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
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
Might I add the skilled abusers know how either not to leave a mark or at least not to leave an obvious one
Might I add the skilled abusers know how either not to leave a mark or at least not to leave an obvious one
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
BRONZE Member
old hand
929 posts
Location: Oregon, USA
old hand
929 posts
Location: Oregon, USA
Posted:
Gnor UV photography will pick up bruises on dark skinned individuals, or even pale people that are too light to see using visible light. There are techniques that can be used if abuse is suspected.
I'm not going to claim to know much of anything about Aus. so everything I'm talking about is the states. While crime rates seem to apply to minorities, they are more directly tied to income levels and poverty. There is a definite minority component in the poverty scale though but that makes it more of an economic problem if you seek a solution.
I don't think anyone deserves any reparations based on their race, or culture, unless they themselves have been directly effected. If you want to give them support because they are below the poverty line, that is fine, but it needs to be given fairly and evenly.
Gnor UV photography will pick up bruises on dark skinned individuals, or even pale people that are too light to see using visible light. There are techniques that can be used if abuse is suspected.
I'm not going to claim to know much of anything about Aus. so everything I'm talking about is the states. While crime rates seem to apply to minorities, they are more directly tied to income levels and poverty. There is a definite minority component in the poverty scale though but that makes it more of an economic problem if you seek a solution.
I don't think anyone deserves any reparations based on their race, or culture, unless they themselves have been directly effected. If you want to give them support because they are below the poverty line, that is fine, but it needs to be given fairly and evenly.
#homeofpoi -- irc.newnet.net Come talk to us we're bored 
Warning: Please Do Not Jump On The Seals
BRONZE Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
5,814 posts
Location: Perth, Australia
Carpal \'Tunnel
5,814 posts
Location: Perth, Australia
Posted:
pats Lurches giraffe
In a hospital situation I hope bruising will be seen. If the person is in the general community and obviously physically abused it will draw attention, but if its not obvious bruising it wont is what I meant.
pats Lurches giraffe
In a hospital situation I hope bruising will be seen. If the person is in the general community and obviously physically abused it will draw attention, but if its not obvious bruising it wont is what I meant.
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:
There are threads in SD that tackle abuse - please let's stay closer to topic, may we?
Would it mean that all reparations (based on atrocities, injustice and genocide) should not be given for more than the affected generation? Personally I can't side that for the reason that mankind lacks a judicial and executive body that would take on rights of victims (The international court is not recognised always and everywhere). It simply is a too easy way out and the breed for further generations to find excuse in what I call "reverse racism".
Victims have to find rest. Imagining that my family would have gotten deprived and murdered would make me pretty angry about those who committed the crimes. Reparations are about settlement. I would feel more comfortable and (in fact I reckon) that the perpetrators would too. It's more of a psychological factor and taking responsibility.
How this would then look like is a different question.
Crimes to humanity are different from crimes against individuals. There is something that is called a collective guilt (pattern)...
Some authors offer insight in how collective systems *may* work. Bernd Hellinger is a widely accredited one, describing how guilt affects the entire community. I reckon it makes sense.
However IMO the idea of "collective guilt" became popular FAR earlier than the 60s....
There are threads in SD that tackle abuse - please let's stay closer to topic, may we?
Would it mean that all reparations (based on atrocities, injustice and genocide) should not be given for more than the affected generation? Personally I can't side that for the reason that mankind lacks a judicial and executive body that would take on rights of victims (The international court is not recognised always and everywhere). It simply is a too easy way out and the breed for further generations to find excuse in what I call "reverse racism".
Victims have to find rest. Imagining that my family would have gotten deprived and murdered would make me pretty angry about those who committed the crimes. Reparations are about settlement. I would feel more comfortable and (in fact I reckon) that the perpetrators would too. It's more of a psychological factor and taking responsibility.
How this would then look like is a different question.
Crimes to humanity are different from crimes against individuals. There is something that is called a collective guilt (pattern)...
Written by: Wiki
Collective guilt is the controversial collectivist idea that a group of humans can bear guilt above and beyond the guilt of particular members, and hence an individual holds responsibility for what other members of his group have done, even if he himself hasn't done this. Advanced systems of criminal law accept the principle that guilt shall only be personal. This attitude is not usually shared by primitive systems of law. Assumption of collective responsibility is common for feud. Such systems tend to judge the guilt of persons by their associations, classifications or organizations, which often gives rise to racial, ethnic, social and religious prejudices.
(...)
Humans seem to have a natural tendency to attribute collective guilt, usually with tragic results.
(...)
The idea of collective guilt, however, became popular in Western World since the 1960s, as many historical injustices, including e.g. slavery in the United States, has been perceived by intelligentsia as faults of the society requiring retribution on behalf of those who had nothing to do with them (see e.g. Reparations for slavery and White guilt).
Terrorism is commonly rationalized by its practitioners on ideas of collective guilt and responsibility. Many nations have laws holding corporations, but not the individual decision-makers within them, responsible for certain kinds of acts.
Some authors offer insight in how collective systems *may* work. Bernd Hellinger is a widely accredited one, describing how guilt affects the entire community. I reckon it makes sense.
However IMO the idea of "collective guilt" became popular FAR earlier than the 60s....
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 don't understand your collective guilt argument? Are you saying the current generation should feel it for past ones?
Similarly, the "reverse racism" - what are you meaning there? Because to me "reverse racism" is the minority being racist towards the majority, which is something that society largely turns a blind eye to and I think is very wrong.
I don't understand your collective guilt argument? Are you saying the current generation should feel it for past ones?
Similarly, the "reverse racism" - what are you meaning there? Because to me "reverse racism" is the minority being racist towards the majority, which is something that society largely turns a blind eye to and I think is very wrong.
