Australia celebrates NRW from 27 May to 3 June.

With a theme of 'In This Together' Chief Executive Officer (NRW), Karen Mundine, has said that Australia’s ability to move forward as a nation relies on individuals, organisations and communities coming together in the spirit of reconciliation. “When we come together to build mutual respect and understanding, we shape a better future for all Australians.” 2020 marks Reconciliation Australia 20 years of operations.

In her address Karen said; “Much has happened since the early days of the people’s movement for reconciliation, including greater acknowledgement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander rights to land and sea; understanding of the impact of government policies and frontier conflicts; and an embracing of stories of Indigenous success and contribution,”

“Throughout this time we have also learnt how to reset relationships based on respect. While much has been achieved, there is still more work to be done and this year is the ideal anniversary to reflect on how far we have come while setting new directions for the future.”

What are we being admonished to reconcile to?

As soon as the real Indigenous & the more numerous pretend indigenous accept the newcomers, reconciliation will be achieved.
The greater majority of newcomers have already bent ar$e over backwards for over a hundred years so, when will enough be acknowledged as reconciliation achieved ?
Meanwhile those non-indigenous morons who always give cause to racial tension will need to be dealt with way more harshly !

Like everything else to do with the Aboriginal industry, nothing and nobody gets reconciled during the week, or at any other time. Of course, if anything worked, the blactivists would be working and living like most other Australians - they would have to, because all the grants, 'rights', faux sympathy, and huge amounts of money would have been stopped.

Nah. Couldn't have that.

Individual "Meanwhile those non-indigenous morons who always give cause to racial tension will need to be dealt with way more harshly". So what do you suggest the usual commo flogging, deportation and shooting? Boiling in oil? hanging, drawing & quartering? Give us an idea how your hurt feelings can only be assuaged.
On another tack can only non-indigenous people be capable of this horrendous crime?
What about my feelings?

Dear Paul,

In this country we need to first reconcile ourselves
with our past and how we mistreated Aboriginal people.

In the words of Aboriginal personality Ernie Dingo,
"Reconciliation is not for Aboriginal people. Reconcile
the injustices that have been done to Aboriginal people,
sit down, think about it, get it out of the way and see
what can be done to fix things."

This requires support from official institutions and
strong leaders.

The government formed the Council for Aboriginal
Reconciliation
many decades ago to advance a national process of
reconciliation. Among the Council's tasks was to address
Aboriginal disadvantage and address aspirations in
employment, health, infrastructure and economic development.

It identified 8 key issues in the Reconciliation processs:

1) Understanding country
2) Improving relationships 3) Valuing cultures
4) Sharing history 5) Addressing disadvantage
6) Custody level 7) Aboriginals controlling their own
destiny 8) Formal documentation of the process.

The Council's formation was an acknowledgement of the
past and ongoing failure of government policy to recognise
and address the cultural social and economic needs of
Aboriginal Australians.

It was also the recognition that progress also requires
a sea-change in the understanding and involvement of
non-Aboriginal Australians because court decisions,
laws and political involvements make the reconciliation
process that much harder.

We can't continue to do what we've been doing and expect
different results.

//What are we being admonished to reconcile to?//

I've always thought it meant reconciliation in the sense of 'the restoration of friendly relations'. Which seems reasonable enough to me; I'm hard-pressed to imagine why anybody would be against friendly relations with blackfellas. Well, except for certain class of inferior people that the rest of us have to put up with. Fortunately that mob of cockroaches are a dying breed.

"I've always thought it meant reconciliation in the sense of 'the restoration of friendly relations'."

Oh good....so we've already achieved reconciliation.

Next problem please.

Dear Toni,

You can see from some of the posts - that not
all of they are a dying breed. Some of them
are hanging on for dear life.

We have on many occasions gone through this motion. It is about time we start talking about equal responsibility and contribution to society, rather than treat aboriginals as needing an apology for being aboriginal. While in hospital yesterday I was asked if I identified as aboriginal; or Torres Straight Irelander, I am fair skinned and blonde hair; which means i could have claimed aboriginality and that identity would have been granted. When we are both treated as equal citizens rather than some underclass needing special privilege, we are then both accepting we are truly reconciled.

Josephus,

Aboriginal Australians don't need an apology
for being Aboriginal. They're not asking for an apology.
What they want is to be treated with respect and have
their history recognised. They can't aek responsibility
if they're not allowed to have any. If whitefellas keep
telling them what to do.

'What they want is to be treated with respect and have
their history recognised'

Yeah kind of like the first settlers whose children and grandchildren and then other migrants who did such a marvelous job in building and defending this nation.

Maybe one year we should celebrate the Indigeneous, the next the British migrants, the next the Italian migrants, the next the Chinese etc etc.

The difference is - we are all living on the land
of our Aboriginal people. They were here first.
And they were never consulted about what was done.
Or how ti was done and by whom.

Foxy you have perpetrated the lie that aboriginals are second class. It is you who has to treat them as equal, rather than claim they are not equal. Reconciliation is a two way acceptance of the equality of the other, rather than treat we are settlers on aboriginal land. Two hundred years of history has been shared and rather than class or entitlement be identified we all must accept equality and stop the two Nation rhetoric.

'The difference is - we are all living on the land
of our Aboriginal people. They were here first.
And they were never consulted about what was done.
Or how ti was done and by whom.'

Yep and my British relatives were here before you Foxy. I was never asked about how I felt about other Europeans coming here. Personally I don't see the land that my wife and I worked for belonging to the aboriginals. If I would go back to Scotland and ask for the land of my ancestors I would be laughed out of the place.

Josephus,

There's not point in talking to you .
You're so ignorant it's not funny.

runner,

They don't want your land. They're not after private land.
They want what's theirs. Fair and square.

BTW:

The future of this country lies in uplifting our
Indigenous people into the mainstream. It will take
strong leadership to do precisely that. Scott
Morrison just may surprise us all. After all he is
a Christian and does practice his religion unlike
some.

On another tack can only non-indigenous people be capable of this horrendous crime?
JBoyer,
Of course not, I have personally witnessed more racist behaviour from indigenous but more idiotic from non-indigenous towards indigenous & they're the ones I'm on about.
Flogging doesn't work due to the no brain-no pain with too many. What does hurt the most is a fine, the hip-pocket nerve is the most sensitive part of an Okker's body !

The future of this country lies in uplifting our
Indigenous people into the mainstream
Foxy,
That sounds warm n'fozzy for the average Whitey but why force people into mainstream when they've so obviously rejected it ? They know that being mainstream means mainstream responsibility also not just the benefits !

runner,

Nobody asked the Aboriginals how they felt being invaded
either. The first inhabitants - who generations of
Australians remember from that one history class when the
teacher mentioned them. But the original inhabitants
would not have thought of themselves as " Australian."
The 250 individual nations that occupied the continent
had yet to gain the wonderful sense of national unity that
white men brought to Australia, along with other marvellous
innovations such as guns and smallpox.

For many thousands of years, these people lived in total
ignorance of what they were missing out on, not even
knowing how deprived they were until their European
benefactors came along to teach and/or kill them.

Of course those white men didn't think of Australia as
"Australia" either. Prior to European settlement the
continent was known in the Old World by a number of names:
"New Holland", "New South Wales," Öld Zealand", "North
Antarctica", "Snakesville", - and more, were common
monikers of the great southern land.

As for you going back to Scotland to claim land?

You certainly would have problems proving where your
ancestors came from - the Picts, Gaels, Cumbrians,
Germanic speaking Anglo-Saxons, Norse ...
such a mixture who formed the Scottish Nation.

//Oh good....so we've already achieved reconciliation.//

Yeah, I'm not convinced that some of the sentiments expressed on this forum could be described by any reasonable person as 'friendly'. And I don't really think you can speak for all your fellow countrymen on this one, but I'm glad to hear that you've achieved reconciliation and are friendly with blackfellas. Good for you.

So individual it is money you are after to make people agree with you? moronic okkers is it? Sounds particularly racist to me but you are the expert.
Here is a tip, keep your racist remarks to yourself as in usual company someone will take umbrage and you will be sorry you did not keep quiet.

Just to mark reconciliation week.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-26/rio-tinto-blast-destroys-area-with-ancient-aboriginal-heritage/12286652

Dear Steele,

Thanks for the link.

Sometimes it seems that in the modern era Australia
has to reflect more than ever on its past. The wrongs
of history continue to echo and be argued over , and
the efforts of Australians to distract themselves
from troubling thoughts have at times have been truly
Herculean.

There has been unprecedented glory for Australians in
the recent past - in sport, entertainment, and the arts.
but an increased visibility on the world stage means an
increased scrutiny on us as a nation, and like a teenage
boy without a lock on his bedroom door, Australia is
frequently caught with its pants down.

This is but one example. Through it all Australia continues
to be led by men and women - who lack vision, talent,
and leadership.

JBoyer,
Thanks for enlightening us because I'sure most people didn't know that Okkers are a race.

//Just to mark reconciliation week.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-26/rio-tinto-blast-destroys-area-with-ancient-aboriginal-heritage/12286652//

Bloody disgusting. I remember a certain amount of outrage and accusations of barbarism some years back when the Taliban blew up a statue of the Buddha... maybe if they were in the business of mining, nobody would have cared.

Taliban blew up a statue of the Buddha..
Toni Lavis,
That very same thought came to my mind the moment I first heard of the Rio Tinto act !

Program after program has been established to improve Aborigines’ lot, costing many billions of dollars over the years. Some were partly or wholly run by Aboriginals for Aboriginals. Some achieved some benefits, but most failed completely. The result to date? Apart from assimilated Aborigines who live their lives much the same as most non-Aboriginals, the lot of the rest has steadfastly failed to improve.

It is not our responsibility to atone for British settlement. Nobody can turn back the clock. People identify with an aboriginal background have no rights to special privileges because their ancestors were here before white Australians.

We all need to get over it. We need to stop the nonsense of smoking ceremonies and welcome-to-country paid performances that mean nothing to 97% of the population in the 21st Century.

Enough of the victimhood!

If this minority of Australians wishes to keep aspects of their culture alive, let them do it at their own expense, just as other minorities do

I doubt these issues will be ever resolved.

I spoke to an aboriginal lady once, and all i heard was hatred and the feeling that the government could never do enough. Fair enough.

I feel sorry for Aboriginal people, especially the many who don't get on within the maintstream, but i cant see things ever getting much better besides making sure that Aborignals are treated fairly and given resources to help overcome disadvantage.

"I'm not convinced that some of the sentiments expressed on this forum could be described by any reasonable person as 'friendly'"

Oh, so we're going for universal submission to the one true faith?

Well that's one way to ensure the whole thing can continue into the generations.

I loved the bit in SR's link where they talked about having lost examples of "bone technology". Basically they took a kangaroo leg bone, sharpened it and, hey presto....technology!! Seriously?

My grandson t'other day sharpened the end of his crayon....crayon technology. Unfortunately his mother forced him to flatten it again. Oh the humanity...future generations will be devastated at the destruction.

Academics have concocted a totally false image of aboriginal culture that has come to dominate all discourse and seen millions of dollars being put into indigenous studies centres, research, courses, colleges and propping up living museums in totally uneconomic, isolated camps misnamed 'communities'. The elites of the aboriginal industry have assumed for themselves a pseudo culture that carries with it all the pomp and circumstance of a nation - one that never existed.

A common culture of all aboriginal people has been invented, as has an unreal society of liberty and fraternity among the nomadic tribes and family groups of the original inhabitants. The truth is regular warfare, raiding, porous borders, brutality and the abandonment of the unwanted.

These historical facts have not prevented the fabrication of an ancient Utopia, the aim of which is not to reflect past truths, but to set up for apartheid in the future

ttbn,
Sounds like you've spent time on communities too. Academia & Australian Academia in particular on the history side are indeed the cause for much of the wedge that continues to split the us & them state of affairs.
A large part of that wedge are the countless gutless bureaudroids who hand over funding with no questions ask re the integrity of applications for 'Projects" !
Morrison really should think about putting in place some fairly fine filters in the guilt industry !

No country is perfect, is often pointed out by
people trying to find a way to argue that there's
nothing actually wrong with their country and no
changes need to be made.

And the fact that Australia is objectively better
than every other country doesn't mean there aren't
some bits that could maybe do with a bit of
improvement.

Australia have never been perfect, obviously. But
having gone through the long, painful process of
becoming a nation, then discovering a national
identity and finding a way to make the rest of the
world take notice of us, Australians have devoted
precious little thought to the nation's failings and
contradictions.

We've had enough time now to stop and reflect, and to
mull over the ways in which Australia, though having
so much that is wonderful and positive to offer the
world, also has a fair bit to feel guilty for.

The issue of the relationship between white Australians
and the original inhabitants is perhaps top of the list.
There are bound to be tensions when two peoples are
forced to coexist with vastly different cultures and
priorities; especially when one of those peoples spends
a significant portion of its time trying to exterminate
the other one.

To this day Australia has not reconciled the darkness at
the heart of its foundation, the brutality upon which the
nation was founded. But in the relative prosperity that
most of Australia now enjoys some serious thought is
being given and some recognition of the struggles of
Aboriginal Australia is starting to break through.

People are still continuing to fight to redress the wrongs of
the past and find justice for the marginalised
not just by recognition of a problematic foundation, but
by the tragedy and heartache in the present moment.

In this time it will be men and women of good heart who
will emerge to question, quarrel, excel, and exploit,
inspire and infuriate. They will help bring Australia
into hopefully a new era of self-awareness and maturity
with all the wisdom and pain that necessitates.

"To this day Australia has not reconciled the darkness at
the heart of its foundation, the brutality upon which the
nation was founded. "

So, again, how?

How do we reconcile that? What do we need to do, say, intimate that would 'reconcile' the past?

What specific measures should we take. Or is just pontificating on how all the others aren't as reconciled as 'me', enough?

Truly, I've been asking this question for two decades now. What is the end point. How do we know we're reconciled? What 'thing' would we see in our society that would signal the end, that reconciliation had occurred?

No one knows, or cares because getting to the end, getting to the reconciled point, isn't the point. If we were reconciled then there'd be nothing to whinge about, nothing that would justify the claim for more resources, more hand-outs. So we never get to the end. And we never even bother identifying where the end is.

//Given the predilection of the left whinge Teachers union to use school time for indoctrination rather than education, this crowd of left whinge clowns want to take us back to 1984.//

Of course. Teaching kids about the history of racial oppression outside of their history classes is exactly like a dystopian totalitarian dictatorship, except for the 'dystopian', 'totalitarian' and 'dicatorship' bits.

I feel there should be a corollary to Godwin's Law that covers Orwell's masterpiece.

Sorry, wrong thread.

I think any rational thinker can see that those responsible for the welfare state have done far more harm to aboriginals than even the few whites that committed murder. With massive alcohol, drug, child molestation issues, those that claim to celebrate Indigenous culture have seen their guilt ideology lead to massive amounts of death and domestic violence. Does not fit the regressive narrative but not really hard to see.

Lets face it. The relationship between Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander people and the rest of
Australia is broken. The system is not working.
It has never worked for Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander people.

The nation persists in governing these people in ways
that are harmful to them with the conviction that if
they find the right policies, the right funding, the
right set of incentives, their lives will somehow
improve. This is a colonial fantasy.

