The Necessity of Reparation for Historic Injustices
harrycoopr wrote:sameaswas wrote:bonza wrote:velocityjohnno wrote:I read a very perceptive analysis of the situation on another website. I think the author (it's not me) has summarised the situation quite well, and it's in the same vein as Bob Birrell's link I posted before; to do with the grad/non grad and nationalist/internationalist split in potential voting and outcome. I'll quote in full because it's worth considering as an explanation for potential tragedy (I agree with them on this) that may happen:
"The Australian Penny drops on the Voice
At long last the national commentariat is twigging to why the Voice is highly likely to be voted down.
It isn’t that we are a nation of racists, who don’t care about the plight of aboriginal Australians. It is that the people pushing hardest for us to vote yes are those we have simply lost trust in to act in our interests, rather than their own.
The vote on the Voice has become a vote of confidence in our elites. And if the only way to get through to them, that we have no trust in them, no confidence in their ability to piece together a narrative which reflects a world we are seeing, and no belief in their ‘leadership’ is to vote no to something they are all pushing for, then it currently appears that Australia will vote no.
‘Them’ is our politicians, senior bureaucrats (State and Federal), academics, business leaders, and executives, a range of high profile institutions, and very large sections of the opinion pushing media. They need to change their game, and to start acting in the broader national interest, as opposed to the narrower sectional, institutional or personal interest.
Their problem is that they aren’t very elite at all. Their vision for us as a nation is cast in terms of bare minima. They like their cars from Europe, their electronics from North Asia or the US and their finances handled by banks in New York or London. They like holidays offshore, as well as their income streams, unless those income streams are harvesting us. Their entire frame of reference is somewhere else. For the most part they despise us, and are only too ready to point to our racism, or an access to housing and quality of life which they felt a little too easy a generation ago. Most fundamentally they are all too dismissive of the economic stress Australian households are experiencing for going along with their elite mantras for the NeoLiberal era. They want us to pay more and work harder – for them. They want obeissance or, better still, deference.
The tragedy is that they are holding aboriginal Australia, and their totally legitimate right to better life outcomes as a section of society, up as a human shield.
All the old techniques for bullshitting the public are there. The general easily supportable idea, no real detail about what it actually means or narrative on how it leads to the better outcome plenty of people want, no real identification of downsides or costs. It’s a ‘good’ which delivers for some but not much for many. The all too obvious question for far too many people is ‘what aren’t we being told about this?’ And the problems of the ‘elite’ start there. The many have been watching this unfold for years, over countless issues.
Crocodile tears on house prices – check. Immigration volumes – check. Free Trade agreements – check. Privatisation of energy – check. Privatisation of Public Services – check again. Workplace flexibilities – check. Taxation offsets for ‘investment’ which do nothing but encourage speculation – check. Taxation offsets for the relatively affluent, but not mainstreet – check. War in Iraq or Afghanistan – check. Same sex marriage – check. First home owner grants – check some more.
All the while real issues apparent on ordinary streets in ordinary Australia either don’t get answered, or, all too often, aren’t allowed to be asked, or are immediately smothered in some accusation to belittle those asking. These people think they are ‘managing’ us. They don’t think – to themselves – they are leading us, and don’t think of themselves as accountable for ‘leadership’. They think that managing us gives them the right to lie to us, or determine what facts are acknowledged or not acknowledged, and to be as spurious as they deem appropriate (to suit their ends).
What you see as the politics of the margins and the polarisation of nothing I agree with, but I see it as something else too.
I see it as ‘denial’ as psychologists might refer to it"
link for context:
https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2023/10/albanese-government-support-sin...
(And harry what is a deconstructed fascist? I picture a dissasembled Panzer IV.)
Q&A Monday was a good example of the above I reckon. I only tuned in for the first question or 15 mins or so - and was distracted so not following - so my take is loose. When asked to comment on the rate of immigration to Australia - Pearson offered the usual stock standard (along with the other female non-indig guest) "let's not be racist" or words to that effect. I felt that was a pretty cynical leadership position on a matter of national interest especially given the times. To be fair Pearson along with the other guest had some self-awareness at least to not go to the usual "You're ALL" racist and soften it with "Let's NOT" be racist when it comes to responding to Australia's population carrying capacity.
It's moments and positions along with other long term and recent policy failures like this that fuel the disengagement and distrust the article speaks to.
I'm voting yes by the way.
bonza goodpost, ditto waveman,gsco,andym,burleigh,indo,sypkan and anyone who riles against the propaganda, appreciate your individuality and independant thinking.