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:
Meaning you consider "reverse racism" or the majorities blind eye wrong?
I'm not only saying that future generations feel guilt for the actions of their ancestry, but also that current generations feel guilty for the deeds of other parts of the present society.
Please think closely about it, you may find some truth in this.
Meaning you consider "reverse racism" or the majorities blind eye wrong?
I'm not only saying that future generations feel guilt for the actions of their ancestry, but also that current generations feel guilty for the deeds of other parts of the present society.
Please think closely about it, you may find some truth in this.
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 any form of racism is wrong and therefore the fact that a blind eye is turned to any form of it is therefore wrong.
And I still don't understand what you're trying to say about the guilt. From the wikipedia article it seems to be "prejudice" not guilt. To me, collective guilt is me feeling guilty for something that I didn't do but a group around me did. Disliking an ethnic group because one of them did something is prejudice, not guilt.
But even if we were talking prejudice here, I think that everyone on here has stated that we don't believe the all native people are drunken abusive louts, just that it has been shown that a percentage are.
i think any form of racism is wrong and therefore the fact that a blind eye is turned to any form of it is therefore wrong.
And I still don't understand what you're trying to say about the guilt. From the wikipedia article it seems to be "prejudice" not guilt. To me, collective guilt is me feeling guilty for something that I didn't do but a group around me did. Disliking an ethnic group because one of them did something is prejudice, not guilt.
But even if we were talking prejudice here, I think that everyone on here has stated that we don't believe the all native people are drunken abusive louts, just that it has been shown that a percentage are.
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 guess my issue is time as well. The land in the affected countries like Austrlia, NZ, Canada and US was taken over 200 years ago in most cases and has been resettled by new people. Who have bought and claimed it for their own and farmed and improved it from their own pockets. Mostly they personally didnt displace people.
The abuse is part of the package. Many people dont want to help a race that doesnt want to be helped or want intervention in ways that we can understand. The race here is selfdestructing and needs to be helped NOW or I think be lost in the next two generations.
But when you have a race responsible for many problems seen its hard to feel sympathy. Most people just sit back and get along with their own lives and let it ride. The chances of them taking my property is low. The chances of resuming land near family is high. The chances of abuse of my freinds due to that is also high. Why then would I want it?
I guess my issue is time as well. The land in the affected countries like Austrlia, NZ, Canada and US was taken over 200 years ago in most cases and has been resettled by new people. Who have bought and claimed it for their own and farmed and improved it from their own pockets. Mostly they personally didnt displace people.
The abuse is part of the package. Many people dont want to help a race that doesnt want to be helped or want intervention in ways that we can understand. The race here is selfdestructing and needs to be helped NOW or I think be lost in the next two generations.
But when you have a race responsible for many problems seen its hard to feel sympathy. Most people just sit back and get along with their own lives and let it ride. The chances of them taking my property is low. The chances of resuming land near family is high. The chances of abuse of my freinds due to that is also high. Why then would I want it?
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:
I side you on your position towards racism. "Reverse racism" is the natural reaction of a minority, or group that has been or is currently repressed, towards the majority or group that oppressed them in the first place. I think it's indisputable that this "reverse racism" exists. Whether wrong or not.
Turning a blind eye towards this phenomenon is equal to dismissing the right of reconciliation. Btw it's not always minorities that get oppressed.
I think that the root for prejudice partly lies within a collective guilt pattern (pls note partly and certainly not always). Yet I am not talking about prejudice, I am talking about (collective) guilt. Meaning that in fact you do feel guilty for something a group around you or a generation before you committed.
The emotional system within ones self is looking for to balance this, which *might* result in putting up defences (in case of collective guilt it *might* result in prejudice). Because look at what it actually is and results in.
Possible scenario: Because of genocide and deprivation the white community feels collectively guilty towards the aboriginal community. Instead of reconciliation all kinds of derogatory theories surface, that diminish their natural right for reconciliation... including that statement of: Well *you* actually didn't suffer, it has been 2 generations ago (which in case of the stolen generation is an outright lie anyway).
All (human) beings are prone to seek balance within themselves and the system they are living in. It's a natural desire. Whereas the guilt might not have been acknowledged by the time the atrocities were committed. Perpetrators often act in "best faith". Here's an article about what Bernd Hellinger teaches. I am not signing up to all he says, btw.
Please Rouge, don't think I am arguing "against" members of this board. Many topics and posts in SD actually feed me with informations, arguments and insights that help me render my personal position upon a specific topic.
I side you on your position towards racism. "Reverse racism" is the natural reaction of a minority, or group that has been or is currently repressed, towards the majority or group that oppressed them in the first place. I think it's indisputable that this "reverse racism" exists. Whether wrong or not.
Turning a blind eye towards this phenomenon is equal to dismissing the right of reconciliation. Btw it's not always minorities that get oppressed.
I think that the root for prejudice partly lies within a collective guilt pattern (pls note partly and certainly not always). Yet I am not talking about prejudice, I am talking about (collective) guilt. Meaning that in fact you do feel guilty for something a group around you or a generation before you committed.
The emotional system within ones self is looking for to balance this, which *might* result in putting up defences (in case of collective guilt it *might* result in prejudice). Because look at what it actually is and results in.
Possible scenario: Because of genocide and deprivation the white community feels collectively guilty towards the aboriginal community. Instead of reconciliation all kinds of derogatory theories surface, that diminish their natural right for reconciliation... including that statement of: Well *you* actually didn't suffer, it has been 2 generations ago (which in case of the stolen generation is an outright lie anyway).
