The Necessity of Reparation for Historic Injustices
Sure
Well said batfink.
batfink][quote=rooftop wrote:None of the book’s excerpts from explorers have been successfully challenged. They exist, many of them in the State Library. It’s been fact checked, it holds up. Did he get a page wrong in his references? Not really material.
Thats not really true what Sutton points out many times and what others had already pointed out for a long time before him like in the book Bitter Harvest and Dark Emu Debunked
Is Bruce just picks and chooses the quotes that he can jump to conclusion's on and join dots that aren't there, while completely ignoring the text before and after or elsewhere that completely go against his ideas.
Indo says “ They are generally poorly educated about the topic because unless Albo says it, its not true."…….. have you worked out the math yet indo ?
Still no answers i-d. What do you think of Dr Cane’s conclusions and the videos and evidence featuring all of the other experts?
Also, you comment a lot on Professor Langton, and so as you said you view and judge that sort of thing, that means that you must have a ‘fetish’ for her? You still haven’t answered the questions about your ‘fetish’, as you describe it, so, once more:
I’ve actually seen and been involved in Professor Langton’s work load. I’ve had some great discussions with her, she’s very kind, but very tough, great story. From what I’ve seen and heard, I think she can cope with the likes of disgruntled Sutton. You i-d probably know that however, as are on a first name basis with ‘Marcia’, and know a lot about her personally. Do you know her professionally, in your work educating and documenting, or socially, or both?
@Uplift
Lets get something clear, I dont have much interest engaging with you as its never been productive, you burnt all your bridges long ago, sooner or latter you will get very aggressive and go off on crazy nonsensical rants and most likely be shown the door when you push things too far and i dont have an interest in being a part of all that.
So i will try to limit my interactions with you to a very bare minimum.
Regarding Langton like i said the other day, she started out an activist gained some credibility as an academic and has clearly returning to being an activist, associating her self with fiction writers like Bruce and attacking people like Sutton just discredits her.
Regarding your videos, before i clicked it was you, i skimmed over some of them seeing what they were about as love doccos and always loved outback Aus and indigenous ones, i landed on two bits that were interesting one about 20 mins in on the last video.
Where Bill Gamage says Indigenous people might have tried agriculture after seeing torres strait island people do it, but they tried and gave up.
And somewhere else was a bit about finding, some bits of clay pots in a cave.
The videos do look interesting so i will try to give them a watch, havent had the time but am home sick today so maybe i should give one a watch.
Supafreak wrote:From the well informed @ indo -dreaming “ Not to mention there is only 24 spots said to be on the voice while there is about 250 different mobs, so even the maths doesnt add up. “ …..After I gave him the information he was whining about he didn’t bother to read and just cried again about details……….sad little man
Look its all kind of irreverent the voice itself is not the problem, its being cemented in the constitution that is the issue.
Anyway wheres you link? ...
I’ve given it to you before indo , I’m not going to bother again as I highly doubt you will read it . Best you duck duck go it for the information on how many will be representing the voice to parliament and how they are elected. You believe you are well informed but don’t even know the basics .
Again to borrow from you i-d, you seem to have a ‘fetish’ with this uplift thing too. Having a quick look around the site, it’s actually you who has threatened people on numerous occasions and you even have a standing offer of rewarding anyone that will give you personal information about a poster in this very thread that you’ve threatened with violence.
Regarding your ‘fetish’ as you put it, with Professor Langton you’ve commented about personal things, like her wealth etc.
As Dr Cane Points out, grasping the vastness and profoundness of Indigenous Australian Cultures requires, ‘a certain amount of intellectual input and alertness on behalf of the listener’. Which you obviously haven’t applied.
The videos highlight that Indigenous Australians rejected that type of agriculture in favour of a style that works with and adapts to the environment. As the record shows is much more successful. Have a look at our present environment, there are some amazing glimpses in those farming videos I posted earlier. Miles of degradation.
How will you prove that Lane made the Australian Indigenous Flag, and that as he asserts colonialism was benign and good for Indigenous Australians?
indo-dreaming wrote:More name calling, typical of the Yes camp, we even see it at the highest level, chicken little's, the No camp are Trump like, claims No voters are somehow racist etc and then they wonder why Yes poll numbers are sliding
Realistically Yes voter's fall into a few categories.