There have been moments of hope - for example - the 1967
Referendum, the Mabo Court case on land rights in 1992,
the bridge walks in 2000, Prime Minster Kevin Rudd's
2008 apology for stolen generations, all gave hope.
But something far more radical is required.

The successes of an Indigenous middle-class does not
obscure the fact that for the majority of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander people government policies and
programs have made little positive difference to their
quality of life.

Over many decades Australian government policies in
Indigenous affairs have been marked by two things - constant
re-invention and constant resistance to the ONE thing that
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people want.
The ability to control and manage their own lives.

They have consistently called for greater control over
their own destinies. So long as governments fail to
address this and as long as they suppress the desires of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people for a greater
say - the policies and programs directed at them will
continue to flounder.

These people need to control their own systems regarding
what is important to them - such as - health, education,
law, and justice - things that matter to them. The Uluru
Statement from the Heart did not ask for much. Yet it was
rejected outright - without so much as a debate.

And we still keep asking - how can we reconcile? What can
we do? The problems lie not with our Aboriginal people. The
problems is US! They keep telling us what they want.
Our governments refuse to listen.

I forgot to add - in relation to the past administration
of Aboriginal affairs it should be recognised that
Aboriginal people have continuously resisted the
imposition of much of government's legislation.

The official records reflect this opposition and contain
letters written by Aboriginal people seeking to recover
their land, their right to vote, their children returned,
to receive citizenship rights and so on.

There's more at the following link:

http://www.theconversation.com/indigenous-reconciliation-in-australia-a-bridge-too-far-54336

The relationship between Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander people ....
Foxy,
Do you have any idea how the islanders regard the Aborigines & the PNG's in private ?

The topic under discussion here is how our governments
have regarded and treated these people over the decades.
That's what needs fixing.

The problems lie not with our Aboriginal people. The
problems is US! They keep telling us what they want.
Our governments refuse to listen.

This is what one leading aboriginal activist wrote.

Warriors of the Aboriginal Resistance - WAR
In response to the attacks on WAR members and the call to burn Australia to the ground at the Naarm Abolish Australia Day Rally, we would like to issue the following statement:
Tuck Australia.
Tuck your land theft, your child stealing and your state sanctioned murders.
Tuck your governments, your military and your police.
Tuck your concentration camps dressed up as correctional facilities and immigration detention centres.
Tuck your economy, your greed and your cult of the almighty dollar.
Tuck your poisoning of water, your wholesale destruction of land and your pollution of our atmosphere.
Tuck your language forced upon us and violently attempting to replace our very own.
Tuck your white supremacy, your patriarchy and your capitalism.
Tuck your flag, your anthem and your precious national day.
WAR will not rest until we burn this entire rotten settler colony called Australia, illegally and violently imposed on stolen Aboriginal land at the expense of the blood of countless thousands, to the tucking ground, until every corrupt and illegal institution of white supremacist, patriarchal, capitalist settler colonial power forced upon us is no more. We will not rest until we build a society that cares for and honours the Earth, our mother, that respects the interconnectedness of all beings, that is founded on our sovereignty and responsibility to this country and the people who live on it, and that offers a place of safety and prosperity for our people and for all those oppressed and excluded by the current systems of power - refugees, people of colour, LGBTQIA people, poor people, disabled people.
Abolish Australia, not just Australia Day

Oh good...so we're dealing with perfectly rational people then.

I wonder why there isn't a solution?

Perhaps because there's no question, just tantrums.

WHAT DO WE WANT!! WE WANT! WE WANT!

Well I've posted what we want in the last post. And Governments are supposed to comply according to Foxy.

You see Foxy, no one really knows what they want. They want to sit by fires at the waterhole and roast a kangaroo, wombat or two with the mates. For fun run a few spears through the adjoining tribe, which they have been doing for thousands of years. Those that assimilate to our laws and contribute to Australian society are reconciled, they do not need modern smoking ceremonies and welcome to country and endless apologies.

Abolish Australia, not just Australia Day
Josephus,
A lot of so-called Indigenous would not survive as many didn't before the invasion !

Josephus,

Thank you for the rant from an Aboriginal person.
It just goes to show that there are nutters and
extremists in all groups.

However, as I wrote earlier - in relation to the
past administration of Aboriginal affairs it should
be recognised that Aboriginal people have continuously
resisted the imposition of much of government's
legislation. The official records reflect this
opposition.

And they have also stated, especially in the Uluru Statement
what it is they are after. However as I stated earlier,
the government refuses to listen. Hopefully, the new
Aboriginal Minister Ken Wyatt may be able to achieve more
than others have done in the post. He may succeed in
presenting an acceptable model that the government can accept.
Although I won't be holding my breath.

There is an aboriginal industry who's members do very well out of making sure there is always an underclass of drunken, wife beating, child molesting bludgers for them to administer.

As for these aboriginals as the old saying still goes, "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink", "you can throw billions at the bludging yobbos of the aboriginal race, but you can't improve their wellbeing", without them wanting improvement.

Meanwhile how about someone reconciling me to the billions wasted on a useless cause.

Dear Hassie,

If our governments keep on pursuing the same old
policies, programs, and incentives that they've
done to date and which haven't worked - in other
words if they keep doing what they've done in the past
they'll keep getting the same results - more wasting
of money. How about actually giving our Aboriginal
people a voice and responsibility in their own affairs
instead of telling them what to do - letting them do it?

It's worked with native peoples in other countries -
why is Australia not following suit?

If it wasn't for white liberals filling activist heads with lies I suspect we would of had much better relationships with the first aussies a long time ago. To many celebrities, left wing deviants, journalist and others would have nothing to virtue signal about if peace was achieved.

Foxy,

Your suggestion does not go deep enough.

A great crime has been committed by Anglo-Australia against the Aboriginal peoples and can only be righted by a formal treaty between the Commonwealth and a collective of the Aboriginal Land Councils, which would entail restoring land rights that are acceptable to all Aboriginal peoples.

Come off the raw prawn O, you could give the aboriginal activists all of OZ, NZ, the USA & the UK, & they would still be screaming they were hard done by.

I have found that most people get what they deserve in this life, what they have earned, but the "aboriginals" have been given at least 10 times what they are worth & are still bitching. It will never stop.

I watched on Gardening Australia last night of a young man from Western Australia attempting to live among standard society pursuing wealth only to find his life unfulfilled. After a divorce he settled down to set up a native trees and plant nursery and educate young aboriginal boys in their growth and use. He had taken responsibility for his life and was making contribution to society. He did not need Government welfare or he needed special recognition. He was acting as being reconciled.

Phil,

The irony is that the Chinese are now doing to us Anglo-Australians what our forebears did to the Aboriginals: the Chinese are giving us a taste of our own medicine.

We replaced Aboriginal Australia with Anglo-Australia and now China is replacing Anglo-Australia with Chinese Australia.

I hope you and your family are practising your Chinese, especially your big Aussie "Ni Hao Mate!"

Gung ho for Land Rights, a Treaty and Reconciliation under China.

is Mise,

You are an absolute visionary. If only I had your powers of foresight.

Is Mise,

Did you hear the news about Foxy giving me a Chinese name: you can call me Bigwen Bigwen if you like.

She might have one for you too but don't ask her for 'Andrew Forrest' because someone got in before us.

And remember: "Ni hao Mate!"

The only people white people should be worrying about are themselves. Thanks to multiculturalism (which is all about minorities, not the host culture/race), we Caucasians are rapidly being "retired"; not just in Australia, but globally. Mass immigration and multiculturalism will be the death of us.

Unfortunately, it is the white elites who are killing us off. They are the ones encouraging other races and minorities to swamp the West. The coloureds and minorities can't just come here without the say so of people like Scott Morrison and other politicians. I get it that they don't care about most of us, but they seem to be too thick to see that they are on the way out, too.

The attitude of the forums racists, white supremacists and hard right nut jobs towards the vast majority of aboriginal people is pathetic.
The Australian ethos of a "fair go" for all has been lost when its comes to our Indigenous brothers and sisters. Everything from open hostility to paternalism has been practised without success. It was the Whitlam government in the 1970's, less than 50 years ago, that made the first attempt to right the injustices of the past. The fact aboriginal people survive to this day, despite the many attempts to eradicate them in so many ways, and they can still call themselves a people, and can clearly identify themselves is a miracle. A few insulting words from a hot head mob gets Josephus all upset, others simply denigrate the aboriginal people as bludgers and halfwits undeserving of our help. Shameful!

Dear Paul,

I have every bit of faith in people of goodwill
who can and will get together and solve our
nation's problems. I also have faith in Scott
Morrison, who I feel as Prime Minster will
surprise us all. I believe he's a good man.

The irony is that the Chinese are now doing to us Anglo-Australians what our forebears did to the Aboriginals: the Chinese are giving us a taste of our own medicine.
Mr Oipinion,
And, before the last invasion the indigenous did it to each other ! But, as there was no money around in those days all was forgiven once a culprit was speared !
As you can see, money changed the game, not the actions plus there were no pseudo indigenous then either !

Hi Foxy,

Yes, Morrison may prove to be far more conciliatory than the alternative Dutton, who clearly demonstrates a high degree of confrontationalism with his politics. A government led by Dutton would be very confronting on all matters, aboriginals included.

We say we dodged a bullet with the government response to covid-19. If things had been different, with Dutton and his mob holding sway, that bullet would have hit us right between the eyes, like in Trumps America. I would expect nothing less from the ratbag conservative brigade.

Individual,

What exactly is an "Anglo-Australian?"

"Anglos"- are such a mixed bag - so which part of
the mix are you referring to exactly?

Foxy,

Scott Morrison might just go down in the history books as the prime minister who had to surrender Australia into the hands of the CCP.

If he really wants to show himself as a man of action I reckon he should step in and override Victoria's decision to sign up to the China's Belt and Road Initiative on the grounds that such an arrangement is not in the national interest because it puts at risk Australia's status as an inner circle ally of the US.

Mike Pompeo has already sent a warning shot to Australia that a BRI between Victoria and China would make Australia a security risk for the US with the result that the US would not be prepared to defend Australia against Chinese aggression.

Or do you think I'm overreacting and we should all join hands in a big circle with the CCP and sing Kumbaya?

Signed
Bigwen Bigwen

Foxy,

This is off the web:

English Australians, also known as Australians of English descent or Anglo-Australians, are Australians whose ancestry originates wholly or partly in England.

I use the term to define the entire polity rather than a particular race. I could have used British Australian. Anglo-Australian is a good term to define our primary institutions etc. that we identify with as a nation. And given that we are still a British Dominion I reckon I'm pretty spot on Daiyu.

Can you suggest something else more appropriate?

Signed
Your big Aussie "Ni hao Mate!", Bigwig Bigwen.

Mr O,

According to the last census of 2016 - Australians
now come from 200 countries and represent more than
over 100 religions and more than 300 ethnic ancestries.

The census highlights Australia's rich cultural
identity. This wide variety of background along with the
many cultures of our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples has helped to create a uniquely Australian identity.

Also the proportion of migrants born in Asia has increased.
From 24% in 2001, to 33% in 2011 to 40% in 2016 and growing.
This reveals closer ties to Asia.

Foxy,

If you read my comment again you will see that I am not about defining race. I am interested in defining the institution of Australia and the best term I can think of is Anglo-Australia which basically identifies Australia as a British Dominion.

Can you offer another term for this?

Bigwen Bigwen.

What exactly is an "Anglo-Australian?"
Foxy,
You'd better ask this someone who claims to be one ! I'm a Celt btw !

With reference to my remarks above on how our political elites don’t care what mass non-European immigration does to the rest of us, while not knowing that the same thing will happen to them, I was just reading something that reminded me that John Howard asianised Australia to an extent never seen before - and look what happened to him. The Chinese voters in his electorate humiliated him by making him only the second Australian serving Prime Minister to lose his seat.

It’s amazing that he still appears in public, and seems to ‘advise’ the Liberal party. Even more amazing is that that the ‘leaders’ since him have kept up the mass Chinese immigration. It might well be that Howard had lost the plot; he had been PM long enough. But there was/is no excuse for Abbott, Turnbull and now Morrison to keep going in the same direction. While some of us are laughing at the US idiot, Joe Biden and his demented ramblings, we should instead be looking at the galah who already has the top job here, and will do so for another two years. Maybe the plan is for Gladys Liu to replace him

Mr O,

Australia has never been part of the United Kingdom.
It was part of the British Empire but became
basically independent in 1931 (the final constitutional
ties were cut in 1986).

It is part of the Commonwealth, but that's a voluntary
club.

Australia is neither a colony nor an overseas territory. We
ceased to be colonies in 1901 when the colonies
federated and became states of the Commonwealth
of Australia. The only tie
we have with the UK is - we share the Queen as our ceremonial
and constitutional head of state. Her representative in
Australia is the Governor-General chosen by the federal
parliament of the day for a five year term.

It does seem odd to some people that a nation as proud as
Australia would accept an unelected foreigner as head of
state.

But Australians accept it. Possibly because most feel it is
better to stay with what works. In the Westminster System
the head of state has mainly ceremonial powers and is
apolitical - which Australians prefer.

Individual,

You stated that you're of Celtic ancestry?

Are you Welsh, Scottish or Irish?

ttbn,

I very much doubt whether Ms Liu will get re-elected.
I'll be very surprised if she does at the next election.
The Liberal Party will probably replace her because of
her connections to the Communist Party. Also many
Chinese Australians may well question whether she has
the skills to be an effective parliamentarian and make
any sort of contribution on behalf of her constituents
and community.

They have yet to see much beyond political fund raising
in her CV. Her interview with Andrew Bolt high-lighted
her inability to dissect the issues and challenges
facing Australia.

The concerns around skills and competence are important
especially for Chinese communities that strongly believe in
merit.

Also, if the Chinese communities are serious about
increasing the participation of Chinese-Australians and
Asian Australians in Australian democratic institutions -
they need to erase the stereotype portraying them as
little more than cash-cows, political fund-raisers, and
numbers-builders.

Unfortunately this is a stereotype that has been
exacerbated by representatives like Ms Liu and former NSW
Labor MP Ernest Wong.

Foxy,

You didn't ask individual if he is Breton.

You will know if he is telling the truth if he replies "Je suis Breton." otherwise he's a Scot.

Mr O,

Is your hero - Jack Daniels?

Are you Welsh, Scottish or Irish?
Foxy,
You need to go back to where the Celts originated. I imagine some of their throwbacks have gone & settled in Wales, Scotland & Ireland !

All this palaver about ‘reconciliation and poor Aborigines is part of the sickening virtue signalling and self-hatred of weak whiteys. The kind that calls Anglo Saxons, Celts, Europeans - white people - who stand up for themselves ‘white supremacists’.

George Orwell remarked on Anglo and European self-hatred in the 1930s. He wrote that English Leftist intellectuals were unpatriotic. The hollowness of character has spread to all Anglo Europeans globally. Marxism has a good deal to do with it, particularly the Soviet kind, whose wiping out of majority Eastern Europeans peoples to protect minorities has a link with Western multiculturalism, which also spurns the majority and rejects nation and family.

