The Necessity of Reparation for Historic Injustices
Brutus - there is unfortunately brutality and cruelty evident in all human cultures since the dawn of time .
What is MOST important is how humans recover from these devastating events .
A child , women or man bullied , neglected , unloved or sexually abused . As you correctly point out it has happened to large groups of people as well . Think also of the Jews .
I have yet to read anything you have written that I think helps your people recover . I hope a treaty which is supported by the majority of Victorians is a good beginning .
AndyM wrote:The evidence is, you know, set in stone.
"An area near Portland in southwest Victoria has evidence of volcanic stone huts that date back thousands of years. [4] The Gunditjmara Aboriginal people of that area developed an 'aquacultural system' made of fish traps and weirs which is thought to be among the world's oldest, [4] covering an area of 100 square km, thus "dispelling the myth that Australia's Indigenous people were all nomadic". [5]
On the opposite end of Australia, on the Dampier archipelago off Australia’s north-west coast, archeologists found evidence of stone houses dating back 9,000 years. [1] The excavation of the circular stone foundations showed occupation was maintained throughout the ice age, and evidence of human occupation dating back 21,000 years."
https://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/land/aboriginal-houses
Just quickly as grabbing lunch then going for a grovel.
Those stone arrangements at Portland are spoken about in another podcast with Sutton & Co, i will dig up the podcast latter, it's much longer.
And from memory their words are that to call these structures stone house's even huts is misleading, they are believed to have been bases for huts they built out of other materials when returned to the area to provide a secure base or even to act as a wind break for the hut.
Things like this and fish traps etc dont not equal permeant settlements, they just mean the tribes of that area came back to these areas at certain times of the year, in exactly the same way if we find a cool camping spot that suits our needs like fresh water nearby or good waves or fishing spot etc, we like to come back to the same location.
Its no different to the remains of huge middens, obviously that doesn't mean they lived permanently in that spot, it just means they processed or ate the shell fish etc in the same location every time they visited and over a long period of visits the middens build up.
The statement that Indigenous Australians “build nothing, and stay nowhere long” is grubby, designed to deceive, and factually incorrect.
Hutchy 19 wrote:Brutus - there is unfortunately brutality and cruelty evident in all human cultures since the dawn of time .
What is MOST important is how humans recover from these devastating events .
A child , women or man bullied , neglected , unloved or sexually abused . As you correctly point out it has happened to large groups of people as well . Think also of the Jews .
I have yet to read anything you have written that I think helps your people recover . I hope a treaty which is supported by the majority of Victorians is a good beginning .
Hutchy.....so how do you recover from past atrocities?
You go back revisit the truth of the "events" with everyone involved ie all Australians.....confront the reality of the past , grieve , then move forward, together creating an informed Australian...proud of "OUR " Culture....inclusive of old and new.....
They are not MY people , they are yours too.......just as the Italians/Greeks/Vietnamese/Chinese/Serbs/Croats/Poms etc are also "our" people.....how can we ever stop the brutality and cruelty? By owning past deeds good and bad , learning lessons from the past so we don't repeat .......
‘Nomads’ don’t travel mindlessly. It’s misunderstood in the context of civilisations and societies, especially with respect to Australia’s indigenous peoples. Although they didn’t necessarily stay in one place, they returned to the same places, at the same times of year, ate the same food, underwent the same lore, etc etc for Millenia. They traveled along the same routes. It was a complex system of living, not an absence of a system.
Bruce Chatwin’s ‘Anatomy of Restlessness’ goes into this in some detail.
Brutus - They are not MY people , they are yours too.......just as the Italians/Greeks/Vietnamese/Chinese/Serbs/Croats/Poms etc are also "our" people.....how can we ever stop the brutality and cruelty? By owning past deeds good and bad , learning lessons from the past so we don't repeat .......
You are so right and I was very wrong to term it that way . Not meaning it the way I wrote it .
We need to do MUCH more than " By owning past deeds good and bad , learning lessons from the past so we don't repeat ......." this imo .
The atrocities of the past will never be repeated as the last decades have shown . Most in Australia do own and recognise that good and the bad existed . The exact extent is still coming out as we learn more .
I am tired of asking what we can do to help to move forward . Seems like you are like me and just don't know .
More education is the only thing I can propose . More money is not the answer .
