Whats you're solution to the current issues faced by the indigenous community, other than going back in time and thwarting australian colonisation

Edited by sydneyfc1987: 4/2/2016 01:03:38 AM

The Cove singing "Happy Birthday Sydney" is always a highlight of the Australia Day match.

BULLSHIT We're commemorating the foundation of NSW the biggest and greatest state in the country

Edited by GDeathe: 3/2/2016 11:40:15 PM

Edited by GDeathe: 3/2/2016 11:42:05 PM

Agree with you mate but brace yourself for people accusing you of hating the British.

Not sure if this was posted already, but just in case:

Out of 53 countries still in the British commonwealth, Australia is the last country left that still holds its national day on the anniversary of the date white people invaded, killed and stole land. Yep, just us, on our own.

https://newmatilda.com/2016/01/28/january-26-australia-all-alone-with-a-national-day-that-celebrates-dispossession/


Another thing to point out - Before the 1930s in New Zealand, they also held their national day on the anniversary of European invasion (Jan 29th). But from the 1940s, Waitangi Day became more popular, in recognition of the treaty between Europeans and Maori that basically formed the country of NZ. . By the 1970s, it had formally become NZ's national day.

I post this to demonstrate that it's actually not that unusual for a country to change the date of its national day.

I'm not Aboriginal, but to me the 26th is not an anniversary to be proud of. I actually find it strange - because it wasn't even the beginning of a unified, independent, democratic Australia - that stuff came much later and on different dates. Federation, for example, was proclaimed on the 1st of January 1901.

On the 26th we don't actually commemorate any of the things that actually make our country great.


Edited by lastbroadcast: 3/2/2016 11:08:36 PM

the only solution i see fit in their eyes is if anyone who
is isnt aboriginal jump on a boat and go back to the old country, whilst handing back the keys to them.
ive raised this argument before and beind branded an idiot by the same people with no clear cut solution

Edited by Socawho: 3/2/2016 08:27:34 AM

:lol:

What should Queensland and Victoria be called after we eradicate anything British related?

Aboriginals need to check their privilege. The new arrivals brought cultural enrichment, sure, at the expense of their own but sacrifices have to be made for progress. The Aboriginal needed this influx of migrants to boost their economy even though the majority of them will never see any of its benefits and be forced to work harder for less. Yes the new arrivals have a complete disrespect of everything they value but the Aboriginal has never had it better, Just look at all the different restaurants they can now eat at. Their numbers dwindling heading towards extinction? Surely not, race is a social construct and they are now constructing differently. Their once freedom to self determination in their own lands as a homogenous group was well worth losing in favour of the wonders of diversity. Only a xenophobic, racist, bigot Aboriginal could possibly disagree.




[size=2]I'm being sarcastic[/size]

The difference between a centrist and a leftard are the magical phrases of 'racism', 'privilege' and 'hetero-sexual white male'. They're also known as debate killers. You can't talk sense with people who want to turn every debate into one about social status, race and sexual orientation ;)

In saying that, if you're a transgender-hindu/muslim-female with a dark complexion, getting a job in Australia is going to be difficult for you :-k

hahaha! See - I'll never qualify as a professor in a Humanities Dept!

It made all the difference for the Europeans. Almost all of the base advancements in Europe such as Gunpowder, paper, the compass, monetary systems, basic maths etc came from contact (typically non-violent trade etc) from other cultures. Who is to say if we made peaceful contact with them, like the Japanese initially, they would not have latched on and advanced rapidly. The presumption that without invasion and genocide a culture can not and will not advance doesn't even make the most basic foundation for a sound argument.

This doesn't, of course, explain why remote aboriginals have still yet to catch up with the rest of us. It is becoming more and more obvious that it is a personal choice. When you have to stop selling petrol and ban alcohol and ciggies you know there are some deep problems in remote communities that they themselves need to sort out. They can't just keep saying "But muh genocide from 200 years ago" "you should give us money and houses for free" when we had nothing to do with it and have done everything possible to help them yet they throw it back in our faces.