To our lunatic Left, it is ‘racist’ to care more for a fellow ethnic than a randomly-chosen human. The Left is radically anti-national in Australia today. Their multiculturalism serves minorities, and keeps the immigration doors open to a continual flow of of co-ethnics.

Australians have been described as a “subaltern ethnicity”; second class citizens; the only ethnic group subjected to “gratuitous defamation and hostile interrogation” by the media, academia and race-relations bureaucracy.

Meanwhile, most Australians of of Aboriginal background are getting on with things like the rest of us. The few who want to remain part of a living museum are beyond help.

Reconciliation weeks and the like are just diversions, staged by activists of the Left to divert us from their evil intent and the real problems in Australia.

The Uluru statement.
http://www.referendumcouncil.org.au/sites/default/files/2017-05/Uluru_Statement_From_The_Heart_0.PDF

It is evident we have two laws and two nations living on the same land , which is a conflict of interest, and reconciliation is never likely to happen. However if the CCP take over Australia no such treaties will be recognised, and aboriginals will be placed in re-education camps. Those that accept the laws of the ruling class will survive, the others will be disposed of.

Well, still no one has offered an explanation as to what reconciliation would look like, how we'd know when we were reconciled. When you don't know the destination it's really impossible to chart the course.

As suspected reconciliation is really about one small group demanding unspecified and (especially) unquantified benefits and another, somewhat larger (but still very much minority) group cheering them on.They don't know exactly what the dissatisfied aboriginal complainants want but they know that they should get it, whatever it is. And somehow they convince themselves this is a moral stance.

In the end, this is merely about one group demanding never-ending handouts and another group virtue signalling their acquiescence and demanding that someone else should pay up.

Paul wrote...."It was the Whitlam government in the 1970's, less than 50 years ago, that made the first attempt to right the injustices of the past."

The Aboriginal Referendum took place in 1967. Whitlam won power in 1972. Oh dear.

Seriously, Paul's historic knowledge is so abysmal that , if he told me what he had for breakfast yesterday, I'd want confirmation.

Foxy,

Yes, Jack Daniels, and Johnny Walker and Jim Beam as well.

You obviously picked up on the fact that I'm a heavy drinker. The first couple of dozen shots in the morning makes my world look pretty rosy but after another half dozen bottles in the afternoon things start to look a bit dark and threatening and before one knows it I want to fight the world.

Well, that's what happens when one takes up drinking as an 8 year old. I should have listened to dear old mum and stuck to the marijuana and cocaine.

mhaze,

There you go, throwing us all into a spin again with more gobbledygook. Please do us all a favour and stick to being just an engineer.

Dear Paul,

The subject of National Reconciliation exemplifies
the arguments of those who insist that there is no
such thing as "objective history".

In discussing the past (and recent failures) we can
see from a few of the posts here that when we begin
to look critically at things or offer suggestions
in resolving problems the product becomes unacceptable
for one or another camp of readers.

It seems to become political, nasty, and personal,
- explanations seem tantamount
to sympathizing and excusing and all too easily lead onto
the questionable practice of stereotyping people that
don't agree with their viewpoints. And this of people
they've never met of know little about.

These people seem reluctant to modify their judgements.
And, continued stereotyping of any persons however,
can encourage "counter-stereotyping" and the result is
usually a complete breakdown in communication.

Thank You for having raised this topic for discussion.
I look forward to our next one.

Foxy,

I don't know if you realised it but you just ended with:

" ............................. the result is
usually a complete breakdown in communication.
Thank You for having raised this topic for discussion.
I look forward to our next one."

I hate giving credit to the OxleyMoron, but "Please explain."

Dear Hasbeen,

How's it going old cock?

You are sitting there helping yourself to copious taxpayer funded medical services and pottering around in you taxpayer funded Men's shed with gay abandon yet labeling Aboriginals as bludgers and wife beaters. How many times did you lay into your wife mate?

Granted there are indigenous health programs specifically structured toward remote communities buy the amount of Medicare expenditure per person is significantly higher for non-indigenous Australians.

The most up to date figures I can find show that across Australia the average annual support from Medicare is $837 to non indigenous and $626 to indigenous.

GP spend - $232 vs $174

Other unreferred - $49 vs $73

Pathology - $108 vs $73

Imaging - - $127 vs $66

Specialist - - $91 vs $40

Operations and other - $239 vs $200

Now one may think the lack of imaging facilities and access to specialists facing many indigenous people may be contributing to the discrepancy between the two, but the figures are almost at the same ratios in the major cities.

So mate you are part of the cohort getting more than their fair share. What on earth are we going to do with you?

SteeleRedux,

I don't think Phil is the sort of guy who would take handouts and depend on the government to help him with health care.

If anybody offered it to him he would just spit in their eye. That's the sort of guy Phil is!

"offer suggestions in resolving problems the product becomes unacceptable for one or another camp of readers."

That might be true but I'll have to withhold judgement until someone offers some concrete suggestions for resolving the (alleged) problems rather than empty feel-good platitudes. I was sort of hoping that someone here might have a crack at it...but alas.

Mr O wrote: "There you go, throwing us all into a spin again with more gobbledygook."

I'm sorry, I'll try to write a monosyllabic post so that you can try to keep up. But even then you might struggle. Last time you asked me if I was an engineer I answered with a simple "no". But even that seems to have been too hard for you to follow.

SR, since there are a multitude of aboriginal specific health programmes, its not surprising that they access the community's general health system less often than those who don't have access to race based programmes. This has been known for two decades.
I was going to ask you for evidence for your numbers but that seems futile these days.... http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=20923#369157

mhaze,

The web is full of concrete suggestions.
All you have to do is look. Many have
been repeatedly offered here in this
discussion as well including citing a variety
of links. Of course if you don't read them -
you have no one to blame but yourself.

Many moons ago Bill Shorten became an international laughing stock when he said he didn't know what his PM had said but he agreed with it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFELLK8htKM

We see the same thinking here with lots of 'virtuous' people not knowing what reconciliation is, but agreeing with it. 'I can't describe what reconciliation is but I think its a good thing'.

Of coarse these people realise that if you don't agree with this undescribable reconciliation then you're a racist and that's unthinkable to them. They'd rather look the dill than be risk being racist in the same way as Shorten preferred to look the dill than inadvertently disagree with his boss.

"Many have been repeatedly offered here in this
discussion as well including citing a variety
of links. "

Well that's patent rubbish, especially as regards the claim about links. I'd ask Foxy to point to examples of what she claimed, but that never works. She's a past master at making unsupported claims and then refusing to offer that support.

But what the hell....Foxy, please point us to the parts of this thread where concrete proposals are made and/or linked. Just hoping that there might be something on the WWW doesn't count.

mhaze,

You can start by reading my post at the end of
page 1 of this discussion where the 8 key
issues are clearly listed in the Reconciliation
process by the Reconciliation Council. These are
concrete steps suggested by the Council to
be taken. They speak for themselves.

Then if you read
my all of posts throughout this discussion you should
be capable of understanding both what Reconciliation
is about, what it entails, and clearly the steps
that need to be taken to achieve it.

If you still can't understand, - then the problem
lies with you - no one else. No one can help you.

Once more for the dummy! (from Foxy's post page 1)

It identified 8 key issues in the Reconciliation process:

1) Understanding country
2) Improving relationships
3) Valuing cultures
4) Sharing history
5) Addressing disadvantage
6) Custody level
7) Aboriginals controlling their own destiny
8) Formal documentation of the process.

Can't expect much more from the guy who only a few short weeks ago was telling us Covid-19 was nothing more than a sneeze, and would be gone soon

I was thinking that no two aboriginal groups can agree on any one thing at the same time and wondered why? Then I realised it is always about more money and how every one of them wants more than the other group. Yes I know that what is colloquially called "White" people do the same but we see the requirement for consensus eventually.
The ragbag of what they want is open-ended, give a dollar, now two, now four etc. It is always the same carpet baggers who get all the money and want even more and give themselves meaningless titles. Started as Doctor now the latest is Professor so what's after that, Highness, Majesty? I think we need a proper referendum to remove any mention of exempting aboriginality from our laws and be one big happy family.

The 8 key (smile) issues aren't concrete proposals. They don't offer a guide toward reconciliation. They most certainly don't explain what reconciliation would look like and how we'd know when we got there.

They are, as I said earlier, " empty feel-good platitudes". Motherhood statements that make those who self-identify as virtuous think they they know what's at stake. They don't.

For example:
4) Sharing history

What does that even mean? We tell each other stories about our past? One side tells how their ancestors learnt to point a point on a bone, the other tells how their ancestors invented civilisation? And after having 'shared' our history, how does that get us to be reconciled?

In the end we still end up knowing that the aboriginals were run of the mill stone age primitives and the British were invaders.

So no closer to this mirage of reconciliation. Just more whining. Still, a bunch of natives would earn a good living sharing 'their' history and since money is what its all about, all good.

"telling us Covid-19 was nothing more than a sneeze, and would be gone soon"

Still struggling with that whole understanding the past thing I see, Paul. Because that wasn't even close to what I was saying

mhaze,

The underlying aim of the reconciliation process is to imbue the Aboriginal mind with a form of sociocultural amnesia that makes them ignorant of their past and accepting of their lowly and underprivileged status in contemporary society.

There, does that make it any easier for you to understand now?

Instead of reconciliation what they should be given is a formal treaty between the Commonwealth and their collective selves and control of their traditional lands.

There, does that make it any easier for you to understand now?

Are you absolutely certain you are not an engineer?

mhaze,

We can see from your posts your incapability to
understand what Reconciliation is and therefore
you are not able to comprehend the actions being
suggested. Don't feel bad.
You are not alone in this.

Take care.
Stay safe.

Foxy,

And don't forget to tell him about the Kumbaya. We must have the Kumbaya otherwise it's all in vain.

Mr O,

Actually, Yothu Yindi's "Treaty" would be more
appropriate.

Albert Einstein ..."If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it."

Foxy,

Clearly you don't understand it. But that isn't the point, is it? The point is to appear to be sympathetic with the aboriginal to show your virtue. My guess is that you've never pondered the issue as to what is the endgame. How we get to or know we are final reconciled.

Let me help...there is no endgame. The seeking of more handouts and power is never-ending.

mhaze,

Would support a treaty between the Commonwealth and the Aboriginal Land Councils?

mhaze,

Clearly it is you who doesn't understand.

Albert Einstein also said:

"The measure of intelligence is the ability
to change."

And more importantly: -

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking
we used when we created them".

Take care.
Stay safe.

mhaze, I am totally with you. I lived in Alice among aboriginals in 1961, an saw the difference between the town dwellers and the camp dwellers. The town dwellers worked and owned their own homes, the camp dwellers scavenged the place for wood and tin. Each had different expectations. I spent time among the camp; building accommodation for aboriginal children being threatened of being removed from the camp.

To some reconciliation means removal of all non aboriginals from the land, unless you adopt their culture and language. that covers Foxy's first four points. Addressing disadvantage is a Bureaucratic view as they want fire and earth, not bricks and mortar. I've seen Brick and mortar dwellings provide by the Government have their timber doors removed for fire wood. The last three points indicate they want their own tribal laws recognised; and not live under Australian laws. They want their own Nation Statehood recognised above Australian, with Australian paying rent for being on their land. Then they are reconciled to their own fate.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/lanesainty/pay-the-rent-aboriginal-australia
Foxy's reconciliation.
1) Understanding country
2) Improving relationships
3) Valuing cultures
4) Sharing history
5) Addressing disadvantage
6) Custody level
7) Aboriginals controlling their own destiny
8) Formal documentation of the process

Josephus,

Down this way in SA, Aboriginal communities may well have unlimited water licence, We lived in one from the early seventies, when slf-determination was being recognised, a stretch of land totalling four thousand acres on the Murray.

Local blockies continue to make good livings from the soil, as diry farmers, and fruit-blocks/grapes/olives/almonds/stone fruit/citrus. Where we lived, the community had four thousand acres of good soil, no rates (since Aboriginal land has no marketable value, since it can't be sold), no repayments necessary, and free water. Within two or three years, the DAA had purchased another four thousand acres for the community.

Since the old Dept of Social Welfare had built up the economic base of that community before it handed over control, by the late seventies it had sheep, grain, lucerne, stone-fruit, citrus, and 40 hectares of grapes, employing about twenty men. All gone now.

Many communities have similar stories: thousands of acres of arable land; and in drier parts of Australia, that land is measured in square kilometres, even thousands of square kilometres. But it's hard to find any community using much of it.

So perhaps as an incentive, another demand can be added to that list:

* the right to make use of any land which the communities may control.

Oops, they already have that right, and have had it for nearly fifty years.

When people actually make use of those resources, I'll get interested in 'reconciliation'.

Joe

Foxy,

I prefer "A man with little knowledge takes a long time to tell you what little he knows" (Thomas Kuhn?)

Mr O,

I prefer:

"May all people here find inspiration and strength to build
a future of reconciliation, justice, peace for all the children
of this beloved land".

And -

"If there is to be reconciliation first there must be
TRUTH".

Dear Joe,

Ever heard of Aboriginal Land Councils?

You can learn more at:

http://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/self-determination/aboriginal-land-councils

My apologies for the typo.

Joe, here's the link again:

http://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/selfdetermination/aboriginal-land-councils

Sorry, Foxy, what's your point ?

Dear Joe,

The point is your own statement - to the effect that -
you said - When people actually make
use of resources ... you'll consider reconciliation...

How about it?

Reconciliation and the drive for it is an idea that probably promotes racism as much as it intents to reduce it.
Instead of being angry about it people need to understand there's just no way to change - the past.
What can you reconcile?
Every new generation coming to terms with the truth about their heritage, and finding a way to live with their anger and resentment that lays just under the surface because of it?

Armchair Critic,

Yes, exactly the reason I see reconciliation as a subterfuge for the Commonwealth to sweep the big issues under the carpet.

If you want to fix the problem then start producing treaties and unalienable land rights.

Maybe we should take to the streets like they are doing in the US at present and start asking for Justice.

We've got our democracy now let's get our FN justice to go with it!

There are some things that can't be swept under the rug.

Cathy Astrid Salome Freeman, the humble country girl
with too many middle names, who had carried a nation's
hopes and dreams on her back, and never once let
herself buckle under the weight.

She had, to put it simply and briefly, run bloody fast.
And this time - in the Olympics nobody cared that her
victory lap featured both Australian and Aboriginal flags,
because this time everybody decided to be normal human beings
with reasonable priorities - that's the magic of the
Olympics.

I must take issue with you Foxy! The Olympics are the most corrupt disgusting thing on the planet. The organisation is rampant with bribes and theft. For these scum to strut around and expect nations to keep paying them bribes makes me sick. The IOC is quartered in Switzerland because only the Swiss are so venal and immoral that they would protect money over people. Don't cite the Swiss siding with the FBI when they went the equally obnoxious Soccer organisation because the Swiss only did that to keep an eye on the feds.
I believe we should exclude Switzerland and any organisation that HQ's there. They are beyond redemption!

Yes Josephus,

Your post of 1 June 2020 5:22:00 PM is replete with "they want[s]". They want this, they want that.

How is that reconciliation?

Its really a list of demands or ambit claims which the self-described virtuous have acceded to. Its a million miles from reconciliation if reconciliation were really about compromise.

