The Necessity of Reparation for Historic Injustices
Supafreak wrote:https://www.history.com/news/dna-study-finds-aboriginal-australians-worl.... DNA Study Finds Aboriginal Australians World’s Oldest Civilization
Supafreak. Hi, thanks, very interesting,AW.
Supafreak wrote:https://www.history.com/news/dna-study-finds-aboriginal-australians-worl.... DNA Study Finds Aboriginal Australians World’s Oldest Civilization
nice - cheers Supa, interesting read.
basesix wrote:Supafreak wrote:https://www.history.com/news/dna-study-finds-aboriginal-australians-worl.... DNA Study Finds Aboriginal Australians World’s Oldest Civilization
nice - cheers Supa, interesting read.
+1
Great link supa.
Interesting when contrasted against um… the assumption that ‘there’s only a few scenarios’ ;)
“1. Albo really didnt know the USFTH was more than one page and never read the rest and is telling the truth, this is pretty much impossible to believe, but if true should be of real concern to all Australian's.
2. Albo really didnt know the USFTH was more than one page and once talk came up about the other pages he read them, and just lied he hasnt read them for some reason, maybe he doesn't want to discuss whats in the other pages.
3. Albo knew long ago there was 25 other pages and read them long ago, but was hoping that they never become an issue.
IMHO number three is the most likely scenario, i think coming into things he thought poll numbers support would stay as high as what they were this time last year, and he could just coast through keeping things as simple and detail free as possible and things like this wouldn't really matter.”
It’s true… ‘Albo’ is not interesting.
And talk is cheap ;)
https://m.
&pp=ygUmZGF2aWQgdHVhIHZzIHNoYW5lIGNhbWVyb24gbmVrIG1pbnV0ZSA%3D
Jelly Flater wrote:Great link supa.
Interesting when contrasted against um… the assumption that ‘there’s only a few scenarios’ ;)
“1. Albo really didnt know the USFTH was more than one page and never read the rest and is telling the truth, this is pretty much impossible to believe, but if true should be of real concern to all Australian's.
2. Albo really didnt know the USFTH was more than one page and once talk came up about the other pages he read them, and just lied he hasnt read them for some reason, maybe he doesn't want to discuss whats in the other pages.
3. Albo knew long ago there was 25 other pages and read them long ago, but was hoping that they never become an issue.
IMHO number three is the most likely scenario, i think coming into things he thought poll numbers support would stay as high as what they were this time last year, and he could just coast through keeping things as simple and detail free as possible and things like this wouldn't really matter.”
Oh great.
Biggest social/political issue of the year V's a tit bit article that creates some Swellnet arse patting.
BTW. Quite happy to hear a fourth or fifth scenario, but it doesn't seem like you have one?????
You skipped past them. Listening isn’t your strong point…
4. ‘Albo’ is not interesting.
5. Talk is cheap ;)
Hahahaha.
One of the greatest mysteries of humankind. Dozens of non-Aussie authors publicly deploring its lack of social traction and engagement. How did Aboriginal people get to Aus, when and how.. clearly before the big, recent migrations from Africa, during the 20,000 - 10,000 years ago ice ages.. was it a flotilla of dreamers, lost raft fishermen? The genetic diversity means more than a single party, yet they can't have stopped long on islands and established colonies, as the genetic diversification to do so, would require a crew of hundreds.
I've read several books with these questions at the core or in passing, especially by interested overseas writers (like Bill Bryson who is just an enthusiast of all things), and I'm just an average shmoe. Imagine how average you'd have to be to find such things tit-bits..
This DNA article was just another piece in a puzzle that is fascinating.
Supafreak wrote:https://www.history.com/news/dna-study-finds-aboriginal-australians-worl.... DNA Study Finds Aboriginal Australians World’s Oldest Civilization
Er, I believe the expression is "tidbits".
"Tit bits" carries a whole other meaning, not really relevant to the discussion here, but an interesting topic nevertheless.
adam12 wrote:Er, I believe the expression is "tidbits".
"Tit bits" carries a whole other meaning, not really relevant to the discussion here, but an interesting topic nevertheless.
Seriously dude why do you bother?
You dont make yourself look smart picking on peoples spelling or grammar, you just come over as that elitist wanker that looks down on people thinking you are somehow better than them.
Anyway
Definition of 'titbit'
Word Frequency
titbit
COUNTABLE NOUN
You can refer to a small piece of information about someone's private affairs as a titbit, especially when it is interesting and shocking."
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/titbit
titbit
noun [ C ] UK
UK /ˈtɪt.bɪt/ US
a small piece of interesting information, or a small dish of pleasant-tasting food:
Our guide gave us some interesting titbits about the history of the castle.
