Oceania Rabbit Proof Fence and our history.

The truth may be harsh, but that doesn't stop it from being true...

Truth is subjective. And so are you.

Let's go through your rambling (and unoriginal) post point by point...

AUSTRALIAN APOLOGY TO THE ABORIGINALS

Well, for a start it's hard to make an intelligent point without being grammatically correct.

We feel that we must apologize for building hundreds of homes for you, which you have vandalized and destroyed.

And white people in housing commission homes never do these things, do they mate? Never mind that you're overlooking the genocide and mass displacement that made these beautiful homes in prime locations necessary in the first place.

We apologize for giving you doctors and free medical care, which allowed you to survive and multiply so that you can demand apologies.

Can we also apologise for introducing a whole range of viruses and diseases that decimated their immune systems in the first place? How about you have a look at the relative mortality rates.

We apologize for helping you to read and write and teaching you the English language, when previously you had no written language and thus, we opened up to you the entire European civilization, thought and enterprise.

Your ignorance of Aboriginal culture borders on the insulting.

We apologize for giving you law and order, which has helped prevent you from slaughtering one another.

Did your grandaddy tell you with great fondness about the good old days of Abo hunting? Did he make his money collecting the government bounty?

We apologize for developing large farms and properties, which today feed your people, where before, you had the benefit of living off the land and starving during droughts.

Again, your ignorance is astounding. These large farms and properties you speak of are wholly responsible for the desperate state of Australian ecosystems. Can you honestly tell me that Australia is in a better environmental state than it was before white occupation? Give me a break. The Aborigines knew the land. They adapted to it, and as such it sustained them. We try to make the land adapt to us, and as such it punishes us.

We could all learn a lot from them.

We apologize for providing you with warm clothing made of fabric to replace the animal skins you had before.

We apologize for building roads and railway tracks between cities and building cars so that you no longer have to walk over harsh terrain.

Unbelievable.......

We apologize for developing the oil wells and minerals including gold and diamonds which you never used and had no idea of their value.

Value to whom? You just don't GET it, do you? The concept of ownership was absolutely foreign to them. They didn't OWN the land, but it BELONGED to them, as they belonged to the land. You cannot instill Western values on such an ideologically opposed culture.

We apologize for working hard to pay the taxes that finance your welfare, medical care, education, etc. to the tune of 10 billion dollars a year.

This point of view I have some sympathy with. Nobody can deny there is endemic misappropriation and misspending in this area, not even level-headed lefties like me. They deserve our support, but it should be more accountable. No arguments there.

We humbly beg forgiveness for all these sins and are happy to take back all the above and return you to the paradise of the outback whenever you are ready.

It would be hard to respond to this point without being personally insulting to you, so I will refrain.

 

Bias on both sides, here. Is an apology for something that this generation has had no influence on whatsoever really all that neccessary? Is an apology from someone who isn't responsible for anything at all gratifying? I believe not. And showing our "remorse" for the mistreat of Aboriginal people before our own time by over-endowing them with resources is clearly not the solution, either.
The solution, really, is simple. Absolute equality. No Aboriginal is held with higher respect, political influence, and government benefits than one of European descent, and vice versa. Everyone has the exact same opportunity, and the exact same respct from others. Isn't that really all that's needed?

 

Look Sith! A flying pig!

Never gonna happen.

 

yep. sorry, but all that will happen right after they stamp out nepotism.

 

Is an apology for something that this generation has had no influence on whatsoever really all that neccessary? Is an apology from someone who isn't responsible for anything at all gratifying?

That's my problem with it as well. Sure I say 'sorry' on National Sorry Day, but what does it mean? When I say 'sorry' I have extreme difficulty in putting any meaning behind it since neither myself or my family (at least going back 4-5 generations) had any involvement with it. Wouldn't therefore my saying 'sorry' mean nothing at all? ?

Not saying that an apology wouldn't be nice to give, but I think it's mainly just a quick statement with no thought behind it that attempts to cloud over the real issues without any attempt at solving them.

 

We, as individuals, in the main do not have anything to apologise for.

While I often argue vehemently for the government - as the institution responsible for the past injustices - to apologise for those actions, I make no personal apologies because I am not responsible.