"They want" a bunch of stuff that its impossible for a sovereign state to give, especially when its clear that having given it, more ambit claims will follow.

This is what I've been ever so gently trying to get Foxy et al to understand. This is a blatant and unending power/money grab which the 'woke' try oh-so very hard not to see lest they be labelled 'racist'.

When Australia had a vibrant, ever expanding economy, we were barely able to keep a lid on these silly notions by throw good money after bad. But the next decade or three are going to be very trying for this nation and we won't have money to throw around to keep the carpetbaggers at bay. These next decades are going to be financially tough and at some point the adults in the room are going to have to tell those throwing tantrums that they can't have what they want. That'll be interesting.

Dear Foxy,

At that particular community, in a sense the people gutted themselves: the men had built up the economic base from about 1961, but the new nine-person Aboriginal-only council had a rule that nobody could sit on it if they were employed by it. A certain logic, but some fatal flaws: i.e. the people running the place knew bugger-all how to make it work; and the men, the workers, had no power to make any positive changes.

Eight thousand acres, of which (until 1977) two thousand was under wheat; another two thousand was used for pasturing two thousand sheep. But nobody wanted to plow any more (a humungous tractor arrived, free from the DAA, on the day that Whitlam was sacked). Dogs got into the sheep so they got rid of the sheep (1979). That left three hundred acres, 80 under grapes (a red-wine glut in 1979 meant that, of course, they had to be ripped out), lucerne (went sour to had to be ploughed up), stone-fruit (got salt-smp, so had to be ripped out).

Brilliant idea: replace all that horticulture with almonds. So everything ripped out, replaced with almonds, financed by a million-dollar loan (which - surprise - turned into a grant) from the ADC. 7,700 acres available but those almonds had to be planted where the other crops had been. They couldn't be kept going, to finance future initiatives - such as almonds.

I don't want to think about the four-million-dollar yabby farm.

Fast-forward: CDEP there was rorted into the millions: DEEWR came in and took the pump. Almonds all died. 300 acres of dead trees. The population dispersed across the SA Riverland, now one family there. Land standing empty, becoming weed-infested.

So what was that about reconciliation again ? After all that fighting for land rights ?

Once bitten, twice shy, they say. But in Indigenous affairs, it's one bitten, twice bitten, thrice bitten, four-times bitten - but sooner or later, Foxy - shy.

Still, pistachios, pecans, avocadoes, olives, dates, hmmmm ......

Joe

Dear Joe,

Lets focus on the positive - because as we should know
and as research has found - Aboriginal people
were for a long time not allowed to join mainstream
economic activities they were generally poorer and
only a select few were able to get any formal business
experience before the early 2000s.

Therefore many Aboriginal businesses have only formed
after that time and their stories are seldom told.
Their biggest challenge is educating local markets
that Aboriginal businesses can add significant value
to the economic landscape.

Now to get to the bottom line - Aboriginal people are
succeeding in all sorts of things and they are trying to
put their stories out there. They are working to initiate
stories and ideas and being leaders in the way they do
business.

However Aboriginal businesses operating on land purchased by
Aboriginal land corporations sometimes face other
challenges. Once land is purchased by the corporation and
divested to another business it cannot be sold - making it
difficult to get a loan from the banks.

Unlike non-Aboriginal farmers who often have been in
business for generations, Aboriginal farmers acquire land
after many years of separation from the land and have to
learn the skills from scratch.

A challenge unique to Aboriginal business is their
Aboriginality. The media has been successful in equating
Aboriginality with failure in many Australian minds.

While Australians have no problem acknowledging individual
successes - like that of sports legend Cathy Freeman
(although there was initial controversy of her carrying
two flags - but another win succeeded in her acceptance) -
they struggle attributing it to their Aboriginality.

But when Australians come to consider the perceived
failings of an Aboriginal person - they almost always
attribute it to their Aboriginality.

Can't win.

Dear Joe,

Although this link is over 4 years old - it's
worth a read. It's by Prof. Marcia Langton:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/26/indigenous-australia-is-open-for-business-but-we-need-investment-to-realise-our-potential

Dearest Foxy,

Sorry, I had to laugh at your comments, a bit bitterly.

But you're partly right, that there are many people - not so much in country areas or on 'communities' - who are doing their best and succeeding: fifty thousand university graduates for a start. We forget that the Indigenous population is overwhelmingly urban these days.

That raises the embarrassing issue, that many of us on the left back in the sixties and seventies thought - quite reasonably - that when people out in settlements could gain control of their land (they already had quite a bit of it), they would forge ahead and build economic self-determination as well as formal administrative self-determination.

No, they didn't. Plenty of opportunities, but maybe everybody missed the point - that people had no great desire to live out in the sticks, except that you were with other Aboriginal people, were provided with housing etc., and got left alone.

People make choices. They have done for a very long time. More money, as Langton demands, won't make a scrap of difference. I certainly wouldn't put another dollar or ounce of effort in projects which weren't going to ever work.

As for reconciliation, thinking about it, and after nearly sixty years of knocking around Indigenous affairs, I really don't know what it means these days. People have opportunity, they either seize it or not, it's up to them.

Love,

Joe

Dear Joe,

I'm more optimistic and an convinced that with the right
government leadership in this country - Reconciliation will
be achieved sooner than later.

As our cities get more conjested, over populated, rural
communities and towns will flourish and grow.
Perhaps then our Aboriginal
communities have more opportunities for jobs and be
part and parcel of this growth.

One thing is for sure - we can't keep on over populating
our cities. As settlements expand so will the opportunities.

Dear Joe,

I want to add - that perhaps I shall make you
laugh again - and you'll think I'm being rather
simplistic. However, to my way of thinking -
you can't have a vibrant, culturally strong
Indigenous community no matter where it is if they
struggle in areas like - employment, income, education,
and too many young kids going to prison. All of these
things bring them down.

Solutions need to be found to their economic and
social issues. But not just any type of solution.
Solutions have to be found that suit their communities
on an individual basis - because their not all the same.

Also it needs to suit their culture and they must be
solutions they have developed. Sustainable economic
and social development can't be achieved without the
people who are aiming to achieve these goals being the
centre of the process. It all must be done by local
residents built on the skills of the people in the
area and not be dependent or rely on outside experts.
Also included in this mix should be a chance for people
to continually learn and be taught new skills.

Government agencies need to work together.

Finally, of course the challenges for all are great. But
they must all work together, listen to each other and
perserve if they're to succeed to improve social and
economic circumstances of the Indigenous Australians
living in the area. Whichever area that may be.

Of course rural and remote communities have less access
to what is needed to survive and suceed. Mental health
issues are also a big part of the problem in these areas.

Dear Foxy,

Thank you, you have a wonderfully good heart, but perhaps you can explain to me, in your own words, what 'reconciliation' means ? I'm happy with equal opportunity with affirmative initiatives especially for people from remote areas, so that everybody can join in building our country in the various ways that they consider appropriate.

I just hope that the 'elite' stays out of the way of Indigenous people desperately trying to get the hell out of life-long welfare, and away from the deadening grip of organisations.

Love always,

Joe

Dear Joe,

Reconciliation as I understand it asks the
Australian community to recognise
and acknowledge the past injustices as
well as the ongoing inequalities experienced
by Aboriginal people and to commit to
working towards a more equal and respectful
future

.....the ongoing inequalities experienced
by Aboriginal people.....
Foxy,
Of course & include the inequalities experienced by Aboriginal people by Aborigines !

Foxy,

You said above:

"As our cities get more conjested, over populated, rural
communities and towns will flourish and grow."

Not likely, unless you intend to force people into rural areas at gunpoint.

One of the impacts of globalisation has been to increase urbanisation. People have been leaving the land and moving to the cities because that is where the factories are that feed global consumerism.

There are also the environmental impacts causing people to leave the land and move to cities for employment. Rivers are drying up with fresh water depletion, areas such as the Sahel are turning into deserts, droughts are more widespread and unpredictable, etc.

Just out of curiosity do you know when globalisation began?

I suggest that to understand reconciliation we ask people like Ernie Dingo, Warren Mundine, Jacinta Price, Cathy Freeman, Yunupingu, Jessica Mauboy, Debora Mailman, and hundreds of others. Ask is their aboriginality a disadvantage.

It is only those that cannot accept their skin colour that are not reconciled to themselves. That is why they shout "white supremist". It is like a teenage girl who is never happy with her body. Not reconciled to whom they are.

Listen to the protests in Sydney and Melbourne about colour this coming weekend.

If you have read the Hammurabi code you would recognise 4,000 years ago the Mediterranean tribes chased the white skin people into the north. Wars over skin colour are mainly against white intellectuals.

Josephus,
As all of the people you mentioned have the appearance of mixed race, they should be the best to tell us the answer to that unanswered question of Reconciliation, they live with both sides of the fence, if anyone would know it's them !

Josephus,

"4,000 years ago the Mediterranean tribes chased the white skin people into the north."

And you know that, how ? As it happens, the people of Mesopotamia were probably mainly what we would call Kurds these days. And they're still there.

Then this elision:

"Wars over skin colour are mainly against white intellectuals."

Hmmm ....... that may need a bit of filling-out :)

Ratbags to the left of us, ratbags to the right of us ......

Joe

Josephus,

What are you using as your sources? Are they primary or secondary sources?

And please don't say something like "It's in the Bible somewhere. Find it yourself."

Josephus,

Thank You for your suggestion that we ask the people
you listed about Reconciliation, and whether their
Aboriginality was a disadvantage.

Lets start with - Ernie
Dingo - the TV personality. He's been a strong advocate
of Reconciliation speaking at the Nation Day of Action at
Belmore Park, Sydney a few years ago - on the forced closure of
Aboriginal communities. He's been very active to close
the gap in remote men's health by empowering them to
improve their physical, emotional, and social
well being. He's the chairman of Indigenous Media
organisation - Bush TV which runs programs called -
"Camping On Country."

He explains that - "We're going back on country with the
men to strengthen their mentality towards their culture,
their law, their language but more so - for medical
benefits." Ernie Dingo speaks about his own mental
problems - especially with depression.

Lets next go to - Yunupingu - the singer, musician, and
activist and very pro- Reconciliation of Yothu Yindi.
He was the first Aboriginal from Arnhem Land to get a
University degree - he was Australian of the Year in 1992.
He dedicated his life to his people - helping train and
educate Indigenous youth. The song "Treaty" became
known world-wide. He died at early age of chronic kidney
disease. Indigenous Australians are almost 4 times more
likely to die of chronis kidney disease than non Indigenous
Australians.

Next we can go to Jessica Mauboy - she has her own website
on which she promotes Aboriginal communities and
Reconciliation. She's extremely proud of her heritage
and has won many awards.

Deborah Mailman - decided to it was the right time to stand up
for her heritage - and undertook the role of Bonita Mabo
because as she explained - "There's a whole generation who
have no idea of what this meant to Australia as a nation".

She decided it was time to stand on her heritage.

Then there's Jacinta Price - who believes that we should
retain Australia Day on the date we have.
She goes on to explain:

cont'd ...

cont'd ...

Jacinta Price goes on to explain that:

"We don't know enough of our history, we don't know
enough about the atrocities that took place and this
date signifies to some that this was the beginning of
all that. So the atrocities didn't necessarily take place
on this particular day, but definitely followed afterwards".

Meaning we should debate the issues.

Foxy,

Well, investigate as well as merely prattling about it all.

For example, when will there ever be just one archaeological investigation of a suspected massacre site ?

When will just one person look up their archived file to see if, how and when they were 'stolen' ? Why aren't thousands taking their files to Slater & Gordon ? Surely they need the money.

Yes, perhaps we can only reconcile once the full truth is on the table.

Joe

Foxy,

I'm glad you said "...... we should debate the issues." because I have concerns that Reconciliation does not go far enough and that Aboriginals will not gain anything meaningful from it in the long run.

I think the politicians, bureaucrats and business people are really saying to them "Here, take the Reconciliation. But we're keeping the land."

I guess I'm still that 'boring and one-eyed" person who can see that there are other things at play that are hidden under the veil of some purported great Australian oneness and Kumbaya infused camaraderie.

I don't see anybody debating 'Reconciliation or Treaty' for instance.

Dear Joe,

Right back at you.

Why don't you as a former researcher with your own
blog - investigate - instead of consistently
being a nay sayer.

I'll give you just two references to start as to why
finding massacres in the Australian archaeological record
is so challenging:

http://www.archaeologyonthefrontier.com/2019/07/26/needles-in-haystacks-2/

And -

Journal article -

"Looking for the proverbial needle? The archaeology of
Australian colonial frontier massacres,"

Archaeology in Oceania. V. 46. No 3, October 2011
pp. 105 - 117.

The article is by M. Lister and Lynley Wallis.

Available at your State Library.

Off you go.

Dear Joe,

Here's more "prattling" for you:

http://abc.net.au/news/2018-09-25/archaeologists-discover-hundreds-of-native-mounted-police-camps/10183402

Read it if you really care.

Dearest Foxy,

I meant actual investigations, not excuses for why there aren't any. But i suppose, if archaeologists can't find any traces of fence-lines, villages, roads, storage pits, etc., we can't expect them to find conclusive massacre sites anywhere. So we'll all just have to believe without question.

I loved archaeology (or at least the idea of it) when I was in school, but put away childish dreams when I had to make a living. I'm a bit too old now.

But most universities have archaeology departments, and maybe they need someone to do some of the paperwork :)

Love,

Joe

Foxy & LOUDmouth,

The sorts of investigations you are discussing go well beyond archaeology. This is a big and sensitive area that requires all sorts of people with specialist credentials in oral history, forensic anthropology, environmental history and archaeology, just to name a few. This is a large scope that would have to be carried out over years. If you are interested in what is involved I would delve into the studies done elsewhere eg sites like Mesoamerica.

It's not the sort of thing one sits down at a computer and punches out over night. IT'S NOT JOURNALISM. Which is what I think you two are looking at.

Dear Joe,

It seems that all I can expect from you is
consistent nay saying regarding Aboriginal
people.

You're not interested in the challenges involved in
finding massacres in archaeological records or
even it appears in the evidence found of frontier
battles and unearthed in Queensland that back the
oral histories of elders.

Then there's nothing further to say.

Mr O,

I appreciate your advice.

However if you would read the link I cited
which details Professor Bryce Barker, an
archaeological anthropologist from the University
of Southern Queensland - who's one of the leaders
of a research project investigating and shedding
light on Australia's violent frontier history
you would realise the research that anthropologists
at universities are under taking.

It involves much more than "journalism".
And projects such as these are being done all over the
country.

See you on another discussion.

Cheers.

Foxy,

I know what is involved.

I was just pointing out that it is a very complex area of investigation with all sorts of sociopolitical implications for the present and requires a diverse range of research skills that go beyond archaeology.

The way you and LOUDmouth were discussing it made we think that you considered it to be on the same level as journalism and I got the impression that you were suggesting (heavens forbid) that LOUDmouth do archaeological research. I wouldn't trust LOUDmouth to do an archaeological survey of the local tip let alone a sensitive historical site.

Misopinionated,

No, you don't have a clue. Stick to Bananas in Pyjamas.