Worth a read for an example of the simple things that we fail to do.
https://theconversation.com/the-nsw-government-needs-to-stop-prosecuting...
I’m afraid I can’t agree. The Earth belongs to everyone and colour of skin, heritage and culture have zero baring on the preservation of fish and seafood stocks. What may have been acceptable 200 years ago is no longer acceptable due to the sheer increase in global human population. The practices of those who lived when the Earth’s human population was less than a billion are no longer visible with a human population above 7.6 billion.
My ancestors fished the waters of the oceans, seas and rivers for hundreds of thousands of years without any real limits, as did the ancestors of everyone on Earth. To grant immunity from persecution based on skin colour, ancestry or cultural belief is outdated thinking with no place in a modern world of shared resources.
I wish it wasn’t so but that’s how it is.
Whilst I don’t agree with every fishing regulation, I still obey them. So should everyone.
Blowin wrote:I’m afraid I can’t agree. The Earth belongs to everyone and colour of skin, heritage and culture have zero baring on the preservation of fish and seafood stocks. What may have been acceptable 200 years ago is no longer acceptable due to the sheer increase in global human population. The practices of those who lived when the Earth’s human population was less than a billion are no longer visible with a human population above 7.6 billion.
My ancestors fished the waters of the oceans, seas and rivers for hundreds of thousands of years without any real limits, as did the ancestors of everyone on Earth. To grant immunity from persecution based on skin colour, ancestry or cultural belief is outdated thinking with no place in a modern world of shared resources.
I wish it wasn’t so but that’s how it is.
Whilst I don’t agree with every fishing regulation, I still obey them. So should everyone.
As a fisherman i 100% agree with this.
I mean where does it stop?
Are people cool with Japanese whaling because it's part of their culture?
Should ethnic groups all over Indonesia have no fishing regulations because they never use too or be able to hunt turtle etc because they traditionally have? (its actually illegal in Indonesia, but it still happens)
It just doesn't work, basically everyone can claim their group use to fish without limits or quotas etc, its also in no way traditional fishing when you are using modern fishing techniques that are much much more effective.
@hutchy19 wrote " I am tired of asking what we can do to help to move forward . Seems like you are like me and just don't know .
More education is the only thing I can propose . More money is not the answer "
Hey hutcho, what about more power to control their own destiny in their home land? What about a centralised voice that's not a token gesture, but a real true authorative power for all Australians, that allows ownership of their culture integrated into the current system.
That's what my original paper was about. A loosening of the reigns of political system and power that is based on a foreign system and on foreign soil but was brought here and created this society that we now call Australia.
When you look at how that system eroded the relationships over time between Aboriginal and non Aboriginal Australians, you can start to see where the trust was lost. Settlers owning(or being given) huge tracts of land, moving the traditional owners off their land, their sacred spiritual home, let alone the place they relied upon for food. They go on the land, they 'steal' a sheep or a cow so they don't starve, they get shot.
So it does go back to past injustices that need to be corrected. If that past injustice is a societal and political system that allowed this to happen, then at what point does that system have to be held accountable, hence relinquishing its powers that it has shown it abused to the rightful traditional owners of the country.
It's not about handing over all political power, media power.....but surely the balance isn't right and fair, and hasn't been right and fair, based on past injustices.
What the finer details would look like, buggered if i know, but surely the starting point has to be that conversation.
Do you think this is a reasonable assumption? I get the impression most crew don't wanna hear this but i can't see anything ever being changed if this fundamental fracturing of relationships from the past isn't corrected in the future.
As far as indigenous fishing goes, down here some of the people involved lived that way for most of their lives because they had little choice. Indigenous people of my age had minimal employment opportunities and no chance at all to ride the property ladder. It seems mean spirited to say the least to deny them the right to do something they have always done. The real issue I suspect is the lucrative trade in abalone licences which can cost millions. Anyway, I innocently gave a couple of blokes directions to a local bay.....they stopped by to give me my share on way back! Indigenous culture works for me. Bugger the millionaires!
I don't expect you two are much concerned with closing the gap anyway.
Yeah sounds like a great idea let's treat people differently based on ethnicity, the whole concept sounds very outdated to me.