All (human) beings are prone to seek balance within themselves and the system they are living in. It's a natural desire. Whereas the guilt might not have been acknowledged by the time the atrocities were committed. Perpetrators often act in "best faith". Here's an article about what Bernd Hellinger teaches. I am not signing up to all he says, btw.
Please Rouge, don't think I am arguing "against" members of this board. Many topics and posts in SD actually feed me with informations, arguments and insights that help me render my personal position upon a specific topic.
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Gnor, IMHO you might underestimate the unique and limited chance that you and the society has to come to terms.
If you look at it like an old family member or friend, you have a quarrel with and that is about to die.... by the time he's gone you missed the chance.
"Reverse racism" and crimes committed towards the white population - to me - are a clear indicator that issues are still present and need to get resolved.
You can ignore it, but it won't just go away, because you blur it out. Usually it piles up.
Gnor, IMHO you might underestimate the unique and limited chance that you and the society has to come to terms.
If you look at it like an old family member or friend, you have a quarrel with and that is about to die.... by the time he's gone you missed the chance.
"Reverse racism" and crimes committed towards the white population - to me - are a clear indicator that issues are still present and need to get resolved.
You can ignore it, but it won't just go away, because you blur it out. Usually it piles up.
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:
So you're saying we're subconsciously guilty and that's why we're acting the way we do? While that might be true of some situations, I don't think it's necessarily relevant here.
Something that I've noticed is that you're the only person who has posted in this discussion who isn't of one of the affected countries. I would encourage you to spend a great deal of time here, and live here like we do so you could perhaps see it from the perspective of people it is going to affect and is therefore relevant to. Because these laws are as relevant to us as they are the native population.
So you're saying we're subconsciously guilty and that's why we're acting the way we do? While that might be true of some situations, I don't think it's necessarily relevant here.
Something that I've noticed is that you're the only person who has posted in this discussion who isn't of one of the affected countries. I would encourage you to spend a great deal of time here, and live here like we do so you could perhaps see it from the perspective of people it is going to affect and is therefore relevant to. Because these laws are as relevant to us as they are the native population.
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:
You are focussing on the personality and not what it points out - experiencing resentment?
I have only spent a year in Australia, but reconciliation by no means is exclusive to your country. I'm German and we were facing a huge pile loads of it (even within my lifetime) - and it is still going on.
So far you have been the only one of the affected countries trying to muffle me due to my origins, sweetheart...
You are focussing on the personality and not what it points out - experiencing resentment?
I have only spent a year in Australia, but reconciliation by no means is exclusive to your country. I'm German and we were facing a huge pile loads of it (even within my lifetime) - and it is still going on.
So far you have been the only one of the affected countries trying to muffle me due to my origins, sweetheart...
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 still don't understand what you're trying to say. I don't we "resent" the aboriginal population because we feel "guilty" for what people did 200 years ago.
and I'm not trying to "muffle" you, i'm just trying to say that I believe that you can't fully understand the problem without walking in our skin.
I still don't understand what you're trying to say. I don't we "resent" the aboriginal population because we feel "guilty" for what people did 200 years ago.
and I'm not trying to "muffle" you, i'm just trying to say that I believe that you can't fully understand the problem without walking in our skin.
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
929 posts
Location: Oregon, USA
old hand
929 posts
Location: Oregon, USA
Posted:
FireTom, there isn't the mass racism (at least in America) that there used to be. Natives and African American's aren't looked down upon by in large. So why should we pay for the wrongs of our ancestors? I think that is a fair and honest question. Natives have all the rights of citizens, more so in some cases.
The same thing I said earlier. The German government is still paying to holocaust survivors. Survivors being the key word, not their children, or grand children, or great grand children. If you can find other cases let me know because I haven't. If your great grandfather was killed by some rogue government how exactly has that effected you personally? Or how is that quantifiable in any way? If have the same rights as any other citizen, you're no longer oppressed, nor have you ever been. What right do you have to make such claims and demand money? Why do you think money = apology?
FireTom, there isn't the mass racism (at least in America) that there used to be. Natives and African American's aren't looked down upon by in large. So why should we pay for the wrongs of our ancestors? I think that is a fair and honest question. Natives have all the rights of citizens, more so in some cases.
Written by:
Victims have to find rest. Imagining that my family would have gotten deprived and murdered would make me pretty angry about those who committed the crimes. Reparations are about settlement. I would feel more comfortable and (in fact I reckon) that the perpetrators would too. It's more of a psychological factor and taking responsibility.
The same thing I said earlier. The German government is still paying to holocaust survivors. Survivors being the key word, not their children, or grand children, or great grand children. If you can find other cases let me know because I haven't. If your great grandfather was killed by some rogue government how exactly has that effected you personally? Or how is that quantifiable in any way? If have the same rights as any other citizen, you're no longer oppressed, nor have you ever been. What right do you have to make such claims and demand money? Why do you think money = apology?
#homeofpoi -- irc.newnet.net Come talk to us we're bored
Warning: Please Do Not Jump On The Seals
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Rouge, well that might be exactly the argument of the indigenous population, don't you think? 
Besides the atrocities were not just happening a 200 years ago, Aboriginees have still been mistreated last century - is it right that they only gained status as human beings in the 70s and had been part of the Australian wildlife prior to that? How about civil rights and apartheid in the US? This is NOT out of sight out of mind...
Native rights have been mistreated for ages and it's still happening. Right, they do not have a concept of "mine and yours" - especially when it comes to land ownership (which is what affects a few current mining projects in Australia).
Fact is that their ancestral land is being exploited, without profits being shared. Sometimes there is a dump left, a hole in the ground. No reparations to neither, the environment and the people. I could also think of Hopi nations being affected in the US... Some claim that the heart of Australia has not been "dead" before the arrival of cattle and rabbits...
