Hi Maverick,

I don't think that Lidia Thorpe will ever become
the leader of the Indigenous people in Australia.
I doubt if she'll by chosen by white people to stay
in parliament and speak on behalf of black people.

Thanks for the link of Noel Pearson. I realize that
he's allowed to give his views because they are
views accepted by white Australia - who are mostly
interested in hearing their version of " Indigenous
Social Justice."

These "intellectual debates" are allowed to be had
within the parameters set by non-Indigenous Australians.
I guess it would be more enlightening to let someone
like Lidia Thorpe have a say - than someone like
Noel Pearson. But of course Pearson is more acceptable
to our white society. And at least he just may be listened
to by more people than if Thorpe spoke hat or no hat -
or possum cape.

cont'd ...

Hi Maverick,

2019 MABO Oration
Delivered by Luke Pearson
3 June 2019

"Our right to self-determination is inalienable.
We have a right to control our own destinies.
We have a right to maintain our connections to
land, and to water. For those people who have lost
those or are losing those, we have a right to rebuild
them. We have a right to rebuild our languages, to
maintain the ones that luckily are still thriving. We
have a right to our families, to our children. These
aren't things that you should need to prove you're
capable of. These are things that should be given."

Shonky,

You have been taken down by your own words! Nothing could be clearer!

No Lidia Thorpe should not resign.
The Greens would replace her with someone sensible whereas with her
there we can see how stupid the Greens can be.

Some people claim they have inalienable rights.
They haven't.
They certainly have inalienable needs.
Food, clothing, shelter and so forth.
They cannot live without them.
In the natural world, these are acquired by the use of force.

In our 'civilised' society, we are able to live in peace.
This is because we allow others to have exclusive use of things they need.
We use the word 'right' to express these 'entitlements'.
This 'right' will result from reasoned discussion.
These 'entitlements' are agreed to and enforced.
That is why we have governing bodies.
That is why we have laws, and enforcement.
That is why we have armed forces to protect the borders of the land we call home.
Without them we could be over-run by another race, which would undoubtedly impose its own standards.
And we could lose all the so called 'rights' we take for granted.
Because we wouldn't be able to enforce them.

There is a vocal group in Australia which talks about inalienable rights.
These 'rights' simply don't exist. They are illusory.
Long ago this group lost its ability to determine its own path in life.
It now has no power to make rules or enforce those rules.
The only way any small group can bring about change is to convince a majority of the justness of its cause.

However, any group which tries to convince us that the sand in one place is mysteriously different from the sand in another place, is bound to fail?
Sand is sand.
It is silicon dioxide mixed with various other substances.
None of these substances is magic.
None of these substances has mystical powers.
It is all just sand.
So the argument falters and fails.

"we can see how stupid the Greens can be" Bazz you would never vote Green in a fit, nor would most on this Forum. I may not entirely agree with Linda's method of presentation, but I like those who did vote her into the Senate support what she says. Most of the conservative mob on here simply want parliament stacked with "yes men" who only reflect their ideals. Her position in the Senate will be determined by those who voted for her not some bunch of reactionary old farts.