At best if it's really going to affect the older guys, give them a special licence and let them fish until they die and if there is some non indigenous old guys in the same situation treat the the same, but you need to draw a line somewhere.
Reality is there is fishing families all over the world that get hit hard economically by changes in fishing regulation, but the regulations are there for a reason, and thats to ensure there is fish/seafood for future generations.
Closing the gap?
God bit of stretch there, if you really want to close the gap the focus should be on education and employment options, and encouraging people from areas with no prospects to area with better prospects, but off course that would be culture destroying or something.
etarip wrote:‘Nomads’ don’t travel mindlessly. It’s misunderstood in the context of civilisations and societies, especially with respect to Australia’s indigenous peoples. Although they didn’t necessarily stay in one place, they returned to the same places, at the same times of year, ate the same food, underwent the same lore, etc etc for Millenia. They traveled along the same routes. It was a complex system of living, not an absence of a system.
Bruce Chatwin’s ‘Anatomy of Restlessness’ goes into this in some detail.
Yes, profound. Thinking it’s also directly linked to the First Nations dreaming, a living and spiritual part of the landscape.
"....the focus should be on education and employment options," Genius!
I know let's start with the fishing industry, they already have the skills, plenty of jobs, good money. It would raise living standards from day one. All we need to do is give the indigenous communities some of the licences and it should all be good.
From my understanding Aboriginal fishers in Australia wanting to fish outside of regulations , especially regarding things like turtles etc have to have a provable continuous connection to the area and history of involvement in any specific fishery. They simply can't do what they want just because they have aboriginal genetics. The land council in my area works with fisheries and has a very conservative approach regarding fisheries , including for people in their own nation. I have no problem with it , they , or at least the vast majority, have no intention of destroying the marine habitat , quite the opposite.
@ Andy
Here's the podcast i was talking about where they talk about the stone things in Portland area.
https://soundcloud.com/experience_anu/in-conversation-with-peter-sutton-...
tubeshooter wrote:From my understanding Aboriginal fishers in Australia wanting to fish outside of regulations , especially regarding things like turtles etc have to have a provable continuous connection to the area and history of involvement in any specific fishery. They simply can't do what they want just because they have aboriginal genetics. The land council in my area works with fisheries and has a very conservative approach regarding fisheries , including from people in their own nation. I have no problem with it , they , or at least the vast majority, have no intention of destroying the marine habitat , quite the opposite.
Most people do the right thing when it comes to any fishing regulation, but i do recall in QLD they had a problem with some indigenous folk fishing for Turtle and selling it on the black market to some Asian groups who pay top dollar as see it as a delicacy.
Quick google for some related links, actually seems like dugong too
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-03-08/dugongs-cruelly-slaughtered-in-il...
https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/black-market-in-dugong-and-turtle-me...
Same thing happens in Indonesia, there was a great docco by an english guy who went and stayed with a ethnic group of indonesians from flores area, they still have traditional hunting rights to hunt whales, he became like family to them, and it all seemed good at first, they are suppose to only take meat to eat themselves, but off course when they came across a big pack of whales they took much much more and sold on the back market.
For sure , no doubt Indo , I also remember dugongs being sold as well .
There's always some bad apples. I can only hope they copped it from the elders afterwards, and that the elders weren't involved.
Didn’t think I’d see the day when Blindboy would be claiming that Johnny Geezerteeth the true blood Englishman should have special fishing privileges unavailable to Pakistani immigrants in UK waterways and seas. That’s his stance though. English heritage means that the bow legged , tea towel on the head Pom deserves to fish his indigenous UK waters whilst the local Pakistanis get told that there’s too much pressure on fish stocks and will have to go without.
Bugger the Paki millionaires says BB….they’ve got the wrong blood in their veins!
The best of British!
How many beers have you had Blowin?
None.
What….you don’t like your bizarre racist thought process satirised ?
It’s a simple transference of what you’ve said onto another indigenous culture. You don’t think are equal based on their heritage and skin colour. You couldn’t have spoken any more plainly.
Mate your stuff used to make me angry, now it just makes me pity you. It is sad and pathetic......and I notice that I am not the only one drawing your attention to that. If you are sober that just makes it even sadder. On the assumption that you will now continue the pathetic shit, I will be back ....... but not while your crap is on the front page.
BB - since your comment outside the thread I will ask this question of you .
