The Necessity of Reparation for Historic Injustices
@indo , So you don’t have a problem with JP declaring that this is “ secret government documents “ and albo is trying to hide what the real agenda is for the voice to parliament. JP just doing a bit of “ truth telling “ I just can’t work out why it isn’t front page news on every paper in Australia . Have a look at JPs bullet points indo , do you really believe this is what’s happening with the voice ? ❌They enshrine the divisive Voice in the Constitution and it’s there forever.
❌The Voice forces Australians into a “treaty”.
❌The treaty means Australians pay a percentage of the GDP – that is, a percentage of the entire nation’s economy – to the Voice … every year.
❌On top of that, Australians are forced to pay “rates/land tax/royalties” to the Voice.
This is why Albo wants you to think you’re voting on a “modest” change.”
Because when Australians find out the truth, there’s no way they’d support it, let alone enshrine it in their Constitution forever. https://web.archive.org/web/20230418132550/https://cairnsnews.org/2023/0...
Ho hum, complete bullshit
https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/email-misleads-with-secret-voice-docume...
Some people will believe anything.
Someone said something once and the person chosen by the LNP as Shadow Minister, paid taxpayer money, dresses it up as "Secret Government Documents" that Albo was "forced to reveal under FOI", then won't answer anything about her "revelations" and refers enquiries to Fair Australia who say people also said these things on social media FFS.
The reason no MSM has picked it up Supa is because it is a bullshit scare campaign that even the Murdoch papers wouldn't touch..
Indo is convinced it's a worry because someone said something in a meeting once and that reveals the truth behind the Voice.
Cairns News is a FNQ far right propaganda outfit, not a news organisation, it's IP address is located in San Francisco, and it is so linked to Bob Katter that it has a disclaimer that it is " not linked to the Katters Australia Party in any shape or form but we support the common sense KPA policies because they represent the wishes of the majority."
This is why Jacinta Price is not suitable to be a Shadow Minister. This is straight up misinformation. This is the level the No campaign has had to stoop to. Scare campaigning with no substance, based on lies and distortions, they can't advocate their case truthfully because the truth is the Voice is a benign measure that only has power to make representations. That's it, no treaty, no share of GDP, no flag change, no power to change national holidays, no power to enrich Indigenous "elites". Just have a say about decisions that affect them, which should be regarded as fair enough, but some people are just cunts, and others are so stupid or so racist they believe anything that reinforces their stupidity and racism.
Yes agreed Adam12 , I’m just gobsmacked that anyone believes this crap . I’m disappointed in JP , I was willing to give her the benefit of the doubt after her appointment but she’s shown clearly the type of politician she’s willing to be . This is just a taste of what’s to come from her and spud. The big losers ( again ) are FNP who need honest representation in parliament on all sides of parliament .
People fall for it alright.
Was at work yesterday and struck up a conversation with an indigenous fella, just gas bagging.
Next thing his female friend jumps in - "Vote No in the referendum!"
I was a bit taken aback - why do you say that I said?
Then she started.
"It's a plot by the elites, they're going to change the laws and sell off the country, it's all part of the New World Order. Australia's not a country, it's a corporation and it's listed on the New York Stock Exchange."
This sounds a bit Jacinta Price I said.
"Yeah yeah" they said. "The Voice is a hoax and it's been put together by a bunch of Jackie Jackies."
Uncle Toms, I said.
"Yeah".
But the people who were consulted for the Uluru Statement were from grass-roots indigenous organisations from across the country.
"Nah, all paid off by big business."
Now alarm bells were screaming in my ears and I regretted being so friendly. Wow, this sure is a lot of information to take in, do you guys have a website where I can read a bit more about it?
"Umm, nah, maybe we should set one up."
So it seems that at least one indigenous sovereign citizen camp (maritime law, the laws don't apply to me, right to travel etc etc) down the road from me is also all in with Jacinta Price and her bullshit.
Wow!
You should hear them Craig.
Well versed, well rehearsed, passionate and committed.
Total belief.
Pretty wild we need to vote in order to have an indigenous voice.
Will we still need welcome to country everywhere?
Burleigh "Will we still need welcome to country everywhere?"