This magazine is full of juicy titbits (= small pieces of interesting information, especially about other people's private lives).
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/titbit
titbit
noun
tit·bit ˈtit-ˌbit
less common variant of TIDBIT
1
: a choice morsel of food
2
: a choice or pleasing bit (as of information)
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/titbit
But even if i was wrong, who gives a shit, it's just a word on a forum, as long as people understand the point its all that matters.
#Karen overload
#feisty info
Play the ball not the players. Good comment.
1. How many people know what the 1967 was about. Probably lots. It is interesting.
2. How many people know what particular bozos were in 'power' or 'opposition' or 'vocal' when they implemented OUR 1967 referendum. Probably not many. The bozos are boring. Forgotten. They are not the ball.
@Indo Dreaming,
I deleted the Albo meme thing. Go post that small-minded shit somewhere else.
Fair enough, once that stuff starts it does tend to get into a back and forth silly brainless meme war and derail decent conversation, not that there isnt a lot of one line off topic pointless post to skim through though.
BTW. It was factually correct though pointing out the contradictions of his own words at two different times.
Perhaps Albo isn't as stupid as he looks, best case of diversion politics since reds under the beds, and the media and the plebs have fallen for it hook line and sinker.
His main goals in life are to double our population, go down in history as a progressive labor leader with vision, and of course to get a selfie with the Kardashians.
[quote=indo-dreaming]BTW. It was factually correct though pointing out the contradictions of his own words at two different times.[/quote]
Maybe. That assumes the person making the meme knows the full context of each statement, and I don't think they do. Like Valvoline, words aren't words. Every utterance is defined by its surroundings and sentiment to mean various things, meaning there's a degree of interpretation.
If people don't understand this then they've skipped any schooling after Year 6 (or perhaps suffer from shades of autism).
The role of good journalism, or even a good media consumer, is to parse that information and read it in the way it was intended.
To willingly interpret it another way is disengenuous and shallow gotcha nonsense.
stunet wrote:@Indo Dreaming,
I deleted the Albo meme thing. Go post that small-minded shit somewhere else.
…. and in a moment of frustration @stunet sets a precedent for the ages by starting to delete @info’s daily liberal dose of small-minded shit.
“And the coloured girls go
Doo do doo do doo do doo ….”
GuySmiley wrote:stunet wrote:@Indo Dreaming,
I deleted the Albo meme thing. Go post that small-minded shit somewhere else.
…. and in a moment of frustration @stunet sets a precedent for the ages by starting to delete @info’s daily liberal dose of small-minded shit.
“And the coloured girls go
Doo do doo do doo do doo ….”
We're all prone to small-minded shit from time to time, you included. That one got my goat because it directly carried on from what I wrote yesterday.
I don't share ID's political view, but he's generally open-minded and not hidebound by ideology, good traits to have whatever stripes you are, but that meme and post was petty.
Ha ha Guy, dont get too excited Stunets no fascist and is smart enough to not want a highly censored echo chamber.
Yeah sure his own politics might have been a factor in deleting the post after all he is human, but i also get that those types of post especially memes can send a thread into a down ward spiral.
Its very unlikely this thread wont go off the rails before we vote, but i dont want to be the one who sends it there.
Edit: wrote this before i saw Stunets post
Indo "Seriously dude why do you bother?
You dont make yourself look smart picking on peoples spelling or grammar, you just come over as that elitist wanker that looks down on people thinking you are somehow better than them."
It was a fucken joke you dipshit.
Jeez.
Did I mention you?
You weren't the only one to say it.
You must be fun to hang with at parties, the nuffy who takes himself way too seriously.
And unless we are in the UK, it was a technically correct joke, maybe not that funny, but correct.
Indo-freeloading.
“ …. he's generally open-minded and not hidebound by ideology, …”
Say whattt?
I’m going to have to give up drugs immediately!!
And that’s entertainment!!
More drugs Guy much more.
Keeping the subject of the thread in mind, keeping on the ball, keeping an open mind, this is totally pertinant to this absolutely crucial topic. Just like you’d be mega carefull about taking a known, repeat offender pedophile’s views regarding child protection on board discussing child care, or about protecting and supporting children, especially if they wilfully show zero remorse, this sort of thing should ring alarm bells, when it cuts loose in any subject involving racism, stereotyping, misogyny, and right from wrong.
