Forums > Social Discussion > UN native rights declaration finally passes, but...
Login/Join to ParticipateStargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Article in Canadian media
Basically what it says is that
What do you think?
Personally this is an issue that affects the "new world" more than the "old world". Personally I think that native tribes should at least get compensated for the loss of their land and receive a fair share of the profits, drawn from their land, but then I am not much affected by this...
I personally think that it IS an embarrassment to the governments of dissenting countries, as many of them stand in front row when it comes to criticise and point their finger at human rights violations. It appears as if this is only the case as long as they are not affected.
There are shades of grey in this, no doubt.
Please keep in mind that this is a sensitive topic. If you decide to step into it and participate in the discussion, please keep it as friendly and on topic as possible.
If you take (personal) offence in certain wordings, please verify whether it was meant as an (personal) insult BEFORE you then NOTIFY either the person, the mods or myself. Please do NOT respond in the (same) way and derail the thread.
It is clearly an online discussion and therefore wordings can get misunderstood - bear that in mind. Overly sarcastic or ironic posts might hurt somebody elses feelings - especially if not CLEARLY marked as such ( [ironic:] ....)
Also if you decide to participate, please don't just throw words of mouth at us, but try to enable us to verify (by posting supporting links) - excluded is personal experience.
Thanks for taking the time to read this
EDITED_BY: FireTom (1191487247)
Article in Canadian media
Basically what it says is that
Written by: CBC news
the non-binding declaration, which sets out global human rights standards for indigenous populations, was easily approved Thursday by the UN General Assembly in New York — with only Canada, New Zealand, the United States and Australia dissenting. Eleven countries abstained.
Article 26 of the UN declaration states: Indigenous peoples have the right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired.
McNee said the provision is overly broad, unclear and capable of a wide variety of interpretations that could lead to the reopening of previously settled land claims and existing treaties.
What do you think?
Personally this is an issue that affects the "new world" more than the "old world". Personally I think that native tribes should at least get compensated for the loss of their land and receive a fair share of the profits, drawn from their land, but then I am not much affected by this...
I personally think that it IS an embarrassment to the governments of dissenting countries, as many of them stand in front row when it comes to criticise and point their finger at human rights violations. It appears as if this is only the case as long as they are not affected.
There are shades of grey in this, no doubt.
Please keep in mind that this is a sensitive topic. If you decide to step into it and participate in the discussion, please keep it as friendly and on topic as possible.
If you take (personal) offence in certain wordings, please verify whether it was meant as an (personal) insult BEFORE you then NOTIFY either the person, the mods or myself. Please do NOT respond in the (same) way and derail the thread.
It is clearly an online discussion and therefore wordings can get misunderstood - bear that in mind. Overly sarcastic or ironic posts might hurt somebody elses feelings - especially if not CLEARLY marked as such ( [ironic:] ....)
Also if you decide to participate, please don't just throw words of mouth at us, but try to enable us to verify (by posting supporting links) - excluded is personal experience.
Thanks for taking the time to read this
EDITED_BY: FireTom (1191487247)
the best smiles are the ones you lead to 
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
The link doesnt work for me
Canada, NZ, US and Australia. It doesn't surprise me at all that they did because I can't think of any other countries that it would affect to the extent that it will affect those four.
The link doesnt work for me
Canada, NZ, US and Australia. It doesn't surprise me at all that they did because I can't think of any other countries that it would affect to the extent that it will affect those four.
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
addict
489 posts
Location: Perth
489 posts
Location: Perth
Posted:
On one hand I'm still annoyed that John Howard (PM of Aus) still hasn't officially said sorry... it's just a word.
On the other hand I think... well, if we are setting back things to how they 'used' to be and radically giving the entirity of Australia back to the few Indigenous Australians left (and is it 'pure bloods', or the definition of "anyone who identifies as being of Indigenous origin, coz seriously, thats a pretty leniant definition!)... then we'll just jump off to another country, taking with us all the workers and labour that make Australia viable, and leave it completely open to invasion by Japan.. (everyone knows Japan wants Australia... :P )
Or maybe... all the 'white' NZers can come over to Australia.. and all the Indigenous Australians can go to NZ and they and the Maoris can be happy that they have their own country and land.
In all, I think the situation is way too complicated to have resolutions on. And considering the four countries that refuse are THE countries with Indigenous rights problems, it shows that the committee maybe wasn't made with actual goals in mind, just more paper to sign, to agree to fake promises...
On one hand I'm still annoyed that John Howard (PM of Aus) still hasn't officially said sorry... it's just a word.
On the other hand I think... well, if we are setting back things to how they 'used' to be and radically giving the entirity of Australia back to the few Indigenous Australians left (and is it 'pure bloods', or the definition of "anyone who identifies as being of Indigenous origin, coz seriously, thats a pretty leniant definition!)... then we'll just jump off to another country, taking with us all the workers and labour that make Australia viable, and leave it completely open to invasion by Japan.. (everyone knows Japan wants Australia... :P )
Or maybe... all the 'white' NZers can come over to Australia.. and all the Indigenous Australians can go to NZ and they and the Maoris can be happy that they have their own country and land.
In all, I think the situation is way too complicated to have resolutions on. And considering the four countries that refuse are THE countries with Indigenous rights problems, it shows that the committee maybe wasn't made with actual goals in mind, just more paper to sign, to agree to fake promises...
BRONZE Member
old hand
1,107 posts
Location: In a test pit, Mackay, Australia
old hand
1,107 posts
Location: In a test pit, Mackay, Australia
Posted:
Under Native Title the traditional owners have the rights to go to court and claim the land anyway, the problem is showing that a particular group *is* the traditional owner bearing in mind that oral history isn't fantastically submissable.
A huge area of beachfront land where my parents live was recently granted Native Title...and was promptly sold off to develop a golf course. It's always struck me as funny that the only bits being claimed seem to be the ones with the monetary value. Maybe I'm being cynicle.
I'd like to see how well this would work in somewhere like the UK; I've got reddish hair, therefore I'm a native rather than one of you dark haired Roman invader scum. I'll have Heathrow Airport please.
Under Native Title the traditional owners have the rights to go to court and claim the land anyway, the problem is showing that a particular group *is* the traditional owner bearing in mind that oral history isn't fantastically submissable.
A huge area of beachfront land where my parents live was recently granted Native Title...and was promptly sold off to develop a golf course. It's always struck me as funny that the only bits being claimed seem to be the ones with the monetary value. Maybe I'm being cynicle.
I'd like to see how well this would work in somewhere like the UK; I've got reddish hair, therefore I'm a native rather than one of you dark haired Roman invader scum. I'll have Heathrow Airport please.
There is a slight possibility that I am not actually right all of the time.
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
I side you on the Howard thingy - but then, does that say anything about the mayority of the Australian public (at voting age)? I remember Howard to be PM already the first time I came to OZ and that's been... geez, '96.