Haha...the independent thinkinking conspiratards. Scary thing is if these lies and made-up rubbish ie UN bullshit are actually believed!! Worse still if they know its bullshit - like Fox news - but peddle it anyway... real lowlifes, no ethics or integrity whatsoever... just human dregs.
How the f did I get lumped in with Burleigh and Indo??
Stone the crows.
Oh yes I had a good laugh at sameaswas’ admiration list. You sure you’re not a double agent AndyM?
you'll like this gsco
the jargon is pretty hard going, but some of you guys will be all over it
https://m.
yes jp... sorry about that... but Im pretty sure camille paglia is considered 'left wing' ...or was...
once...
gsco the history when I was learning was a disappointment, for the great turning points and important events were replaced by a focus on the minutiae; digging around and finding small aspects that hadn't been mentioned. So I got into that. It looks like it has become more extreme now. The essential skills of gathering primary documents, working out the voices recording them, and synthesising a view from this probably remain. The most threatening thing I found in my kids' education was an upper school program that replaced critical thought with a focus on interpreting text or events from 'how you feel' which I argued would lead to a more volatile expression of views in the society and divorce reason from debate. Luckily we had homeschooled and the kids were wised up enough to see this method in light of critical thought.
It's important to preserve a record of the history of our peoples, before the time it was altered. Written history becomes our memory, our stories, and carry forward our knowledge and values.
Here's a read for you gsco
https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2020/09/the-royal-navys-triumph-over-sl...
At any rate, you are a mathematician and valuable, maybe you could find some solace or help out here:
AndyM wrote:@Basesix "I think the world's societal woes are SOOOO much more about 'class' and lack of choices in life than anything to do with gender or race."
Exactly, class issues have never gone away and, since neoliberalism became hegemonic and eliminated class from the discussion, identity has stepped in as some sort of very poor substitute.
this was pre trump...
we should have seen a real correction by now...
but, but, but, ... trump!
"...This is American politics at peak neoliberalism, where a distorted version of identity politics is used to defend an oligarchy and a national security state, celebrating diversity in the management of exploitation and warfare..."
" ..The thing about Clinton's newfound identity politics crusade that has planted so many palms across left-wing faces is that Clinton is brazenly channeling the latest racial and gender justice discourse to block a racially diverse working-class assault on the oligarchy she has long defended—it's just too much. All of the important struggles that Clinton cites cease to be intersectional the moment they are abstracted from political economy..."
"..."In general, [this approach] smooths over class differences within black populations," Spence explains, "and in so doing embraces a form of brokerage politics that elevates the needs of a subset of elite blacks over the needs of black populations in general.”
Clinton, writes Boston Globe columnist Derrick Z. Jackson, is trying to distract from the fact "that Wall Street investors and bankers play a huge role in discriminatory redlining, predatory lending, and foreclosures," as she "shamelessly counts on blacks for support while she is engaged with the system that holds back the aspirations of too many black people."..."
https://www.salon.com/2016/02/19/hillary_clintons_cynical_race_appeals_t...
"VJ: deconstructionism, constructionism, post-constructionism, critical theory, critical race theory, modernism, postmodernism, post-postmodernism…it’s all just peak echo chamber, rabbit hole academic conspiracy theory activism trash with no information content, but is also what’s taught in arts and history etc degrees nowadays…" @costco
Just this paragraph shows your true ignorance costco... a really dumb statement. It's so obvious you don't understand the theory and exemplifies all your other anti-intellectualist posts. No wonder yr sucked into the whole rightwing whacko conspiracy rabbit hole... so sad that uneducated and misinforming people believe their own bullshit. I had a mate the same... did a BA in Aboriginal Studies... did ok but was obviously overwhelmed by the sophistication of the theory so turned 180 degrees and started his internet education...Alex Jones etc... the guys a raving nutjob now, much like a few on here... very sad state of paranoia/inferiority/rage at own feelings of personal powerlessness etc... very Trumpian symptoms...much like a few on here
that's a very amusing post, syp.
in that there is nothing there.
I tend to think kinda more Wagga and Western Sydney when I think of Aus.
Got anything about people from there?