There's two distinct things there Burls. The Welcome to Country which is undertaken by an Indigenous person welcoming people to their ancestral country, and an Acknowledgement of Country undertaken by a non Indigenous person speaking publicly. They are both gestures of respect, just words, no harm done but meaningful to many people both here and from elsewhere. I was with a mate from California once who heard a Welcome to Country and asked me what was that about, when I explained it he was really impressed, kept saying "how cool is that", said he wished they did that for the Native American tribes back home. I'd been a bit ambivalent about them prior to that, but I like them now. Simple gestures can carry weight and create positivity.
Supafreak wrote:@indo , So you don’t have a problem with JP declaring that this is “ secret government documents “ and albo is trying to hide what the real agenda is for the voice to parliament. JP just doing a bit of “ truth telling “ I just can’t work out why it isn’t front page news on every paper in Australia . Have a look at JPs bullet points indo , do you really believe this is what’s happening with the voice ? ❌They enshrine the divisive Voice in the Constitution and it’s there forever.
❌The Voice forces Australians into a “treaty”.
❌The treaty means Australians pay a percentage of the GDP – that is, a percentage of the entire nation’s economy – to the Voice … every year.
❌On top of that, Australians are forced to pay “rates/land tax/royalties” to the Voice.
This is why Albo wants you to think you’re voting on a “modest” change.”
Because when Australians find out the truth, there’s no way they’d support it, let alone enshrine it in their Constitution forever. https://web.archive.org/web/20230418132550/https://cairnsnews.org/2023/0...
It was talked about in meeting's from the FOI files, so 100% some involved do want these things.
They are just obviously smart enough to not try to push it all in one go
But do you really think the voice is the end game?
Do you really think the voice wont be used as the next step in getting a Treaty? (that further divides us like has in NZ)
You would expect also changing Australia day and no doubt push for getting rid of the flag and if Albo tries to push the Republic thing, id expect the voice will say they support the move, possibly claiming they speak for the indigenous population
I think its naive to not think the voice will not also be used as a political vehicle.
If they* could no doubt they would also go after things like “rates/land tax/royalties"
These things have all been talked about before by the gravy train and activist types
Come on mate, your being super naive if you think they* are every going to just stop at the voice and thats it, its not a conspiracy theory to suggest the voice is the stepping stone to these other things.
* "they" = city folk/so called academics/gravy train riders/activist the classic example being the 5 to 7 million dollar worth lady Marcia
Very interested to know how has a treaty divided NZ as you state @ info , maybe you know something that the overwhelming majority of NZers don’t so keen for your factual insights
GuySmiley wrote:Very interested to know how has a treaty divided NZ as you state @ info , maybe you know something that the overwhelming majority of NZers don’t so keen for your factual insights
NZ is now a hugely divided country. It wasn't 6 years ago. The Treaty of Waitangi is one of the tools used to divide us (it wasn't 6 years ago; it was uniting us): Maori/Non-Maori; rich/poor; left/right, etc etc.
We were a strong nation, proud of our mixed heritage and history, and people got along - and got on with things. Very different times now.
What do you see as the drivers of this IB?
Yeah also keen to get your thoughts IB but thought @info should first get the opportunity to inform us all of his vast wealth of knowledge about NZ, strictly from his online resurchin of course.
- A general global us vs them shift
- A govt that said lots of 'Nice' things, but did nothing except fan the flames of division ("Team of 5 million vs River of Filth").
- Some very 'creative' new interpretations of The Treaty.
- A growth in activism. e.g. upper middle class school kids and managerial class city dwellers vilifying farmers and saying that they should be shot (no joke). NZ happens to do the cleanest farming (co2 wise) in the world, so any reduction in our farming will raise emissions globally.
The list goes on, and it's a long one. These are not the days of celebrating humanity and that which unites us, sadly.
@indo , the voice does not have any policy changing powers. They can make suggestions and inform parliament how they would like area’s that directly affect them tackled . They can’t change anything mate you are extremely naive ( misinformed )if you believe this to be true but for some reason you don’t understand this , it’s up to the government of the day to make any changes . Just because someone has voiced something at a meeting 6-7 years ago doesn’t automatically make this the agenda of the voice and even if it was ( their agenda ) they don’t have the power to implement it . JP is going full RWNJ with this and you are blindly defending her for it . To accuse Albo of hiding the truth from Australians is next level nut job .
adam12 wrote:Burleigh "Will we still need welcome to country everywhere?"