Nobody is asking you to apologise. Rather, it's the institutions of Church and Government who need to apologise for the atrocities of the past couple of centuries. I think institutional apologies are entirely fair and appropriate.

 

I know it's radical, but it's really the only way to solve it so that one group or another won't have to cry out misjustice. All it really takes is a lot of political reform, which isn't so difficult to do.

EDIT: D'oh, this post is by Gecko. Not Sith. Was using his comp as usual ...

 

ObiCam, you're right - we as a nation, not individuals, have a responsibility to set things right. Thus, why the Government, which, in any liberal representative democracy, is responsible to and for the people, must apologize on BEHALF OF THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT.
And to the Gatherer,
1) Aboriginal is an ADJECTIVE. Not a noun. Thus, making remarks about teaching ABORIGINIES (n) English really serves to do nothing more than make you look the fool. Which, in itself, could serve as an adjective to bigot...
2) Stolen Generation = GENOCIDE! That's right, the crime that NAZI GERMANY committed against the Jews. The one Turkey denies to this day, of their 1915 massacre of approx. 1.5 million Armenians [despite overwhelming evidence to support Armenian claims]. The crime which means the intended destruction of a racial, ethnic, cultural or religious groups. And don't throw the whole "they thought they were doing them a favour" thing into the mix; intent is always second to actions, which is why we have a manslaughter charge. As the old saying goes, the road to hell is paved with the bricks of good intentions.


Ender

 

While it's nobel and all of you to defend the Armenian Genocide almost 100 years ago, you've forgotten that genocide goes on around the world all the time. Iraq has been killing of Kurds for decades now. Surely that's a more pressng matter.

 

And, given a few more weeks, what the Isrealis will be doing to the Palestinians...


Israel shoots people in refugee camps.

We don't process refugees fast enough.


And who does the UN go after?


Strange world.

 

Oh, for sure, but I know many Armenian people, and as I'm told, it's a pain we can't feel. Yes, the Kurdish issue is Genocide, certainly, and an equally wrong issue. BUT - if we can't get Saddam to play along on NBC Weapons control, what makes you think he'll end up like Slobby-Dan Milosebitch and on trial for war crimes soon? Doesn't mean we stop trying, though...


Ender

 

Stolen Generation = GENOCIDE! That's right, the crime that NAZI GERMANY committed against the Jews.

BS

Nazi Germany tried to wipe out entire races. They did it for evil purposes

The Australian Government removed a small number of Aboriginal children from their families in the hope of benefitting them

Don't even compare them. It's like apples and carrots.

 

Who gives a crap if intent is good or bad? Personally I don't think that I'd appreciate some minister telling me I'd be better off living away from my people. And I didn't say that the Stolen Generation was a Holocaust, I said it's Genocide, and if you read my initial post, it VERY CLEARLY defines the crime under the UN Convention, and Article II (e) directly defines the, and I quote
"(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. "

So there's no confusion as to whether the deaths 6 million Jews [though I believe it's now considered to be closer to 8 million] can quantitively compare to the stolen generation, here's another bit:

"In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group... "

My Contention:
Intent, as it relates to any deed that can broadly be called a crime (in this case I obviously mean Genocide) means *nothing*. It is the ends we always concern ourselves with, NOT the means. If you shoot and kill, for example, a mass-murderer, even the abhorrent Osama Bin-Laden, it does not disguise the fact that someone is dead, and a law [and indeed social convention] has been broken, regardless of the illegality or moral composition of the victim. Now, if you did not mean for that to happen, or if the person was so heinous an individual you perhaps saved many lives in your act, and a jury acquits you, it doesn't excuse the crime; it merely states that society can forgive you for it, as a jury of your peers believes you to be redeemable. The whole notion of a "jury of peers", if I remember the little jurusprudence I know, was to find social acceptance for "moderate" crimes, eg crimes of passion, accidental crimes, etc etc.

Though, to all who deny that the Stolen Generation didn't happen, that it wasn't a genocide, etc etc; I lay down this challenge:

Prove it.

Prove to me that the action do not clearly violate the United Nations Convention on Genocide, specifically Article 2 (e). Prove to me that the actions of the Church and State, though supposedly for the best, do not make them accountable. Prove to me that the testimonies of the affected is false, prove to me all the documents that support the process of making this infants "English" enough are false.
I hate to remind you of it, but Aborigines have rights too, you know. Despite what some seem to think, judging by their posts.