AndyM wrote:harrycoopr wrote:sameaswas wrote:bonza wrote:velocityjohnno wrote:I read a very perceptive analysis of the situation on another website. I think the author (it's not me) has summarised the situation quite well, and it's in the same vein as Bob Birrell's link I posted before; to do with the grad/non grad and nationalist/internationalist split in potential voting and outcome. I'll quote in full because it's worth considering as an explanation for potential tragedy (I agree with them on this) that may happen:
"The Australian Penny drops on the Voice
At long last the national commentariat is twigging to why the Voice is highly likely to be voted down.
It isn’t that we are a nation of racists, who don’t care about the plight of aboriginal Australians. It is that the people pushing hardest for us to vote yes are those we have simply lost trust in to act in our interests, rather than their own.
The vote on the Voice has become a vote of confidence in our elites. And if the only way to get through to them, that we have no trust in them, no confidence in their ability to piece together a narrative which reflects a world we are seeing, and no belief in their ‘leadership’ is to vote no to something they are all pushing for, then it currently appears that Australia will vote no.
‘Them’ is our politicians, senior bureaucrats (State and Federal), academics, business leaders, and executives, a range of high profile institutions, and very large sections of the opinion pushing media. They need to change their game, and to start acting in the broader national interest, as opposed to the narrower sectional, institutional or personal interest.
Their problem is that they aren’t very elite at all. Their vision for us as a nation is cast in terms of bare minima. They like their cars from Europe, their electronics from North Asia or the US and their finances handled by banks in New York or London. They like holidays offshore, as well as their income streams, unless those income streams are harvesting us. Their entire frame of reference is somewhere else. For the most part they despise us, and are only too ready to point to our racism, or an access to housing and quality of life which they felt a little too easy a generation ago. Most fundamentally they are all too dismissive of the economic stress Australian households are experiencing for going along with their elite mantras for the NeoLiberal era. They want us to pay more and work harder – for them. They want obeissance or, better still, deference.
The tragedy is that they are holding aboriginal Australia, and their totally legitimate right to better life outcomes as a section of society, up as a human shield.
All the old techniques for bullshitting the public are there. The general easily supportable idea, no real detail about what it actually means or narrative on how it leads to the better outcome plenty of people want, no real identification of downsides or costs. It’s a ‘good’ which delivers for some but not much for many. The all too obvious question for far too many people is ‘what aren’t we being told about this?’ And the problems of the ‘elite’ start there. The many have been watching this unfold for years, over countless issues.
Crocodile tears on house prices – check. Immigration volumes – check. Free Trade agreements – check. Privatisation of energy – check. Privatisation of Public Services – check again. Workplace flexibilities – check. Taxation offsets for ‘investment’ which do nothing but encourage speculation – check. Taxation offsets for the relatively affluent, but not mainstreet – check. War in Iraq or Afghanistan – check. Same sex marriage – check. First home owner grants – check some more.
All the while real issues apparent on ordinary streets in ordinary Australia either don’t get answered, or, all too often, aren’t allowed to be asked, or are immediately smothered in some accusation to belittle those asking. These people think they are ‘managing’ us. They don’t think – to themselves – they are leading us, and don’t think of themselves as accountable for ‘leadership’. They think that managing us gives them the right to lie to us, or determine what facts are acknowledged or not acknowledged, and to be as spurious as they deem appropriate (to suit their ends).
What you see as the politics of the margins and the polarisation of nothing I agree with, but I see it as something else too.
I see it as ‘denial’ as psychologists might refer to it"
link for context:
https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2023/10/albanese-government-support-sin...
(And harry what is a deconstructed fascist? I picture a dissasembled Panzer IV.)
Q&A Monday was a good example of the above I reckon. I only tuned in for the first question or 15 mins or so - and was distracted so not following - so my take is loose. When asked to comment on the rate of immigration to Australia - Pearson offered the usual stock standard (along with the other female non-indig guest) "let's not be racist" or words to that effect. I felt that was a pretty cynical leadership position on a matter of national interest especially given the times. To be fair Pearson along with the other guest had some self-awareness at least to not go to the usual "You're ALL" racist and soften it with "Let's NOT" be racist when it comes to responding to Australia's population carrying capacity.
It's moments and positions along with other long term and recent policy failures like this that fuel the disengagement and distrust the article speaks to.
I'm voting yes by the way.
bonza goodpost, ditto waveman,gsco,andym,burleigh,indo,sypkan and anyone who riles against the propaganda, appreciate your individuality and independant thinking.
Haha...the independent thinkinking conspiratards. Scary thing is if these lies and made-up rubbish ie UN bullshit are actually believed!! Worse still if they know its bullshit - like Fox news - but peddle it anyway... real lowlifes, no ethics or integrity whatsoever... just human dregs.