There's two distinct things there Burls. The Welcome to Country which is undertaken by an Indigenous person welcoming people to their ancestral country, and an Acknowledgement of Country undertaken by a non Indigenous person speaking publicly. They are both gestures of respect, just words, no harm done but meaningful to many people both here and from elsewhere. I was with a mate from California once who heard a Welcome to Country and asked me what was that about, when I explained it he was really impressed, kept saying "how cool is that", said he wished they did that for the Native American tribes back home. I'd been a bit ambivalent about them prior to that, but I like them now. Simple gestures can carry weight and create positivity.
Who are they meaningful for now? Right idea for sure, but its not a tradition for our indigenous brothers and sisters, never has been. Is it really what they want?
Thanks for the response IB. Can't comment on the specifics (hence my question) but agree wholeheartedly with the global rise of us vs them as an issue. Cultural and idealogical polarisation and entrenchment on all sides, as writ large in the US, make conversations and dialogue difficult.
Couldn’t agree more blackers. If we were like the US in our politics, 'the Voice' would have people running scared, talking about 'what ifs' like headless turkeys, being divisive and referring to 'they' left, right and centre. There'd be dog-whistling, people arguing the semantics of terms like dog-whistling, people referring to 'the flag' and welfare gravy trains with severe frowns. A US disposition would see us shift focus to the almighty dollar. There'd be claims a Voice would clog up courts and decisions, and that lawyers will be the winners (while ignoring the solicitor-general, and quoting any lawyer that supports their carry on). There'd even be talk of conspiracies. Poor US, scared weird little political culture it has, would be focusing on political noise, a handful of personalities and a loud minority.
Thank Christ we live in Australia, where we are calm and reasonable, where mean-spiritedness is frowned upon, we do what feels right in our gut, and we're not scared of incremental change.
There's already all of that Baseix, thankfully just not in big enough numbers to gather real momentum or to be taken seriously.
But as shown by the shooting of those cops in Queensland, it needs to be closely monitored without giving it oxygen.
burleigh wrote:...but its not a tradition for our indigenous brothers and sisters, never has been. Is it really what they want?
Welcome to Country are a version of ceremony with history stretching back thousands of years. Differed between nations/tribes but it has a longstanding tradition, even if the modern context has changed slightly.
Note: Not all Indigenous people abide by Welcome to Country as they feel an imposition to smile and perform. As one well-known, and now infamous, Aboriginal activist from Wollongong said: "You weren't welcome then so why do we have to say it now?"
Acknowledgement of Country is a more recent inclusion; a sign of respect that can be performed by anyone, not just an elder. Maybe that's what you mean when you say "it's not a tradition"?
stunet wrote:burleigh wrote:...but its not a tradition for our indigenous brothers and sisters, never has been. Is it really what they want?
Welcome to Country are a version of ceremony with history stretching back thousands of years. Differed between nations/tribes but it has a longstanding tradition, even if the modern context has changed slightly.
Note: Not all Indigenous people abide by Welcome to Country as they feel an imposition to smile and perform. As one well-known, and now infamous, Aboriginal activist from Wollongong said: "You weren't welcome then so why do we have to say it now?"
Acknowledgement of Country is a more recent inclusion; a sign of respect that can be performed by anyone, not just an elder. Maybe that's what you mean when you say "it's not a tradition"?
Yeah you're right. Is it really a sign of respect though? I'm sure it makes us white folk feel great, but how to the Indigenous feel about it?
burleigh wrote:stunet wrote:burleigh wrote:...but its not a tradition for our indigenous brothers and sisters, never has been. Is it really what they want?
Welcome to Country are a version of ceremony with history stretching back thousands of years. Differed between nations/tribes but it has a longstanding tradition, even if the modern context has changed slightly.
Note: Not all Indigenous people abide by Welcome to Country as they feel an imposition to smile and perform. As one well-known, and now infamous, Aboriginal activist from Wollongong said: "You weren't welcome then so why do we have to say it now?"
Acknowledgement of Country is a more recent inclusion; a sign of respect that can be performed by anyone, not just an elder. Maybe that's what you mean when you say "it's not a tradition"?
Yeah you're right. Is it really a sign of respect though? I'm sure it makes us white folk feel great, but how to the Indigenous feel about it?
About Acknowledgement of Country? I think it was first devised around the time of Keating's Redfern speech, so at a time of great fraternity and optimism, and I imagine it would've been welcomed as a symbolic gesture of the soon to appear advances in quality of life.
