao Zedong and the struggle he and his followers engaged in post WWII in "freeing" China from oppression, I never though of Maoism as having any relevance in a country like Australia. Maoism seemed fitting for those poor third would countries wanting to free themselves from Western Imperialism at that time, nothing more than that.

The story of Aboriginal people in South Australia, post European settlement, is a rather sorry story
Paul1405,
Didn't you state previously that your background includes Maori ?

Banjo,

"The terms “First nations” and “Aboriginal nations” should be understood in the original anthropological sense."

Precisely.

Paul,

You haven't yet said where the Aboriginal villages were

There were no aboriginal 'nations'; the (maybe) first inhabitants of this continent were not even civilised, just as all nomadic people with no contact with civilisation were not civilised. There is nothing derogatory about that fact. Some people waffling on about 'nations' and 'civilisation' clearly don't have even a school dictionary in the house.

We need to stop stop obsessing about people who died out two centuries ago. Nobody wants to be blamed non-stop for what somebody they never knew might have done to other people they never new.

The merest idea of 'constitutionalising' one small (very small) section of the population is pure racism and apartheid.

You arrogant, paternalistic, condescending white bastards won't be happy until you are handing out rations of tobacco, flour, sugar and tea again.

Didn't you state previously that your background includes Maori ?

No Indy I never stated that. My son claims some "Aboriginality" based on some test his wife shouted him. Its my belief based on scientific information that there is no test that proves Aboriginality. The rednecks from One Nation, Hanson and Latham, have put that forward as policy. It sounds a bit like the Nazi's wanting proof of no Jewish ancestry before joining the SS. I assume One Nation wants proof of Aboriginality before also joining the SS, that's Social Security. Otherwise what is the point, unless of course you want a boomerang symbol stitched to their clothing for easy identification.