Hmm, regarding the fact that "ïndigenous people", errm women got raped and impregnated and children got stolen from their families, raised as whites; regarding the fact that (at least in Australia and the US) a cultural and human genocide has taken place - IMHO it's a bit frivolous to point out "leniant" definitions.
no insult meant.
I have somehow noticed that - besides being darlings - many young Australians seem to fall for their systems propaganda. Remember: Australia (as the US, Canada and New Zealand) existed just fine without "the whites", there was (and is) no need for "viability", Australia is not in need of cattle, neither rabbits, nor uranium, opal or goldmines...
Is this coming from the same person that wants to help African landmine victims? I sense and give credit to sarcasm in this statement and I am not too much into political correctness myself, but appreciate ppl speaking their minds.
I side you on your stance that the situation is VERY complicated - especially to Australians, Canadians and all those who have been born into this difficult situation.
It is not your fault (as the Holocaust is not mine). Hence we should try to make up our minds afar from nationalistic media propaganda and look for solutions, where indigenous and our own dignity is preserved and where the damage done fairly gets sorted - and especially to avoid the same or similar mistakes to be repeated.
It is especially problematic, where ppls (bad) consciousness is tapped into.
IMHO it would make you a great deal "prouder to be *fill in country*" if you can claim that anything possible is done (with your idealistic support) to reconciliate.
"Sorry" is only a word - but it means a lot if one just can't say it. How(ard)ever: actions speak so much louder.
Eera: Yes, it is hard to draw a line somewhere. Where and when? As an indigenous, would you rather claim or be happy to receive desert(ed) land, or would you (for once) prefer to get those pieces that the (white invaders) make a great deal of money with?
Cynism and sarcasm is valid in here, as is irony.
EDITED_BY: FireTom (1190603960)
I side you on the Howard thingy - but then, does that say anything about the mayority of the Australian public (at voting age)? I remember Howard to be PM already the first time I came to OZ and that's been... geez, '96.
Hmm, regarding the fact that "ïndigenous people", errm women got raped and impregnated and children got stolen from their families, raised as whites; regarding the fact that (at least in Australia and the US) a cultural and human genocide has taken place - IMHO it's a bit frivolous to point out "leniant" definitions.
no insult meant.I have somehow noticed that - besides being darlings - many young Australians seem to fall for their systems propaganda. Remember: Australia (as the US, Canada and New Zealand) existed just fine without "the whites", there was (and is) no need for "viability", Australia is not in need of cattle, neither rabbits, nor uranium, opal or goldmines...
Written by: Natasqi
all the 'white' NZers can come over to Australia.. and all the Indigenous Australians can go to NZ and they and the Maoris can be happy that they have their own country and land
Is this coming from the same person that wants to help African landmine victims? I sense and give credit to sarcasm in this statement and I am not too much into political correctness myself, but appreciate ppl speaking their minds.
I side you on your stance that the situation is VERY complicated - especially to Australians, Canadians and all those who have been born into this difficult situation.
It is not your fault (as the Holocaust is not mine). Hence we should try to make up our minds afar from nationalistic media propaganda and look for solutions, where indigenous and our own dignity is preserved and where the damage done fairly gets sorted - and especially to avoid the same or similar mistakes to be repeated.
It is especially problematic, where ppls (bad) consciousness is tapped into.
IMHO it would make you a great deal "prouder to be *fill in country*" if you can claim that anything possible is done (with your idealistic support) to reconciliate.
"Sorry" is only a word - but it means a lot if one just can't say it. How(ard)ever: actions speak so much louder.
Eera: Yes, it is hard to draw a line somewhere. Where and when? As an indigenous, would you rather claim or be happy to receive desert(ed) land, or would you (for once) prefer to get those pieces that the (white invaders) make a great deal of money with?
Cynism and sarcasm is valid in here, as is irony.
EDITED_BY: FireTom (1190603960)
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
SILVER Member
Member
7 posts
Location: Adelaide, United Kingdom
Member
7 posts
Location: Adelaide, United Kingdom
Posted:
hhmmmm... this looks like a thread that could get very heated, so I'm a bit afraid to admit it, but I agree with Eera.
Every piece of land on this planet has been stolen/fought over throughout history. Where do you draw the line? If something has been taken from me personally, by someone who is currently living and benfitting from that, then yeah sure. But if something has been taken from my great-grandparents by people who are now dead, I'm not sure you should be punishing their great-grandchildren for that (after all, if natives are going to get this land, someones got to loose it).
Virtually everyone is an immigrant, and if "Indigenous peoples have the right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired", you're going to have to displace almost everyone in the world.
Yeah it sucks that wars and invasions and settlements have happened, and people lost out because of it, but its happened all throughout history, and trying to reinvent the world the way it was before then is impossible. And even if it is returned to the natives, who exactly are the natives??? Before white people came to lots of the lands native tribes were fighting over them amoungst themselves, most of this land was changing hands before european settlers arrived.
Anywase im starting to ramble now, so please don't slaughter me for my opinions
hhmmmm... this looks like a thread that could get very heated, so I'm a bit afraid to admit it, but I agree with Eera.
Every piece of land on this planet has been stolen/fought over throughout history. Where do you draw the line? If something has been taken from me personally, by someone who is currently living and benfitting from that, then yeah sure. But if something has been taken from my great-grandparents by people who are now dead, I'm not sure you should be punishing their great-grandchildren for that (after all, if natives are going to get this land, someones got to loose it).
Virtually everyone is an immigrant, and if "Indigenous peoples have the right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired", you're going to have to displace almost everyone in the world.
Yeah it sucks that wars and invasions and settlements have happened, and people lost out because of it, but its happened all throughout history, and trying to reinvent the world the way it was before then is impossible. And even if it is returned to the natives, who exactly are the natives??? Before white people came to lots of the lands native tribes were fighting over them amoungst themselves, most of this land was changing hands before european settlers arrived.
Anywase im starting to ramble now, so please don't slaughter me for my opinions
SILVER Member
Member
7 posts
Location: Adelaide, United Kingdom
Member
7 posts
Location: Adelaide, United Kingdom
Posted:
I for one would prefere to get those pieces that the (white invaders) make a great deal of money with, but that doesn't necessarily mean im entitled to it
.
True, but then this in turn takes weight away from natives claiming only land of value, because allthough settlers brought some bad things as listed above, they also gave much of the land being claimed the value it now holds. I'm not saying that land doesn't have value for its own sake, but much of the land that money has been made off holds its value primarily BECAUSE of the settlers investment.
Written by: FireTom
As an indigenous, would you rather claim or be happy to receive desert(ed) land, or would you (for once) prefer to get those pieces that the (white invaders) make a great deal of money with?