A share of the profits drawn from Uranium mining in Australia could be put into the development of renewable resources and intercultural exchange, so that the white ppl might learn how those black ppl survived without all these sophisticated tools - therefore spread understanding and provide a less biassed view on aboriginal culture and capabilities.
Lurch, I guess above post answers some of your questions already.
EDITED_BY: FireTom (1190864606)
Rouge, well that might be exactly the argument of the indigenous population, don't you think? Besides the atrocities were not just happening a 200 years ago, Aboriginees have still been mistreated last century - is it right that they only gained status as human beings in the 70s and had been part of the Australian wildlife prior to that? How about civil rights and apartheid in the US? This is NOT out of sight out of mind...
Native rights have been mistreated for ages and it's still happening. Right, they do not have a concept of "mine and yours" - especially when it comes to land ownership (which is what affects a few current mining projects in Australia).
Fact is that their ancestral land is being exploited, without profits being shared. Sometimes there is a dump left, a hole in the ground. No reparations to neither, the environment and the people. I could also think of Hopi nations being affected in the US... Some claim that the heart of Australia has not been "dead" before the arrival of cattle and rabbits...
A share of the profits drawn from Uranium mining in Australia could be put into the development of renewable resources and intercultural exchange, so that the white ppl might learn how those black ppl survived without all these sophisticated tools - therefore spread understanding and provide a less biassed view on aboriginal culture and capabilities.
Lurch, I guess above post answers some of your questions already.
EDITED_BY: FireTom (1190864606)
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, it would be, which is why I said that it affects the white population as well as the native population. Or do we have no rights in this at all? Australia is MY home too. I think this is an example of that "reverse racism" where it's ok if people forget that Australia (and the US and Canada and NZ) is now home to Europeans and Asians and Africans and we all call it home too and should therefore have the same rights as everyone else.
Those laws which were overthrown in the 60s and 70s have BEEN OVERTHROWN. Does the US still have apartheid? I didn't think that they did. I completely agree with Lurch that there isn't "mass racism" these days.
I remember reading something when I was in school about cultures who used to punish the children for the crimes of their father. At the time it was a hot human rights debate. That is essentially what you are asking us to do.
Alternatively, it's the "original sin" case. Where (if you believe this) the man and woman we are all descended from "sinned" and therefore we are all "born in sin" because of something our ancestors did. fair?
And I agree about the uranium mining. but I didn't think that was what this was about.
Yes, it would be, which is why I said that it affects the white population as well as the native population. Or do we have no rights in this at all? Australia is MY home too. I think this is an example of that "reverse racism" where it's ok if people forget that Australia (and the US and Canada and NZ) is now home to Europeans and Asians and Africans and we all call it home too and should therefore have the same rights as everyone else.
Those laws which were overthrown in the 60s and 70s have BEEN OVERTHROWN. Does the US still have apartheid? I didn't think that they did. I completely agree with Lurch that there isn't "mass racism" these days.
I remember reading something when I was in school about cultures who used to punish the children for the crimes of their father. At the time it was a hot human rights debate. That is essentially what you are asking us to do.
Alternatively, it's the "original sin" case. Where (if you believe this) the man and woman we are all descended from "sinned" and therefore we are all "born in sin" because of something our ancestors did. fair?
And I agree about the uranium mining. but I didn't think that was what this was about.
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...
SILVER Member
Member
7 posts
Location: Adelaide, United Kingdom
Member
7 posts
Location: Adelaide, United Kingdom
Posted:
I don't buy the whole collective guilt theory, the first thing wiki says about it is that its controversial, and i for one don't feel guilty about anything that someone else has done.
Do you mean that people who are in one way or another related to those who have wronged another people are prejudice because they feel guilt (if that is what you are saying, it seems the wrong way around to me, if anything they'd be extra-cautios not to be predujice). Or that those who are related to the people that have been wronged are predujice against those related to the wrong-doers (in which case, i think collective-blame might be more approprate, and imho no more justified than any other form of prejudice).
I don't buy the whole collective guilt theory, the first thing wiki says about it is that its controversial, and i for one don't feel guilty about anything that someone else has done.
Written by:
I think that the root for prejudice partly lies within a collective guilt pattern (pls note partly and certainly not always). Yet I am not talking about prejudice, I am talking about (collective) guilt. Meaning that in fact you do feel guilty for something a group around you or a generation before you committed.
Do you mean that people who are in one way or another related to those who have wronged another people are prejudice because they feel guilt (if that is what you are saying, it seems the wrong way around to me, if anything they'd be extra-cautios not to be predujice). Or that those who are related to the people that have been wronged are predujice against those related to the wrong-doers (in which case, i think collective-blame might be more approprate, and imho no more justified than any other form of prejudice).
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Only because we don't buy them, guns are still out there for sale, just because we ignore it, collective guilt (or blame) will not cease to be put on us. Besides it is a deeply sub-conscious pattern and has something to do with "identification". Some are better in shielding themselves against it, others are not.
If your child would murder someone, would you not partly feel guilty? Now this is a pretty obvious example. How would that apply if your (grand) parents committed crimes (that you come to get knowledge of) - how would that feel?
It's always more easy to dismiss and reject something that feels uncomfortable, than to even take 5 minutes of openness and identification. This resentment is a natural defence mechanism too.
I seem to be the only one in here, coming from a background where an entire society was/ is questioning it's nationalistic background and was/ is willing to do what is necessary in order to come to terms with history. Just because no significant attention has been paid to ppls concerns, doesn't mean that they are not justified.
I don't claim reverse racism to be justified and that collective guilt should be applied uniform. But I say that governments should actively meet their responsibility when it comes to atrocities and injustice.