1. Your over the top la la land types that maybe really do believe these things like a voice or treaty etc would make a difference, even if there is no logical or evidence basis reasons to believe so, its just more of a hunch or something, these are your Southern raw and the Uplift types who almost have a type of fetish for anything indigenous.
2. Those who just see it and almost everything else through a political lense and will vote Yes because Albo says too. (these would be your Supa, Andys,(both) Adam types)
They are generally poorly educated about the topic because unless Albo says it, its not true.
A great example of this the other month Supa who even tried to claim LNP & Abbott supported the voice in years gone by (even when it wasn't a thing) and posted an old article on LNP supporting constitutional recognition as proof thinking he had a gotcha moment.
Unfortunately for him LNP have supported constitutional recognition for decades and Dutton made it clear earlier this year he and LNP still do, he clearly showed at that point he didn't know that this is about two very different issues, constitutional recognition and the voice an advisory body being cemented in the constitution.
To be fair it should be noted here that LNP have failed in this area, they should have been much smarter and put a referendum to the people years ago and ideally made it a seperate three part question 1. constitutional recognition in the preamble, 2. Changing Aust day & 3. Treaty.
Which would mean we wouldn't be here doing all this, basic constitutional recognition in the preamble would have easily gotten up, and the other two issues would have been put to rest. (and highly likely not got up)
3. Those that are more worried about how others will perceive them, or even how Australia will be perceived by the world, somebody said this the other month here on why they are voting Yes even though they agreed with aspects of the No camp, this view is kind of sad, because its such a silly thing to base your vote on, and those that support racial division technically a form of racism shouldn't be viewed in a positive light.
4. Those that might not be overly political or just true swing voters and just havent investigated the pros and cons and voting based more on a feel good vibe or just on very vague or often misleading information they might have happened to hear in the media from the yes camp, generally from Albo or Lidia.
Id expect these make up the majority of Yes votes, especially younger, they often dont know the history of failed federal advisory bodies and think this is new, so say whats the harm in trying or often do believe indigenous people dont have a voice when that is completely untrue, with already established advisory bodies, and a long list of of groups, organisations, bodies that consult with governments at all levels from councils to state to federal, not to mention an over representation of indigenous people in parliament (a good thing) and a very diverse one too and of course a minister for indigenous Australians.
Sadly these are the people that Albo is hoping will get the Voice over the line, and why he is very vague on information or plays things down or tries to use peoples good will with constitutional recognition to drag the voice through (hence why its not a two part question)
Thank fully the longer this drags out the more people do come across more information on what this really means for Australia and they do become more informed and start questioning things, which only works in the No camps favour, especially when Albo and Lidia cant or wont answer questions. (which makes people very wary)
BTW. The idea anyone on the NO camp doesn't care about fellow Australians is very silly, we want all Australians to be treated equally and fairly and as one and not divided by ethnic backgrounds.
Most of us including myself also support constitutional recognition in the preamble, we are also not opposed to the voice or any advisory body being legislated in policy, personally if the yes vote fails ti get up, i think its important that the Voice is legislated in policy, so we can all see that it isn't some magical solution and the right choice was made.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.....
@ Supa
Oh okay i remember your link that was quite a while ago..hmmm im sure im replied to it, maybe i started but got distracted, i remember it didn't really answer the questions it was still very vague.
It didnt (and nobody can say) how the process of being elected will be decided just says communities will decide.
Albo's go to line on everything is "It will be decided after the referendum" nah mate that doesn't cut it, we want to know before not after, those involved have literally had years and years to work every detail out and have a proper and clear answer to any and every question.
To be done properly it has to be a proper democratic process like an election and then how do you decide who can vote?
Self ID only is very problematic
And who over sees an election to ensure its done fairly without corruption etc?
The only people who can realistically do this is the electoral commission.
In regard to numbers Ive read the numbers and like i said the maths doesn't add up my understanding is there is at least about 250 indigenous groups but:
"The National Voice will have 24 members: two from each state and territory, five from remote communities, two from the Torres Strait, and one representing Torres Strait Islanders living on the mainland.
There must be a gender balance amongst the members; individuals will serve four-year terms (and can only serve twice), and two full-time co-chairs will be elected by the members themselves.
The members will be elected by the Local and Regional Voices.
Let's take a look at them.
There will be 35 local Voices representing districts around the country" (soource SBS)
If they were going to be smart about this, why not concentrate on communities that actually have the greatest issues?