I for one would prefere to get those pieces that the (white invaders) make a great deal of money with, but that doesn't necessarily mean im entitled to it
. Written by: FireTom
I have somehow noticed that - besides being darlings - many young Australians seem to fall for their systems propaganda. Remember: Australia (as the US, Canada and New Zealand) existed just fine without "the whites", there was (and is) no need for "viability", Australia is not in need of cattle, neither rabbits, nor uranium, opal or goldmines...
True, but then this in turn takes weight away from natives claiming only land of value, because allthough settlers brought some bad things as listed above, they also gave much of the land being claimed the value it now holds. I'm not saying that land doesn't have value for its own sake, but much of the land that money has been made off holds its value primarily BECAUSE of the settlers investment.
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
I agree at asking where one draws the line.
Do the Japanese have to acknowledge the land they stole from the Ainu? And as Eera said; what about the Romans and the natives of the British Isles?
And sorry Tom, but I don't think it's believing the government propaganda. The example Eera gave is nothing to do with government propaganda or perhaps I'm just a cynic too
I agree at asking where one draws the line.
Do the Japanese have to acknowledge the land they stole from the Ainu? And as Eera said; what about the Romans and the natives of the British Isles?
And sorry Tom, but I don't think it's believing the government propaganda. The example Eera gave is nothing to do with government propaganda or perhaps I'm just a cynic too
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
BRONZE Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
5,814 posts
Location: Perth, Australia
Carpal \'Tunnel
5,814 posts
Location: Perth, Australia
Posted:
I cannot see an answer to the racial issues in Australia.
The native issues are huge. We have a generation that has high unemployment and huge drug taking behaviour that is detrimental to their health. It seems we have a generation that has lost hope and now mental capacity.
Throwing money at the issue doesnt give back selfrespect or hope. We cant send in the army or government officials as thats interfering. We cant leave it as thats neglect.
Its been common knowledge that young kids have STDs. Yet access to communities by police is denied.
The few people who care are swamped by the problem. The teachers who go to the communities are abused and threatened and wont take families due to the threat so getting teachers up there is difficult.
People from within the communities sabotage the attempts to restrict alcohol. The govt has reimplemented a policy controlling social secuity payments in an attempt to ensure the payments are spent on food and bills rather than drugs and gambling. Should this be allowed? I think yes. In any situation where the recipient of parenting payments causes concerns of the use of the money should be subject to the same.
Those who havent been racist in the past become so from constant reinforcent of stereotype behaviour. I resent that I am now more racist than ever but I now feel the need for protective behaviour. If you know the rules and break them constantly it is detrimental not only to yourself but the rest of people identified with you. No matter what the race involved.
How do you give hope to people who have no hope and are lost? How do you help people who dont want help?
What worries me most is the people who care most in the communities are older. When they are gone will the next generation step into their roles. These older people are already trying to raise grandchildren as the parents are "lost".
Communties are now asking for kids to be taken away. Ironic with the " sorry" generation debarcle we have just had.
I cannot see an answer to the racial issues in Australia.
The native issues are huge. We have a generation that has high unemployment and huge drug taking behaviour that is detrimental to their health. It seems we have a generation that has lost hope and now mental capacity.
Throwing money at the issue doesnt give back selfrespect or hope. We cant send in the army or government officials as thats interfering. We cant leave it as thats neglect.
Its been common knowledge that young kids have STDs. Yet access to communities by police is denied.
The few people who care are swamped by the problem. The teachers who go to the communities are abused and threatened and wont take families due to the threat so getting teachers up there is difficult.
People from within the communities sabotage the attempts to restrict alcohol. The govt has reimplemented a policy controlling social secuity payments in an attempt to ensure the payments are spent on food and bills rather than drugs and gambling. Should this be allowed? I think yes. In any situation where the recipient of parenting payments causes concerns of the use of the money should be subject to the same.
Those who havent been racist in the past become so from constant reinforcent of stereotype behaviour. I resent that I am now more racist than ever but I now feel the need for protective behaviour. If you know the rules and break them constantly it is detrimental not only to yourself but the rest of people identified with you. No matter what the race involved.
How do you give hope to people who have no hope and are lost? How do you help people who dont want help?
What worries me most is the people who care most in the communities are older. When they are gone will the next generation step into their roles. These older people are already trying to raise grandchildren as the parents are "lost".
Communties are now asking for kids to be taken away. Ironic with the " sorry" generation debarcle we have just had.
Is it the Truth?
Is it Fair to all concerned?
Will it build Goodwill and Better Friendships?
Will it be Beneficial to all concerned?
Im in a lonely battle with the world with a fish to match the chip on my shoulder. Gnu in Binnu in a cnu
BRONZE Member
old hand
1,107 posts
Location: In a test pit, Mackay, Australia
old hand
1,107 posts
Location: In a test pit, Mackay, Australia
Posted:
Let's not overlook that *Australia* didn't exist prior to the white man. There is no such thing as an Aborigional nation, rather they are individual tribes with their own languages and cultures, each unique. A job I was on recently we had different guides for different territories, the Waka man wouldn't let the Gang Gang man onto "his" territory. Bad blood still runs against the "traditional" enemies
Please don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the Aborigional people of all nations haven't been treated abysmally, they have.
The difference is that it's recent enough for people to care; does anyone here really give two hoots about the Norman invasion of England? Who honestly gives a toss about the Lutherian slaughter of Rome in the 1600s. If we're talking about mass rapes look no further than the Japanese invasion of Nanking in the 1940s
Apparently you can officially be recognised as Aborigional, and claim all the payments if you are 1/64 black. That's about as black as I am. So, as Natasqi pointed out, do these effectively white fellas get the same rights to claim if one of their great-great-great-great grandparents was Aborigional?
In law, if not practise, we all have the same rights whether we're black, white, yellow, red or green. Let's keep it that way, this is only going to cause resentment.
Let's not overlook that *Australia* didn't exist prior to the white man. There is no such thing as an Aborigional nation, rather they are individual tribes with their own languages and cultures, each unique. A job I was on recently we had different guides for different territories, the Waka man wouldn't let the Gang Gang man onto "his" territory. Bad blood still runs against the "traditional" enemies
Please don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the Aborigional people of all nations haven't been treated abysmally, they have.
The difference is that it's recent enough for people to care; does anyone here really give two hoots about the Norman invasion of England? Who honestly gives a toss about the Lutherian slaughter of Rome in the 1600s. If we're talking about mass rapes look no further than the Japanese invasion of Nanking in the 1940s
Apparently you can officially be recognised as Aborigional, and claim all the payments if you are 1/64 black. That's about as black as I am. So, as Natasqi pointed out, do these effectively white fellas get the same rights to claim if one of their great-great-great-great grandparents was Aborigional?
In law, if not practise, we all have the same rights whether we're black, white, yellow, red or green. Let's keep it that way, this is only going to cause resentment.
There is a slight possibility that I am not actually right all of the time.