Oh, and here some briefly googled Hopi opinions
Go on, I need a break now.
Only because we don't buy them, guns are still out there for sale, just because we ignore it, collective guilt (or blame) will not cease to be put on us. Besides it is a deeply sub-conscious pattern and has something to do with "identification". Some are better in shielding themselves against it, others are not.
If your child would murder someone, would you not partly feel guilty? Now this is a pretty obvious example. How would that apply if your (grand) parents committed crimes (that you come to get knowledge of) - how would that feel?
It's always more easy to dismiss and reject something that feels uncomfortable, than to even take 5 minutes of openness and identification. This resentment is a natural defence mechanism too.
I seem to be the only one in here, coming from a background where an entire society was/ is questioning it's nationalistic background and was/ is willing to do what is necessary in order to come to terms with history. Just because no significant attention has been paid to ppls concerns, doesn't mean that they are not justified.
I don't claim reverse racism to be justified and that collective guilt should be applied uniform. But I say that governments should actively meet their responsibility when it comes to atrocities and injustice.
Oh, and here some briefly googled Hopi opinions
Go on, I need a break now.
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Oh and Lurch...
Human rights watch on US racism against Arabs and Muslims
Oh and Lurch...
Human rights watch on US racism against Arabs and Muslims
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:
I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree on this one.
The child example i accept i would probably feel some guilt, but thats because as the parent i would have had significant influence over my child, and the murderous child would largely be a product of my bad parenting.
However, i don't think that i would feel guilt over actions committed by my parents/grandparents before i was even born, because i had no say in the matter, and there is no way i could be held responsible for actions committed that i had no control over.
Written by: FireTom
If your child would murder someone, would you not partly feel guilty? Now this is a pretty obvious example. How would that apply if your (grand) parents committed crimes (that you come to get knowledge of) - how would that feel?
I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree on this one.
The child example i accept i would probably feel some guilt, but thats because as the parent i would have had significant influence over my child, and the murderous child would largely be a product of my bad parenting.
However, i don't think that i would feel guilt over actions committed by my parents/grandparents before i was even born, because i had no say in the matter, and there is no way i could be held responsible for actions committed that i had no control over.
BRONZE Member
old hand
929 posts
Location: Oregon, USA
old hand
929 posts
Location: Oregon, USA
Posted:
No FireTom, I'm not guilty in any way for the crimes of my ancestors. Nor do I owe their victims anything. The crime ends with them. What sort of culture would we be in if the debt of crimes carried on through generations? Think about that long and hard.
No FireTom, I'm not guilty in any way for the crimes of my ancestors. Nor do I owe their victims anything. The crime ends with them. What sort of culture would we be in if the debt of crimes carried on through generations? Think about that long and hard.
#homeofpoi -- irc.newnet.net Come talk to us we're bored
Warning: Please Do Not Jump On The Seals
BRONZE Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
5,814 posts
Location: Perth, Australia
Carpal \'Tunnel
5,814 posts
Location: Perth, Australia
Posted:
Many communities are avocating removal of children in this generation to allow them to escape thier own communities and the endemic abuse. Who is mean to take the children I do not know. The theory of the previous removal was to "help" them, tis time to save them from their own people.
I wont say I am ignoring the situation so much as I have no viable solution and can see no soloution. Whatever the government tries is shot down from some direction. How can you give a generation respect without support from within
Many communities are avocating removal of children in this generation to allow them to escape thier own communities and the endemic abuse. Who is mean to take the children I do not know. The theory of the previous removal was to "help" them, tis time to save them from their own people.
I wont say I am ignoring the situation so much as I have no viable solution and can see no soloution. Whatever the government tries is shot down from some direction. How can you give a generation respect without support from within
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
addict
489 posts
Location: Perth
489 posts
Location: Perth
Posted:
Off topic slightly.. People say that there are no 'true' Maoris.. i.e. 100% Maori blood.
Is this true?
I think most of the racist views by 'Whites' (non-Indigenous) comes from the system. In Primary school you would study Indigenous culture... 4/7 years in Primary school, and at least two years of lower high school.
It's REALLY drilled into us. So much so that when the topic is mentioned, we're nearly "Yeah, we know, they were hard done by, we don't know how to solve the issue, move on".
And also, for many people the only Indigenous people they know are the TV/sports stars (Ernie Dingo, Cathy Freeman) or the Indigenous people asking for money at the train station.
I have worked in food kitchens around Perth. If you are homeless, and need food. There are places you can go. I know of many short and longer stay houses. I know organisations that help you get Centrelink (welfare) payments, then give you business clothes and taxi vouchers to get to job interviews.
Australia IS a land of opportunities, and while these services are not available in the country etc, in Perth, there is (to my knowledge) no reason to be begging on the street. The Big Issue (for the un-Perth peeps, a magazine news thing that is sold on the streets usually by disabled/homeles type people) is a great example of a simple, recognised 'pulling myself out of the dirt' kind of initiative.
So for many, seeing people beg (and it's not just Indigenous, but they are widely present) IS a sign that they are lazy. After all, begging (Proven fact here, can find the article/reference if needed) can get you >$200 a day. If you're in the right place.
And this is the reason I don't give money to beggers (though street performers and this amazing man who had a sign saying he lost his legs.. somewhere in some war while I was in Melbourne who was balancing on a large pole and juggling.. I like street entertainers.)
And most of the time, if they ask you for money for food, and you suggest a place very close that provides free food (either Buddhist places or aid organisations) you get abused or spat at.
So, I understand where many people are coming from, when they ignore the problem.
Off topic slightly.. People say that there are no 'true' Maoris.. i.e. 100% Maori blood.
