Dear Davif F.,

The Aboriginal people have a long history of
fighting and lobbying for their rights.
The following link explains this complex history:

http://abc.net.au/news/2018-07-04/complex-history-of-indigenous-and-non-indigenous-australia/9930944

Dear Paul,

You wrote:

“I don't agree, I believe Aboriginal people are a unique part of Australian society, and as such should have a special voice to parliament, regarding laws only affecting them, unlike the voice big business or Rupert Murdoch etc has now. There is no suggestion First Australians should have veto power, or authority to make laws outside of parliament.”

Since you write that “There is no suggestion First Australians should have veto power, or authority to make laws outside of parliament” what form would you give that special voice? To refer to the Aborigines as First Australians is rather a misnomer. The Aborigines inhabited a land area which later was called Australia. The First Australians were those people who were citizens of that land area at the time the land area was first known as Australia. The Aborigines had a society before Australia existed. To call them First Australians is to deny that. They were also excluded from Australian society at the time that the land area was first called Australia.

The Aborigines are a unique part of Australian society. Rupert Murdoch is also a unique part of Australian society. I feel that the influence of the Aborigines is more benign than the influence of Rupert Murdoch, but both are unique.

I believe the Aborigines should have the power to make laws outside of parliament. They should have the same power to make laws that affect them as Orthodox Jews have the power to make laws concerning what is kosher for those Jews who wish to follow those laws.

Since the land was taken from the Aborigines and many of them were murdered in the process I believe they should receive some recompense for that. They are not First Australians. They are a conquered people conquered by a society that later became Australia.

So we should have a special parliament-lite, membership of which would be restricted to one race. Only one race would be able to vote for it. Only one race would be allowed as members. It would only make laws or recommend laws about one race.

This is the very definition of racism. Sure its racism to supposedly benefit that one race, but racism nonetheless. Its that benign racism that has so bamboozled poor ol' Paul.

Forty years ago, Australia joined the world in opposing apartheid. Now the woke want to introduce it here.

________________________________________________________________

Paul/ Foxy assert without the slightest evidence that the high rates of DV against black women is due to poverty. Yet the DV industry itself asserts that it has nothing to do with wealth and that it occurs in all levels of society. That's why, when governments do anti-DV campaigns, it always targets white middle-class men.

But I understand how this works. If, today, you need it to be about poverty, then it is. And if, tomorrow, you need it to NOT be about poverty, then it isn't. The causes are what you need them to be right now. And these people will later claim to be the followers of the science.

Of course, its all about the politics. The welfare of the black women - well that needs to come a distant second to the politics of lauding the black men.

Black women have suffered overwhelming abuse at the hands of their men for millennia and white apologists are allowing that to continue.

Australua was always Australia, even before Matthew Flinders named it Australia, I see nothing wrong with a formal voice to parliament for the First Australians.

mhaze in your Joe Goebbels style purposely misrepresents what I say, both on an Aboriginal voice and the issue of DV. DV is never acceptable, be it from black or white. mhaze you being one of the haters, I don't believe you have any concern for black women, you see DV as a weapon you can use to bash Aboriginal people over the head with.

Laws are made for the good of the community
davidf,
Yes, it's the only way to think as a Nation ! Unfortunately, the Laws to deal with Law breakers aren't strict enough & the disciplinary actions are laughable !
Aborigines are already the most looked after group on the face of the planet yet they still want more on top of the highest lease payments in history !

Because we have in Parliament a lot of brainless activits who cannot develop laws that encompass all society. A healthy society does not work on Social activits it whorks on compassionate thinkers. It is better if the Government does not set laws to control private life and personal decisions. But we have Governments setting laws on social values and beliefs - these are religious values set by society.

What laws do aboriginals want exclusively for them?