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
I found out the other week that the tribes in my area of Victoria DID DOT traditionally do dot painting, NOR did they play the didgeridoo. But it makes the money now, so they do.
That's not exactly being traditional of them, is it?
And in the same line, why should people claim land which traditionally isn't actually theirs but they can make money out of it? The law states "otherwise used or acquired." My area's tribes have 'acquired' dot painting and the didgeridoo. But it's not traditional and has only been acquired since white time. Yet under the UN law, if it were land, they'd be entitled to it. Sounds opportunistic to me.
Oh and before someone tells me I was believing white propaganda - my source is a local tribeswoman
I found out the other week that the tribes in my area of Victoria DID DOT traditionally do dot painting, NOR did they play the didgeridoo. But it makes the money now, so they do.
That's not exactly being traditional of them, is it?
And in the same line, why should people claim land which traditionally isn't actually theirs but they can make money out of it? The law states "otherwise used or acquired." My area's tribes have 'acquired' dot painting and the didgeridoo. But it's not traditional and has only been acquired since white time. Yet under the UN law, if it were land, they'd be entitled to it. Sounds opportunistic to me.
Oh and before someone tells me I was believing white propaganda - my source is a local tribeswoman
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
addict
489 posts
Location: Perth
489 posts
Location: Perth
Posted:
Just pointing out (which was clarified above) that anyone who is 1/64th Indigenous can claim. People who have never met/lived with/talked to Indigenous people can now claim to be part of a culture they know nothing about.
*nods* I agree, it was fine without the whites.(even better in an ecological POV...) But if the land is to be claimed, and in the extreme situation, everyone without Indigenous heritage sent away... then, a traditional lifestyle would be near impossible to live.
Australia's land has been cleared, farmed and most traditional means of subsistance wouldn't be a 'viable' existance. And would anyone exchange land for vaccines, antibiotics, surgery etc?
I think returning to a traditional diet would be excellent for most Indigenous Australians as the Western diet is terrible for their systems, with T2DM and Cardiovascular problems rampant... but whether there is enough of the traditional plants and animals left to live on, especially in the areas that they used to inhabit... ??
And yes FireTom, I was being sarcastic :P
My point was that the wording is too simplistic.. and even though it is just a signature, once signed, the govt can get pounded for not acting...
So, as for the solution...
It's just, you look at the situation (I'm only talking about Oz because I have 10% knowledge here, but zip elsewhere)
We tried complete overbearing on all their matters - didn't work
We tried self determination, the terrible outcomes of ATSIC...
Now shared responsibility is actually getting somewhere!
Having studied the medical Shared Responsibility Agreements (SRAs) I think some progress is being made.
One such one is, If the community makes sure there is ~70% attendance rate at school for primary children and they turn up with washed faces and are clean and clothed, the community gets a pool.
Now this seems really weird for many people. People who have been brought up in a western society with a strong work ethic.. "We have 99% attendance rates, don't need to be bribed to clean ourselves, and we don't get a free pool!"
But when you look at it, the rates of many eye diseases have been greatly reduced, people in the community are interested and work together, and then they get a pool, a reward which also increased exercise.
This is only one SRA...
I don't know... on one hand I believe words such as Sorry mean a great deal... but on the other I think "stop wasting time on these stupid policies that mean nothing and start more programs that actually help."
*shrugs* I'm far from an expert, my 2c.
Written by: FireTom
Hmm, regarding the fact that "ïndigenous people", errm women got raped and impregnated and children got stolen from their families, raised as whites; regarding the fact that (at least in Australia and the US) a cultural and human genocide has taken place - IMHO it's a bit frivolous to point out "leniant" definitions.
Just pointing out (which was clarified above) that anyone who is 1/64th Indigenous can claim. People who have never met/lived with/talked to Indigenous people can now claim to be part of a culture they know nothing about.
Written by: FireTom
I have somehow noticed that - besides being darlings - many young Australians seem to fall for their systems propaganda. Remember: Australia (as the US, Canada and New Zealand) existed just fine without "the whites", there was (and is) no need for "viability", Australia is not in need of cattle, neither rabbits, nor uranium, opal or goldmines...
*nods* I agree, it was fine without the whites.(even better in an ecological POV...) But if the land is to be claimed, and in the extreme situation, everyone without Indigenous heritage sent away... then, a traditional lifestyle would be near impossible to live.
Australia's land has been cleared, farmed and most traditional means of subsistance wouldn't be a 'viable' existance. And would anyone exchange land for vaccines, antibiotics, surgery etc?
I think returning to a traditional diet would be excellent for most Indigenous Australians as the Western diet is terrible for their systems, with T2DM and Cardiovascular problems rampant... but whether there is enough of the traditional plants and animals left to live on, especially in the areas that they used to inhabit... ??
And yes FireTom, I was being sarcastic :P
My point was that the wording is too simplistic.. and even though it is just a signature, once signed, the govt can get pounded for not acting...
So, as for the solution...
It's just, you look at the situation (I'm only talking about Oz because I have 10% knowledge here, but zip elsewhere)
We tried complete overbearing on all their matters - didn't work
We tried self determination, the terrible outcomes of ATSIC...
Now shared responsibility is actually getting somewhere!
Having studied the medical Shared Responsibility Agreements (SRAs) I think some progress is being made.
One such one is, If the community makes sure there is ~70% attendance rate at school for primary children and they turn up with washed faces and are clean and clothed, the community gets a pool.
Now this seems really weird for many people. People who have been brought up in a western society with a strong work ethic.. "We have 99% attendance rates, don't need to be bribed to clean ourselves, and we don't get a free pool!"
But when you look at it, the rates of many eye diseases have been greatly reduced, people in the community are interested and work together, and then they get a pool, a reward which also increased exercise.
This is only one SRA...
I don't know... on one hand I believe words such as Sorry mean a great deal... but on the other I think "stop wasting time on these stupid policies that mean nothing and start more programs that actually help."
*shrugs* I'm far from an expert, my 2c.
BRONZE Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
5,814 posts
Location: Perth, Australia
Carpal \'Tunnel
5,814 posts
Location: Perth, Australia
Posted:
The pool idea is brillaint.
Kids get passes to the pool if they attend school.
Swimming in the pool cleans the strep out of the greebly places and makes them less prone to all sorts of skin and other diseases. Gets them at school. Win win. Cept I wouldnt like to swim in those pools. Normal pools are really icky schmicky with bandaids, scurf and the like
The pool idea is brillaint.
Kids get passes to the pool if they attend school.
Swimming in the pool cleans the strep out of the greebly places and makes them less prone to all sorts of skin and other diseases. Gets them at school. Win win. Cept I wouldnt like to swim in those pools. Normal pools are really icky schmicky with bandaids, scurf and the like
Is it the Truth?
Is it Fair to all concerned?
Will it build Goodwill and Better Friendships?
Will it be Beneficial to all concerned?