Is this true?
I think most of the racist views by 'Whites' (non-Indigenous) comes from the system. In Primary school you would study Indigenous culture... 4/7 years in Primary school, and at least two years of lower high school.
It's REALLY drilled into us. So much so that when the topic is mentioned, we're nearly "Yeah, we know, they were hard done by, we don't know how to solve the issue, move on".
And also, for many people the only Indigenous people they know are the TV/sports stars (Ernie Dingo, Cathy Freeman) or the Indigenous people asking for money at the train station.
I have worked in food kitchens around Perth. If you are homeless, and need food. There are places you can go. I know of many short and longer stay houses. I know organisations that help you get Centrelink (welfare) payments, then give you business clothes and taxi vouchers to get to job interviews.
Australia IS a land of opportunities, and while these services are not available in the country etc, in Perth, there is (to my knowledge) no reason to be begging on the street. The Big Issue (for the un-Perth peeps, a magazine news thing that is sold on the streets usually by disabled/homeles type people) is a great example of a simple, recognised 'pulling myself out of the dirt' kind of initiative.
So for many, seeing people beg (and it's not just Indigenous, but they are widely present) IS a sign that they are lazy. After all, begging (Proven fact here, can find the article/reference if needed) can get you >$200 a day. If you're in the right place.
And this is the reason I don't give money to beggers (though street performers and this amazing man who had a sign saying he lost his legs.. somewhere in some war while I was in Melbourne who was balancing on a large pole and juggling.. I like street entertainers.)
And most of the time, if they ask you for money for food, and you suggest a place very close that provides free food (either Buddhist places or aid organisations) you get abused or spat at.
So, I understand where many people are coming from, when they ignore the problem.
BRONZE Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
5,814 posts
Location: Perth, Australia
Carpal \'Tunnel
5,814 posts
Location: Perth, Australia
Posted:
The number of pure Aust aboriginals must be smallish as well.
The number of pure Aust aboriginals must be smallish as well.
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
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
Gnor, I tried to look that up but can't find it. however I found a reason why it might be hard to find:
https://elecpress.monash.edu.au/pnp/free/pnpv4n4/price.htm
Gnor, I tried to look that up but can't find it. however I found a reason why it might be hard to find:
Written by: Charles Price
an appreciable number of persons of mixed indigenous and other origins are willing to give their other ancestries in a census ancestry question there are considerably more who do not admit to any ancestry other than Aboriginal or TSI. So long as indigenous persons take pride in their indigenous origins - and sometimes receive financial advantages for doing so - this tendency for many persons of mixed indigenous and other origins to admit only to their indigenous origin will continue.
https://elecpress.monash.edu.au/pnp/free/pnpv4n4/price.htm
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 guys, I'm responding mainly as Lurch directly addressed a question to me - but let me first ask you to kindly keep the (child) abuse out of here? It has nothing to do with the topic. I'm certain you didn't refer to the "stolen generation" when talking about "taking kids away from their parents to save them"... These people are still alive btw and have any of those, who took and displaced them from their parents ever faced a trial? Has any compensation been provided to the victims of this kidnapping? Educate me.
Begging is part of many cultures - with varying responses and ways to look at. I'm not judging beggars, regardless of their ethnicity just because they do what they do. Ask why (apart from not falling for their "scam") one is likely to cast a judgement.... it's a cultural thing (apart from being off topic too)
If the debt of crime is never been reconciliated - bad luck for the victims? Example: Should Germany in this case have told all the victims of Nazi regime to directly sue those in charge and receive their compensation from them individually?
Why - as a society - would we care for crimes that WE (individually) have not committed anyway?
It's not as if we inherit guilt, we inherit responsibility that we either meet up with, or choose to ignore. That's an individual approach, depending on ethics.
If - for another example - a theft or fraud takes place and the perpetrator dies before standing trial, the compensation for the victim is forfeited? Is this the ethic value we install these days? Bad luck? I don't think so.
Lurch - you have looked into my links for Hopi indians and the Human Rights Watch regarding "racism in the US today"? Any commentary on these?
Help me out here guys - is my thinking really so twisted and off?
As for another example: if the US just manages to ignore claims of innocent victims to torture (in Guantanamo and elsewhere - recent crimes) just long enough so the perpetrators are deceasing before a ruling is reached - does it mean they get away from all civil claims? If one makes a claim against his insurance company and dies before the company pays out - the money is "lost"?
IMO you exactly worded it,
I am not talking about voluntary victimisation either, but personally I rather close shoulders with and by that hope to help victims than siding perpetrators and make them get away with their crap.
Genocide and theft is wrong and it remains wrong. If it's state ordered, to me it doesn't make much difference but seeing no laws in effect to help victims, seeing no advocates of "victims" (because they range amongst the wildlife and as we know animals have no immortal soul).
We are likely to ratify genocide and therefore might be as guilty as the perpetrators (acting on our behalf) as long as we accept the (monetary) benefits and deny reparations.
Yes - IMHO this lasts more than only one generation, but that's just me...
me - I'm a cleric
EDITED_BY: FireTom (1190899531)
Well guys, I'm responding mainly as Lurch directly addressed a question to me - but let me first ask you to kindly keep the (child) abuse out of here? It has nothing to do with the topic. I'm certain you didn't refer to the "stolen generation" when talking about "taking kids away from their parents to save them"... These people are still alive btw and have any of those, who took and displaced them from their parents ever faced a trial? Has any compensation been provided to the victims of this kidnapping? Educate me.