How the f did I get lumped in with Burleigh and Indo??
Stone the crows.
Welcome to the club AndyM. It’s fun in here
well basey...
in the 'debate'
the 'argument' is... it's all very 'trumpy'
...apparently...
however... the 'trumpy' don't happen in a vacuum...
unless you're in a bubble... a vacuumous bubble of righteousness that is...
I refer you to the 'the identity trap' article above
where trump is the nutty yin to the nutty yang
and, I think you are smart enough to put a couple of other two and two's together...
cute little post, syp, i actually wrote the 'federal erection' indo comment for you x
there's mathematicians everywhere VJ. And lawyers, and PhDs and tradies and self-aware bums. Who cares? Sociologically balanced people, are becoming rarer, you wanna lock your kids into a future, keep them balanced : )
haha, classic, AndyM, on the shitlist, hehe. My latest (re our previous chats) is the ubiquitous guttersnipe Anglicism: 'Innit'... gone as a cute reference, doc martin, etc, to a defer sign-off with a couple of Aus presenters.. wow-ee?
Clive? Booooo... Basic working-human stories are no more popular now than ever.. abc haters want them gone altogether? peripheral. no-one fights properly for such things. Blue collar over blue-blood, surely. The brothers John and Alexander Bethune in Scotland are heroes of mine fwiw. @indo has the love that shall not speak its name for elon-types, we stare constantly at narcissistic bozo talking heads.. Trumps, Pharos, boring, boring, kardashiwatevsness..
The People's Story Museum in Edinburgh, the wicked Beachport museum in Pam's town https://www.nationaltrust.org.au/places/beachport-old-wool-grain-store-m...
these things are real. pertinent to this thread.
yep, gsco, to paraphrase berleigh, I thought we were to be friends?
It has all gone fairly well to this point: western pillars and aqueducts and westminster and krispy kreme. And now, aligning with an awkwardness in your life, there is something going badly wrong. It is not to do with you, your social position, your attitude, your perception, it is the WORLD that has the problem. YOU are at the cusp of something full-on. YOU can perceive it. YOU can explain it. YOU can see through it. Thank YOU for explaining it to us. We are small. You are HUGE gsco. And we thank you.
Shit, basesix has gone full nut job. He’s had a few and the kranks are getting to him.
"Hey, henno, where'd you catch the big red fish?"
(spot on, bro! enuffs enuff : )
BSCM is living in his van, literally, going nuts, literally.
I hope he gets the help he needs. Imagine living in the Australia he thinks he lives in.
basesix wrote:"Hey, henno, where'd you catch the big red fish?"
(spot on, bro! enuffs enuff : )
Whaa yes I’d like to have a beer with you.
actually, seeds, your sarky post to adam12 the other night made me think of free-forming wordplay.. my brain went to 'dub be good to me', dunno why, but it was cool.. i didn't realise there was an origin to the freestyle rap in the song that referred to (quoted) an '88 tune, jam hot. TOTALLY one of the records you can get for under $50 (post being 2/3 the cost.. : / that will mean something to your grand kids ; )
As long as you realise it wasn’t AT Adam12
5:20, haha, I reckon you're a tank fly boss..
I found this interesting, I liked the beats international song..
we'll do a beer one day, gotta do at least one band meeting.
seeds wrote:Frog? Evangelical left?
Britannica Dictionary definition of EVANGELICAL
2 : having or showing very strong and enthusiastic feelings
He spoke about the project with evangelical zeal.
The far left are very much evangelical in action, persuasion and language on their favourite causes. They even stray into the realm of being a psuedo religion:
You must follow the one true path to salvation and avoid sin in thought or action on - climate, gender, inclusivity, diversity etc. or be damned to eternal gnashing of teeth (or perhaps just a bit of career cancellation, a dose of aggressive shouting or a social media pile on).
Geez that’s surely only associated with the right happy clappers these days. ESP. In the land of the free. News to me. Thanks
basesix wrote:5:20, haha, I reckon you're a tank fly boss..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8ipWOLCAzM
I found this interesting, I liked the beats international song..
we'll do a beer one day, gotta do at least one band meeting.
That was cool.
Well there’s a lot more to that Beats International track. Love learning this stuff
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dub_Be_Good_to_Me
mm. all good re whatever people think the things are ; )
fun seeds, I reckon I'll try find a 12 bar (which I don't like) that I like.