Then you might come up with 50 communities to focus on and could have 50 members and have proper representation.
But of course its not really about closing the gap, it's about much more.
BTW. From that SBS piece you might also assume from this line "The members will be elected by the Local and Regional Voices." if so even worse as it wont be a proper democratic process???
And the big question is why are we even having this conversation, if they admit they already have Local and Regional Voices.????
I thought their whole argument was they dont?
Once again indo you haven’t looked close enough, the information is there if you look and read it . Best you don’t accuse everyone of being uninformed when you don’t know the basics .
Well SBS and everyone else also dont seem to know you should tell them your secret info Albo has shared with you
Dutton Says He’ll Need More Detail Before He Can Support The Matildas https://theshovel.com.au/2023/08/08/dutton-says-hell-need-more-detail-be...
Supafreak wrote:Dutton Says He’ll Need More Detail Before He Can Support The Matildas https://theshovel.com.au/2023/08/08/dutton-says-hell-need-more-detail-be...
haha
Brilliant!!
Well I am not going to argue with a PHD graduate of the University of Newscorpe with majors in political science, Indigenous culture, and who knows what else. @indo, you read like a LNP staffer spruiking talking points without and original thought ever. Hope U are getting paid for some of the utter nonsense you write.
Think I will take the advice of Mark Twain....
"without and original thought ever"
Okay show me where there is ideas on helping solving indigenous problems like the ones ive suggested in reply to Guy yesterday?
They probably exist but those post are my own thought's, but if you know where others suggest these ideas id be interested in reading them.
Bud1 wrote:How will you prove that Lane made the Australian Indigenous Flag, and that as he asserts colonialism was benign and good for Indigenous Australians?
Where on earth does this flag thing come from??
sypkan wrote:haven't watched the vids Bud1, but preety sure I caught some of that series on sbs or abc way back, might have another look
not exactly sure which conclusion you are referring to... but the bits I've read seem a bit 'special interest' and idealistic to be honest...
idealistic and special interest are fine, and even neccessary... but...
Listened to that guy and watched a good chunk of the videos today, there is some interesting bits in there but yeah its very special interest, im not exactly sure what Uplifts point is though???
awww god albo...
really? ...that's how you're going to deal with this?
someone get this man some new advisors!
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has called Australians that want more details about the Voice to Parliament QANON style conspiracy theorists. The outburst from the embattled PM came after a question about an FOI release that showed the alleged full contents of the Uluru Statement… pic.twitter.com/wBUH5cnvN9
— Rukshan Fernando (@therealrukshan) August 8, 2023
Sypkan promoting a grifter now, who would have thunked that?
Supafreak wrote:Dutton Says He’ll Need More Detail Before He Can Support The Matildas https://theshovel.com.au/2023/08/08/dutton-says-hell-need-more-detail-be...
Haha...
The uplift fetish is growing i-d.
You can’t remember the flag thing? Seriously? That extremely long post that you made a point of copying, pasting and exclaiming that you are so interested in? Even thanking the poster? When you hysterically let everyone know that your mission in life is that you must ‘call out bullshit when you see it’. But then you constantly demonstrate that you have a history of being shallow, saying one thing and quickly back peddling, twisting peoples words, and so on. And struggling with information. As well as ignoring and opposing the lines cameras. It must be hard with such a limited memory and attention span.
it really don't matter who runs the vid, the tape doesn't lie...
you really think writing off people as cospiracy theorists is a wise political move?
its the corona files all over again... we've all seen how well that shit aged...
the corona files with labor's woeful ministry of truth policy idea ticking away in the background
dumbest tactic ever
he just dismissed and belittled anyone who's smart enough to use google to check up on his deceitful words...
not real bright
Still no answers either sykpan? How about you, can you remember if you watched the videos yet? Can you remember what was in them? You were in a such a muddle about them. What do you think of Dr Canes conclusions, and all the other international and national experts in the videos?
You seem to be getting a bit hysterical, how’s the hole digging going? At least you’re an expert at being shallow too, like your adviser i-d.
the only hole is the one avoiding you big buds
but you keep asking...
so, i made a point of trying to catch the footprints series when it first aired years ago, however I missed it as much as I caught it, but it was still very good
I went and listened to your little doctor conclusion though, it was all interesting and fair enough... but it was also a bit 'special interest' and idealistic... as I said...
look big buds, I'm more than happy you have found the church you've been looking for... and all the zeal and stuff that comes with that...
but sorry, he isn't the guru I'm looking for
I don’t understand you ever sypkan. Incessant fence sitter. You’re not looking for a guru. You are the guru.