Joe

Foxy,
I know several people who have had dealings with one of the indigenous people on your list.
I personally have never spoken with that person but have been in the same room a couple of times. Now, those people who had dealings with that person unanimously commented on the rather arrogant conduct of this person.
You would possibly change your mind regarding the suitability of this person as part of reconciliation were you to meet !

Individual,

How dare a black person be arrogant?
Is that what you're implying?

Well, I think that it may surprise you to
know that skin colour does not define a
person's personality. Other factors come
into play.

Anyway - it was Josephus who brought up the
names not me. I simply followed through in
answer to the questions he raised recarding
those people and their stance on Reconciliation
and whether their Aboriginality meant anything
to them.

BTW:

Did it not occur to you that when a person is
self-conscious because of the way they may
have been treated in the past by others, that
perhaps their so called "arrogance" may simply
be a form of "self protection," or a cover up
to appear confident.

Just a thought.

To all of you still arguing, Reconciliation Week will pass into history as it always does, and there will be not be one iota of difference made.

Foxy,

That would go a long way to explaining LOUDmouth's pretentious behaviour.

Reconciliation Week has already passed.

It ran from 27 May to the 3rd June.

And of course it came and went.

Of course it didn't make one iota of difference.

Sadly, that's been part and parcel of the past history
of our Indigenous people in this country.

Their requests have continued to be ignored and the
white man's solutions have, and will continue to be
given precedence because although we insist on demanding
responsibility from them - we don't take responsibility
ourselves in correcting what needs to be done.

Stalemate. An impasse will continue to exist until
a change occurs.

Mr O,

Don't forget to be perfect yourself.

D'oh!

Misopinionated, and Dear Foxy,

Pretentious ?! Moi ?!

Today's my wedding day, 54 years ago :) So many wonderful, wonderful memories ......

I can highly recommend inter-marriage, it's the Australian future, to always be learning as - and from - an 'outsider' to someone else's perspective. Well, it has been common already for 200 years anyway.

Joe

LOUDmouth,

Donald Trump is in the same boat: he married a Slav.

And don't forget Obama. His wife is African-American and he is American-African.

And what about the members of the European royal families over the centuries: Danes marrying Italians, Italians marrying Spaniards, Spaniards marrying Gerpersons, Gerpersons marrying other Gerpersons. There's just no stop to it I tell you!

Joe this is for you:

To paraphrase the song -

"If I could save time in a bottle
The first thing that I'd like to do
Is to save every day 'til eternity passes away
For your children to spend time with you".

"The time has now come to tell you
That the years have so quickly flown by
As you celebrate all of your memories
The one thing that still remains true
Are the years with your family that lie ahead
Get your children to know the real you".

Take care.
Stay safe.

Thank you, Foxy, that's beautiful. Lovely song, lovely man who wrote it .....

So often, yes, the best die young.

Love,

Joe

skin colour does not define a person's personality.
Foxy,
It does when the argument is that people are being discriminated against because of their colour.
I don't see the slogan "All Lives matter", only the one that says "Black Lives matter".

Individual,

Perhaps that's because the one's being discriminated
against are black - and it's to attract attention to
the fact that their lives matter just as much as those
of whites.

Just a small thought before I say - Good-Night.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People are
the First People but today they are less than 3%
of the Australian population in Australia's system
of Democracy.

This makes it hard to have their voice heard.

It also makes it hard to influence laws that are made
about and for them in Parliament.

They've been asking for a voice - they were excluded
from our nation's founding document. And the Constitution
could be changed to allow and make sure that Parliament
hears Indigenous voices when it makes new laws about
them. This could help our Parliament make better and more
effective laws for our Indigenous people. It is vital
that they have a real say in the laws, policies and
programs that affect their rights.

Take care.
Stay safe.

because the one's being discriminated against are black.
Foxy,
What do you think the percentage is for those who deliberately bring discrimination upon themselves ? I have witnessed such insidious behaviour more than just a few times when people manipulate a situation whereby they instigate confrontation & once the desired effect is in place they exploit the perception that they're the victim !
Hypocrisy is bad enough but it is even more dreadful when it is used by Leftists to inflame racial hatred to fuel their ambush on harmony under the guise of Democracy !

I don’t understand why anyone thinks reconciliation isn’t working already. At the last census it was shown that over 70% of people who identify as indigenous have non indigenous partners. I would have thought that marriage was the ultimate in reconciliation between races.
Foxy, you keep forgetting what I have told you many times. Aboriginal people already have a lot of control over their future. They have their own health services managed by elected councils of aboriginal people. Their own legal service managed by elected aboriginal councils. An aboriginal education service that advises the education department. All remote communities are managed by elected aboriginal councils. The northern part of Australia is mostly aboriginal land and people are free to live there in whatever manner they choose apart from illegal activities.
As for inequalities, I’m still waiting for anyone to enlighten me as to anything, any service or facility or benefit that aboriginal people don’t receive that white people do. Rather the reverse is true, I could provide a long list of benefits and services aboriginal people receive that whites don’t.

Big Nana,
it's good to see there are people who know because they see rather than those who are ignorant & only dream !

Big Nana,

From what you said above I can see you would be against having a formal treaty between the Commonwealth and the Aboriginal Land Councils?

Could you please explain why you are against this?

Mr Opinion, you obviously are unaware of the bitter disputes between tribal groups and the Land Councils. Many tribal groups wish to split from the a Land Councils and manage their own land.
But that brings another problem because within tribal groups is bitter dispute over who is actually a “ real” member and between neighbouring tribes is dispute about where the actual boundaries of their land is.
So you see, it’s a very complex issue that would not be solved by any treaty.
And the definition of treaty is an agreement between nations, but aboriginal people had no nations, they had tribes. And what more would they get from a treaty that they don’t have now? Billions of dollars have been spent to their benefit, they own 30% of the Australian landmass, schools, medical facilities, housing have all been built on their land by tax payers, and they have even more legal rights than non aboriginal people.
A treaty would have to be drawn up for every single tribal group because they were all distinctly separate.
And if a treaty was drawn up between each and every tribe, declaring them nations, then they wouldn’t be entitled to all the extra benefits they get now because they are citizens of another nation.
So, what would be gained?

Big Nana,

Fair enough. So you say it is just too diverse and complex an arrangement of indigenous groups to provide for a singular treaty to cover all Aboriginals.

I agree with you on that being the case. Things are always a lot more complex below the surface.

A very similar situation exists in PNG and even small island nations such as Vanuatu.

I get the impression you believe that given time things will sort themselves out.

Mr Opinion, I believe the situation will resolve, just as every settled or conquered nation has assimilated into the dominant culture, on one condition. Aboriginal people must be compelled to take responsibility for their own outcomes. The government has provided all the services, facilities and extra benefits needed to achieve the best outcomes for people. Now, it is up to aboriginal people to use all those services to their advantage.
The majority of aboriginal people actually have done this. Tens of thousands of university graduates, many people owning small businesses, over 30% own their own homes, tens of thousands of aboriginal kids in secondary schools with ambitions to do well.
It is only a small percent who have been left behind, and paternalistic management of those people is what is holding them back.
And on a last note, when I say assimilation, I don’t mean people have to abandon those cultural practices that are legal. In fact , I’m all in favour of them retaining language, art, music, mythological stories etc.

The Australian government has always sought to
create a single uniform white Australian
culture which has been pursued through the various
assimilation policies and which has had devastating
effects on Indigenous communities.

However the "Aboriginal problem" refuses to go away.
It refuses to disappear.

And it will continue until an agreement is reached
with our Indigenous population.

Other nations have managed to reach agreements with
their native people - why can't our nation do that?

The study of our country's history would possibly help some
understand exactly where the problem lies.

Foxy,

Where on earth do you get your stuff from ? Sometimes it is so un-real.

Joe

Dear Joe,

I get it from the history books you don't read.

I get it from the history books you don't read.
Foxy,
Written by Historians whose profits for their writing depends on how much they appease the victim bleaters, many of whom are actually descendants of perpetrators & instigators of conflict !

Foxy,

You have to keep in mind that the people asking you such a question do not have your background and do not understand that the way we learn is by reading. That's why books are so important: that is the way we learn.

Mr O,

They do read what suits them. - Mainly histories
(ones that haven't been shredded to protect themselves)
written by the so called white "protectors", and self-
promoting so called "historians" who've made careers
in promoting white myths - like Windshuttle - who should
have been blown away a long time ago.

When presented with actual histories and facts - they ignore
them and certainly don't read them. No matter what link you
may give to Joe - he'll never read it unless he knows it
backs his viewpoint.

Also he doesn't like you presenting historical facts -
notice the moment I do that - he'll stop with the
"Dearest Foxy" addresses and revert back to just "Foxy,"
(gotta laugh). He's obviously pissed off.

Dearest Foxy,

I'm sorry for getting up your nose. Well, yes, I do read, and have done for more than sixty years now. I have two book-cases of books relating to Indigenous people, you name it. Berndt & Berndt of course, Elkin, Karberry, early accounts like Tench's and Threlkeld's and Taplin's. I think my first book might have been "Aranda Boy" by the wonderful Rex Ingamells, maybe around 1959. Donald Stuart's "Yandy" opened my eyes and I talked to him later about it, in 1973 I think, in Perth. I loved Rowley's brilliant three-volume coverage in the early seventies. I was a bit sceptical about some of Reynolds' conclusions. That brings us up to the last forty years :)

But there's been so much over the years, tens of thousands of pages of reports and royal commissions and diaries as well as books and articles. Of course, you've read them all :). And of course, your friend Misopinionated has also actually read something so he knows it all by now, such a brilliant learner, so young but so wise.

Keep learning !

Love notwithstanding,

Joe

Individual,

There's so many sources available now for anyone
really interested in this country's full history and
also on the topic of the quality of life for our
Indigenous Australians in the 21st century - and the
reasons behind the problems that still exist.
State libraries are great places to go to if you're
interested.

To quote:

You'll find out that "the legacy of more than 200 years
of dispossession, social injustice, and discriminatory
government policies that brought about the near
annihilation of the country's First Peoples continues
to contribute to the social and economic inequality that
has persisted for Indigenous Australians today".

"They still make up the largest proportion of socially
and economically disadvantaged people in Australia".

"For the 24% of Indigenous people living in remote areas
of Australia in the early 21st century this disparity
is even more pronounced".

"They are less healthy, have fewer educational and
employment opportunities than other Australians".

"Although extensive government funding and programs were
dedicated to improving Indigenous well being at the end
of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century,
many Australians and Indigenous people and leaders
believed that this imbalance would not be remedied until
governments worked with Indigenous leaders and local
communities to address inequalities and implement
CULTURALLY appropriate policies".

This information was obtained from the following link
which has much more on the subject:

http://www.britannica.com/topic/The-quality-of-life-for-Indigenous-Australians-in-the-21st-century-2109242

Enjoy.

LOUDmouth,

If you like reading you would just love doing an Arts degree where you could read all of those fascinating Arts things like history, archaeology, anthropology, philosophy, sociology, etc.

Dear Foxy,

You mentioned somewhere the herding of Aboriginal people onto missions. I don't know of that happening anywhere, but I don't know everywhere of course. I don't know about the Brethren Mission at Cundeelee in WA, or Doomadgee in Qld. But the missions that I do know about tended to be poorly funded, so had few staff, often just the missionary, and no means nor reason to do anything like herding people.

I suspect that people were herded OUT OF the area across the western part of SA where atomic tests were carried out in the 1950s, perhaps people were 'caught' or rounded up, and trucked to Ernabella in the north and Yalata in the south. Perhaps people were rounded up and moved against their will to Woorabinda in Qld. Elsewhere i don't know about.

I'm wracking my brains, what's left of them, about the possibilities of herding in SA: at Pt McLeay on Lake Alexandrina and at other missions here in SA, the missionaries (and then the secular superintendents after the state government took the missions over around 1917) were often on their own, or had maybe one or two other staff members who had other duties - schoolteachers, farm managers, etc. And certainly, Aboriginal people came and went as they pleased in the early days, often to the annoyance of missionaries who had to feed them while they were there.

Maybe all of the missionaries fabricated their accounts. Maybe everything happened in ways different from in their reports. Maybe someone will turn up other versions of reality. But mission populations often exceeded hundreds, so I'm puzzled how missionaries could take off the time from so many other duties to go out and somehow round people up, at the same time that they were desperately trying to find funds and cajole governments, to provide more rations.

[TBC]

Foxy, you do realise that more non aboriginal people live remote and very remote than aboriginal people don’t you? That is, according to Commonwealth Health Department figures.
And all these non aboriginal people have to exist with even less health services than aboriginal people do, because they only have the mainstream health services, unlike aboriginal people who have access to two health services.
And you do realise that people such as I raised healthy children in these areas, more remote than you can imagine at times, without even power or running water.
Perhaps you can explain why one section of the population can live healthy lives in these areas but the other half cannot, given equal, even better services for some.

Big Nana,

Read the link from Enc. Britannica that I
cited to Individual.

It explains a great deal.

Hi Foxy and Mr Opinion. You do both realise that many of the first settlers could actually read and write and have left behind thousands of first hand observations in letters and journals. Some of these have now been published online by universities and historical societies. I suggest you start with this one. It’s very informative and may surprise you as to how accepting many of the first settlers were about aboriginal customs.

http://heritage.darebinlibraries.vic.gov.au/Assets/Files/AU7005.pdf

Big Nana,

I've worked in State and University Libraries
amongst many other Insitutions of Learning -
and have catalogued vast collections as well
as oral histories on the subject.

This is taken from just one book I enjoyed
reading:

Did you know that one of the most problematic of
Arthur Phillip's responsibilities when he was
dispatched to Port Jackson and given the task of
founding a new colony in the alien southern continent
stemmed from an instruction given by King George III
of England to the effect that the governor of the
new colony should:

"endeavour, by every possible means, to open an
intercourse with the natives, and to conciliate their
affections, enjoining all subjects to live in amity
and kindness with them".

This was in the days when people still took instructions
from George III relatively seriously - before he
began ordering people to move Buckingham Palace to
Antarctica and knighting giraffes and so forth - so
young Arthur felt he should at least make an effort to
do as he was told.

This was awkward, though, as the local Indigenous
population wasn't particularly keen to have any kind of
intercourse opened up with the people who had turned up
uninvited and started clogging up the land with their huge
ugly animals and weird dyhing crops and ill-mannered
men with incredibly lax attitudes to gun safety.

It wasn't that the Eora'people who were living in the
Port Jackson area at the time weren't a friendly bunch:
it's just that they realised early on that the benefits
of multiculturalism were basically restricted to bullets
and smallpox, and no matter how many dinner party
invitations the governor sent them, continuing to breathe
was a more attractive option.

There you go.

Big Nana,

It's easy to see your interests lie in the area of social history of contact Australia and your views are shaped by the way everyday people have interacted with each other.

I was initially trained in anthropology and ended up wanting to be a sociologist because I like studying everything and sociology lends itself to that. A couple of decades ago I actually managed to get myself registered with a couple of dozen Aboriginal Land Councils for social impact assessment albeit I never got an opportunity to work on a project.

I'm interested in the big structural issues which have been shaped by social elites and institutions of power and governance. I see the process of dispossession to be one of the sins of Britain and the Australian colonies which had one aim - to feed the mills and factories of the British Empire, with large populations of Aboriginals driven from their lands to establish leaseholds and then incorporated into what could only be called wage slavery, but paid in kind not in cash.