I think this is 12 bar.(remember I’m not a musician) bloody good
Bridging the schnapp – Chairman’s Lounge no longer Priceless https://theklaxon.com.au/ztem-70/. Senate records show Price first disclosed her Qantas Chairman’s Club membership on August 13, which was the same day she disclosed she had ceased being a Bridging the Gap ambassador……… Two weeks ago it was revealed Price has billed Australian taxpayers $76,509.19 for 76 business-class flights in just her first seven months in office.
Hey Sameaswas,
Sorry about the looser quip! A bit of bantering, spur of the moment thing, said in jest, cheers
thanks for the jp interview sypkan.
VJ, I've been aware of the Ramsay Centre for a while. It's fascinating that they're pushing for some basic, elementary history courses to be taught in Australian universities but are experiencing almost blanket pushback. Our universities are well down the critical theory, post-structuralism, critical race theory rabbit holes.
Also, thanks for the article. And what do you know, on the front page of the Quadrant is a book diagnosing another fabrication and pathology of the Yes campaign, which many people in here are displaying clear-cut symptoms of (and probably should go to the doctor to get checked): Romancing the primitive.
book review wrote:...romanticising the primitive dominates Australian intellectual and cultural life, becoming an obsession and virtually a religion.
Millions of Australians now obsess over the idea that race matters above everything and accept racist absurdities: people of Aboriginal descent are inherently wise and good-natured as well as naturally expert custodians and conservators of the land, while people of non-Aboriginal descent are, by nature and in contrast, alienated and unconnected.
Every day, millions of people take part in cult practices that divide the world into indigenous and non-indigenous, believing a farrago of New Age Aboriginal spirituality proclaims the one true path to moral improvement.
Romancing the Primitive defends science against superstition and liberalism against thralldom, seeking to reinstate genuine intellectual inquiry and discovery and build debate on real information. Along the way, the narrative critically visits the Uluru statement, the High Court and education in Australian schools and universities.
Surf's pumping today...
'. And what do you know, on the front page of the Quadrant is a book diagnosing another fabrication and pathology of the Yes campaign, which many people in here are displaying clear-cut symptoms of (and probably should go to the doctor to get checked): Romancing the primitive.'
Who needs a 'divisive' change to the constitution when you've got these sort of posts eh gsco?
Starting to find your posts a little fucking annoying.
And to each poster who calls someone out (rightfully usually) and then backs away and apologizes. Don't bloody apologise and don't back down.
These grubs deserve to be called out for the poorly human traits they're displaying.
;)
https://m.
&pp=ygUSQnJpZ2dzIHRvbSBnbGVlc29u haha, thanks JF, that was refreshingly awesome.
Supafreak wrote:Bridging the schnapp – Chairman’s Lounge no longer Priceless https://theklaxon.com.au/ztem-70/. Senate records show Price first disclosed her Qantas Chairman’s Club membership on August 13, which was the same day she disclosed she had ceased being a Bridging the Gap ambassador……… Two weeks ago it was revealed Price has billed Australian taxpayers $76,509.19 for 76 business-class flights in just her first seven months in office.
Of course she is... a crook like her mum... why u think she's so No and pro-colonialism... she'll lose her job if the Voice gets in. Another disgusting human with zero integrity
southernraw wrote:And to each poster who calls someone out (rightfully usually) and then backs away and apologizes. Don't bloody apologise and don't back down.
These grubs deserve to be called out for the poorly human traits they're displaying.
Southerncooked is sooking again.
What the real Constitutional experts think
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-10-06/open-letter-constitutional-law-un...
san Guine wrote:What the real Constitutional experts think
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-10-06/open-letter-constitutional-law-un...
Na, don't buy it. Read something on Instagram that said it was a UN take over. Cannot believe the elites!!
andy-mac wrote:san Guine wrote:What the real Constitutional experts think
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-10-06/open-letter-constitutional-law-un...Na, don't buy it. Read something on Instagram that said it was a UN take over. Cannot believe the elites!!
I reckon its a Socialist conspiracy
Briggs on 10 Midday. He mentioned swellnet's burleigh!
What's that Basesix?
Come on Briggs logon and school the resident carnts
Did Briggs say “if you don’t know, google it” ?
burleigh wrote:Did Briggs say “if you don’t know, google it” ?
He said only ever, EVER, get your info about important issues strictly off instagram from the same clueless twits as you always do. You're way ahead of him!
gsco wrote:thanks for the jp interview sypkan.