'BTW. i saw a women at the market in Dandenong the other day with a burqua or maybe it was a Niqab it was kind of in-between couldn't see her face though, i was waiting for my missus so did a bit of people watching with her, to be honest she didn't look oppressed like the full black robe ones I've seen in Indonesia that look like servants of the men, actually looked the opposite in this case she had her little middle eastern guy following her around and from the body language she looked like she was wearing the pants so to speak.
It was quite crowded and was thinking maybe i will accidentally go bump into her and say sorry etc and see if she will interact with me and see the reaction of her husband, but by that time my missus had finished.'
https://www.swellnet.com/forums/politico/307178?page=63
‘Hey, would ya like to stalk my family and bump into them, I know where you’ll be welcomed with open arms and even protected as you go about your brilliant(sic), open minded(sic) educating and documenting ‘work’’.
Taking into account that lot, in yet another stunning outburst of awareness, but in reality to play games and bolster his fucked up (naar, iz nort, iz juzz a opern myndud outlook), he simultaneously drivvles this, in relation to another, ‘by the way IMHO google skim’.
‘especially if i came up against challenges or disadvantages that true indigenous people face like being judged on their appearance and stereotypes‘
'I dont agree Floyd I'm sure there is many many many true indigenous people that feel as i do and think it's a joke that some white fella thinks he is indigenous because their great great grandmother was indigenous, id sure feel that way if i was a true indigenous person’
'I can't believe nobody came up with the old line.
"It doesn't matter how much milk you put in coffee it's still coffee"
Which well is not true at some point it just becomes coffee flavour milk.'
https://www.swellnet.com/forums/politico/352734?page=1
So there, all you despicable people that that’s aimed at…
‘Stop pickin’ orn me an’ bringin’ shite up… its protected here anyway.’
But na, why be petty, its just more ever so lovely, ever so comfortable, some on here have even said ever so ‘sweet’ outbursts. Once again, protected, encouraged, coz,
‘By the way… context!!! IMHO’
And after all he, ‘by the way, was juzz bein’ opern mynded an’ sweet… agin’! IMHO’
Carry on swillnuttlin’.
While its nice that everyone seems to want to talk about me, id much prefer to talk about the topic of the thread.
I guess there is all kinds of views out there, reasons for Yes, reason's for No.
"Arnhem Land clan leader Reverend Djiniyini Gondarra plans to vote No to a Voice as treaty quest continues"
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-17/arnhem-land-clan-leader-djiniyini...
indo-dreaming wrote:While its nice that everyone seems to want to talk about me, id much prefer to talk about the topic of the thread.
I guess there is all kinds of views out there, reasons for Yes, reason's for No.
"Arnhem Land clan leader Reverend Djiniyini Gondarra plans to vote No to a Voice as treaty quest continues"
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-17/arnhem-land-clan-leader-djiniyini...
Oh, my God, he's found another one.
"Quick, better re-post this on that website I don't actually subscribe to yet use to vent my anti-FNP ideology on day and night, that'll show 'em."
And as the "elitist wanker" in residence, I would point out there are only five spelling and grammatical errors in the two sentences he used. Pretty good effort. D+.
Haha…
Maybe it’s the one eyed thingy that’s easy to relate to ;)
- ‘Its very unlikely this thread wont go off the rails before we vote, but i dont want to be the one who sends it there.’
Farkkk. I guess sometimes you get what u don’t want ay ;)
- not really sure how things can be properly seen with one eye closed…
Is there an actual ability to see ‘all kinds of views’ clearly, let alone much at all ? Probly allows a narrow viewpoint… if that’s what you’re into ;)
https://m.
&pp=ygUNZ2V0IHNvbWUgaGVscA%3D%3D
Jelly Flater wrote:Haha…
Maybe it’s the one eyed thingy that’s easy to relate to ;)
Slow clap
Its interesting to see the patterns formed by posters here through this thread
A lot just add nothing to the conversation and are more concerned about dissing me or just posting totally non relevant videos trying to be edgy or play up to the boys like we did at 13
While i dont agree with Supafreak on anything and he can still give it at times, I think he deserves credit in that he does actually post articles or thoughts that are on topic.
Looking through the past pages basesix post are also relevant the music stuff.
Southern raw is also capable as you will see earlier in this thread as is AlfredWallace
Theres is the other odd one like Frog or Seeds, Sypkan that pop in and keep on topic.
Uplift tried to start with some substance with those interesting videos but as predicted slipped back into old habits pretty quickly.
And of course truebluebasher is a facts and figures man
Another flat out day coming up Indo? ;-0
34:45
big 'white' brother.. their rules? their rules.
36:40, the progress from wholesale bastardry in 1963, to making a doco like this in 1985.