They never did appear though and, for some, I guess it's become a hollow gesture. I doubt there'd be a consensus on how Indig folk feel about it. Ask around and you'd probably get a wide range of responses.
It does sometimes feel like merely a box that has to be ticked off. Went to a small music festival in Wollongong late last year and the MC gave a short but original Acknowledgement and it was the first time I'd heard one that was actually heartfelt.
blackers wrote:Thanks for the response IB. Can't comment on the specifics (hence my question) but agree wholeheartedly with the global rise of us vs them as an issue. Cultural and idealogical polarisation and entrenchment on all sides, as writ large in the US, make conversations and dialogue difficult.
X2
Indo "If they* could no doubt they would also go after things like “rates/land tax/royalties"
Royalties have been paid from mining on Indigenous land in NT since 1952
https://rse.anu.edu.au/researchpapers/CEPR/DP77.pdf
But do keep enlightening us with your vast knowledge of "they*" Indo.
Indo "You would expect also changing Australia day and no doubt push for getting rid of the flag"
"In more recent years, the organisation Ausflag has campaigned vigorously for a new flag, or rather to get rid of the Australian National Flag. This movement was given considerable exposure when Paul Keating was prime minister in the years 1993-96.
Ausflag ran a national flag design competition in 1997-98. Among its sponsors were two multinational corporations, one Japanese and one American. This reliance on foreign support attracted considerable criticism. But as with the republic, getting rid of our existing symbols and institutions is seen as more important than any resulting division in the community. One hundred flags, described as the finalists, were featured in colour on a full page of the Sydney Morning Herald on 26 January 1998"
https://www.crownedrepublic.com.au/index.php/crowned-republic/the-austra...
So were Ausflag "they*" too Indo?. Seems like "they*" have been plotting all these horrible outcomes from the Voice for a long while.
Might be a few different ways of looking at this, but wondering what thoughts were of Jacinta NP rejecting the Voice cos it classifies Australians along racial lines but then accepting a job as Shadow Minister for Indigenous Australians.
How do you square those two positions?
Her criticism of the Voice is the implication that Aboriginals are a "separate entity to the rest of Australia", yet isn't that just what her portfolio does?
FWIW I like a lot of JNP's moves but in this instance it feels to me like she's hamstrung by her own words.
GuySmiley wrote:Yeah also keen to get your thoughts IB but thought @info should first get the opportunity to inform us all of his vast wealth of knowledge about NZ, strictly from his online resurchin of course.
Ok smart arse
My sister is married too a Kiwi, they met in OZ, moved to NZ to start a family but moved back as wages low and cost of living high.
They live 5 to 10 minutes drive from me and have Kiwi family and friends over on a fairly regular basis, last time was over Xmas and the discussion came up around this kind of thing and they (half a dozen Kiwis and my Sister) all said almost exactly what Island Bay has said
I have Kiwi friends on the Goldie that i sure have said things along a similar line, while obviously many Kiwis im sure dont agree ive never met or seen online any Kiwi that has had a different view and said its been a positive, but admittedly there is obviously the factor especially in social media where we tend to move in areas where people share the same views as us.
Island Bay wrote:NZ is now a hugely divided country. It wasn't 6 years ago. The Treaty of Waitangi is one of the tools used to divide us (it wasn't 6 years ago; it was uniting us): Maori/Non-Maori; rich/poor; left/right, etc etc.
We were a strong nation, proud of our mixed heritage and history, and people got along - and got on with things. Very different times now.
@info so you have a straw poll of a handful of people that then allowed you to make the categorical/sweeping statement that the treaty of waitangi (signed in 1840) has divided NZ. I'm serious flabbergasted at your logic.
Further, you have never flown across the ditch from what you have previously said. Never been to Wellington nor the Te Papa? never been to Waitangi? or anywhere on the North or South Islands and observed firsthand how Maori men and women proudly work shoulder to shoulder with non-Maori in all and every sort of job?
info dreaming the dream ........
Indo's not replying to my post regarding his belief the Voice is going to cause royalties to be paid (started happening in 1952, still happening today, nothing to do with the Voice) or the flag to be changed (debate started by white people in the early 90's, nothing to do with the Voice). Would be interested to hear what else the Voice is going to cause that has already happened or never will because "they"are not going to stop at the Voice", "they" being "* "they" = city folk/so called academics/gravy train riders/activist the classic example being the 5 to 7 million dollar worth lady Marcia."