VJ, I've been aware of the Ramsay Centre for a while. It's fascinating that they're pushing for some basic, elementary history courses to be taught in Australian universities but are experiencing almost blanket pushback. Our universities are well down the critical theory, post-structuralism, critical race theory rabbit holes.
Also, thanks for the article. And what do you know, on the front page of the Quadrant is a book diagnosing another fabrication and pathology of the Yes campaign, which many people in here are displaying clear-cut symptoms of (and probably should go to the doctor to get checked): Romancing the primitive.
book review wrote:...romanticising the primitive dominates Australian intellectual and cultural life, becoming an obsession and virtually a religion.
Millions of Australians now obsess over the idea that race matters above everything and accept racist absurdities: people of Aboriginal descent are inherently wise and good-natured as well as naturally expert custodians and conservators of the land, while people of non-Aboriginal descent are, by nature and in contrast, alienated and unconnected.
Every day, millions of people take part in cult practices that divide the world into indigenous and non-indigenous, believing a farrago of New Age Aboriginal spirituality proclaims the one true path to moral improvement.
Romancing the Primitive defends science against superstition and liberalism against thralldom, seeking to reinstate genuine intellectual inquiry and discovery and build debate on real information. Along the way, the narrative critically visits the Uluru statement, the High Court and education in Australian schools and universities.
Surf's pumping today...
You've already looked into it, cool. There is certainly room for an alternate history. An historical separate sovereignty, to put it in today's terms.
Anthro lecturer was hardcore romancer back in the day. His spiels contradicted the actual research using primary sources and cognitive dissonance was evident. I just couldn't see the nobility in burning out your unliked neighbours when the wind favoured it.
Did you know that prehistory is currently undergoing a massive upheaval and revolution due to the mapping of the genome and the application of genetics to tracing early human evolution and migration patterns. The revolution is putting a lot of those Aboriginal Studies courses universities are currently offering in quite shaky ground.
For instance, DNA evidence is now disputing the standard "out of Africa" theory, and they've discovered that Aboriginal Australians have the highest percent of both Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA of all peoples on the planet. Here's a map from the book Who We Are and How We Got Here: Ancient DNA and the New Science of the Human Past from one of the leading experts in the field:
Also, due to this they're starting to ask questions about and look into whether Aboriginal Australians are actually the original inhabitants, or if there was a Denisovan peoples here first that interbred with Aboriginal Australians and then went extinct. In any case, they seem to now believe that there was a Denisovan peoples at least very close to Australia that went extinct due to the migration of Aboriginal Australians into Australia, and that left its DNA marker (up to 5% Denisovan DNA). A passage from the same book:
I read the above book and intend to read: The World Before Us: How Science is Revealing a New Story of Our Human Origins which is from another leading expert in the field and detailing the latest findings.
"The Australian Constitution was drafted in the 1890s and came into force in 1901. The original Constitution was approved through referendums in each of the colonies, but many people, including women, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and people who did not own property, had limited or no voting rights. The framers (who were all white men) included the concept of ‘race’ within the Constitution, as they intended for the new Commonwealth Parliament to be able to pass laws that discriminated against people on the basis of race. In particular, they sought to pursue the White Australia Policy, where the rights of white Australians were given preferential treatment in relation to immigration, employment and movement."
Hiccups wrote:burleigh wrote:Did Briggs say “if you don’t know, google it” ?
He said only ever, EVER, get your info about important issues strictly off instagram from the same clueless twits as you always do. You're way ahead of him!
So I was right. The new campaign is good but he’s still not giving anyone ANY information. Telling people to google it is pretty funny
burleigh wrote:southernraw wrote:And to each poster who calls someone out (rightfully usually) and then backs away and apologizes. Don't bloody apologise and don't back down.
These grubs deserve to be called out for the poorly human traits they're displaying.Southerncooked is sooking again.
Hey hellman behind your keyboard.
You wanna reply to this? Or gonna run away scared again?
"It's very obvious Burleigh is just a troll.
Can anyone recall him ever posting anything of substance?
Its in his name. Berley. Just here to get bites.
I ask you Berley, why are you here?
One of the reasons i browsed back through the beginning of this thread earlier was to see where it all came undone, because it was a very respectful discussion at one point.
Pretty much all the same posters that are still here, except you, were all posting thoughtful, insightful, or at the very least attempting to debate with at least some level of research.