Im in a lonely battle with the world with a fish to match the chip on my shoulder. Gnu in Binnu in a cnu
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Dunno, this thread so far is perfectly staying cool - great, hope it continues like that.
Are there any native ppl in Europe suffering from their land gotten taken by invaders? In fact, if you'd draw the line at roman or norman occupation, much of Britain would belong to my Anglo and Saxon cousins Oops and parts of Poland and France would be returned - not too bad for Germany at least. Perfect example, no? No, because Germany has agreed to give up all possible claims against these countries. This is not even two generations away, ppl are still alive.
So maybe we stay within reason?
True, 1/64th of blood is fairly diluted - side you on that one. True, the aboriginal community is facing a lot of challenges. True, they have been fighting over land for ages (so did Europeans btw) and true, much of the cultures have been mixed (dot painting and didj - two very different tribes). Certainly I am not talking about the right to claim, just because you can perfectly play the Didj - my voice ain't of any significance in this anyway.
Personally I was talking about "government/ public owned land" and basically I meant "vacant", not your home that your grandparents have already been living in.
I am not that much talking out of the box as it might seem - reparations have been paid from Germany towards Israel until pretty recently and I thought it was perfectly alright. Land has been returned, or preferably compensated for, after the Berlin wall came down and Germany got reunified. My family had land returned that has illegally been taken away from them. I'm not sure but only a few years ago, forced workers got compensated with "reasonable" (but maybe not enough) money for the labour they had to do in German companies during the 1030s and 40s.
The nation Australia might not have existed, but what does that mean?
And btw, I could think of South America and South Africa to be affected by this declaration too...
Thanks for clafirication Natasqi *phew*
And don't forget that a great deal of land has lost all value due to white mans investment...
Dunno, this thread so far is perfectly staying cool - great, hope it continues like that.
Are there any native ppl in Europe suffering from their land gotten taken by invaders? In fact, if you'd draw the line at roman or norman occupation, much of Britain would belong to my Anglo and Saxon cousins
Oops and parts of Poland and France would be returned - not too bad for Germany at least. Perfect example, no? No, because Germany has agreed to give up all possible claims against these countries. This is not even two generations away, ppl are still alive.So maybe we stay within reason?
True, 1/64th of blood is fairly diluted - side you on that one. True, the aboriginal community is facing a lot of challenges. True, they have been fighting over land for ages (so did Europeans btw) and true, much of the cultures have been mixed (dot painting and didj - two very different tribes). Certainly I am not talking about the right to claim, just because you can perfectly play the Didj - my voice ain't of any significance in this anyway.
Personally I was talking about "government/ public owned land" and basically I meant "vacant", not your home that your grandparents have already been living in.
I am not that much talking out of the box as it might seem - reparations have been paid from Germany towards Israel until pretty recently and I thought it was perfectly alright. Land has been returned, or preferably compensated for, after the Berlin wall came down and Germany got reunified. My family had land returned that has illegally been taken away from them. I'm not sure but only a few years ago, forced workers got compensated with "reasonable" (but maybe not enough) money for the labour they had to do in German companies during the 1030s and 40s.
The nation Australia might not have existed, but what does that mean?
And btw, I could think of South America and South Africa to be affected by this declaration too...
Thanks for clafirication Natasqi *phew*
And don't forget that a great deal of land has lost all value due to white mans investment...
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
BRONZE Member
the kicker of elves
371 posts
Location: Dublin, Ireland
the kicker of elves
371 posts
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posted:
Hmmm, my mate Paul would get the hill of Tara and Skryne valley if all the Irish land was given back. That'd be pretty rockin'.
Hmmm, my mate Paul would get the hill of Tara and Skryne valley if all the Irish land was given back. That'd be pretty rockin'.
Man is no more than a conduit for excrement to pass through.- daVinci
Jointly owned by BurdA and Tinypixie
Wielder of the voice of Patrick Stewart
BRONZE Member
old hand
929 posts
Location: Oregon, USA
old hand
929 posts
Location: Oregon, USA
Posted:
If modern theory states that all 'human' life originated in Africa, does that mean that the Africans as a whole own the entire world? They would after all be the 'native' people to everywhere.
It's far too complicated an issue to backdate it hundreds of years. I think it's a great policy to enforce for future generations but this is like claiming reparations for slavery and I think a lot of the same arguments apply to both arguments.
In the states at least, there aren't any "native" people alive today who were pushed from their homelands, those are a few generations back. And while it was sad, and cruel, the ancestors of those people don't deserve compensation for their misery. The forced labor that FireTom talks about is the same, the children of those people forced into labor did not receive anything.
I've got native blood in me, and while it would be awesome to have a 'homeland' in a sense to tie that part of my culture closer to me, I don't think I have any more entitlement to this land than anyone else. Especially since if you look at native cultures very few of them had any sort of 'title ship' or ownership of land, it was for *everyone*
If modern theory states that all 'human' life originated in Africa, does that mean that the Africans as a whole own the entire world? They would after all be the 'native' people to everywhere.
It's far too complicated an issue to backdate it hundreds of years. I think it's a great policy to enforce for future generations but this is like claiming reparations for slavery and I think a lot of the same arguments apply to both arguments.
In the states at least, there aren't any "native" people alive today who were pushed from their homelands, those are a few generations back. And while it was sad, and cruel, the ancestors of those people don't deserve compensation for their misery. The forced labor that FireTom talks about is the same, the children of those people forced into labor did not receive anything.
I've got native blood in me, and while it would be awesome to have a 'homeland' in a sense to tie that part of my culture closer to me, I don't think I have any more entitlement to this land than anyone else. Especially since if you look at native cultures very few of them had any sort of 'title ship' or ownership of land, it was for *everyone*
#homeofpoi -- irc.newnet.net Come talk to us we're bored
Warning: Please Do Not Jump On The Seals
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
Actually, I was thinking that that makes them the imperialists
Written by: Lurch
If modern theory states that all 'human' life originated in Africa, does that mean that the Africans as a whole own the entire world? They would after all be the 'native' people to everywhere.
Actually, I was thinking that that makes them the imperialists
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Well if all human life originates in Africa and spread from there to the entire planet, then the Africans would have to pay reparation to... well to whom?
Great preposition though, entire mankind should pay reparations and let the natives benefit from the profit drawn from the soil. Gives the word "environmentalist" an entire new facet... or better speaking it gives it the right meaning.
The forced labourers I was talking about were still alive and the Federal Republic of Germany paid about more than 50 Billion Euro to foundations aiding the survivors. Besides it ain't true that children of victims didn't get reparations. I could dig out some figures, but got a life to lead apart from SD. Also don't forget that after WWII all foreign assets of Germany have got confiscated. I could now start to write an entire page about reparations that Germany paid after WWI (where Germany did not even start the war) and WWII, but this is neither in my or your interest.