So, you might see history one way but as you can see I choose to look at things from a different perspective. All depends where you are looking from.

The Indigenous need to reconcile with themselves before there is any hope of harmony among all !

individual,

You are truly an individual............... You are truly the great Oneness of the Universe.

Mr Opinion, I don’t know which land councils you have worked with but up here in the north life is very different to down south. Even as I write now, the Kimberley, an area twice the size of Victoria, only has a population of 35,000 . 50% indigenous, 50% non indigenous. Vast areas have never been seen by white people. My aboriginal father in law was raised in one of the most remote missions on record, available only by sea, , and set up in 1912 amongst indigenous people who had ever seen whites before a white married couple and their fellow missionary dragged themselves through the mangroves and started to build a paper bark hut for themselves.
There hasn’t been the massive land loss up here that was seen down south, nor was there much in the way of governing bodies to keep check on happenings.
My husbands family, including some extended family, back to the late 1800s always got paid in money, not rations. My husbands grandfather was a half caste man who was skipper of a lugger that took provisions up the Kimberley coast, my father in law a ships engineer on the pearling luggers. Their family history is not unique here. When I arrived in 1970 nearly all the work was done by aboriginal people, they basically ran all the infrastructure in the Kimberley, plus drove all the trucks that brought in supplies. Even then many owned their own block of land in towns which they built homes on. The few whites were the professionals, doctors, nurses, school teachers etc. And a small police force.
So, the north of the country wasn’t seen as a food supply for England, the crown barely knew the north existed.

Thank you Big Nana for a most interesting recount of your husbands family history. Attitudes towards Aboriginality today are far different from the attitudes of more than a hundred years ago. My first cousin on my mothers side, has after much research into things, things I already knew or suspected, obtained Aboriginal status for herself. For reason of respectability this is something that has been suppressed in our family for about 120 years. When she told me the "news" I said "good for you" As for me, I don't identify as Aboriginal, although I am as Aboriginal as my cousin.

Big Nana,

Unfortunately I was unsuccessful in getting an assignment and loss interest and went off to do another degree in something completely different. I was registered with Councils across the country and I'm sure one was with your region.

I'm assuming you are of an age to remember local events back in the 1960s. Do you recall the events occurring at Fitzroy Crossing when thousands of displaced Aboriginal workers from the large cattle stations in the region camped outside the town?

when thousands of displaced Aboriginal workers from the large cattle stations in the region camped outside the town?
Mr Opinion,
And how did that come about ?

individual,

The bottom fell out of the world meat market and the owners of the cattle stations in Western Australia just stopped operations and moved back home to Perth leaving their Aboriginal workers on the stations without food supplies. Unable to fend for themselves they drifted towards Fitzroy Crossing. The report I read said they numbered about 5,000.

They camped outside the town and the United Nations declared it a refugee situation. The WA govt and Commonwealth govt were so embarrassed that that suppressed reporting of the situation in newspapers.

These 5,000 people were all adults who worked on the cattle stations as stockmen, trackers, cooks, maids, handymen, etc., etc. They were the wage slaves of their white entrepreneurial masters who held the leaseholds over former Aboriginal lands that had been taken possession of by the government.

So there must have been lots of children there too? you ask. No, the children had been removed from their families and institutionalised in missionary schools with the aim of leaving their parents free of raising children in order to extract their time for labouring for their white masters.

Watching the news last night I see the two women organising the rally for today state; they will go ahead with the rally even though the high court has not given permission, because it is aboriginal land and the law does not apply. Leetona Day, the mother of David Dungay, says nothing will stop her from marching.The Police say everyone over the 5,000 attending will be advised to leave or be arrested.

The Greens and Left Councils have identified the land of this continent as aboriginal tribal land, and is not owned by the dwellers, or those who have built or farmed or mined. The aboriginal requirement is to have another government run by aboriginal elders to make law and say how the land is used and garner rent from the occupiers on their land. blob:http://www.sbs.com.au/7a132209-de7d-41ac-b525-4c427fc2f1c3

Until that happens they will not be happy, as they do not wish to assimilate into Australia under our laws, their relationship to this continent is Mother Earth.

The question is - what Indigenous people want;
What white people will accept.

A Referendum among Indigenous people about how the
Constitution should change -
so that their own inclusive and concrete proposals
are shared and not open to challenge later by people
who might be satisfied with a pro forma nod in the
preamble, or by radical separatists.

The Uluru Statement was a step in the right direction.
It listed what was wanted - and the details were to
be worked out together later. However it was rejected
outright by the government.

with the aim of leaving their parents free of raising children in order to extract their time for labouring for their white masters.
Mr Opinion,
Your remark is utterly unbalanced !

individual,

In what way?

In what way?
Mr Opinion,
Think !

Mr Opinion, you are correct in that black people moved into Fitzroy Crossing in the 60s but you have got the cause wrong.
In 1968 the equal wages accord went passed and station owners were compelled to pay equal wages to black stockmen instead of the usual 50% of what white stockmen got. In itself this was the right thing to do, they deserved the same wages however, no one but the station owners took into consideration the repercussions of this decision. The custom then was that black stockmen got less wages but the station fed and clothed their entire family who were living in the station camp. This wasn’t just wives and children. It was uncles and aunts, grandparents etc. . They all got rations and clothing provided on top of the wage. Once the black workers got equal pay the station owners announced that they could not feed and clothe all these extra people and either the stockman had to pay for their supplies or they would go without. So, all these extended families moved into the nearest towns. That is what caused the influx, however the number was hundreds not thousands. The population of Fitzroy Crossing in 1976 was only 605 people including aboriginals.
As for the missions in the Kimberley, only one mission took children without parents and that was Beagle Bay, which is where the part aboriginal children removed from single mothers were taken.
As for the other Catholic missions, children were taken from parents at age 7 and put into dormitories within sight of the parents dwellings. The children stayed with their parents on Sundays and school holidays. I presume this was to ensure kids went to school each day. That generation were certainly very literate. The non catholic missions in the Kimberley left Kids with their parents. Where I got my information, my husband spent some of his early years in the mission and stayed in the boys dormitory. For for the stations, his parents worked on stations around the Kimberley, including Nookenbah, the site of the huge demonstrations in the 70s.

Hi Big Nana,

My limited understanding about the pastoral pay situation was that the workers also demanded housing accommodation - the logic went: since single white pastoral workers got accommodation provided free, why couldn't the families of the Aboriginal pastoral workers get free accommodation as well ?

I typed up the transcripts (colour-coded) of conferences through the sixties of Aboriginal welfare officers and ministers, so I'm just going on memory here :). Anyway, they would be on www.firstsources.info , on the Royal Commissions and Conferences Page.

Harry Giese would have been in the thick of things: I think he remarked that Aboriginal pastoral workers were, on the whole, already getting award-level wages by 1967, but were also seeking those accommodation benefits.

Joe

Deaths in custody
http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/cfi/cfi033
Of the deaths in custody since 1997 of that 1600 have been in prison and 985 in Police custody. There have been 500 indigenous and 2,104 non indigenous. Many in road chases and of natural causes. 97% of aboriginal deaths have been from natural causes, not Police brutality.

Big Nana,

It was about 36 years ago that I ran across that article so my memory of it might be a bit faulty. If I recall correctly the article was written by Peter Yu.

Thanks for letting me in on the facts

Here's the story of Vincent Lingiari - the tale of
a true hero in which the great Australian song writer
Paul Kelly has immortalised in his song, "From Little
Things, Big Things Grow". Vincent Lingiari was a living
legend whose story merits singing to future generations
for as long as this country endures.

Vincent was born in 1919, a member of the Gurindji
people of the Victoria River region of the Northern
Territory. Vincent's parents worked on the Wave Hill
cattle station, 600km south of Darwin, and even further
away from any actual city. It was a starkly remote
place in the middle of some of the world's most
unforgiving country, seemingly designed less to raise
cattle than to punish them for their sins.

At the time of Lingiari's birth, Wave Hill was owned by
William Vestey, the employer of Lingiari's parents, and
later the boss of Vincent himself, when the boy was put
to work at the age of 12 at the Wave Hill stock camps.

Today it might seem appalling that a 12 year old could be
forced to work mustering cattle, but these were different
times, when child labour was a cherished part of everyday
life.

Forcing Aboriginal people to work for them was a longstanding
tradition for the Vesteys and the Wave Hill station. Like
many Aboriginal nations, the Gurindji had found their
traditional way of life somewhat squeezed by white settlers.

An inquiry found that the Vesteys were paying its Aboriginal
wokers less than five shillings a day - the minimum legal wage
for Aboriginal people while non-Aboriginal male workers earned
two pounds eight shillings. At the time it was actually
illegal to pay Aboriginal workers more than a specified amount
so the Vesteys were falling short of the standards set.

Moreover the little money the Gurindji did receive from
government benefits was paid direclty into company accounts
which the Aboriginals did not control.

Besides the almost heroically unjust pay grades, gurindji
employees at Wave Hill were living in corrugated iron
humpies whith no lighing, plumbing, furniture or floors -
literally no floors.

cont'd ...

cont'd ...

There must always come a limit to how much people
will stand, and the Gurindji finally approached it.
The tipping point came when Vincent Lingiari, who had
begun work on Wave Hill at the age of 12 and had continued
working for a pathetic pittance in inhuman conditions for
35 years became leader by his Gurindji brethren in 1966.

He called upon his people to refuse to accept the Vesteys'
abuses and with two hundred other Indigenous Wave Hill
employees and their families, walked off the station.

They set up camp at Wattle Creek, called Daguragu by the
Gurindji.

Lingiari's actions caused uproar. Lingiari demanded better
pay and rations, and protection of the Aboriginal women.

To make a long story short - he had something bigger in mind.
He wanted the return of Gurindji lands to their rightful
owners. He ended up getting support from prominent
Australians such as novelist Frank Hardy, and trade union
leader Brian Manning, he pushed Vesteys to give back the
stolen property they were squatting on.

In any case if anyone is interested in the full story its
available on the web. Vincent Lingiari died in 1988, in
his late sixties. The battles he inspired, for justice
and respect, live on.

His name is indelible in the story of Australia, a
reminder of the time a poor stockman led a couple of
hundred folk off their worksite, and stared down
millionaires and ministers until they gave in.

For Vincent Lingiari knew where he stood, and big things grew
from it. His name is borne by the federal electorate of
Lingiari in the Northern Territory.

Foxy, why are you lamenting 12 year old black kids doing farm work, something all white farm kids are expected to do, when in England 6 year old white kids were being sent down into mines to work 12 hour shifts.
I live in hope of a post decrying the horrific treatment of convicts and white children back in that era.

My school holidays from at age 10-12 were spent working on a farm & from 12-14 I worked for a roofing contractor & at 14 I started my apprenticeship. For me school holidays always meant work.

Big Nana,

I hope you're not condoning child labour in Britain during the Industrial Revolution.

The use and abuse of child labour was absolutely abhorrent. What those poor children went through is one of the great black spots in history and human behaviour.

Please find time to read some of the accounts to be found in the history and sociology literature. Children as young as 4 were put to work; a large group of children aged 8-14 employed by one mill spent 12-14 hours a day in the factory and rest of the day corralled together in a barn to sleep, only to be woken at 4 am to be marched down to the mill for another day of work. And the horror of putting an 8 year old, boys and girls, into the dark unventilated coal mines where they crawled several miles on hands and knees to the coal face.

How many children died because of these conditions. The lucky ones ran away but only to places like London where they probably ended up as prostitutes and thieves or at the end of the rope. And of those that stayed in the mills how many committed suicide?

Big Nana, children are not small adults to be used in the same way as adults, which is how people thought in the 19th century. We don't do this nowadays in our society because people need to be trained over long periods to perform the tasks in the workforce. The types of jobs on offer require children to be educated to a higher age and to do several years of vocational training at university and technical colleges.

Misopinionated,

My god, what a moron. Just because someone points out that young people had to work from early ages in earlier times, doesn't mean they condone it. But I suspect you know at least that much.

After all, until well into the twentieth century in Australia, the vast majority of kids went only to primary school. Public secondary schools weren't built until around 1900, and well afterwards in the countryside. So of course, they were expected to go out to work from twelve and thirteen. The compulsory age of fourteen wasn't instituted until (I think) around 1914. And even then, in the rural areas, if a kid lived more than a few miles from a school, they didn't even need to EVER go to school. I don't think my mum's father ever went school, he was selling meat off the back of a cart from the age of nine.

Many wonderful sociologists wrote extensively about the inequities of class: Robert Redfield, Oscar Lewis, Aaron Wildavsky, John U. Ogbu, all contributed enormously to the understanding of persistent class inequality, about different aspects of it. All died far too young, around sixty. Who knows what they could have written if they had lived another twenty years.

Their works would be available on Google Scholar, or from Book Depository (postage free). Give them a try.

Joe

Child labour. How did that get into the act. The people we are talking about, adults and children, are all on benefits provided by white 'racists'. No work for them. And the female trouble makers are thriving on it - all grossly obese.

LOUDmouth,

Actually, you would provide a good case study re child labour, having yourself left school after Grade 6 and then going to work. I'm sure you have some interesting stories to tell.

If people haven’t now woken up to what two-faced, gutless grubs the creeps they keep putting into office are, they never will. The China virus has been the instrument to reveal all.

People can’t travel, go to the football, attend funerals or worship in a church, but thousands of thugs can march shoulder to shoulder, blocking streets and shouting germs in the cause of anarchy and get away with it.

In South Australia, the Police Commissioner - whose officers have been harassing and fining people for breaches of draconian social distancing laws - said it was OK for thugs to parade in Adelaide on Saturday.

Our ELECTED premier did bugger-all.

If Australian voters have any sense at all, they will regard politicians in a very different light in future, and start demanding people who can be relied on to do the job they are paid (over-paid) to do. The current duds have hidden behind so-called experts for the duration

Ttbn,

So everybody who exercises their right to free speech and march in protest against police brutality, is a thug ? And anybody who supports those rights, even if they disagree with the protestors, is also some sort of thug by association ?

Alternatively, anybody who commit a violent offence when they are children or teenagers deserves the death penalty thirty years later for supposedly (we haven't heard much about the veracity o the accusation) trying to pass a dud $ 20 note.

Get a grip. Of maybe loosen it for once before you go blind.

Joe

Dear Big Nana,

With the Vincent Lingiari case I was merely giving
an example of how things really were for many Indigenous
people on cattle stations at the time.

Of course it might seem appalling to some
that a 12 year old could be forced to work mustering
cattle, but as you suggest these were indeed different
times, when child labour was a cherished part of everyday life.
And of course lets not forget - as was institutionalised
racism and the belief that Aboriginal people were
subhuman.

Forcing Aboriginal people to work for them was a longstanding
tradition for the Vesteys and the Wave Hill station. Like
many Aboriginal nations, the Gurindji had found their
traditional way of life somewhat squeezed by white settlers.

The white settlers of course were only following their own
traditional way of life, i.e. theft and genocide, so it was
a real clash of cultures.

The waterholes that Aboriginal tribes had depended on had been
fenced off by pastoralists or polluted by their cattle,
which also destroyed desert plants that were an important
resource for the original inhabitants.