But there was never a snarky, ill educated sniper like yourself that would constantly berate users without actually posting any thoughts or researched facts of any substance like yourself.
All you do is post instagram links of suss looking groups of sovereign citizens and name call other users.
So i ask you Burleigh. What are you actually doing here?
If not to actually debate, you're just a troll and i'm pretty sure that goes against the code of conduct set out by this website."
basesix wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QereR0CViMY
onya, sameaswas, online counterculture is truly impressive.
haha love monty python, fast forward to the scene in the movie where they are going on about "what have the romans done for us?!!" kind of appropriate for the current reffo imo.
"Telling people to google it is pretty funny"
it is pretty funny
they have googled it...
and...
Reform wrote:sameaswas wrote:oops apologies to velocityjohno it was your post not bonzas, you go on my hero's list too.
i'm voteing no.
Infinite looser! ..Especially if the voice isn't successful.
we all lose as a community, any which way it falls.
Reform wrote:Hey Sameaswas,
Sorry about the looser quip! A bit of bantering, spur of the moment thing, said in jest, cheers
just saw your post, appreciate the apology no offence taken.
basesix wrote:Briggs on 10 Midday. He mentioned swellnet's burleigh!
is this the same briggs that is AB Briggs? allso goes by the rapper name of king billy??
ALL SWELLNET google this fat racist's music videos and be shocked at his lyrics, the contempt towards white ppl and encourageing acts of violence towards anyone not black.
he is a racist bigot and a hypocrite, and yet the yes23 think he is a good role model for fnp youth!
seriously go watch his music videos and then see what a two faced arsehole he really is.
aw and his mob drive around listening to this "bash whitey propaganda".
Uni assignment i did a few years ago. This is my take on things. I'm sure this will ruffle many feathers. I hope so.
Love Blue Diamond x
The Necessity of Reparation for Historic Injustices
Introduction – Compensatory Justice
Disparities between the standards of living of humans on this planet have long been a part of our history on this planet. From the wealthy nations of the West to the developing and undeveloped nations on this globe, the diversity in the quality of life when viewed from a moral standpoint are without a doubt grossly unfair.
In this paper I will look at why historic injustices do require some form of reparation. I take a strong stance that we are more obliged to solve current injustices than to provide reparation for every act of injustice in the past. In doing this I will first investigate the historic injustice of the Aboriginal people of Australia and I will look at the argument that they are entitled to some form of reparation and why.
I will incoroporate some interesting views from Jeremy Waldron, Robert Nozick and others which will help me slowly build to my conclusion that reparation should be in the form of Non Indigenous Australians surrendering some of our priveleges as a form of reparation.
Historic Injustices to Indigenous Australians:
Australia the continent was well inhabited for many years long before white settlement. It is commonly known that in 1788 Australia was colonised as a country under the rule of the British Empire, with total contempt for the fact that it was already inhabited by a native indigenous race of people.
The way the original inhabitants have been treated, including forced assimilation, execution, stolen families and not even allowed to be recognised as citizens for a large part of white Australia’s history are also well known facts. (Poole, 1999,pp114-142)
There exists now a situation where there is a large divide between Aboriginal and non Aboriginal Australian’s that can be traced back to the moment Australia was invaded by English settlers and the brutal and unfair treatment that has followed.
So at this point now, in 2013 what is the just and fair way to make amends for past actions?
I would argue that a moderate to large amount of reparation is overdue for this nation of people, the Aboriginal people. But there are many challenges to this view point especially that of how much reparation, and what sort of compensation.
Past injustices or present suffering?
One of the questions raised in an issue like this is whether it is better to provide compensation or reparation for past deeds, which have already been done in a previous generation and cannot be changed, or whether it is better to now provide assistance to those who are suffering in their current situations and consider that as a form of moral duty.
To understand this we need to delve a little deeper into this issue and hear some differing viewpoints.
Firstly we need to understand what the best way to provide reparation. How do we judge what is the best way of giving back and how much? Jeremy Waldron states “The historic record has a fragility that consists, …in the sheer contingency of what happened in the past” (Waldron,1992,p5 )
This is saying that we can’t trace every single injustice back to the original act therefore reparation for every act would be almost impossible because it would ultimately be guess work.
In this statement he has an objection from Robert Nozick who believes it is in fact possible to address this problem by “changing the present so that it resembles how the past would have looked had the injustice not taken place” (McKenzie, 2013)
This would be a way to ultimately provide maximum reparation, but is it the correct approach? I believe this is a fairly radical approach, although it does have some merits in the fact it would be working in a positive way for indigenous people, I don’t think it is entirely the right way to deal with these issues but it is on the right track.