You said the Panda ( ? -some animal as I have nearly forgotten the story ) Tax minimisation affair was huge news . You were revelling in it . I said it would be lucky to be an item for a week and probably days .
I didn't see another reference to it on the third day . I am sure you would have been paying closer attention . How many days for you ???
You reply on all other posts so why not answer this question ?
Keep cool fellas.
Go rethink your racism Blindboy, old fella. I’ll be back again later and I’ll wait for you to explain to me how you arrive at your arbitrarily determined interpretation of who is and isn’t worthy of cultural primacy.
I understand your slowly turning brain cogs can’t figure out how to dodge the trap of ignorance you’ve built for yourself and that your traditional technique is to go away, get frustrated and angry and then come back full of indignant fury that someone dare let your own dumb ideologies paint yourself into a corner. You’ll convince yourself that you can Ad hominem your way back into balance.
Why not try contemplating the truth that people are people and they should all be treated equally in a modern and fair world. Far out concept, I know! You will invariably find there is no alternative without twisting yourself into all kinds of impenetrable knots.
Leave racism behind bloke. It’s ugly. Just cause it’s your brand of racism doesn’t mean it’s any less ugly.
@BB
So does this mean you agree with Japan that it's their right to continue whaling as its something they have done for centuries and is part of their culture?
If not, then why not?...what's the difference?
The difference is that the Japanese fleet was a large industrial operation far from their country. Honestly did you really need me to point that out? Hard to know what would be sadder if you did, it suggests you don't think before you post, if you didn't it suggests you post stuff that you know beforehand is nonsense.
Actually, traditional Japanese whaling was limited to just a few coastal villages and limited to inshore waters because the whalers were in very small non motorised boats. Eating whale meat is not a centuries old Japanese tradition as falsely stated above but let’s not let the facts get in the way of a good story. Whale meat is not a broadly consumed traditional Japanese food, not now not never!
"So does this mean you agree with Japan that it's their right to continue whaling as its something they have done for centuries and is part of their culture?"
Indo bringing a chimp to the gorilla fight once again.
Didn't they start hunting whales to eat during WWII because of food shortages?
There is still traditional whaling in Timor, small boats, hand thrown harpoons. You have to admire their courage.
Traditional forms of whaling have been occurring in Japan for millennia. While there was industrial whaling in Japan from the late 1800s, it was heavily relied on in Japan post-WW2 as a means to address protein shortages.
Okay fair enough the "centuries" bit might not be correct, but It's actually Japans argument about being a tradition not mine.
"Like other whaling nations, Japan argues hunting and eating whales are part of its culture" From BBC article.
Anyway how long does something need to be practised for it to be a tradition???
The point is more there is groups of people all around the world that have eaten animals that are now endangered or numbers not sustainable and we have limits and quotas on them to protect them for a reason, t idea that a group of people should be exempt and treated differently under law or regulation because its been their practice is crazy it could even be argued its a form of racism towards others who dont have those same rights purely based on ethnicity.
If an ethnic group tradition is child marriage or female circumcision should it be their right to practice these too???
Actually a quick google shows whaling has been practised at some level in Japan for centuries. (too late to edit my above post)
9th Century Whaling starts in Norway, France, and Spain
12th Century Hand-harpoon whaling starts in Japan
1606 Hand-harpooning whaling by organized groups starts in Taiji, Japan
1612 Hand-harpooning of Baird's beaked whales starts in Chiba Prefecture, Japan (near Wadaura)
1675 Whaling using nets begins in Taiji, and spreads to Shikoku and Kyushu, contributing to rapid expansion of whaling
1712 Sperm whaling starts in the U.S. (US-style whaling)
1838 Organized whaling using nets starts in Ayukawa, Japan
1864 Modern whaling is developed in Norway
1868 With harpoon guns completed in Norway, Norwegian-style whaling starts
1879 A storm claims the lives of 111 whalers from Taiji. This incident prompts transition from net whaling to modern whaling
1899 Japan starts Norwegian-style whaling
1903 The world's first whaling factory ship (Netherlands) sails out to Spitsbergen sea
1904 Norway sets up a whaling station in South Georgia Island; Whaling begins in Antarctic Ocean
1905 First whaling factory ship sails to Antarctic Ocean
1906 Full-scale modern whaling starts in Japan with construction of modern whaling station in Ayukawa
1925 A mother ship equipped with a slipway goes on whaling for the first time
1931 First International Whaling Convention is signed
1932 Claws (tail fin pinchers) appears
1934 Japan enters mother ship-type whaling in Antarctic Ocean
1940 U.S. quits whaling
https://www.whaling.jp/english/history.html
BTW. It should be noted the Japanese aren't wanting to hunt and eat it to supply their whole population or eat as an every day meal, they just want the right to hunt a number to supply a select minority of the population and eat as a delicacy, similar to indigenous people who arent just hunting dugong or turtle every day as a main food source.