Makes you think we should have come a lot further in the 40 years since..
basesix wrote:34:45
big 'white' brother.. their rules? their rules.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzjW6RjQQi4
36:40, the progress from wholesale bastardry in 1963, to making a doco like this in 1985.
Makes you think we should have come a lot further in the 40 years since..
Thanks basesix , very educational , easy to see who the real savages were .
“ A lot just add nothing to the conversation …”.
Yet even more narcissism.
@Guy Smiley , I value your contribution to the thread . Having worked in the industry you have first hand experience and knowledge of what’s been given and taken away with changing governments . You have seen what was working and what has failed . Keep it coming .
keeping up with the posts here and on other sites, mostly after looking at friendly jordies opinion pieces there are vids from all and sundry on the page, not from him, who cracks me up, good on em.
and i look at the voice vids then read the comments section, mostly nay voters who give their reasons, i suggest the yes mob read them too.
just read a piece from "checkmate"... @ABC.FactCheck (18/8/2023) about how the yes mob have dissed mundine etc etc, read the article you will find out what i mean.
abc found out that yes campaign had misquoted him and edited his speach deliberately and thereby make him out to be a hypocrite, which he was not.
they (yes) actually called him a hypocrite based on the lies (propaganda) put out by the voice article, it was a deliberate slur on his integrity by malicous editing of his speach.
the only good thing i got from abc fact check was that at least there are some ppl left at abc who are still willing to be impartial and call out the liars and decievers in power.
abc are loseing respect in the community..."the ministry of truth" george orwell 1984.
Yes that’s a telling video. Professor Marcia Langton has been in the trenches for so long. John Pilger has too and now he tells the truth about Julian Assange. You would think all the videos would be enough.
I don’t even know how to describe the likes of id anymore, or nuttle’s ‘open minded’ crap. Or when nuttle proclaimed ‘tough love is the answer’. So so far its been soft? I’ve got friends trying to revive the fucking, ‘look they ate the pymgies’ shit. And like id, ‘look Langton’s just a rich bitch’.
FFS. I’m voting yes. I actually wish that considering the evidence and the whole saga, that we were developed enough that its a no brainer.
Supafreak wrote:basesix wrote:34:45
big 'white' brother.. their rules? their rules.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzjW6RjQQi4
36:40, the progress from wholesale bastardry in 1963, to making a doco like this in 1985.
Makes you think we should have come a lot further in the 40 years since..Thanks basesix , very educational , easy to see who the real savages were .
supa i watched the naidoc awards on and off and most of the recipients were old comeing up to retirement and were proud of their 45yrs of service to their community.
so 45yrs of what? their lot is worse now than it was 45yrs ago and no one can deny it.
please read mundines speach of what a voice must be, not the false and corrupted propaganda of yes23 as referred to in my previous post.
if the govt adopted his way i will vote yes, leave the constitution alone, do not entrench racism and favouritism and division based on colour in our constitution.
“ FFS. I’m voting yes. I actually wish that considering the evidence and the whole saga, that we were developed enough that its a no brainer.”
Totally agree
sameaswas wrote:just read a piece from "checkmate"... @ABC.FactCheck (18/8/2023) about how the yes mob have dissed mundine etc etc, read the article you will find out what i mean.
abc found out that yes campaign had misquoted him and edited his speach deliberately and thereby make him out to be a hypocrite, which he was not.
they (yes) actually called him a hypocrite based on the lies (propaganda) put out by the voice article, it was a deliberate slur on his integrity by malicous editing of his speach.
the only good thing i got from abc fact check was that at least there are some ppl left at abc who are still willing to be impartial and call out the liars and decievers in power.
abc are loseing respect in the community..."the ministry of truth" george orwell 1984.
Thanks for that
"But an analysis of Mr Mundine's public statements from 2017 and more recently show he has consistently opposed a national Voice, while at times advocating for a local, grassroots approach."
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-18/fact-check-warren-mundine-voice-s...
Like i said before though, even if he had, would it matter, people can and should change their minds when they get new information, generally the change is made over time though a process of evolution, like many of us did during Covid.
Its when you get clear overnight backflips like Megan Davies last week you go hang on a minute, it's clear why they backflipped 360 over night and thats not a genuine reevaluation and changing of view.
sameaswas said “ leave the constitution alone, do not entrench racism and favouritism and division based on colour in our constitution. “ …….I really don’t know what to make of this .
Supafreak wrote:sameaswas said “ leave the constitution alone, do not entrench racism and favouritism and division based on colour in our constitution. “ …….I really don’t know what to make of this .