Waldron argues that it is based on too many unknowns. “The status of counterfactual reasoning about the exercising of human reasoning of human freedom is unclear”(Waldron 1993,p10)
Which leaves the question somewhat open about the sort of reparation that is required, but provides one clear answer to the key question. Both agree that yes, reparation to some extent is required. But how much and in what form?
Another philosopher who leans more towards Waldron’s views is Kymlicka. He is somewhat more straightforward in his assessment that property rights in particular for Aboriginals would create “massive unfairness” and also he maintains the argument “Aboriginal rights must be grounded in concerns about equality and contemporary disadvantage. (McKenzie, 2013) I agree with both these views but I don’t think they provide any active solutions.
The Solution?
So if its not handing back all of Australia’s land to the original inhabitants that is the most appropriate way to deal with past injustices, then what is?
I look at the current country I grew up in, as a white Australian. I ask myself why I never had Aboriginal friends growing up, no understanding of Aboriginal culture and why my basic understanding of Indigenous Australians is mostly 200 years old. I look at our flag, a symbol of a nation that stole a country from its original inhabitants, with no recognition of the Indigenous people at all on it. I see that Australia considered Indigenous people as less than people until only 40 years ago and I see the way that Indigenous Australians live a completely separate life to the way of life I know as an Australian. I see that the only indigenous politician I am aware of is a former Olympian and it is because of this fact of her sporting status that I know this. I see no collective power or representation of Indigenous Australians and I see non Indigenous Australians,( a culture built on a history of stealing a land and mistreating its people) still taking, taking as much out of this land as they can, with little to no regard of sharing or giving to the original inhabitants. I see a government that says lots of words about ‘closing the gap’ and bringing the living standards of non- indigenous and indigenous Australians closer together, but apart from nice words, there is no conviction, no follow through, just assimilation , and all that still remains are injustices.
As stated by Sparrow, “Continuity gives rise to responsibility on part of present generations of Australians for our history”.(McKenzie,2013). Although deeds happened in the past beyond our control, what we do now to either ignore, or rectify these issues will reflect on us in history. So if we choose to do nothing, we are contributing to the history of the mistreatment of non- indigenous Australians. And this is simply unacceptable in my opinion.
Conclusion
So what is fair? I believe that the way forward is a surrendering of some of our privileges as non- indigenous Australians. The simple fact is it was morally wrong without a doubt what has happened in the past. And it is also morally wrong without a doubt to ignore these facts and not offer some form of reparation in the present. But how much?
I think that going back to Robert Nozick’s argument is a start. I think Nozick is wrong to make the present resemble the past in every aspect. But I do think that it would be reasonable to restore some aspects of the way things should be. The things that happened in the past were out of our control and we can’t go back to changing the way things were. But we could change the way things are.
For some examples. Why not give at least 50% of political power to indigenous people? It surely would be a fair thing to do considering this is their country. Media control. 50 percent. Industry. Realestate. The list goes on. Why do we not acknowledge the indigenous people on our flag, or better still use their flag? Why is Australia still a part of the Commonwealth when it serves little purpose to any of us and serves as a constant reminder to Indigenous Australians that they are still controlled by the original invaders. These to me are fairly simple reparations that would have minimal impact on Australia as a whole. Perhaps, it would alter the way we live but I think it is our responsibility, morally to forfeit some of our privileges for the greater good. Basically a little bit goes a long way.
In closing, it is a fact that a huge injustice occurred to the Indigenous population and suffering continues to this day. There is no easy solution to such a burden of pain. I believe the only solutions are for the non- Indigenous population to take responsibility and sacrifice our own way of life to bring about an overall equality. Sacrifice is not an easy word. But it all comes down to right and wrong. We are in a position to give, in this current generation. What are we so scared to lose, that was never ours in the first place??
Bibliography
McKenzie,C.”Prof” (2013), Lecture, Historic Injustices and Indigenous Rights, Macquarie University
Poole, R. (1999). Nation and Identity.Routledge, London, pp.114-142
Waldron,J. (1992). ‘Superseding Historic Injustice’. Ethics, 103 (1), 4-28
References
Poole, R. (1999). Nation and Identity.Routledge, London, pp.114-142
Waldron,J. (1992). ‘Superseding Historic Injustice’. Ethics, 103 (1), 4-28