Fence paling up your arse and all.
it's called not being a partisan fuckwit
That was quick sykpan, your memory has suddenly improved so dramatically! Why didn’t you just say that in the first place? When you said you couldn’t remember or, weren’t even sure what they were about. After you now say that you actually made a point of watching them? You are coming across as shallow, and not too bright.
Dr Cane features in the second video and wrote the book ‘First Footprints’. So what do you think of the videos findings and where all of the other international and national experts highlight and prove how successful and brilliant Indigenous Australians were? After you made such a point of watching them, although you weren’t sure if you even did or what they were even about?
Why do you consider Dr Cane little? And his conclusions idealistic?
1. wasn't exactly sure it was same series, now I am, pretty simple
2. I have no doubt how brilliant indigenous australians were/are
Im just not sure how wise it is to lock up the whole of the country as some potential preserved religious site, because some guy, somewhere, 'may' have pondered a serpant or something, in some dried up dusty creek bed out back in the pilbara 50 000 years ago...
no one else is doing that
pretty sure other places have similar 'potential' sites...
it is good that we have the opportunity to consider such things...
but really?
I don't particularly want to farm or mine it either...
but the religious nuttery some bring to such issues doesn't really overly help that cause either from my perspective
but you do you...
Cockhead. Always have been always will be.
Memory suddenly flooding back, as I said sykpan.
‘Im just not sure how wise it is to lock up the whole of the country as some potential preserved religious site’
This shows that are missing the point totally. Indigenous Australians weren’t and aren’t ‘preserved’ or ‘preserving’. The opposite, they were the masters at accepting changes for the benefit of all, and working with and nurturing the planet, for the benefit of all. Perhaps rewatch them but with much more intellectual input and alertness, as Dr Cane suggests.
‘But the religious nuttery some bring to such issues doesn’t really overly help that cause either from my perspective’
So you view choosing, creating and fostering such an enduring system, that dealt with all it means to be human, that is proven to have ensured overall equality and harmony, for such a diverse number of Cultures, whilst nurturing the environment, that worked for 60,000 years as ‘religious nuttery’?
All while you are terrified of and so zealous about not changing a constitution, but ‘preserving’ it, a constitution ‘humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God’, whilst being ruled by leaders bound by the constitution, that you relentlessly whinge about, who, ‘swear’ that they ‘will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Victoria, Her heirs and successors according to law. SO HELP ME GOD!‘
That’s actually ironically hilarious.
Not so hilarious is the result, international wars, inequality and mind bending, ever worsening environmental degradation. Yep keep running with that one sykpan.
Why do you consider Dr Cane ‘little’ as you say?
Seriously, you are looking less bright and more shallow by the second.
no, it's you that brings the religious nuttery, i imagine dr cane to be quite reasonable
dude, we're back on your utopia argument again, which is fine, but you just seem to have no capacity to explain how it will all work in the modern context...
none whatsoever
the constitution... pffffff.... i said no such thing...
keep chatting with yourself big buds
or maybe rooftop... you came to a pretty abrupt halt there... very unusual...
pepper him with questions maybe, rather than wasting so many paragraphs trying to character assasinate me
we'd all learn something then...
PKKP Land and Heritage Manager Dr Jordan Ralph said the decision to repeal the new laws was a "backwards step":
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-08/pkkp-land-and-heritage-manager-dr...
(how many cameras does it take to capture a 1-on-1 interview? holy smokes : )
GuySmiley wrote:Sypkan promoting a grifter now, who would have thunked that?
Grifter basically just means someone trying to con money out of people without providing anything of value in return generally through being deceitful
While i dont agree because i think Avi provides a good service that other media doesn't I can accept others view to call Avi a Grifter because he does ask for money a lot and gets involved in legal cases that he expects everyone to fund (but again people love this as see it as him fighting for them)
And its fair to call endless activist groups or even so call charities these days grifters as they constantly ask for money but often the money that goes to the cause is tiny while those running it do very well.
BLM is the best example of this and the biggest grift in history getting hundreds of million, with little of it doing anything for their causes while those who ran it bought up millions in properties or employed friends or family on crazy money for trivial position's.
