Originally posted by drdonI can see you and Chrissy have both been brainwashed by the generation of leftist revisionist historians that have pushed the black armband brand of Australian history way past the point of credibility.
Just so. And often their souls which live in connectedness to the land. This alienation has produced a troubled generation of young Kooris. This connectedness must be restored. There can be no return to the past but a sense of belongingness must be nourished rather than starved through blaming the victims of injustice for the consequences of our wrong doing.
This 'connectedness with the land' is twaddle to some extent, in that you are connected to where you are brought up. If you're brought up in say, Darwin, you're connected to that. That's what your memories are of. You're not strongly connected with tribal land you may never have seen or visited.
Originally posted by dfm65Tell that to the Israelis, mate.
This 'connectedness with the land' is twaddle to some extent, in that you are connected to where you are brought up. If you're brought up in say, Darwin, you're connected to that. That's what your memories are of. You're not strongly connected with tribal land you may never have seen or visited.
Originally posted by dfm65It isn't twaddle. The Aboriginal people go back a long, long way in the age for people in the areas. Living off the land, and being wanderers is the skills that were handed down through all those generations. It was their pride. Ozzy settlers stopped their way of life, by imposing a new life where Aboriginal people could no longer live their old one.
I can see you and Chrissy have both been brainwashed by the generation of leftist revisionist historians that have pushed the black armband brand of Australian history way past the point of credibility.
This 'connectedness with the land' is twaddle to some extent, in that you are connected to where you are brought up. If you're brought up in say, Darwin, yo ...[text shortened]... are of. You're not strongly connected with tribal land you may never have seen or visited.
I think their way of life was better for the land, environment. Maybe Non-Aboriginal people should get off their land.... or maybe that is a bit leftist.
Originally posted by Bosse de Nagei'm glad i put that 'to some extent' in there. :-)
Tell that to the Israelis, mate.
To clarify: obviously there is *some* connection to the land of your ancestors, as there is a connection between me and the European countries of my ancestors, but I it doesn't seem reasonable to use that as a excuse for delinquency, as our drdon seems to want to do. But yes, perhaps the Israelis stress the same kind of claim beyond credibility too. But both Israel and post-1788 Australia are facts that are not going to go away.
Originally posted by drdonOh yeah, and do you have a reference for this. btw?
Secondly, I don't think it is at all ridiculous to compare these events simply because there were fewer Aboriginal people to exterminate. An example: There is a huge waterfall in the New England area of NSW. An entire "tribe" - every man, woman and child troops could find in the area were rounded up and assembled at the cliff top then driven over the cliffs near the falls at bayonet point. They were a nuisance to farmers.
Originally posted by dfm65Sure. That doesn't explain why you should refuse to acknowledge that there was a calculated effort to eradicate Aboriginal culture and seek to redress that particular wrong by providing opportunities for marginalised koori to reclaim what is theirs, rather than insisting their behaviour conform to a Western prototype.
But both Israel and post-1788 Australia are facts that are not going to go away.
Originally posted by dfm65Go try to live in the bush or desert then, and see how much connectedness you have to your ancestors.....
i'm glad i put that 'to some extent' in there. :-)
To clarify: obviously there is *some* connection to the land of your ancestors, as there is a connection between me and the European countries of my ancestors, but I it doesn't seem reasonable to use that as a excuse for delinquency, as our drdon seems to want to do. But yes, perhaps the Israelis stress the ...[text shortened]... bility too. But both Israel and post-1788 Australia are facts that are not going to go away.
1 edit
Originally posted by drdonSimilar things were done for similar reasons in South Africa to the San people (a misnomer: they were a loosely related set of clans with four different languages). The farmers placed a far higher value on the lives of sheep than "bushmen" of questionable humanity, with whom they dealt the same as with any other vermin. Now they're gone for good.
Secondly, I don't think it is at all ridiculous to compare these events simply because there were fewer Aboriginal people to exterminate. An example: There is a huge waterfall in the New England area of NSW. An entire "tribe" - every man, woman and child troops could find in the area were rounded up and assembled at the cliff top then driven over the cliffs near the falls at bayonet point. They were a nuisance to farmers.
Originally posted by dfm65brainwashed? 😞
I can see you and Chrissy have both been brainwashed by the generation of leftist revisionist historians that have pushed the black armband brand of Australian history way past the point of credibility.
This 'connectedness with the land' is twaddle to some extent, in that you are connected to where you are brought up. If you're brought up in say, Darwin, yo ...[text shortened]... are of. You're not strongly connected with tribal land you may never have seen or visited.
c'mon dfm no need to get personal just because we differ in opinion.
The reason why i brought Mabo (terra nullius) in to the equation was because it is a significant case in that it finally righted a wrong in Australian history to an extent, even if it did take 200+ years. Or maybe the majority that sat on the bench were brainwashed too.
Originally posted by dfm65What does "twaddle to some extent" mean? and who are these leftwing revisionists? And why do they wear "black armbrands"? What is an arm brand anyway?
I can see you and Chrissy have both been brainwashed by the generation of leftist revisionist historians that have pushed the black armband brand of Australian history way past the point of credibility.
This 'connectedness with the land' is twaddle to some extent, in that you are connected to where you are brought up. If you're brought up in say, Darwin, yo ...[text shortened]... are of. You're not strongly connected with tribal land you may never have seen or visited.
Originally posted by Orange PeelWell put. Left, right or indifferent, we can live in harmony. The land is large enough. Mutual respect for each other and the Law is all that is required.
It isn't twaddle. The Aboriginal people go back a long, long way in the age for people in the areas. Living off the land, and being wanderers is the skills that were handed down through all those generations. It was their pride. Ozzy settlers stopped their way of life, by imposing a new life where Aboriginal people could no longer live their old one.
...[text shortened]... ment. Maybe Non-Aboriginal people should get off their land.... or maybe that is a bit leftist.
Many white Australians are very sensitive about this topic. They generally don't argue that the "stolen generation" factor did not happen, but that the removal of Aboriginal children from Aboriginal families was in some way “good” for them. These were hideous crimes for which Australians should be embarrassed about. I think the feeling of wishing these events did not happen motivates justification of what was done.
The removal of children from their families to "assimilate" them is genocide as defined in the convention Australia signed, no matter how much one wishes it did not occur.