What does Marcia Langton's net worth have to do with the Voice other than confirm your racist envy?
Can't have an Indigenous person worth more than you? That's a reason to discredit her, what she's worth? Goose.
@indo , you said “ It was talked about in meeting's from the FOI files, so 100% some involved do want these things. “ JP says they are “ secret government documents “ ….do you understand what JPs doing here indo ? Do you also go along with her statement ? “ This is the bombshell Albo tried to hide. “ …..again do you understand what JP is doing ?
I tell you what, Guy. Indo's "sweeping statements" echo the sentiments of a heck of a lot of people over here, if not everybody.
I tried to explain earlier why the Treaty is causing division: it's the modern reinterpretations where all of a sudden Maori did not cede sovereignty to the Crown, and now own all water etc. The Treaty is our founding document, and has been proudly honoured by generations of Kiwis of all colours, but it's being weaponised. I think that's what ID was referring to. Is that worthy of lazy ad hominem attacks?
Weaponised?
For joe and jo average in their everyday life or those small subset of politically active people and suspicious of any change - real or perceived?
Yes, weaponised. When things are being changed in order to divide an otherwise healthy, egalitarian and very non-racist country, that's pretty apposite.
If things were to change in Australia to the effect that some people's votes counted more than others', and so that non-elected groups held veto right over essential infrastructure, would you find that trivial, GS? Would you belittle those that opposed such actions?
Be careful what you wish for peoples.
The only winners will be Lawyers.
Real benefits on the ground need more than political point scoring.
There are many issues to be addressed/services improved but that is unlikely to be accelerated by a Yes vote.
Too many snouts in the trough already who don't deliver.
Not belittling you IB, just trying to understand what is happening on the ground in NZ a country I love as I’ve also have found to be “ ….. healthy, egalitarian and very non-racist country ….”.
Didn't mean myself, just referring to this: "For joe and jo average in their everyday life or those small subset of politically active people and suspicious of any change - real or perceived?"
@ Guy
Im only going off what ive been told by Kiwis and what ive read online, and im only seeing more of the same from Island Bay here.
What are you basing your opposing beliefs on?
An article from a media outlet like the Guardian that confirms the view you want to believe,?
like i said im sure there are others that think its been a good thing, but no doubt it has caused a feeling of division for many.
@ adam12
Grab a ticket mate and stand in line, but like i said to Guy the other day, just cause you want my attention doesn't mean im always going to give it too you, i dont owe you an answer just because you ask it
Yes there is royalties paid on indigenous land like for mining or access, but do you think they won't be seeking more royalties and other payments in the future?
BTW. I never suggested the voice directly was going to cause more royalties to be paid, as ive clearly said it's more just a stepping stone and part of box ticking, Voice, Treaty, Get rid of Australia day, Get rid of Aussie flag, seek more types of payments like royalties .
Marcia Langton's has done extremely well from the gravy train and im sure a lot of others want a part of it, to believe a lot of this is not about money is crazy, money and power, people of all ethnicity's are always chasing both wherever they can find it, and the indigenous industry is huge its literally worth billions, those on the voice will get a say in where a lot of this money goes,(thats the power) no doubt to those they are connected with.
Even if there was some magic cure to all indigenous issue's, i doubt many would really want it as the money would dry up overnight, but hey call me a cynic
@Supafreak
Honestly i really dont like that wording i dont think its a good angle or look, id much prefer she dropped that language and angle and just say, look guys this is what ive uncovered from a FOI document, this is what they have been talking about in the past, i think it deserves attention and discussion.
And then use questions to make suggestions rather than those type of statements and language.
Like
Do you honestly think they have really dropped these ideas?
Does Albo know about this?
If so has he been hiding this from us?
It is a media article though, so we dont know how it's been edited.
Yes i know what she is doing she is playing politics it's what politicians do, and like it or not this is just as much about politics as anything else,.
I can confirm what IB is saying that NZ has changed significantly in the last few years as regards race tensions. The push from the Maori caucus within the labour party has resulted in very one sided new interpretations of the treaty. Culminating in the 3waters bill where it effectively results in a situation where 17% of the population holds 50% of the voting rights or control. That's causing huge rifts in some areas and while some are OK with it, many on the left are not OK as well. I personally don't like at all the direction our current government has taken us and in my view race relations have gone a long way backwards.