Some of you should read stuff by Prof Colin Tatz, who teaches Aboriginal Studies and Genocide Studies.
http://www.omen.net.au/~staffy/tatz01.html

"There is Aboriginal dismay, frustration and anger at the ?reforms? of the Howard Government. There is a deep sense of betrayal that In this liberal democracy, a Government espousing a human rights agenda can seemingly run the clock back to what looks like old-time Christian paternalism. "


Ender

 

Ive actually stayed away from this post, because I know that if I took a look at it I might not come back to JC and the Forums again, but that too is harsh..

As an Indigenous person, I feel compelled to reply, yes, I recieved an education at a public school, but I had to pay for it...like everyone else...I have a job, thats not in a government dept, but I would love one, only reason why I dont have one is that I was not sucessful in gaining employment with one....yes at one time my family did live in government housing, but we never destroyed it and we had to pay rent like everyone else...I pay my taxes, I pay my own way...like many Indgenous people before me and with me...

My people only make up 2% of the total population of Australia, only we are the original people of Australia, we were here before non-Indigenous people, and we will be here after...

If you dont believe what happend either in Rabbit Proof Fence or in any other historical book where evidence of this has been recorded, then I suggest to you that you come and talk to me, and I can give you family examples, talk to my Mum, talk to my Aunts and Uncles, they will tell you...

This is a real history, this is the history that happened to my people...no we dont get free medical service, thats what medicare is for...free legal counsel..thats what legal aid is for...I havent seen a free car..nor a free house...if I did then I would be have both in my posession...

the majority of people Ive met on this forum are pretty kewl people, its unfortunat the few that spoil it for the many...please dont get me wrong, this is not a judgement on everyone, this is just someone speaking on behalf of their people...

Im not going to enter this discussion again, because I feel that if I do the enjoyment of the JC fourms will have gone and thats not what I want happen...

Regards

LisaJ

 

Here's another great piece from Prof Tatz (I had the honour of studying under him_:
Governments don?t understand that rights for Indigenous people is a world issue. The principles are enshrined and promulgated, even in the face of some grand hypocrisy on the part of some ?believing? states. There is an international philosophy, however poorly practised, about rights, even about such sloppily phrased ideas as ?self-determination? and ?reconciliation". If we are seen to negate the hard-won battles for land, administrative autonomy, voluntary separate schools where identity can be affirmed, we will receive some of the unpleasant attention once reserved for Smith?s Rhodesia and apartheid South Africa


Ender

 

LisaJ, I hope that the ignorance of others hasn't hurt you too deeply.

Stinrab, serious, what do you know of this? What John Laws has told you? What FACTUAL basis underlies the thrust of your arguement? Can you support your claims with facts? I would like to you prove your claims about, for example, Aboriginal welfare benefits. I can suggest some great resources for your research, like, for example, the Royal Commission Into Aboriginal Deaths In Custody. They're muuuccccccchhhhh better off, right?

Or:
You could email The National Centre for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Statistics (NCATSIS).
Or:
From the Aust. Bureau Statistics 1996 yearbook:

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs%40.nsf/94713ad445ff1425ca25682000192af2/368968084ca747b2ca2569de002139c0!OpenDocument

According to their statistics, Aborigines constitute 1.7% of the Population in 1996.

"Health

The NATSIS asked questions about health status and health actions; attitudes to health; illness conditions; health risk factors; and access to health services. Overall, 88% of people considered themselves to be in good, very good, or excellent health. Despite this self reported health status, 44% of people took a health related action (which may have included admission to hospital, consulting a doctor, or using bush medicine) in the two weeks leading up to the survey and 41% reported a current health condition or illness.

Almost 35% of people had a health condition which they had experienced for six months or more (long term sufferers). Table S1.3 lists the major health conditions reported during the survey, and the percentage of males and females who experienced those conditions. Table S1.3 is concerned with all sufferers of current health conditions, not only those considered to be long term sufferers."