The argument about them previously using tradition hunting methods so why should they be allowed to use modern methods is also no different to the issue of Indigenous people having traditional hunting rights, they also dont use traditional methods, they use all types of modern fishing tools and speed boats etc, so also comparable.
The argument about only certain groups of Japanese being traditional hunters im sure could be gotten around, im sure they would be happy if even their whaling fleets were located and were staffed with people from these regions.
Suggesting that Japan's claim to traditional whaling rights should include international waters and Antarctica is somehow comparable to people collecting abalone along the coast where their ancestors have done it for millennia is absurd. In the more comparable case of traditional whaling in Timor, I accept that they have the right to continue.
You do a lot of “quick googling” Indo
Blindboy back here today doubling down on his belief that indigenous Englishman should be able to fish UK waterways to their heart’s content whilst brown skinned immigrants are not allowed to do the same. Even if a Pakistani family has ancestry dating back 250 years the Pakistani family isn’t allowed the same fishing rights as the Englishman with a 1/16 English bloodline?
Interesting.
You know how some people describe a belief like that Blindboy?
Racist. Racist. Racist.
Blindboy says: “No Saint George flag tattoo…..no cod for you! No UK fish for filthy mud blood Pakistanis! Seafood for English only!” Hey, a couple of the Pommy likely lads might even slip Blindboy a couple of the species threatened cod …..he loves the indigenous culture!
Doesn’t sound quite as virtuous when put like that does it BLINDboy?
goofyfoot wrote:You do a lot of “quick googling” Indo
Well it is the biggest source of information in the world these days, and if you select the right sources you can find reliable up to date information on pretty much anything, i find it a much better source than just blindly believing people on a forum or social media.
If i hadn't googled the above topic i would still be believing Guy was correct as would others, but he is wrong and i was correct, whaling HAS been practiced for centuries by the Japanese.
Blowin wrote:Blindboy back here today doubling down on his belief that indigenous Englishman should be able to fish UK waterways to their heart’s content whilst brown skinned immigrants are not allowed to do the same. Even if a Pakistani family has ancestry dating back 250 years the Pakistani family isn’t allowed the same fishing rights as the Englishman with a 1/16 English bloodline?
Interesting.
You know how some people describe a belief like that Blindboy?
Racist. Racist. Racist.
Blindboy says: “No Saint George flag tattoo…..no cod for you! No UK fish for filthy mud blood Pakistanis! Seafood for English only!” Hey, a couple of the Pommy likely lads might even slip Blindboy a couple of the species threatened cod …..he loves the indigenous culture!
Doesn’t sound quite as virtuous when put like that does it BLINDboy?
Front page
Since the discussion has desecended to primary school playground level.
"Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me" nyah, nyah.
Do your worst you fuckin' dill.
blindboy wrote:Since the discussion has desecended to primary school playground level.
"Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me" nyah, nyah.
Do your worst you fuckin' dill.
I’m just trying to understand your rank racism. You haven’t even bothered to address this yet as you know it’s fucking disgraceful. As I said yesterday, you will make this personal before addressing the issue itself as you have no moral justification for segregating modern humans based on skin colour. I said you’d go for indignant rage as a distraction and here we are.
You think that someone who is 1/8 English in the UK should get fishing rights which are denied to someone of Pakistani descent, despite the Pakistani having relatives who’ve lived in the UK since 1788.
You think that if two babies were born side by side in the same hospital in Australia tomorrow that the one with the darker skin has more rights to fish than the one with yellower skin.
Disgusting. Get back to the 18th century and take your racist , bloodline cult bullshit with you. Give us a call when you’re willing to join modern society cause we don’t want your throwback divisive identity politics weighing down another century. That shit is over.