Cheers IB and PM.
Just going to post something minorly racist.. Every large male muscled out Samoan ive ever met at g-land have been loud mouth egocentric sociopathic ridiculing kooks who think they own g-land after a week trip and never stop loud mouthing their own switch footing or barrels but never seem to have any photos from any of the photogs computers full of photos of surfers who rip. Then you say quietly, sw wind might turn offshore or go glassy later on sunset to which they ridicule you to all their friends saying you know nothing about the ocean.
Never met a kind traveling Samoan in person,(never been to Samoa either though) met about 15 -16 and they were all try hard hero tough guys with loud mouths and too many tatts...My bro said "oh yeah he grew up surfing shark island and now travels by himself all over indo almost every year for the last few years for 6 months at a time and rides a bodyboard or a surfboard but knows nothing about the ocean"...
It was then that his Aussie sidekick i just met but had photos of was off him and seemed to want to know where i had been traveling and i became sort of friends with a youthful Mick Burke, a future g-land legend charger extraordinaire..friends of micks friends too due to those Samoan assholes.Forgot to send him the shots tho.
then the alpha Samoan came back and said on the boat " nusa dua will be good today", i laughed and said nusa dua is crosshore in a south westerly i could tell you where to go but im not going to...maybe try sanur if you can fight, but you dont seem to know much about the ocean or indo!" hahaha
we all laughed and he was shattered.
groundswell wrote:Just going to post something minorly racist.. Every large male muscled out Samoan ive ever met at g-land have been loud mouth egocentric sociopathic ridiculing kooks who think they own g-land after a week trip and never stop loud mouthing their own switch footing or barrels but never seem to have any photos from any of the photogs computers full of photos of surfers who rip. Then you say quietly, sw wind might turn offshore or go glassy later on sunset to which they ridicule you to all their friends saying you know nothing about the ocean.
Never met a kind traveling Samoan in person,(never been to Samoa either though) met about 15 -16 and they were all try hard hero tough guys with loud mouths and too many tatts...My bro said "oh yeah he grew up surfing shark island and now travels by himself all over indo almost every year for the last few years for 6 months at a time and rides a bodyboard or a surfboard but knows nothing about the ocean"...
It was then that his Aussie sidekick i just met but had photos of was off him and seemed to want to know where i had been traveling and i became sort of friends with a youthful Mick Burke, a future g-land legend charger extraordinaire..friends of micks friends too due to those Samoan assholes.Forgot to send him the shots tho.
then the alpha Samoan came back and said on the boat " nusa dua will be good today", i laughed and said nusa dua is crosshore in a south westerly i could tell you where to go but im not going to...maybe try sanur if you can fight, but you dont seem to know much about the ocean or indo!" hahaha
we all laughed and he was shattered.
Slightly racist?
Slightly racist i guess pretty racist and it was just one bunch..If People judged Aussies by some of the gangs or bogans ive met in Bali they would give off just as bad an impression i guess..Ive only met that bunch of samoans in all my life but they were all loud mouths judging surfers styles and talking about going switchfoot in the tower in front of everyone checking it.. etc some laughing at lesser styled photos of surfers but they had none taken of them.The one who said i didn't know much about the ocean said he gives surfers one wave/chance if they dont go well first wave he burns them or snakes them.
I never surfed with the hero and probably very racist of me to judge them all by that prick and his friends but i never saw him surf speedies, cobra or moneys the whole time i was there 3 1/2 weeks. saw him at kongs i think.Didnt see him surf tho.
Kongs is a crap wave too.
Yeah you cant judge an ethnic group on one group you have met, people bang on about how much Brazzos suck, but Ive met quite a few in Indo that are really good down to earth blokes.
In Indo some of the worst groups, ive surfed with is packs of Aussies, people just act differently in packs especially all male groups than they do if just one to three guys doing a trip together and guys are always more well behaved if a female presence among them.
Cant say ive met a Samoan surfer though, met one from Afghanistan though.
Australia’s most advantaged and disadvantaged areas - no surprise where the most disadvantaged areas are:
Woorabinda (Queensland), Cherbourg (Qld), Belyuen (NT), West Daly (NT), Yarrabah (Qld), Kowanyama (Qld), Wujal Wujal (Qld), East Arnhem (NT), Doomadgee (Qld) and Central Desert (NT).