Meanwhile white hunters shot the Aboriginal hunting dogs
and the kangaroos that were a staple food for the locals -
kangaroos were a threat to the white invaders because
they competed with cattle for grass and water, and were also
symbolic of natural grace and beauty, two things that the
British Empire had vowed to wipe off the face of the earth.

With their traditional food sources running short, the
Aboriginal communities came up with the eminently
practical idea of grabbing a bit of British beef for
themselves. This seemed only fair since it was the cattle that
had decimated their society, but the whites, operating
on the tried and tested imperial principle of -
"when in doubt, shoot everyone", did not take kindly to the
people whose land they had stolen trying to stay alive.

And so the Gurindji found themselves forced to move to the
cattle stations and work as stockmen and servants, and
child labourers, for no or at best - meagre rations.

Big Nana,

There you go - I trust that clears things up for you.

I'm surprised though that you with over 50 years experience
of living amongst Aboriginal communities would not have
known all of this.

But there it is again: history!

Foxy,

I'm sure that Big Nana would have known all of the truth about the Gurindji walk-off, from first-hand reporting as well as Frank Hardy's book. She probably yarned with Phillip Nitschke and Don Atkinson and others who were deeply involved in supporting the Gurindji cause. [Check out Charlie Ward's new book on the issues.]

We've been over this before, but you might have forgotten that, in law relating to pastoral leases, Aboriginal people's rights to use the land as they always had done, were recognised (AFA Annual Report, 1935: pp. 35-37 - on my website: www.firstsources.info - AFA Page). In Federal law, once the Commonwealth had taken over control of the Northern Territory from South Australia and got its act together, they enacted such recognition in the early twenties - this clause had to be inserted into every pastoral lease:

“ And reserving to aboriginal inhabitants of the said State and their descendants during the continuance of this lease full and free right of egress and regress into upon and over the said lands and every part thereof and in and to the springs and surface waters therein and to make and erect and to take and use for food, birds and animals ferae naturae in such manner as they would have been entitled to if this lease had not been made. ”

So Aboriginal people had rights recognised to live on their own land and make traditional use of it. What attracted people to pastoral stations, apart from the excitement of being with horses and chasing wild cattle, were rations and later the cash remuneration.

In different wording, those land-use rights are still in force in South Australia, except that now, people have to apply to an Aboriginal committee.

Joe

LOUDmouth,

You have an odd way of using 'dispossession' and 'exploitation' and 'colonialism'.

Dear Joe,

You really need to study the history of this country
written by a wider variety of sources than the ones
you prefer to read.

Regarding the Vincent Lingiari case - you need to get
the facts. He was opposed by a society that had dedicated
the best part of two centuries to the brutal
dispossession and oppression of his people.

Lingiari stood firm and declared he would not submit.
He was after something bigger and more fundamental:
the return of Gurindji lands to their rightful owners.

Anyway - I won't go into the details here. You're someone
who believes that historical evidence shows a
"Black-Armband" version of Australian history is
deeply flawed and that Aboriginals were NOT "herded"
onto missions, driven from their lands of have countless
children stolen from their families.

So what's the point in continuing to have conversations
with you on any Aboriginal issues. It merely gives you
a platform - which I am no longer interested in doing.

I'm sure that you'll find plenty of "kindred spirits"
on this forum who will gladly support your viewpoint.

I'm just not one of them.

You wrote to me on another discussion that I "didn't
have a bloody clue, I accept that you believe that.
And therefore as I said - talk to those who in your
wisdom you think do.

Joe,

Correct. All demonstrators are thugs.

Joe,

I would also appreciate it if in the future you would
not address me as "Dearest Foxy," and end with "Love,"
or "Love withstanding". Lets keep it impersonal.

LOUDmouth,

And the same applies to me too, thank you very much!

Mr O,

This does not concern you.

D'oh!

Loudmouth,
George Floyds crimes:
http://thecourierdaily.com/george-floyd-criminal-past-record-arrest/20177/

http://www.reddit.com/r/fakenews/comments/gsq6vv/george_floyd_wasnt_innocent_this_is_his_criminal/

George Floyd did not die for a forged $20 bill, the Police were sick of his criminal acts including robbery with guns. He had spent several times in Prison and was no innocent man.

Josephus,

The fact remains George Floyd died as a result
of being arrested by white police officers.
His criminal record should not bear any relevance
to this fact.

Thomas Lane the Minneapolis cop charged in George
Floyd's killing was hired despite having a
criminal record with 7 convictions and a slew of
traffic violations.

Josephus,

You preach one thing from the Bible and do the opposite in practice.

In the words of our own renowned OxleyMoron: "Please explain."

So, why are they demonstrating against Whites when another cop is looks Arab & another looks Asian ?

Individual,

Because they're not black - they're acceptable.

Josephus,

I fully understand where you're coming from.

However, remember that just because people don't
agree with your take on things does not make
them "haters" as runner would say. It just means that
both you and he can't deal with diversity.

I was surprised but pleased to hear Mathias Cormann truthfully saying that the thuggish demonstrators were selfish for carrying on about a foreign problem. On the same news bulletin it was pretty clear that normal people are fed up with the double standards on social distancing.

I agree that Floyd's criminal record doesn't excuse his killing by cop, but it proves that he was of poor character; if he had been a decent, law abiding person, he would still be alive - as would several other people; and their would have been no reason for the opportunistic thugs and looters to run amok.

There should be a total ban on all demonstrations; they achieve nothing except more hatred and contempt.

Because they're not black - they're acceptable.
Foxy,
?? Acceptable for what ?

....start demanding people who can be relied on to do the job they are paid (over-paid) to do.
ttbn,
Making Uni indoctrinated experts ineligible for public office would be a good start with immediate signs of success !

individual,

Don't necessarily cut out university graduates, but all candidates should have had experience in the real world in business - anything in private enterprise - before they can nominate. No party hacks who have worked for politicians or parties straight from school.

ttbn,

You used the term 'the real world'.

Is this opposed to a Trumpism such as 'the fake world'?

I have just seen a photo of Victorian police 'bending the knee'. A group of grandstanding Aborigines were doing the same on TV the other night. These poor, wet Australian creatures rubbish America non-stop, but copy everything the Yanks do.

Foxy,

"Meanwhile white hunters shot the Aboriginal hunting dogs
and the kangaroos that were a staple food for the locals -
kangaroos were a threat to the white invaders because
they competed with cattle for grass and water, and were also
symbolic of natural grace and beauty, two things that the
British Empire had vowed to wipe off the face of the earth."

Don't try and compete with Paul, he's the resident comedian.

Is Mise,

Well you've certainly had bad luck when it
comes to thinking.

Is Mise,

The same thing was happening across the world at the same time especially in North America and Africa.

You know this yourself. And you know that in Australia it was all about taking control of the Aboriginal land by colonial governments who leased the land to British settlers who were required to meet quotas set by the government for wool, wheat, etc., to provide the British Empire with the materials it needed to make Britain the wealthiest nation in the world.

Individual,

You ask - they're acceptable for what?
(not being black). Obviously as police officers
in a white society even if they have criminal records.

Next time - take an intelligent guess all by yourself.

Foxy,

Shooting the kangaroos; come off it, there are more 'roos today than at any other time and even with the meat industry blokes and farmers using modern quick-firing rifles the 'roos multiply.

Back in the day of muzzleloading guns with a very slow rate of fire, there was no danger of 'roo populations being wiped out or even thinned out.

Do a bit of research before you put your digits to the keys and do yourself and others a favour.

Is Mise,

Before you give advice to others take some
time to do your own research first.

http://www.pursuit.univmelb.edu.au/articles/kangaroo-hunting-in-colonial-australia

http://www.theconversation.com/friday-essay-the-art-of-the-colonial-kangaroo-hunt-102169

My apologies I added one letter to many to the Univ of Melb.

Here's the link again:

http://www.unimelb.edu.au/articles/kangaroo-hunting-in-colonial-australia

Damn, I've done it again - hurried and made a mistake.

http://www.pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/kangaroo-hunting-in-colonial-australia

Foxy,

Do you realise that Australia is a bloody big country ? Plenty of room for both cattle and kangaroos, always has been. BUT also, in the early days, a shortage of labour. So pastoralists had to find ways to attract Aboriginal labour to their stations and PLEASE don't say that they were rounded up and made to work - or conversely that they were all shot. That's simply not possible by the one or two or small number of whitefellas in any one area.

The upshot was that pastoralists NEEDED labour, and local Aboriginal people were okay with their groups being fed in exchange for a bit of work.

In a couple of Arthur Upfield's Bony detective novels, he casually remarks about the dams that pastoralists have built in order to attract Aboriginal people to camp and settle near their stations, so that the younger men could be available as workers. And many of the young women too. After all, the local Aboriginal people knew there country far better than any whitefellas. And people took up the offer in exchange for rations, for all of the clan, that was the common practice.

Bu there was never so much cattle and pastoral activity that kangaroos were ever under threat. It's a big country :)

Joe

Joe,

Read the two links I've just given to Is Mise.

And also read about the Vincent Lingiari and
what caused the walk off of Wave Hill cattle
station of over 200 people and their families
and the conditions that these people lived
under. Then dare to tell us how wonderful
life was for their people.

Joe,

There's more at the following link:

http://www.australianstogether.org.au/discover/australian-history/wave

Also the National Museum of Australia has more information.

Seek and you shall find.

Foxy,

If you want to see something pretty cool - assuming you haven't already done so - have a look at the Google Maps aerial satellite view of the National Museum of Australia. See how many images of The Dreaming you can identify.

Foxy,

Why go to extremes, from one extreme to the other ? No, life was never 'wonderful' for any Aboriginal people ever since their ancestors left Africa. Life was a bit more straitened over that period than 'wonderful'.

Yeah, I met a couple of the elders from Wattie Creek, Captain Major and another bloke, lovely blokes, in 1972 and 1973. When Phillip Nitschke went up there, we were inspired by his example to leave factory work and go up to a rural community here in SA. As it happened, like him, I tried to set up a vegetable garden, given that there was water laid on, and there was a tractor with a rotary attachment, and a shed-ful of fertiliser (and a shearing shed with years of sheep poo in the yards). The people there welcomed it too, somebody growing stuff that they could harvest, peas and tomatoes and sweet corn. That lasted a couple of years.

Joe

Joe it's not going from one extreme to another.
Why are you using language like that?
All I am doing is answering you allegations with
facts and those of Is Mise as well and you call
doing that going to extremes?

No matter what is brought up regarding our Indigenous
People - you always seem to deflect or totally reject
anything that doesn't match your own so called "research".

Perhaps you actually need to broaden your viewpoint?

Anyway, I'm sick of arguing with you, it is such a
waste of time. No matter what I present you don't
even do me the courtesy of reading any of the links.

On another discussion you told me that our Indigenous
People have had "self-determination" for over 50 years.

Yes the Federal government led by Gough Whitlam adopted
the policy of "self-determination" for Indigenous
communities in 1972. This policy was described as -

"Aboriginal communities deciding the pace and nature of their
future development as significant components within a
diverse Australia". It recognised that Aboriginal people
had a right to be involved in decision making about their
own lives.

However, there was no agreement as to HOW this should be
achieved NOR was there a framework within which this could
occur. Nothing was established. The effect was it
limited the exercise of self determination to what was/is
compatible with the interest of the Australian state.

Successive Australian governments have rejected the view that
self determination includes the right of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait people to decide anything that the government
did not agree with.

So you see - self determination by Aboriginal people in this
country is defined much more narrowly than it has been
in international forums. Our people cannot decide on their
future.

And how much longer will they have to wait?

Loudmouth

Said:

"........... life was never 'wonderful' for any Aboriginal people ever since their ancestors left Africa."

So I guess you reckon the rest of homo sapiens sapiens who didn't find their way to Australia were having a picnic.

Foxy,

I liked this bit,
"Here, a lost young girl is rescued by a kangaroo who has, in turn, lost her joey. Dot’s father is a kangaroo hunter; when his daughter finally returns, he renounces hunting altogether and turns his farm into a sanctuary for native species."

Pretty well sums it up, Australia's stupidest animal and a stupid author.

Sure people hunted 'roos, they still do and the'roos are thriving as they always have.

Is Mise,

I'm getting a bit worried about you and this fixation you have with kangaroos. Have you ever thought about taking up elephants or pandas or something else that might take your mind off kangaroos?

Opinion,

No, those animals are not a problem around here, suicidal 'roos intent on killing themselves by dashing in front og cars are my worry, as I said they're the stupidest animal in Australia if not the world.

Foxy,

Your links were little more than opinion pieces but they did shew that Aboriginal Australians were still hunting 'roos as they have never ceased to do.

"['roos]and were also symbolic of natural grace and beauty, two things that the British Empire had vowed to wipe off the face of the earth."

Let us have a reference for your wide-ranging research that backs up that gem of wisdom.

Foxy,

Self-determination, self-government, self-management. were all in the pipeline well before Whitlam, at least here in SA, being as usual the most progressive state: Don Dunstan as Minister for Aboriginal Welfare in the mid-sixties, pushed this policy through. As Premier (1966-1968, 1970-1879) he was always promoting Aboriginal rights. Lovely bloke, I first met him in 1965 at a dance on a mission/settlement, then again in 1973, and again in 1988 and 1998 before he died. I've seen many of his memos and letters about self-management from 1965 onwards, in the State Archives.

He had some strange ideas though, for example: about closing up the Pt McLeay School and opening up the village. Because that meant that the kids from that schol would have to go to the 'whitefellas' ' school a mile away, the whitefellas there circulated a petition about 'letting' Aboriginal kids into 'their' school. Naturally, the people at the community circulated another petition to condemn the whole idea; which died in the arse.

Actually, all sorts of ideas about self-government were in the pipeline - and being enacted - well before 1972, even in Queensland where - of all people - Bjelke-Petersen was Minister for Native Welfare (or whatever it was called). In WA, Labour's Bill Grayden had put forward initiatives in the sixties too. With many states and territories, all with their unique issues, there were really many, many notions about Indigenous rights put forward after 1950 or so.

Joe

William Gladstone once said that "men are apt to mistake the strength of their feeling for the strength of their argument". It applies to women as well - they were just wise enough to know when to keep quiet in his day.

Recognising aboriginal cultural norms like; We belong to the tribe, the Earth is our mother, all that is on mother earth we share.

There is no private property in aboriginal tribal culture, unlike Australian laws that identify and is mostly about boundaries and ownership. Administration of the Police of the Law is about theft, imbeselment, fraud etc. Aboriginals are now constantly being told we are on their land, and the police who administer Australian law are fighting against them, by arresting them for driving stolen cars or stealing property found on their land.

Josephus,

What are you talking about?

Joe,

Self determination "being in the pipeline"- is well
and good, but its totally different to actually being
achieved, implemented, and established.

There was no agreement as to HOW this should be
achieved NOR was there a framework within which this
could occur. This has never been established as David
Roberts pointed out in his book, "Self-Determination
and The Struggle for Equality", (1998 - Univ. of
Queensland).

Foxy,

Australian Aboriginals already have equality as citizens and before the Law; that is Australian Law, they have no equality under their own tribal laws; hence the plight of young women and girls in their communities.