Begging is part of many cultures - with varying responses and ways to look at. I'm not judging beggars, regardless of their ethnicity just because they do what they do. Ask why (apart from not falling for their "scam") one is likely to cast a judgement.... it's a cultural thing (apart from being off topic too)
If the debt of crime is never been reconciliated - bad luck for the victims? Example: Should Germany in this case have told all the victims of Nazi regime to directly sue those in charge and receive their compensation from them individually?
Why - as a society - would we care for crimes that WE (individually) have not committed anyway?
It's not as if we inherit guilt, we inherit responsibility that we either meet up with, or choose to ignore. That's an individual approach, depending on ethics.
If - for another example - a theft or fraud takes place and the perpetrator dies before standing trial, the compensation for the victim is forfeited? Is this the ethic value we install these days? Bad luck? I don't think so.
Lurch - you have looked into my links for Hopi indians and the Human Rights Watch regarding "racism in the US today"? Any commentary on these?
Help me out here guys - is my thinking really so twisted and off?
As for another example: if the US just manages to ignore claims of innocent victims to torture (in Guantanamo and elsewhere - recent crimes) just long enough so the perpetrators are deceasing before a ruling is reached - does it mean they get away from all civil claims? If one makes a claim against his insurance company and dies before the company pays out - the money is "lost"?
IMO you exactly worded it,
Written by: Natasqi
...most of the racist views by 'Whites' (non-Indigenous) comes from the system. In Primary school you would study Indigenous culture... 4/7 years in Primary school, and at least two years of lower high school. It's REALLY drilled into us. So much so that when the topic is mentioned, we're nearly "Yeah, we know, they were hard done by, we don't know how to solve the issue, move on".
And also, for many people the only Indigenous people they know are the TV/sports stars (Ernie Dingo, Cathy Freeman) or the Indigenous people asking for money at the train station.
I am not talking about voluntary victimisation either, but personally I rather close shoulders with and by that hope to help victims than siding perpetrators and make them get away with their crap.
Genocide and theft is wrong and it remains wrong. If it's state ordered, to me it doesn't make much difference but seeing no laws in effect to help victims, seeing no advocates of "victims" (because they range amongst the wildlife and as we know animals have no immortal soul).
We are likely to ratify genocide and therefore might be as guilty as the perpetrators (acting on our behalf) as long as we accept the (monetary) benefits and deny reparations.
Yes - IMHO this lasts more than only one generation, but that's just me...
me - I'm a cleric EDITED_BY: FireTom (1190899531)
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
BRONZE Member
old hand
929 posts
Location: Oregon, USA
old hand
929 posts
Location: Oregon, USA
Posted:
They are all fair arguments FireTom, but is it moral or ethical for the 'victim' or the victim's family to expect material compensation for their pains from a party that had no responsibility for the crime? I would submit no.
As bad as it sounds, life is rough. Horrible horrible things happen every day. You have to deal with it and move on. I never said that we should not *care* about the crimes of the past, we must remember them in order to avoid them in the future. But I don't we 'inherit' the responsibilitys for the actions of our ancestors, UNLESS we continue and condone their crimes. Which we are not. Indians are not oppressed by the nation. In some cases they have more rights than 'normal' US citizens as their reservations are soverign. Why do you think most of our casinos are on reservation land?
Firstly, compensation for the victim is for the civil courts not the criminal courts. If there was some compensation found, it would be taken from the estate before it was given to the family. Not after. Think about it, if your father committed some horrible crime, would YOU deserve to be paying it's victim for the rest of YOUR life? I think not. So in a sense yes, they're out of luck.
I'm not sure what you were trying to point out with the Hopi link, most of that page is about a private power company seeking land. How does that relate?
The families and those directly effected by Guantanamo Bay have a solid claim, but if you wait 200 years, until it is their great great great grand children do they have a claim? No.
They are all fair arguments FireTom, but is it moral or ethical for the 'victim' or the victim's family to expect material compensation for their pains from a party that had no responsibility for the crime? I would submit no.
As bad as it sounds, life is rough. Horrible horrible things happen every day. You have to deal with it and move on. I never said that we should not *care* about the crimes of the past, we must remember them in order to avoid them in the future. But I don't we 'inherit' the responsibilitys for the actions of our ancestors, UNLESS we continue and condone their crimes. Which we are not. Indians are not oppressed by the nation. In some cases they have more rights than 'normal' US citizens as their reservations are soverign. Why do you think most of our casinos are on reservation land?
Written by:
If - for another example - a theft or fraud takes place and the perpetrator dies before standing trial, the compensation for the victim is forfeited? Is this the ethic value we install these days? Bad luck? I don't think so.
Firstly, compensation for the victim is for the civil courts not the criminal courts. If there was some compensation found, it would be taken from the estate before it was given to the family. Not after. Think about it, if your father committed some horrible crime, would YOU deserve to be paying it's victim for the rest of YOUR life? I think not. So in a sense yes, they're out of luck.
I'm not sure what you were trying to point out with the Hopi link, most of that page is about a private power company seeking land. How does that relate?
Written by:
As for another example: if the US just manages to ignore claims of innocent victims to torture (in Guantanamo and elsewhere - recent crimes) just long enough so the perpetrators are deceasing before a ruling is reached - does it mean they get away from all civil claims? If one makes a claim against his insurance company and dies before the company pays out - the money is "lost"?
The families and those directly effected by Guantanamo Bay have a solid claim, but if you wait 200 years, until it is their great great great grand children do they have a claim? No.
#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:
In our legal system, victims don't receive compensation from the perpetrator anyway. If you TV is stolen, it's replaced by insurance, not money you receive from compensation. If you want the money, sue them.
Your fence gets graffitied by delinquents? You tell the police the cost of the damage so that they can put that in their report, but when the delinquents pay the fine you see ZERO of that money.