Condition Males Females Persons
Asthma 13.8 16.8 15.3
Diabetes 11.7 10.2 10.9
Heart problems 7.2 8.5 7.8
Chest problems 6.6 8.9 7.7
Skin problems 6.8 6.5 6.6
High blood pressure 4.5 4.8 4.6
Ear or hearing problems 3.8 5.2 4.5
Eye problems(a) 3.1 4.4 3.6
Kidney problems 3.1 2.8 3.0

(a) Excludes eye problems which can be corrected by glasses.


Almost 60% of people aged 13 years and over stated that alcohol was one of the main health problems in their local area. Similarly, 76.2% of people aged 13 years and over also listed alcohol as a common social problem for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in their area.

Source: 1994 National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Survey.


Do I need to go on? A whole armada of introduced health issues; the result of an immune system not conditioned to handle the strains of infection that are essentially mutated versions of ancient Anglo afflictions; which of course have some 2000 years of evoluion on their side. And alcohol, which the white population introduced, is a major issue and you find people will whine about their drinking problem! Sorry, but ignorance, bigotry and the lack of compassion really get to me.

Ender

 

Almost 60% of people aged 13 years and over stated that alcohol was one of the main health problems in their local area. Similarly, 76.2% of people aged 13 years and over also listed alcohol as a common social problem for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in their area.

Then you're right, lets roundup all these evil white ppl ramming alcohol down your ppl's throats. Happy hunting.

 

I love it when stupidity becomes a substitute for a cry of defeat. So cute.
Ah, to hell with it! Let's JUST IGNORE IT AND HOPE IT GOES AWAY, this pesky race issue. Heck, when you ignore someone's concerns, their legitimate claims to something, be it land or justice, IT NEVER EVER EVER turns nasty.

Perhaps, I should try ignorance, cause a lot of people seem to be preeetttttyyyy blissful...

Ender.

 

Yeah, give it a shot, works for me.
I'm totally ignorant of white mans ability to force aboriginals to drink. I'm sure most ppl are.
I am not however, ignorant of the fact that 98% of aboriginal ppl I encounter either attempt to mug me, harrass me or other ppl for money or cigarrettes, start fights on trains, get drunk at bars and become violent, requiring the staff to remove them, all the while claiming racism, and generally causing a great deal of antisocial behaviour.

I won't even type the name my 6 year old son was called by an indigineous teenager for simply walking past him. It did however, contain the term "white..".
The aboriginals in the cities are far more racist than anyone else I have ever seen.
It may sound like a generalisation there, but as far as in the city goes, that's what I see.
But feel free to take this as racism, it does seemm to be the first words you are taught to speak.

I have, on the other hand met and worked with aboriginals in the rest of this state who would do your ppl proud, it's a shame you allow what I hope is a minority to tarnish yourselves in such a way.
Maybe you should seek to solve the problem from within first? Seems logical to me.

Oh, and calling someone stupid for having an opinion that does not agree with yours is called flaming, Don't do that again.

 

How does voicing these issues help the situation. It seems to me you're wasting your time on here when you should be out there preaching all the bad things in these communities, cause quite frankly, I'm sick of hearing how evil I am for introducing alcohol, disease and everything bad to this country.

You're just hear to stir up a discussion and in the end do nothing about the situation. So what if you can quote some statistics from all over the place? How is that helping the issue? It doesn't. Get over it.

It's one of the main faults of governments lately to just find out stats rather than spend the money on actually solving the problem. It's interesting to note that the organisation that gathered all those stats through their surveys was an organisation designed specifically for gathering statistics. How much is spent on this organisation and who's bright idea was it to start it in the first place? It's wasted money, everyone knows there's problems out there, so why not get the money directly to it, rather then waste the money to discover exactly how big the problem is.

 

Who gives a crap if intent is good or bad? Obviously the UN that you are so Blithlyy quoting...
"In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group... "

Thus, Intent matters, The Australian Government had no intention to destroy anything.

 

I must differentiate between intent and motive. Heck, I need to revise that, it's a sound theory, until you take mass murder into it. No, really, it is; it works for any crime EXCEPT mass murder - which intent is extremely important because of the ramifications of the planned act versus achieved results. Thanks, UmmYep.
Futhermore, I did mean "intent" to be the subjective definition of good or bad, as expressed by a person, rather than actual actions. To effect, it's the difference between the means and the end, though both can be called intent. I need a break, I've been up since 6:30am!!!