Is Mise,

I suggest you stick to topics you perhaps know something
about. Leave Indigenous people and their issues to
others to discuss. People who know what they're
talking about. Historians, researchers, authors, writers
who've studied the subject and issues involved. Librarians
with qualifications and years of expertise in delving
into subject matters, and so on.

Foxy,

I think that might have been an article of Dave's from 1994 :). I worked with him from 1981 at ASTEC (SACAE - Uni of SA), and my wife a bit later, until 2005.

I'm a bit concerned about your airy statement that " .... there was no agreement as to HOW this should be achieved NOR was there a framework within which this could occur."

Agreement amongst whom ? The people on the councils in the actual communities ? Or constant government intervention, leaning over the shoulders of the council members ? Of course, since every community had (and has) its unique nature, why should there be those sorts of top-down directives dictating how they should run their communities ? Do you understand that self-determination means just that, determination by the people themselves ?

I'm not suggesting that they always, or all that often, got it right, mistakes were made, but they were their mistakes to make. The whole point of self-determination is to (up to a point) leave it to the people to sort out what they want to do.

What you seem to be advocating (please excuse me if I'm wrong) is some sort of 'guided self-determination' which would never have ended. Yes, it certainly would have helped to have experienced consultants in agronomy, agribusiness, etc., perhaps a respected Aboriginal ombudsman-type figure, from the outset, perhaps from the mid- or late-sixties. Hindsight is a wonderful teacher.

And I have to say that very few academics have ever known enough about actual communities, how they are run, what their actual issues might be - maybe Fay Gale came closest, given her hands-on interaction with people on SA communities over sixty years. Very sadly mised, twelve years now.

Joe

Foxy,

Is Mise did anthropology at Sydney (apparently he was in the same class as me.)

I don't think it is a matter of him not knowing anything - he's just gone off the rails a bit.

Foxy,

"....Librarians with qualifications and years of expertise in delving
into subject matters, and so on."

as a qualified librarian perhaps you'd finally give us a reference, using your undoubted years of expertise on the quote below.
Otherwise, people might think that your remark
'...also symbolic of natural grace and beauty [kangaroos], two things that the British Empire had vowed to wipe off the face of the earth." is just racist claptrap or a deeprooted hatred for things British.

We await your feeble reply.

So, at the time of Federation, the kangaroo (and the emu) were put up there as our national emblems. Some deeprooted hatred.

I have great respect for librarians - as librarians. Some may have a lot of experience as well, out in the real world, in addition to their librarian expertise. Some may have academic and administrative experience as well. The late Denise Bradley started out as a librarian before becoming the VC at the UniSA and heading the 2007-2008 review of higher education.

But if academics generally (subject to the same proviso) are at one or two removes from actual Indigenous people, or communities, then librarians may be one extra step away from actual contact and first-hand knowledge. Hence, I suppose, their exaggerated respect for academics.

Of course, there may be people who are librarians (and academics) but also have deep, first-hand, constant and long-term knowledge and experience of Indigenous people - there's nothing stopping them. But they seem to be pretty thin on the ground.

Joe

Good Evening Joe,

I've answered your questions on the article discussion
earlier so I'll simply it short. You'll find the answers
to your questions in the David Roberts book already
cited, pages 259 - 260. They explain in more detail
regarding self-determination.

Anyway, there is so much information currently available
now in both State and National Libraries, as well as other
archival primary sources of documented accounts, oral
histories, et cetera that researchers, writers, historians
willing to look are able to find and verify the data they
are seeking.

I see no point in continuing our discussion. We keep
going over the same issues all to no avail.

I don't need your or any one else's validation. Lets
leave it at that.

Is Mise,

I've already given you references. Two in fact.
You brushed them aside despite the fact that both
referred to a whole list of other sources you could
refer to if you were really interested in the topic and
one of the articles was taken from Prof. Ken Gelder
and Dr Rachael Weaver's highly reputable book,
"The Colonial Kangaroo Hunt" published in March this year.
You regarded the links as merely "opinion pieces"
despite their verifiable sources. And stated my attempts
in trying to help you as "feeble".

Dear oh dear.

As for me "hating" the British?

Hardly. They're part and parcel of my family.

However stating historical facts about British colonisation
does not equate to "hatred" but - history.

Anyway, seeing as you obviously don't respect me and consider
my replies as "feeble". All I can do is politely suggest
you look for your answers elsewhere.

Your local library should be able to point you in the
right direction.

I shan't be responding to you any further on this matter.

Foxy,

Otherwise, people might think that your remark
'...also symbolic of natural grace and beauty [kangaroos], two things that the British Empire had vowed to wipe off the face of the earth." is just racist claptrap or a deeprooted hatred for things British.

Well, if you love the British why did you say such a stupid thing as the above?

As for sticking to things about which I have knowledge, I have lots of knowledge about the firearms of the early Colonial period and the reaction of kangaroos to gunfire,
I hunt rabbits and hares with a flintlock muzzleloading gun and one gets but one shot off then all game runs, besides which, over an extended period, two shots a minute would be about average; whereas, with my 50-year-old breech-loading gun I can fire 20 shots in a minute with ease but if culling 'roos I'd be lucky to get three before the rest are out of range.

It is simply impossible to reduce the 'roo population in any area killing them with muzzleloading guns, the birthrate would be faster than the killing.

A person would get one shot at a mob of 'roos and have to wait at least twenty minutes before being able to get within range again, and the range of effectiveness is 50 to 70 yards.

As for knowing about Aboriginal people, I was a guest of the Aboriginals at Laperouse in 1988 and I didn't meet one academic.

What's more, I was driven there by an Aboriginal woman in a Commonwealth car.
She was doing 80 miles/hour along Anzac Pde [we were running late].
I asked her if she wasn't scared of getting booked; "No mate, the Government pays my fines and the coppers know the car an' usually lay off".

Foxy,

I just had a bit of a read back and I found your,

"However stating historical facts about British colonisation
does not equate to "hatred" but - history."

This is history?

"..also symbolic of natural grace and beauty two things that the British Empire had vowed to wipe off the face of the earth."

So the Brits were determined to wipe natural grace and beauty from the face of the Earth, just give one reference, as a trained librarian you should have no trouble at all.

Note to readers: don't hold your breath.

Is Mise,

History books are full of facts regarding the British
Empire and the behaviour of the colonizers.
I've given you two links about colonial behaviour
in this country - there's plenty more on the web. If you're
not satisfied with what I've given you - do your own research
that you'll be happy with.

My time is too valuable to continue to indulge you. This is
after all simply a discussion forum - not a course in
an institution of Higher learning for which I would be
getting paid. I'm under no obligation to humour or indulge
you here. If you don't like what I'm saying - and you don't
accept it - it's up to you to find alternatives and
prove me wrong.

Put up or shut up - as they so rudely say. I don't have to
prove anything to you. You're just a key board warrior
looking for a fight. Been there done that with Weary Dunlop
and your banging on about his guns.

I've now put you on my "binned list". Because when I came back
to this forum - I decided not to continue to humour morons.

Hi Issy,

Com cars come from a pool, unless you are Queen Tutti Tutti or ScumO Morrison, the ID is the number plate. Can you provide evidence to support; "No mate, the Government pays my fines (evidence please, not common practice in the pub service) and the coppers know the car an' usually lay off". Is that one particular car always going down ANZAC Pd @ 80 mph. It must have been an old bugger of a car to be doing 80 MILES per hour in 1988.

Hi Foxy,

You can't beat Issy on guns, he lives and breaths guns, he has guns for breakfast, he dreams of guns in his sleep! He was there when Artie Phil jumped ashore at Sydney Cove, if you can find the official film of the event, there is Issy in the background scaring off the roos and darkies, happily firing his musket at them.

BTW, Issy was at Charlie Heston's send off from the gunnies, he plugged a few rounds into the corpse as a final tribute. he also supports the Shooter and Hooter party, and their policy of free guns for all!

Foxy when challenged to back up her stupid assertion

"..also symbolic of natural grace and beauty two things that the British Empire had vowed to wipe off the face of the earth."

So the Brits were determined to wipe natural grace and beauty from the face of the Earth, but she can't back it up so has gone off to greener pastures where nasty people won't challenge her racist and erroneous statements.

She mentions Weary Dunlop's pistols seemingly, or blissfully, unaware that I proved that he had two pistols on his person after the surrender.

Paul,

Wow!!

Hey Moron - yes you Is Mise,

What you were asserting at the time was that Weary
Dunlop had his guns on him so that he could defend
his men in case the Japs tried to kill them - so
cut the crap.

As for having to prove MY assertions? They're not
MY assertions - they're the assertions of historical
facts from colonial records at the time - and they're
on the web - Google them if you can put your guns down
for a moment. Perhaps your Indian wife could help you with
British colonialism and what they did in India?
Snf the beauty and nature the Brits maintained there.

Is Mise,

Here's another "opinion piece " for you to knock back:

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2011/oct/19/end-myths-britains-imperial-past

Too bad Issy, Wow!! don't cut it. The judging panel unanimously declared that a crappy defence. Therefore you are awarded a PORKY AWARD 2nd Class with a BS citation! Here it is and we haven't even thought of Xmas, and you have earned your 49th PORKY. Just think, one more PORKY and you will be eligible to receive a PORKY STATUE, fashioned by my very own hands from a discarded Freddo Frog wrapper (the closest thing I could find that locked like Porky Pig) and the inner tube of a spent toilet roll. I hope you are not chocking up at the thought of receiving such a coveted honour.I don't give them out to just anyone, only to the special people.

Foxy,

I think Is Mise has a bee in his bonnet and in terms of psychoanalytical explanation I think he is demonstrating denialism. I fear something terrible has happened in his life that causes him to reject knowledge and surround himself with guns as a way of protecting himself against some unimaginable evil that he believes pervades his life.

PS Maybe I should introduce him to my friends Jack Daniels, Johnny Walker and Jim Beam. Twenty shots before lunch will brighten up his day and make for a rosy world. Plus his aim with his guns will be diminished making the world a lot safer place for the rest of us.

Opinion,

I'm not surprised that you prefer the cruder whiskies.

Paul,

Double wow!!.

//'...also symbolic of natural grace and beauty [kangaroos], two things that the British Empire had vowed to wipe off the face of the earth." is just racist claptrap or a deeprooted hatred for things British.//

Bollocks. Disagreeing with things that Britain used to do and don't anymore - like having an empire - is neither racist nor indicative of a hatred for all things British. Britain used to practice slavery, execute criminals by hanging, torture people, execute people for being 'witches' of some very dodgy evidence, and engage in any number of other practices that are morally dubious.

British imperialism, like any human endeavour on such a grand scale, was neither all good nor all bad. I found a radio programme by a comedian I quite like the other day on this very subject, and I feel it makes the point extremely well:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m00057qs

But disagreeing with questionable moral practices carried out under the banner of imperialism isn't anti-British unless you think it was fine when the French, Spanish, Dutch and Portugese did it. That would be racist. If you just disagree on general ethical grounds, I fail to see how it's racist. Or indicative of a dislike of contemporary Britain

As for the Empire vowing to wipe natural grace and beauty from the Earth... lighten up dude, it's a joke. The humour arises from the absurdity of the idea of people taking solemn vows to do what people have done quite naturally for a very long time, which is to cause environmental damage wherever we go. When humans moved into the North America and Australia, there followed thereafter a suspiciously swift collapse of both continents respective megafauna populations. All the great Imperial powers did it. And not just the European ones. Pretty much everyone throughout history has done it, and environmentalism is a fairly recent concept.

So yes, of course the British were ecological vandals. See the example of the thylacine for an excellent case study. Of course at that point in time, so was everybody else. But since it was the British who settled here, they're going to be the people that are mentioned in discussions about Australia.

However I think that it in the interests of balance and not upsetting the overly-sensitive, that in future any discussions where the unfortunate and grim realities of British imperialism are raised should be accompanied by the statement 'but the French did it too'. I feel this should keep everybody happy except the French, and when were that miserable bunch of cheese-eating surrender monkeys ever happy about anything?

Foxy,

"Here's another "opinion piece " for you to knock back:

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2011/oct/19/end-myths-britains-imperial-past

Fair enough description, it is an opinion piece and one that highlights the negatives without once mentioning a positive.

Toni,

"As for the Empire vowing to wipe natural grace and beauty from the Earth... lighten up dude, it's a joke"

So is the author of that ridiculous statement; if she intended it as a joke then let her tell us so.

Dear Toni,

Thanks for posting what should to normal people be
obvious.

However you're wasting your time with
this person. I stopped explaining myself to him when
I realized that he only understands things from his
level of perception.

Foxy,

Here's the full quote again, is it all a joke as I originally assumed or only partly a joke?

"Meanwhile white hunters shot the Aboriginal hunting dogs
and the kangaroos that were a staple food for the locals -
kangaroos were a threat to the white invaders because
they competed with cattle for grass and water, and were also
symbolic of natural grace and beauty, two things that the
British Empire had vowed to wipe off the face of the earth."

Pray tell us which is the funny, make-believe part?

Is Mise,

Why do some people assume that whites have always been all-powerful, that they have come in vast numbers to efficiently conquer helpless people ? In much of the outback, whites have been in the majority for barely a century, for much less in some parts.

Muzzle-loading muskets took up to a minute or more to clean out and reload, while spears could be thrown every few seconds. Single-shot carbines and rifles weren't introduced until at least the 1840s, and repeater rifles (I've seen an assertion that they were used in the Pinjarra Battle in WA in 1832) weren't invented (the Winchester rifle) in the US until the 1870s.

When pastoralists seized/were leased land, they needed labour. So they attracted young men to their stations with rations, and by building small weirs or dams across rivers, to encourage people to come and settle nearby. That continued really, until the 1960s.

The truth is what counts, not stance or passion or narrative.

Joe

Is Mise,

"The reason why the sun never sets on the British Empire
is because God doesn't trust the British in the dark".
(Anon).

"I think I can save the British Empire from anything -
except the British".
(Winston Churchill).

I doubt if these statements were meant to be taken
seriously either.

If any of you have studied World History one thing that stands out is that it is a story of empires and the library shelves are full of literature on empires from all the Arts fields like history, anthropology, sociology, archaeology, etc. Fascinating stuff. And the story of empires is still in motion with Putin trying to restore the Soviet Empire and Xi trying to establish a new Chinese Empire on a global scale.

The problem with the rise of empires is that they seem to always bring death and destruction to those who come in contact with them. Part and parcel of the exploitation package I guess.

Joe,

Yes indeed truth is what counts.

Whites form the vast majority of the population
in this country. Aboriginal people about 3.3%.

Yet there are some who still believe that the
historical evidence shows a "black armband"
version of Australian history is deeply flawed,
that Aboriginals were not herded onto missions,
driven from their lands, or have countless
children stolen from their families.

I totally agree - truth is what counts.

But some people refuse to see it or accept it.

Foxy,

So none of,

"Meanwhile white hunters shot the Aboriginal hunting dogs
and the kangaroos that were a staple food for the locals -
kangaroos were a threat to the white invaders because
they competed with cattle for grass and water, and were also
symbolic of natural grace and beauty, two things that the
British Empire had vowed to wipe off the face of the earth."

was meant to be taken at face value?

Funny, at first I thought that you were joking, ah! well, I'm proved right again.