In our legal system, victims don't receive compensation from the perpetrator anyway. If you TV is stolen, it's replaced by insurance, not money you receive from compensation. If you want the money, sue them.
Your fence gets graffitied by delinquents? You tell the police the cost of the damage so that they can put that in their report, but when the delinquents pay the fine you see ZERO of that money.
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:
I appear to mistake life and teddy bears?
IMO we we condone and continue our ancestors crimes, when shrugging off the past, merely enjoying the benefits their actions have for us and I find that what you are suggesting simply is not according to (international) law and present jurisdiction. Fortunately
Jewish groups OK Swiss Holocaust fund plan
“HUNGARIAN GOLD TRAIN CASE”
If you have crime-related injuries you can apply for compensation through the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme, which even includes:
Washington state department on Labour and Industries Crime Victims Compensation
Crime Victim compensation in Texas
Last but not least look at compensation schemes put onto the tobacco industry.
As mankind grows out of the caves, we do simply have to apply the categorical imperative - which certainly applies to the native population as well
The current status of native American Indian territories is a direct result of applicable rights.
That I call "the good attitude"... Keep it up US presidents. 800 million bucks for the US is too much of a bargain.
Please look at the proportion of Hopi reservations, in relation to the state of Arizona
'nuff said for now.
I appear to mistake life and teddy bears?
IMO we we condone and continue our ancestors crimes, when shrugging off the past, merely enjoying the benefits their actions have for us and I find that what you are suggesting simply is not according to (international) law and present jurisdiction. Fortunately
Jewish groups OK Swiss Holocaust fund plan
Written by: CNN
Under the plan approved in Jerusalem, all legitimate claimants and their heirs to dormant Swiss bank accounts will receive their full proceeds -- an amount, a source told Reuters, that was expected to total about $100 million.
“HUNGARIAN GOLD TRAIN CASE”
Written by: Hagens-Berman
Jewish Hungarian Nazi victims are eligible to receive welfare benefits through the settlement. Heirs cannot receive direct monetary benefits. As monetary consideration, heirs receive a $500,000 cy pres award to a recipient institution for the compilation of an historical archive about the Gold Train and the looting of the Hungarian Jewish community during World War II.
If you have crime-related injuries you can apply for compensation through the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme, which even includes:
Written by: direct.gov.uk
The Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme allows financial awards to be made:
* to recognise the injuries, physical and mental, caused by a crime of violence
* in certain circumstances, to compensate for past or future lost earnings or special expenses caused by such a crime
* for bereavement as a result of a crime of violence, including, in some cases, compensation for the lost earnings of the person who has been killed
Washington state department on Labour and Industries Crime Victims Compensation
Crime Victim compensation in Texas
Written by: Attourney General of Texas
Victims of violence and their families must deal with the emotional, physical, and financial aftermath of crime. The Texas Crime Victims' Compensation Fund helps innocent victims and their families when they have no other means of paying for the financial cost of crime.
Last but not least look at compensation schemes put onto the tobacco industry.
As mankind grows out of the caves, we do simply have to apply the categorical imperative - which certainly applies to the native population as well
The current status of native American Indian territories is a direct result of applicable rights.
Written by: President Truman on the need of an ICC Act
“Instead of confiscating Indian lands, we have purchased from the tribes that once owned this continent more than 90% of our public domain, paying them approximately 800 million dollars in the process.
It would be a miracle if in the course of these dealings – the largest real estate transaction in history – we had not made some mistakes and occasionally failed to live up to the precise terms of our treaties and agreements with some 200 tribes.
But we stand ready to submit all such controversies to the judgment of impartial tribunals. We stand ready to correct any mistakes we have made.”
That I call "the good attitude"... Keep it up US presidents. 800 million bucks for the US is too much of a bargain.
Please look at the proportion of Hopi reservations, in relation to the state of Arizona
'nuff said for now.
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
GOLD Member
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
Hi Fire Tom, I think you make an excellent point about collective guilt. This is certainly obvious in the United States, where people still feel the need to carry guns because they live with the collective fear of slave and Indian uprisings of the past.
The collective guilt for Australians Aboriginal’s is a little less obvious. Perhaps, we are still in denial. Even here on HOP people are still trying to sweep the problem under the carpet and blame the Aboriginies for all the problems that the whitefella has caused.
Personally, I’m disgusted with comments that go along the lines of white people don’t want to help a race that doesn’t want to be helped or Aborigionals are self destructive or you have a race responsible for many problems it seen its hard to feel sympathy.
Isn’t it about time we grew up and accepted responsibility for the destruction of Aboriginal culture, which has led to current situation. To me this is more about recognition and acknowledgement than money. A simple “I’m sorry” by John Howard would have made a tremendous difference to the self esteem of a race of human beings. Instead he sent in the army. Nothings changed in 200 years
Hi Fire Tom, I think you make an excellent point about collective guilt. This is certainly obvious in the United States, where people still feel the need to carry guns because they live with the collective fear of slave and Indian uprisings of the past.
The collective guilt for Australians Aboriginal’s is a little less obvious. Perhaps, we are still in denial. Even here on HOP people are still trying to sweep the problem under the carpet and blame the Aboriginies for all the problems that the whitefella has caused.
Personally, I’m disgusted with comments that go along the lines of white people don’t want to help a race that doesn’t want to be helped or Aborigionals are self destructive or you have a race responsible for many problems it seen its hard to feel sympathy.
Isn’t it about time we grew up and accepted responsibility for the destruction of Aboriginal culture, which has led to current situation. To me this is more about recognition and acknowledgement than money. A simple “I’m sorry” by John Howard would have made a tremendous difference to the self esteem of a race of human beings. Instead he sent in the army. Nothings changed in 200 years
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com