But Im not sure how Rushkun is a grifter its hard to even see where he is making money?
He doesn't seem to ask for any money or even have a Patron type thing that even lots of left wing political You tubers have and push, and generally adverts in his videos are super rare just standard ones at the start of a video and no product promotions in his videos.
All that said he still provides a product that he would put much time into so has every right to make money like many other Youtubers like your Jordies etc
Lets not forget he started because he is a wedding photographer and during Covid couldn't work, so instead of sitting on his arse at home feeling sorry for himself he decided to get out there with his equipment and start documenting things often live streaming whole demonstration's providing an insight we would never have otherwise.
Again its hard to see where or how he was making money from this, maybe he sold some footage to news networks?
But its fair to say he would have spent thousand's of hours basically working for free, even if he now started really pushing to bring in money through ads or patron etc it would take a veery long time for him to just break even.
He is only a grifter(just a name call) in your eyes, because you dont like that he has views you oppose and gets therm out there and when it comes from a person of colour these views are even more powerful because they dont conform with the idea of how you or others think a person of colour should think.
Now that I’ve pulled you out of your shell, and refreshed your memory, you are very chatty this morning sykpan!
Dr Cane addressed your ‘utopia’ obsession sykpan. Its part of the myth and stereotype driving you to being fearful and hysterical about Indigenous Cultures locking you into this ‘preserved’ state. Have another listen, rewatch the videos that you now suddenly remember so much about, but be more present and apply more intellectual input and alertness.
So you’re all for changing the constitution and giving Indigenous Australians a voice then?
‘but you just seem to have no capacity to explain how it will all work in the modern context..
none whatsoever.’
The whole idea is to give Indigenous Australians a say, and self determination. Be more present, apply more intellectual input and alertness.
Are you Peter Dutton? You are aren’t you? Here, back to your hysterical ‘digging’.
https://theshovel.com.au/2023/08/08/dutton-says-hell-need-more-detail-be...
You are doing a stellar job of character assassinating yourself. At least you are trying to control your abusive outbursts with me, not doing so well with others though.
Now that you are imagining Dr Cane as ‘being quite reasonable’, considering his expertise and experience, what do you think of his conclusions and do you think that there is anything that we can learn from them, and utilize?
sypkan wrote:awww god albo...
really? ...that's how you're going to deal with this?
someone get this man some new advisors!
https://twitter.com/therealrukshan/status/1688781051219640321
Its kind of crazy that we are at this point where we really dont know if the Uluru statement is one page or much more.
Even before all this coming up i was under the understanding the one page was more the condensed thing, but obviously wasn't the detail.
There seems to be decent evidence its not just minutes or notes from the creation of the Uluru statement but more than that, its going to be interesting where this goes.
Edit: i went back to that podcast, they used the word report so assume different.
indo-dreaming wrote:sypkan wrote:awww god albo...
really? ...that's how you're going to deal with this?
someone get this man some new advisors!
https://twitter.com/therealrukshan/status/1688781051219640321
Its kind of crazy that we are at this point where we really dont know if the Uluru statement is one page or much more.
Even before all this coming up i was under the understanding the one page was more the condensed thing, but obviously wasn't the detail.
I listened to a left wing 7am podcast the other day and the indigenous guy was explaining how his mother wasn't convinced but went and read all the pages in full which he was blown away by as was a lot to take in, she then agreed on it all. (i will try to find the episode)
There seems to be decent evidence its not just minutes or notes from the creation of the Uluru statement but more than that.
Is that the Peta Credlin that admitted that the whole carbon tax campaign was a lie and done for purely political bastardry?
And here is a lefty source.
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/carbon-tax-just-brutal-politics-cred...
And here is a deep fake audio recording of her admitting it. I'm sure she would never dream of using the same tactics regarding the voice!
https://www.buzzfeed.com/markdistefano/whats-the-point-of-australian-pol...
I thought so, it’s so obvious now, you and sykpan are Peter Dutton i-d!
https://theshovel.com.au/2023/08/08/dutton-says-hell-need-more-detail-be...
andy-mac wrote:indo-dreaming wrote:sypkan wrote:awww god albo...
really? ...that's how you're going to deal with this?
someone get this man some new advisors!
https://twitter.com/therealrukshan/status/1688781051219640321
Its kind of crazy that we are at this point where we really dont know if the Uluru statement is one page or much more.
