Paul,

While it is true that many people are not satisfied with what they have the reality of the hand to mouth existence of the hunter gatherer with zero comforts would be the equivalent of the bottom of the ladder Europeans in 1770 with a life expectancy a little over 30.

Australians are far better off now, and you are free to don a loin cloth and fend for yourself if you think it is a better existence. Your logic is a joke.

Your logic is the joke SM with your smug superior attitude, a typical self serving materialists. I bet you have a flasher car than the bloke next door. The colonisers of the 18th and 19th century had the same attitude as you.

I can tell you one thing my "Fijian Family" may not have your flash car and latest Iphone, in fact materially they have very little, but happiness they have in bounds.

BTW Joe, in 2021 we will be sponsoring one of our Fijian boys to go to uni in Brisbane, if he wants. His middle school results have been excellent with A's, so if all is well, and he wants to come here I see no problem. We have already told him if he wants that we are willing to help him.

'Your logic is the joke SM with your smug superior attitude, a typical self serving materialists. I bet you have a flasher car than the bloke next door. The colonisers of the 18th and 19th century had the same attitude as you.
'

dear oh dear.

Obviously Paul has never seen the numerous Landcruisers supplied to Aboriginal corporations that are trashed not far from new. You really are blinded by your warped narrative Paul.

The Economist says when James Cook landed in
Australia in 1770 aboriginals had been there for about 60,000
years. Their 500 or so separate nations
were deemed terra nulius, free for the taking.
Aborigines were butchered or displaced and
later their children were stolen and placed in foster care under a
cultural assimilation programme that lasted for many decades. They
got the vote only in 1962. After a referendum five years later,
they were included in the census. But not until 1992 did the
high court recognise that they should have some claim over their
land. Even well intentioned policies brought in more recently
have failed them.

When the law said they must be paid the same wage as other
Australians for the same job many were sacked. Billions of
dollars were poured into programmes to help indigenous peoples
every year with mixed results. The decade wide gap in life
expectancy is getting wider.

Though only 3% of the population aborigines fill a quarter of
Australia's prison cells. Their young men have one of the
highest suicide rates in the world. Their children are almost
ten times more likely to be in state care, and the list goes on.

The Uluru Statement from the Heart asked that our Constitution
our founding document must reflect what came before: it must
acknowledge the place of the First Peoples. Others have
described it as our nation's rule book.

It is a rule book, that still carries the illegitimacy and
stain of race, so it surely needs amendment. This land's
First Peoples have felt the sting of exclusion and
discrimination. It is the challenge of a nation to rise above
its past. Can our constitution meet the aspirations of those
locked out at the nation's birth?

Will the First Peoples be given full voice to shape their
destinies and complete their union with their fellow
Australians?

These things are not incompatible. The First People do
not have special rights, but inherent rights.
It diminishes no one to acknowledge and protect that
unique status, in keeping with the spirit and limits of
our constitutional democracy.

Paul,

Would you care to back up your assertion that Australian troops in Korea threw bombs at children?

I can remember tossing chocolate and tins of rations but perchance you have some detailed information; or is this but another boring example of your Green bile bubbling over?

Hi Paul,

Your comment: " ..... when you only accept people because of certain criteria that is being elitist. I believe like all students Aboriginal children included, where possible should be part of the general education system. No one should be hived off because of their race or religion. I must agree with you, there is no case for a special aboriginal university. "

Yes, I fully agree. My point about Indigenous university participators is that they have also been in full agreement, or at least 95 % :)

But the Indigenous power-elites have been pushing blindly for a separate university for a long time. Certainly, in the 90s, pressure was put on staff in certain programs at at least one university to try to direct Indigenous applicants to Indigenous-focussed courses (that 'Blacks should do Black courses, whites should do white courses'), and when objections were raised that that was moving towards Apartheid, those objectors didn't get their contracts renewed.

Many times, I've thought that if some of the Indigenous power-elite were introduced to the topic of Apartheid, they would perk up and say, "Hey, that's not a bad idea."

After all, the aim of the game, for them, is power over other Indigenous people, over as many people in as many ways as possible, not results. My hope is that as many Indigenous graduates as possible liberate themselves from that control.

Joe