Let’s face it supafreak, you, me, others are expecting some empathy some graciousness some generosity of spirit when there is none. The NO camp is mean and tricky and so devoid of common decency they would never give a ‘reach around’, more interested in reaming the country hard then working with it!
I’m just trying to understand what exactly they believe they’re going to lose and how their lives will change . It’s like they believe FNP will have the power to change laws and we will all be paying rent or something .
Supafreak posts "sameaswas said “ leave the constitution alone, do not entrench racism and favouritism and division based on colour in our constitution. “ …….I really don’t know what to make of this . "
If you started at Henry Parkes' Tenterfield Oration (1889), considered the birth of Australian federation, and followed through the various conventions that led to the federation of the colonies and the enactment of the Constitution Act (1901) and specifically s51(xxvi) you would understand that "racism and favouratism and division based on colour" has been entrenched in our constitution since it's inception.
Some quotes from that time;
" ‘the moment the Commonwealth obtains any legislative power at all it should
have the power to regulate the affairs of the people of
coloured or inferior races who are in the Commonwealth’."
Edmund Barton 1898 Australia’s first prime minister and
a founding justice of the High Court of Australia,
"(s51(xxvi)...enables the Parliament to deal with people of any alien
race after they have entered the Commonwealth; to localise
them within defined areas, to restrict their migration, to
confine them to certain occupations, or to give them special
protection and secure their return after a certain period to
the country whence they came"
Quick and Gerran 'Annotated Constitution' 1901
" ‘we want a discrimination based on
colour’.
Henry Higgins, Victorian Delegate and future High Court Justice, at the Melbourne Convention 1898.
Many have argued over the years for the repeal of s51(xxvi), known as the "race power", (it was amended in the 1967 Referendum to include Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders), but only those who lack a knowledge and understanding of Australian history and the Constitution itself would say something like " “ leave the constitution alone, do not entrench racism and favouritism and division based on colour in our constitution. “
It was there from the beginning.
It is still there today.
Yet the No case still assert incorrectly that the Voice will be inserting race and division based on colour into our Constitution and the ignorant eat it up in spoonfuls.
Supafreak wrote:I’m just trying to understand what exactly they believe they’re going to lose and how their lives will change . It’s like they believe FNP will have the power to change laws and we will all be paying rent or something .
Supafreak.
Best quote ever on this topic since it commenced.
For the scared and opposed, this highlights the selfishness within, period.AW
Thanks for spelling it out ( again ) adam12
@adam
Yep thanks. Should be a no brainer for Yes, but we need the Tories to create division....
Supafreak wrote:sameaswas said “ leave the constitution alone, do not entrench racism and favouritism and division based on colour in our constitution. “ …….I really don’t know what to make of this .
Seems pretty clear and simple to me, its just means leave the constitution alone, the aim should be that we are all seen as one no matter ethnicity or skin colour or if your family has been here a month, 100 years or thousand's of years.
I cant see how anyone can argue against this, but somehow some try, even strangely trying to take moral high ground in doing so???
Some even claim to be legal experts and try to make ridiculous arguments, but the reality is there is no single ethnic group in the constitution that has special rights and powers above others, and hopefully most Australians will have enough common sense to ensure things stay this way.
GuySmiley wrote:“ FFS. I’m voting yes. I actually wish that considering the evidence and the whole saga, that we were developed enough that its a no brainer.”
Totally agree
Indeed, completely agree too.
Was actually thinking about this yesterday, and my first thoughts when i heard about this referendum, and where my mind went.
Asked myself the honest questions, is my yes vote based on reasoning, or my own biases?
All i can conclude is that it was an easy thought. This is just part of the evolution of ideas and progress that i've been trying to vocally throw my support behind for alot longer than this referendum was tabled, which i believe would be similar sentiments to the other crew on here that don't have to think too hard about a commonsense decision.
What i really asked myself was, given there's been no singular significant movement to create a better way of living for indigenous Australians, and this is framed as being one, even if you don't completely buy into it and are skeptical, what is your option B?? For however many years since the last referendum, there has been little to no political push to help initiate change. The opportunity was always there for past governments, and bar K.Rudds Sorry, there's been nothing. But now there's a huge backlash from the naysayers because it's not up to 'their' expectations.
Tough titties.
Something has to change, and without an option B, voting yes couldn't be easier. Better than just leaving it the way it was to sort itself out. Clearly that hasn't worked.
Supafreak wrote:I’m just trying to understand what exactly they believe they’re going to lose and how their lives will change . It’s like they believe FNP will have the power to change laws and we will all be paying rent or something .
…. and no thought of what the country would gain
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