This is about taking on responsibility for the past. Countries got invaded, even though no declaration of war was ever given (as much as Germany has not received a formal declaration of peace until today). One could ridicule the argument even further and demand that any reparations would have to be paid by those states, where the invaders originated (namely the EU).
IMHO it is too easy to simply say: Well we managed to NOT talk about this for THIS long, now it's too late. Bad luck, guys...
Then (with no doubt) there are still pure "breed" natives and those who live in tribal communities as we speak. The argument gets diluted if we emphasise on ppl of 1/64th native origin (which is in the interest of those who don't oppose to pay compensation).
If nations could bring themselves to at least take the profit and put it into environmental conservation and to promote better education and health care to the surviving tribes, it would be a good starter.
Well if all human life originates in Africa and spread from there to the entire planet, then the Africans would have to pay reparation to... well to whom?
Great preposition though, entire mankind should pay reparations and let the natives benefit from the profit drawn from the soil. Gives the word "environmentalist" an entire new facet... or better speaking it gives it the right meaning.
The forced labourers I was talking about were still alive and the Federal Republic of Germany paid about more than 50 Billion Euro to foundations aiding the survivors. Besides it ain't true that children of victims didn't get reparations. I could dig out some figures, but got a life to lead apart from SD. Also don't forget that after WWII all foreign assets of Germany have got confiscated. I could now start to write an entire page about reparations that Germany paid after WWI (where Germany did not even start the war) and WWII, but this is neither in my or your interest.
This is about taking on responsibility for the past. Countries got invaded, even though no declaration of war was ever given (as much as Germany has not received a formal declaration of peace until today). One could ridicule the argument even further and demand that any reparations would have to be paid by those states, where the invaders originated (namely the EU).
IMHO it is too easy to simply say: Well we managed to NOT talk about this for THIS long, now it's too late. Bad luck, guys...
Then (with no doubt) there are still pure "breed" natives and those who live in tribal communities as we speak. The argument gets diluted if we emphasise on ppl of 1/64th native origin (which is in the interest of those who don't oppose to pay compensation).
If nations could bring themselves to at least take the profit and put it into environmental conservation and to promote better education and health care to the surviving tribes, it would be a good starter.
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
Yes, there are still "pure" natives, living in tribal communities. But if they're living tribally and in their "native" environment then obviously the land they're occupying is their own and has not been claimed by white folk. Therefore what compensation is owed to them?
Yes, there are still "pure" natives, living in tribal communities. But if they're living tribally and in their "native" environment then obviously the land they're occupying is their own and has not been claimed by white folk. Therefore what compensation is owed to them?
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
where do you find me stating that they are living in their "native" environment?
where do you find me stating that they are living in their "native" environment? the best smiles are the ones you lead to
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
Traditional tribal communities don't happen in down-town sydney
edited cos the quote was being fubar
EDITED_BY: Rouge Dragon (1190770348)
Written by: FireTom
who live in tribal communities
Traditional tribal communities don't happen in down-town sydney
edited cos the quote was being fubar
EDITED_BY: Rouge Dragon (1190770348)
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Which might just prove the point...
Consider, someone coming into your house, Rouge - taking your room, making you live in backyards trashbin. Then they start selling individual pieces of your home to other ppl, or rent it out. See it's always funky easy to be all liberal when you're not affected.
Maybe we should all talk to our aboriginal friends and neighbours about this topic and see how they make us feel...
Those aboriginee (of even just 25% "pure blood") I met and talked to when in Oz strangely enough had some hurtful twinkle in the eye when talking about culture clash and the way they get treated sometimes. Part of this are white ppl who consider them to be lazy by nature and ALL being drunk scumbags. Another part of this is that some portion of todays white population rather ignore the topic (at least when it comes to take action) and are "proud to be *fill in nationality*" when in fact in their eyes there is little to be proud of when looking at genocide and ignorance of it.
Written by: RD
Traditional tribal communities don't happen in down-town sydney
Which might just prove the point...
Consider, someone coming into your house, Rouge - taking your room, making you live in backyards trashbin. Then they start selling individual pieces of your home to other ppl, or rent it out. See it's always funky easy to be all liberal when you're not affected.
Maybe we should all talk to our aboriginal friends and neighbours about this topic and see how they make us feel...
Those aboriginee (of even just 25% "pure blood") I met and talked to when in Oz strangely enough had some hurtful twinkle in the eye when talking about culture clash and the way they get treated sometimes. Part of this are white ppl who consider them to be lazy by nature and ALL being drunk scumbags. Another part of this is that some portion of todays white population rather ignore the topic (at least when it comes to take action) and are "proud to be *fill in nationality*" when in fact in their eyes there is little to be proud of when looking at genocide and ignorance of it.
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
I think that the portion of white people who think that all aboriginals are drunken scumbags are the minority. And the issue isn't being ignored. If you read some of the above posts, the white fellas realise that there IS an issue, but it's a very difficult issue to resolve. "racism" gets thrown around so much these days and i think that a large portion of it is simply "crying wolf" (but that's off topic and something I was ranting about in my blog last week! lol!)
And it's not as simple as comparing it to taking the house of a white person. Because as we have established that might have been the situation a few centuries ago, but that's not the case now. The case now being the very grey area of pure indigeous Vs 1/64th indegenous and "what is living a traditional life". And it's not even as easy as asking our aboriginal friends and neighbours, because considering I live in a city, any aboriginal neighbours of mine aren't going to be living very traditionally at all!
I think that the portion of white people who think that all aboriginals are drunken scumbags are the minority. And the issue isn't being ignored. If you read some of the above posts, the white fellas realise that there IS an issue, but it's a very difficult issue to resolve. "racism" gets thrown around so much these days and i think that a large portion of it is simply "crying wolf" (but that's off topic and something I was ranting about in my blog last week! lol!)
And it's not as simple as comparing it to taking the house of a white person. Because as we have established that might have been the situation a few centuries ago, but that's not the case now. The case now being the very grey area of pure indigeous Vs 1/64th indegenous and "what is living a traditional life". And it's not even as easy as asking our aboriginal friends and neighbours, because considering I live in a city, any aboriginal neighbours of mine aren't going to be living very traditionally at all!
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
BRONZE Member
old hand
1,107 posts
Location: In a test pit, Mackay, Australia
old hand
1,107 posts
Location: In a test pit, Mackay, Australia
Posted:
Trouble is, a welfare mentality exists amoung many of the city-based koori (that's a term that they apply to themselves in NSW / QLD, it's not in the slightest way derogatory), let alone the remote communities. Australians will give anyone a fair go, but hate it when someone is seen to be milking the system, so while a perticular group is seen to be receiving free housing, cars, medical, education etc, while everyone else is paying through the nose, it's just not liked.
It's no coincidence that the black fellas who don't go for all the handouts and are part of the working community are much happier and have the respect of the community. Australians hate seeing white fellas sat around bludging off the government, and can't see why special exemption is made.