Sheesh....enough....again.
Trying to throw blanket theories over society from out on the fringes, and on a surfing wesbite.
Seriously, save the anger.
Geez, i could have put the house on that happening. I stand by my earlier post and a “quick google” will also show the centuries old Japanese whaling tradition was limited to (1) inshore coastal waters by (2) only a few coastal villages and (3) involved the opportunistic netting of whales straying too close to shallow protected seas. I also remember whaling was only practiced on one or two of the many japanese islands so to argue it was a common practice throughout the entire island chain or country is just false. As false and as misleading as to quote the Japanese Whaling Assn as @info has done above .... an organisation known for the buying IWC votes of poor pacific nations and its wholesale misinformation. Sort of like quoting Trump on truth telling and integrity in govt.
Stu….This attitude of Blindboy’s is the face of modern racism. It’s literally segregation based on bloodlines and skin colour. Yet this is what we aren’t allowed to discuss ? This attitude of Blindboy’s is an anchor from the past and it’s stopping humanity from moving forward to a more harmonious, peaceful world. You know this is true yourself. Racial identity politics are a trap, a dead end, a throw back mode of thought.
Now we aren’t allowed to discuss an idea because it’s controversial despite it being incontrovertible truth? That’s the worst type of censorship there is Stu. It’s a shame you want to quell it just because you might get more hate mail from the other vociferous throwbacks out there who think that their race defines them and means anything at all and that the world should be in thrall to petty and outdated race politics which will continue divide and erode society until 33000AD unless we put a stop to it.
I’m not angry. I only find Blindboy to be as self impressed dullard, but I know the perpetuation of this racial division rubbish to be dark ages shit. You do do. Say so and say it loud. The more of us that finally race our voices and say “Enough!” to this rubbish , the sooner it crawls back into the ooze of evil ideas.
Oh FFS...
Read back just how silly that whole statement is.
The face of modern racism...? Absolutism writ large. Can't even be arsed responding to that now. Got fifty other things more pressing.
Of course it’s the definition of racism and the concept that people can be separated by skin colour without it being racist is the modern face of racism . That’s why Blindboy can’t even begin to defend his sub human ideology when I pose it word for word in another context. It’s cult of bloodlines rubbish.
Your relentless anger and inflexible intellect is fascinating, that's my take home point right now.
You've called him a racist, called me a censor, claim you have incontrovertible truth.
Seriously, go outside and wonder at the world for a little while. Don't try to understand it. Just observe it without judgement.
Guy face it, you were wrong and my statement was factually correct.
You probably got your misinformation from a poorly researched media article, the source i provided is obviously from those that know, because they are the ones who ancestors were doing the hunting.
Just eat some humble pie for once, you thought you were calling me out and it backfired.
indo-dreaming wrote:@BB
So does this mean you agree with Japan that it's their right to continue whaling as its something they have done for centuries and is part of their culture?
If not, then why not?...what's the difference?
Heres the quote again, as you can see no mention of it being common practice or practiced widely or eaten widely.
stunet wrote:Your relentless anger and inflexible intellect is fascinating, that's my take home point right now.
You've called him a racist, called me a censor, claim you have incontrovertible truth.
Seriously, go outside and wonder at the world for a little while. Don't try to understand it. Just observe it without judgement.
My inflexible intellect? I’m the one thinking outside of the fucked up orthodoxy.
Here’s an analogy you’ll get your head around: You’re a bouncer on a nightclub door and it’s “Friday fishing night!” Your boss tells you that you can only let in those with brown skin and not those with red, yellow or white skin.
Is your boss racist? Yes. Very much so. Yet this is the concept your flexible intellect can’t appreciate.
Anyway mate, I’ll go outside and the wonder of nature will erase my mind so that I fall into line with the fucked up orthodoxy of modern racial identity politics and everyone will be happy being defined by their skin colour* and who their great grandparents fucked two hundred years ago.
*Actually skin colour has nothing to do with it anymore. It’s purely who you “culturally identify” with …..it’s the racism for the diehards after we’ve all been in the Big Melting Pot.
Listen to these inflexible dickheads….wrong side of history guys. We’ve chosen to double down on racism as the best way to move past it!
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