Edited by scotch&coke: 2/2/2016 11:15:59 AM

you forgot to use the words white privilege ;)

...and there is quite the whiff of cultural superiority claims when that argument comes round too.

For those actually interested in genuinely asking the question as to why European and some Asian cultures became technologically advanced, when others (eg in the Americas & Australia) didn't, the answer is quite straightforward, and has nothing to do with "superior culture" or "superior intelligence".

For the detailed version, read Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs and Steel". For the cut down version, here goes:

To make the technological leap out of the stone age, you need crops that are viable to be farmed, and you need animals that are able to be domesticated, both as a source of meat, and as beasts of burden.

When your society has those pre-conditions, you are able to increase your population, move from a rural to an city based system, and produce enough surplus goods to trade at a high level, which then increases networks, which then helps spread knowledge and increase technology.

Australia had no suitable animals for widescale domestication. Whilst the Americas had only Llamas - not very suitable. They did have corn.

This plays out in what we see - some development beyond hunter gatherer lifestyle in the Americas (Mayans, Aztecs), but not at a huge scale, no such development in Australia, and the most advanced technological societies evolving in Europe, the middle east, and the Asian steppe.

In conclusion - technological sophistication is an accident of evolution, based on specific pre-conditions. NOT the superiority or otherwise of individual cultures.

Edited by AzzaMarch: 2/2/2016 10:24:48 AM

Geezus - this thread has really gone to loony town.

I love the "they would still be living in mud huts" argument - you make it sound like the british came here to give them access to technology. They were specifically excluded and denied from accessing british technology, and actively hunted down and murdered for generations.

I've lost all respect for him and his victim card lately.

CHRIST :lol:

That's a little tough, but they would have been 'invaded' one way or another.

It really isn't as simple as you're making it out to be. Tasmania's entire Aboriginal population was wiped out, if that happened to any ethnic/cultural group today it would be called genocide.

So tell me, did the Jews just "lose" the Holocaust?

Excellent listening to Stan Grant on Q&A right now.
Great perspective on the indigenous views & feelings

Not really

40k years had amounted to nothing, I doubt an extra 200 would do anything more.

This is hilarious. True though, don't see anyone complaining about the present day Anglo-Saxons who took over the picts and celts.

This provocative, conflicting response reads like a Draupnir n friends play.

I can sympathize with the Aboriginal because they have been supplanted from their lands, their culture, way of life and religion destroyed. A demoralized people.

Its a similar sympathy I will feel for the Anglo and Europeans as they embrace the same fate in their homelands.

I'm not contesting that fact. I'm just saying that the presumption that a native culture would "still be living in huts" is completely ludicrous.

Yep, I soent 10 days I a remote community a few years back as part of an opening of a new community centre. Incredible experience which made me develop both a huge compassion for Aboriginal people and a hatred of their 21st century culture and attitudes.

Not entirely true. Look at China, Japan and South Korea. 3 of the most technologically advanced countries in the world today yet they were never properly colonised.

Why is it then that literally on every government and educational form i have had to fill out for the past 18 years of my high school and adult life have i had to tick a box to confirm whether or not i am an "Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander"?

One of my mates was a med student and he believed in everything the Greens had said about needing to help the Aboriginals and that somehow it is the governments fault that they live in squalor. A quick work experience/ uni placement in the Northern Territory has literally turned his thinking to the complete opposite. This is evolution at work right now. All the systems are in place to help remote communities yet they do nothing with it.

I would like to see the difference in life expectancy/ success in Aboriginals living in remote areas compared to more Metropolitan cities. I'm sure there would be a significant disparity

If the British didn't come then someone else would have. They're probably lucky that it wasn't the French or the Spanish.

how much do you think is spent every year on aboriginal affairs?

More buzzword shit

"Empowering communities" - what does that even mean?

Aboriginal people are given so much shit, lower entry scores for uni, large welfare dependence etc

If they choose not to take it then so be it. Let's face it, if it wasn't for British settlement they would still be living in mud huts in their uncivilised lifestyle.

Edited by 433: 1/2/2016 04:05:34 PM