Personally I figure that we all have the same opportunities to get meaningful employment, there are thousands of training schemes and incentives set up especially for the koori to get out there, so why are they not taking advantage of it?
The whole "traditional lifestyle" thing hold no grounds when you're living in a fibro house, driving a landcruiser and fishing from a tin boat with an outboard. I seriously doubt you'd find many willing to go back to living a bark shelter wearing a kangaroo skin laplap.
I'm suprised that this thread has lasted so long without racism coming up, thanks to the people reading it with an open mind.
Trouble is, a welfare mentality exists amoung many of the city-based koori (that's a term that they apply to themselves in NSW / QLD, it's not in the slightest way derogatory), let alone the remote communities. Australians will give anyone a fair go, but hate it when someone is seen to be milking the system, so while a perticular group is seen to be receiving free housing, cars, medical, education etc, while everyone else is paying through the nose, it's just not liked.
It's no coincidence that the black fellas who don't go for all the handouts and are part of the working community are much happier and have the respect of the community. Australians hate seeing white fellas sat around bludging off the government, and can't see why special exemption is made.
Personally I figure that we all have the same opportunities to get meaningful employment, there are thousands of training schemes and incentives set up especially for the koori to get out there, so why are they not taking advantage of it?
The whole "traditional lifestyle" thing hold no grounds when you're living in a fibro house, driving a landcruiser and fishing from a tin boat with an outboard. I seriously doubt you'd find many willing to go back to living a bark shelter wearing a kangaroo skin laplap.
I'm suprised that this thread has lasted so long without racism coming up, thanks to the people reading it with an open mind.
There is a slight possibility that I am not actually right all of the time.
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
off topic but; really? they're Koorie in NSW and QLD too? I thought the Koorie were VIC and south NSW!
off topic but; really? they're Koorie in NSW and QLD too? I thought the Koorie were VIC and south NSW!
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
BRONZE Member
old hand
1,107 posts
Location: In a test pit, Mackay, Australia
old hand
1,107 posts
Location: In a test pit, Mackay, Australia
Posted:
The local Aboriginal and Islander radio station here is Koori Radio, I've heard a different term in central NSW, can't remember what it was though. I though Vic were Murri? One of the koori girls I work with's surname is Murray, so she's the Murri Murray.
*back on topic*
The local Aboriginal and Islander radio station here is Koori Radio, I've heard a different term in central NSW, can't remember what it was though. I though Vic were Murri? One of the koori girls I work with's surname is Murray, so she's the Murri Murray.
*back on topic*
There is a slight possibility that I am not actually right all of the time.
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
Interesting fact which throws the cat among the statistics:
My mum works with three ladies who are of Aboriginal ethnicity. However they have explicitly stated that they are NOT "Aboriginal Workers" they are "workers" just like everyone else and they do not want to receive any special treatment for being of Aboriginal heritage because they see themselves as the same as everyone else. They have also stated that they are NOT to be included in any statistics relating to "Aboriginal Workers" for the same reason as above.
I wonder how many "workers" have done the same thing (as well as other people in other areas), thus making the statistics less accurate than they would like to be.
Interesting fact which throws the cat among the statistics:
My mum works with three ladies who are of Aboriginal ethnicity. However they have explicitly stated that they are NOT "Aboriginal Workers" they are "workers" just like everyone else and they do not want to receive any special treatment for being of Aboriginal heritage because they see themselves as the same as everyone else. They have also stated that they are NOT to be included in any statistics relating to "Aboriginal Workers" for the same reason as above.
I wonder how many "workers" have done the same thing (as well as other people in other areas), thus making the statistics less accurate than they would like to be.
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
BRONZE Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
5,814 posts
Location: Perth, Australia
Carpal \'Tunnel
5,814 posts
Location: Perth, Australia
Posted:
[Quote]Consider, someone coming into your house, Rouge - taking your room, making you live in backyards trashbin. Then they start selling individual pieces of your home to other ppl, or rent it out. See it's always funky easy to be all liberal when you're not affected.
Given many of the people in Austrlia came as convicts not free white settlers they didnt come as a ruling class they worked thier asses off.
The displacement happened initially 8ish generations ago. All the best arable land was snaffled initially then expansion happened. It doesnt make it ok that the English had a displace ethos 200+ years ago but its the way the world was then and still is in many places. It is such a complex emotional issue that has little chance of resolution. Many aboriginal familes who "succeed" cut themselves off rom their extended families to avoid emotional abuse. Tall poppy syndrome at its best.
Land is being given back. In large chunks with large amounts of money to make it viable. Then the rate of local petty theft magically goes up and resentment is heightened. Businesses are set up. Look at one local aboriginal business that owns the local pub that supplies the alcohol that fuels the problems in the community. How responsible is that. But to take away the right to buy alcohol is deprivation of liberty. The money to buy the grog is not worked for, its given as welfare payments. The grog fuels the problems talked about later in my post.
Not everyone judges all Aboriginals to be lazy drunken slobs who think its ok to sexually abuse their children and beat their family. But when you get that strerotype reinforced again and again its hard to avoid it.
3% of the popualtion commit 20% of the crimes.
A research centre also found that one in five assaults, one in three robberies, more than one in three homicides and about one in ten sexual offences are inter-racial. About 93% of those involve Aboriginal offenders and non-Aboriginal victims.
Up to 50 per cent of Aboriginal children are victims of family violence and child abuse
A survey carried out among 120 households in Adelaide found 90 per cent of the women and 84 per cent of the young girls had been raped at some stage of their lives.
In most States, more than 70 per cent of assaults on Aboriginal women are carried out by their husbands or boyfriends
Aboriginal women are 20 times more likely than non-Aboriginal women to be victims of violence
90% sexual assualt rate of women in an urban environment. My friend was raped by a 16yold who was on his 3rd offence after commiting the first violent sexual assualt at 13. He had been assulted himself and would have been up on a murder charge if he hadnt of been interrupted.
In our schools there are different sets of rules to suit. One local high school when the aboriginals threw water bombs at the staff got no punishment. Kids who swear get dtention. Thats breeds racial tension when its an obviously different treatment.
Give me a reason not to have prejudice and concerns for me and my family. If one of my children formed a relationship with an aboriginal I would have concerns. The only side I see in my normal life is awful. The kids left at a park for a day while the parent goes off sniffing paint. Who to call? No aboriginal dept wants to know so its police to deal with it. Sure we have the sportsman and women who have succeeded but from what I see they all seem to cut themselves off from aboriginal culture in their usual lives.
[Quote]Consider, someone coming into your house, Rouge - taking your room, making you live in backyards trashbin. Then they start selling individual pieces of your home to other ppl, or rent it out. See it's always funky easy to be all liberal when you're not affected.
Given many of the people in Austrlia came as convicts not free white settlers they didnt come as a ruling class they worked thier asses off.