Even before all this coming up i was under the understanding the one page was more the condensed thing, but obviously wasn't the detail.
I listened to a left wing 7am podcast the other day and the indigenous guy was explaining how his mother wasn't convinced but went and read all the pages in full which he was blown away by as was a lot to take in, she then agreed on it all. (i will try to find the episode)
There seems to be decent evidence its not just minutes or notes from the creation of the Uluru statement but more than that.
Is that the Peta Credlin that admitted that the whole carbon tax campaign was a lie and done for purely political bastardry?
And here is a lefty source.
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/carbon-tax-just-brutal-politics-cred...
And here is a deep fake audio recording of her admitting it. I'm sure she would never dream of using the same tactics regarding the voice!
https://www.buzzfeed.com/markdistefano/whats-the-point-of-australian-pol...
If its just her word then yeah okay, but she seems to bring decent evidence in this video that aren't her words and are words of important people/organizations involved
There is obviously much more documents/pages involved in the Uluru statement the question is what part do they play in things????
Albo never hosed down the WA Heritage Back Flip...
Dutto dragged the cat outta the bag...
Dutto : "In this case the harm can be Undone...but that's not the case with the Voice!"
You'd all be stuck with Albo's Voice for Eternity...
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-08/roger-cook-repeals-aboriginal-cul...
Back roads...
MSM : PM was losing his Voice so he told Cooky to bury the Cave art...matter's not...mud is sticking!
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-06/was-wa-cultural-heritage-act-cann...
[L] Yes Voter : "Thank God! We were praying for an ALP Stolen Generation Crisis as a distraction!"
PKKP are now demanding Albo step up & override Capt Cook to mandate Nat Heritage LAW.
https://nit.com.au/07-08-2023/7108/pkkp-threatens-to-go-solo-after-wa-cu...
Pretty sure tbb & crew already predicted that inevitable outcome.
Garma VIP DJ Albo : "Our Dreamtime Reffo will set out to repeal evil Capt Cook's Stolen Heritage act!"
You cannot make this shit up people...it is exactly how it reads...ALP keep spearing their two left feet!
Is Bud1 Hutchy19?
Are you Peter Dutton as well gsco?
What do you think of Dr Cane’s conclusions and the conclusions and evidence of all the national and international experts in the videos gsco?
gsco wrote:Is Bud1 Hutchy19?
No Hutchy was a conservative yeah,?
This one is very different a very long time Swellnet poster that has had all kinds of names previously Uplift, Herc, Cryptoknight, Oh he used his real name too.
Old gym junkie fella from SA, has a habit of repeating himself or points in every post, can get extremely aggressive, almost always goes out in a blaze of fire, not to be seen until a year or two latter. (assume gets bans but thats between him and Swellnet)
My advice either just ignore him or if you feel like a shit fight that goes no where engage with him, but once you do he will follow you around forever as you can see me and Sypkan made the mistake in the past of engaging with him.
There you go gsco, you can relax and focus on Dr Canes interview and the videos.
Well, unless you are on I-d’s hit list. As you no doubt would have seen, he offers rewards to anyone on the site that will give him the personal information that he needs to find and assault people. He happily admits that he is actively pursuing a poster as you post gsco.
Oh yeah and i forgot one important aspect, he will take any previous words you have said and twist them often just that little bit to suit his narrative, for example above, ive always been quite clear my intent doesnt involved assault or violence.
Dutton bypassed Indigenous community safety for grants in Coalition seats https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/dutton-bypassed-indigenous-crime...
That’s not true, and you also make it clear i-d that you are very handy, slap happy with the delete button.
But anyway now that you’ve made your intent and personal code of conduct clear, you’ll no doubt be swamped with posters as you promise to reward them for offering up personal information about those on your hit list.
fucken hell you guys go round and round in circles, same shit, every single day
Why?
This document details the records of first nations people regional meetings and referendum dialogue that informed the eventual Uluru statement from the heart
https://www.niaa.gov.au/sites/default/files/foi-log/foi-2223-016.pdf
It summarises the many concerns of the participants and their hopes and ambitions for the future. It does so at a level of detail that helps one understand what may be the motivations and outcomes, that will be underpinning The Voice in practice, from the perspective and words of current and future leaders of The Voice far more than the one page or 26 page summaries can do.
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