The reason I brought this up was to try and change people's ideas. Why? Because I believe that if this issue, the issue of reconciliation and everything associated with it - be it the Stolen Generation, socio-economic status, etc etc - is one that needs to be addressed and, for lack of better words, solved. It is, to draw an analogy, like a wound; except most hope it will simply heal given time and being allowed to run it's natural course. I, on the other hand, have studied similar examples and this one, and believe that it is more likely to become "infected" - that is, the wound can get much, much worse. Do we want that? No!
I have campaigned in many places for this issue, not to be some pinko commie whatever, but because I am fundamentally compassionate and wish to see us move on. We need to admit to our past and use it as a basis for better race relations. I signed the sorry book, I walked the bridge with a leg brace on. I also took on, what, 5 or more people here and was the only one to actually use facts. I also think I held my ground pretty well.
So I guess I am doing something, even if I changed one persons understanding of the situation. In effect, am I not serving my country?
"I have, on the other hand met and worked with aboriginals in the rest of this state who would do your ppl proud, it's a shame you allow what I hope is a minority to tarnish yourselves in such a way.
Maybe you should seek to solve the problem from within first? Seems logical to me.

Oh, and calling someone stupid for having an opinion that does not agree with yours is called flaming, Don't do that again. "

I apologise, and retract my statement, if you will for using Aboriginal as a noun instead of Aborigine. Deal?
And yeah, minorities often do tarnish a group. Islamic terrorists, Christian terrorists [ones who attack med clinics in the USA]. Hopefully we can acknowledge the Koran is not about AK47's. And that Christians aren't all gun-toting, doctor murdering types. And that Aborigines aren't welfare sponging racist drunks, yeah?

Ender

 

STINRAB wrote:
"BS

Nazi Germany tried to wipe out entire races. They did it for evil purposes

The Australian Government removed a small number of Aboriginal children from their families in the hope of benefitting them

Don't even compare them. It's like apples and carrots."

Actually, like comparing red and green apples.
Both were racially destructive, albeit different means, though same end. And if you try and argue that ends always justify the means, you could argue in favor of Stalin's terror squads, mass murder everywhere, etc etc.
Both boiled down to the issue of blood /b]. Nazis believed that their Aryan blood was pure; and that Jewish blood could and would contaminate this "purity". Christians believed that by diluting Aboriginal blood, and mixing it with European blood, you would directly benefit Aborignies spiritually and culturally.

See, not that far off, if you know enough to make the connections. Check out Yehuda Bauer or Michael R Marrus for more on Aryan "blood purity".

Ender

 

I also took on, what, 5 or more people here and was the only one to actually use facts.

Um, no, you used dry stats gathered by someone else, I spoke from persoanl experience.

I'll accept your apology, but don't expect one in return. My family only came over here in the 60's and had nothing to do with whatever your ppl went through, my ancestors, the Scots, actually suffered much worse at british hands, but you won't find me stirring crap on a scifi fan msg board because of it.

Go tell your story to someone who gives a damn, 'cause I certainly don't.
Wedge said it, instead of wasting your time here, why not go out to those communities and lecture them on bettering themselves?

 

(IF you don't like the message, don't shoot the messenger...)

SM, how do you know I haven't?
You don't. Futhermore, you wanna know a funny thing? My background is English and Dutch. Two colonial powers, two repressive white nations. And what am I trying to do? Get people to understand what happened, and instead of postivity I get people shooting a messenger 'cause they don't like the message. Try and turn whatever emotion you feel into a positive action for change. If I can, for example, make one person go "Hmmm, maybe I will do this or read that" and change their ideas, haven't I done more than most? Have I done something more constructive than your average John Laws and be destructive and hateful? Yes. At the end of the day, I've said something I don't like, that we committed a genocide, and then basically seen people get all unhappy about that and defensive. No one contested the fact, just the issue of bringing it. I re-read this thread, not one post refuted that the Stolen Generation directly violated Article II(e), did they? They just got upset.
I'm not going to post anymore to this. I just hope some of you opened your minds. Now, excuse me whilst I <stifles a sarcastic, "all-knowing" chuckle> "get over it."

Ender