"The socioeconomic index takes into account census data on income, education, occupation, housing, employment and family structure, among other factors, to rank an area’s advantage and disadvantage."
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/apr/27/liquid-assets-aus...
AndyM wrote:Australia’s most advantaged and disadvantaged areas - no surprise where the most disadvantaged areas are:
Woorabinda (Queensland), Cherbourg (Qld), Belyuen (NT), West Daly (NT), Yarrabah (Qld), Kowanyama (Qld), Wujal Wujal (Qld), East Arnhem (NT), Doomadgee (Qld) and Central Desert (NT)."The socioeconomic index takes into account census data on income, education, occupation, housing, employment and family structure, among other factors, to rank an area’s advantage and disadvantage."
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/apr/27/liquid-assets-aus...
Not a bad article, and seems to be based on all the aspects it should be including family structure.
Pretty much what you would expect with the influence of mining also showing up.
This is exactly how things should be determined,
I think most real/pure surfers can relate to this.
Lets get behind our indigenous brothers and sisters to restore something real in this fast changing world of shit that none of us are stoked on.
Cheers.
Maybe its different for indigenous people, but personally i think all humans have a connection to the land i think its in our DNA as humans, its just that some people are more in tune with it than others..
Ever since i was a kid, i always felt at peace and drawn to nature, the bush, a creek, the beach, coast and ocean, i was always on my bike looking to explore be it farmland or bush or a swamp or alongside the railway line.
I dont think its so much a local thing though, while i feel a connection to the land in areas ive always spent time like Phillip island, when i lived in Tassie i felt maybe even more connected to the coast, id spend so much time just walking not just beaches but reefs, points and rocky covers or sitting just taking it all in, same deal in Indo, i will walk for hours on end along coastlines and while its foreign in a sense, its also not, im just at peace and connected to something even if after hours of walking along a coastline in the middle of nowhere to some spot ive never been before.
For me while i love riding waves, i think just being in the water surrounded my nature is a lot of the attraction of surfing, i really noticed this when i surfed that Urbun surf, i was pumped for it all, but i honestly hated the whole experience it just felt so wrong on every level, the organised nature, visually, the smell, the sounds, the feel, no aspect at all had an attraction to me, because the most important aspect was missing and thats the natural environment.
I think the attraction of other things like fishing or bush walking also has something to do with something that is inside us that harks back to days where we lived in nature and hunted and fished, most of human existence has been spent in that time I think it deeply ingrained in us all. (but again some are much more in tune with it than others)
Hey Indo. I like this post. It incorporates story.
I think that's something to be embraced in all cultures and something specific to the crux of Indigenous Australia and something to be embraced.
Yeah i've sat out on that far Eastern headland at Woolamai (i think Magiclands) and there's some pretty serious energy out there.
Thanks for sharing that open minded post of your own experience.
Story is sacred.
indo-dreaming wrote:Maybe its different for indigenous people, but personally i think all humans have a connection to the land i think its in our DNA as humans, its just that some people are more in tune with it than others..
Ever since i was a kid, i always felt at peace and drawn to nature, the bush, a creek, the beach, coast and ocean, i was always on my bike looking to explore be it farmland or bush or a swamp or alongside the railway line.
I dont think its so much a local thing though, while i feel a connection to the land in areas ive always spent time like Phillip island, when i lived in Tassie i felt maybe even more connected to the coast, id spend so much time just walking not just beaches but reefs, points and rocky covers or sitting just taking it all in, same deal in Indo, i will walk for hours on end along coastlines and while its foreign in a sense, its also not, im just at peace and connected to something even if after hours of walking along a coastline in the middle of nowhere to some spot ive never been before.
For me while i love riding waves, i think just being in the water surrounded my nature is a lot of the attraction of surfing, i really noticed this when i surfed that Urbun surf, i was pumped for it all, but i honestly hated the whole experience it just felt so wrong on every level, the organised nature, visually, the smell, the sounds, the feel, no aspect at all had an attraction to me, because the most important aspect was missing and thats the natural environment.
I think the attraction of other things like fishing or bush walking also has something to do with something that is inside us that harks back to days where we lived in nature and hunted and fished, most of human existence has been spent in that time I think it deeply ingrained in us all. (but again some are much more in tune with it than others)
Good comment!
Humans are humans at the end of the day.
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