The displacement happened initially 8ish generations ago. All the best arable land was snaffled initially then expansion happened. It doesnt make it ok that the English had a displace ethos 200+ years ago but its the way the world was then and still is in many places. It is such a complex emotional issue that has little chance of resolution. Many aboriginal familes who "succeed" cut themselves off rom their extended families to avoid emotional abuse. Tall poppy syndrome at its best.
Land is being given back. In large chunks with large amounts of money to make it viable. Then the rate of local petty theft magically goes up and resentment is heightened. Businesses are set up. Look at one local aboriginal business that owns the local pub that supplies the alcohol that fuels the problems in the community. How responsible is that. But to take away the right to buy alcohol is deprivation of liberty. The money to buy the grog is not worked for, its given as welfare payments. The grog fuels the problems talked about later in my post.
Not everyone judges all Aboriginals to be lazy drunken slobs who think its ok to sexually abuse their children and beat their family. But when you get that strerotype reinforced again and again its hard to avoid it.
3% of the popualtion commit 20% of the crimes.
A research centre also found that one in five assaults, one in three robberies, more than one in three homicides and about one in ten sexual offences are inter-racial. About 93% of those involve Aboriginal offenders and non-Aboriginal victims.
Up to 50 per cent of Aboriginal children are victims of family violence and child abuse
A survey carried out among 120 households in Adelaide found 90 per cent of the women and 84 per cent of the young girls had been raped at some stage of their lives.
In most States, more than 70 per cent of assaults on Aboriginal women are carried out by their husbands or boyfriends
Aboriginal women are 20 times more likely than non-Aboriginal women to be victims of violence
90% sexual assualt rate of women in an urban environment. My friend was raped by a 16yold who was on his 3rd offence after commiting the first violent sexual assualt at 13. He had been assulted himself and would have been up on a murder charge if he hadnt of been interrupted.
In our schools there are different sets of rules to suit. One local high school when the aboriginals threw water bombs at the staff got no punishment. Kids who swear get dtention. Thats breeds racial tension when its an obviously different treatment.
Give me a reason not to have prejudice and concerns for me and my family. If one of my children formed a relationship with an aboriginal I would have concerns. The only side I see in my normal life is awful. The kids left at a park for a day while the parent goes off sniffing paint. Who to call? No aboriginal dept wants to know so its police to deal with it. Sure we have the sportsman and women who have succeeded but from what I see they all seem to cut themselves off from aboriginal culture in their usual lives.
Is it the Truth?
Is it Fair to all concerned?
Will it build Goodwill and Better Friendships?
Will it be Beneficial to all concerned?
Im in a lonely battle with the world with a fish to match the chip on my shoulder. Gnu in Binnu in a cnu
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Beware of semantics
Certainly those who dare to take advantage are not favoured by anyone who pays for his own salary with sweat, blood and tears. Some do grow under pressure, some do stand up for themselves, some dislike being labelled as victims or being lumped into the same bin - all this holds a message for the rest of us.
I've seen a fair number of dolers at Byrons main beach car park - amongst each others, they considered themselves pretty cool. So it's (as you said it, Eera) not a mere black vs. white vs. black issue.
Hence if the people all of a sudden get a voice and a body I reckon it should not get ignored and rejected with nationalistic slogans.
I would like to know how much the respective governments (those who rejected the declaration) actively involved themselves into the phrasing of said document. It's easy to just repulse and reject, claiming that it has not been worded specific enough... Do I come across?
One of the important issues is the "enforcement of rights". Is there any acknowledged international institution? Most likely not one that hold (enough) power. The declaration itself is not binding...
Beware of semantics
Certainly those who dare to take advantage are not favoured by anyone who pays for his own salary with sweat, blood and tears. Some do grow under pressure, some do stand up for themselves, some dislike being labelled as victims or being lumped into the same bin - all this holds a message for the rest of us.
I've seen a fair number of dolers at Byrons main beach car park - amongst each others, they considered themselves pretty cool. So it's (as you said it, Eera) not a mere black vs. white vs. black issue.
Hence if the people all of a sudden get a voice and a body I reckon it should not get ignored and rejected with nationalistic slogans.
I would like to know how much the respective governments (those who rejected the declaration) actively involved themselves into the phrasing of said document. It's easy to just repulse and reject, claiming that it has not been worded specific enough... Do I come across?
One of the important issues is the "enforcement of rights". Is there any acknowledged international institution? Most likely not one that hold (enough) power. The declaration itself is not binding...
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Gnor, thanks for posting this.
Victimisation is one of the key issues when it comes to (reverse) racism - at least IMO.
120 households by far is not a representative study. As a matter of fact this starts with 10 times as many. So please let yourself not be blinded by questionable media reports.
Racial concerns is fuelled by... the media. Again and again. Same story here, same there. To avoid racistic effects, the media in Germany often does not report names, when a foreign origin commits a crime. Which is not the right approach either.
Inferior complex and victimisation breeds violence and racism. Therefore one should ponder what can be done to help, without merely providing money. I rarely throw money into beggars hats (for example) I provide food and water.
Gnor, thanks for posting this.
Victimisation is one of the key issues when it comes to (reverse) racism - at least IMO.
120 households by far is not a representative study. As a matter of fact this starts with 10 times as many. So please let yourself not be blinded by questionable media reports.
Racial concerns is fuelled by... the media. Again and again. Same story here, same there. To avoid racistic effects, the media in Germany often does not report names, when a foreign origin commits a crime. Which is not the right approach either.
Inferior complex and victimisation breeds violence and racism. Therefore one should ponder what can be done to help, without merely providing money. I rarely throw money into beggars hats (for example) I provide food and water.
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
BRONZE Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
5,814 posts
Location: Perth, Australia
Carpal \'Tunnel
5,814 posts
Location: Perth, Australia
Posted:
I agree its not representative by any means. Its a very intrusive senstive issue in itself. Many people coming from the communities would say its not an outlandish statements though. Another difficult thing is that dark skin hides bruises. So its no as obvious the abuse as it would be on a caucasion
The many stds seen in children under 13 is indicative of long term problems. Most of my rascism does not come from the media but personal experience, reinforced many incidents with my family and friends but I know full well the value of the media and its misrepresentation.
I agree its not representative by any means. Its a very intrusive senstive issue in itself. Many people coming from the communities would say its not an outlandish statements though. Another difficult thing is that dark skin hides bruises. So its no as obvious the abuse as it would be on a caucasion
The many stds seen in children under 13 is indicative of long term problems. Most of my rascism does not come from the media but personal experience, reinforced many incidents with my family and friends but I know full well the value of the media and its misrepresentation.
Is it the Truth?
Is it Fair to all concerned?
Will it build Goodwill and Better Friendships?
Will it be Beneficial to all concerned?
Im in a lonely battle with the world with a fish to match the chip on my shoulder. Gnu in Binnu in a cnu
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com