|
Post by chequeredflaggg on Feb 25, 2013 11:01:47 GMT 10
|
|
|
Post by volk on Feb 25, 2013 11:36:52 GMT 10
Well I'll be, who woulda thunk it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2013 12:50:23 GMT 10
Reads like the Country Liberal Party passing the buck for their own in action....typical consrevatives values...blame game no fix.
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Feb 25, 2013 21:29:49 GMT 10
|
|
|
Post by caskur on Feb 25, 2013 23:30:51 GMT 10
umm... no... the lefties pushed in the old days, for alcohol to be served to aborigines despite it not being part of their culture,.. despite warning after warning this would happen... now suck it up!
When publicans refused to serve them, they were threatened with jail.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2013 2:37:28 GMT 10
Give back ALL land stolen from the original inhabitants of Northern Territory and remove ALL bactaria, viruses, introduced pests, alcohol, etc, infested on the land by whitie and I'm sure the descendents of the original inhabitants will be able to look after themselves in the traditional manner as practised for many thousands of years before whitie came along.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2013 6:23:03 GMT 10
And if whitie hadn't come along, who would it have been then? Perhaps you and the Abos would have preferred the Indos, chinky chonks or nips? No matter what way you look at it, someone would have filled the void. And you can bet there wouldn't be one Abo left on the continent. Of course there wouldn't be any welfare to be worrying about either.
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Feb 26, 2013 6:26:12 GMT 10
More blatant racism from Stellar.
Has it occurred to her puny moronic brain that the terms "Chinky Chonks" and "Nips" are offensive?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2013 6:30:04 GMT 10
Urban slang.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2013 7:47:39 GMT 10
"Look, over there.... A 'Dole Bludger'......." Now, do ya reckon that'll distract them ?
|
|
|
Post by bender on Feb 26, 2013 8:21:52 GMT 10
And if whitie hadn't come along, who would it have been then? Perhaps you and the Abos would have preferred the Indos, chinky chonks or nips? No matter what way you look at it, someone would have filled the void. And you can bet there wouldn't be one Abo left on the continent. Of course there wouldn't be any welfare to be worrying about either. Stellar, your grasp of history is abysmal. The Chinese and the Japanese didn't have the capability to mount a colonisation of a country like Australia till the end of the 19th century (the 1800's) and Indonesia was a Dutch Colony until the middle of the 20th century. The Dutch were well aware of Australia, had explored the west and Northern coastline for a couple of hundred years before Captain Cook showed up, and had showed absolutely zero interest in either claiming Australia, or in colonising it. Essentially the only Countries that could viably conduct a colonisation of Australia during the era in which it did happen were England or France (Captain Arthur Phillip stated in his diaries that his greatest fear was a landing and attack on the colony by the French) and less likely Spain, Portugal, Italy or Germany. And out of all the countries listed, England has the worst record when it comes to colonisation and the impact of it upon indigenous people. Your argument that whatever we've done isn't so bad because others would have done worse is one that is simply not backed up by the facts. It is beyond stupid. Which is something that is the rule and not the exception when it comes to your arguments.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2013 8:44:14 GMT 10
Abel Tasman certainly had a squizzy at Oz and the Maoris had him running shit scared away from NZ ..Where as Capt Cook was a tad more aristocratic lookin' and with a more charming personality than Abel...while initial meetings with the indigenous folk around the globe and the Pacific with Capt' Cook may have impressed native folk with his noble charm and personality, it wasn't long before they saw through the charade and thought he was a whitey colonizing fuckwit...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2013 8:56:30 GMT 10
And if whitie hadn't come along, who would it have been then? Perhaps you and the Abos would have preferred the Indos, chinky chonks or nips? No matter what way you look at it, someone would have filled the void. And you can bet there wouldn't be one Abo left on the continent. Of course there wouldn't be any welfare to be worrying about either. Stellar, your grasp of history is abysmal. The Chinese and the Japanese didn't have the capability to mount a colonisation of a country like Australia till the end of the 19th century (the 1800's) and Indonesia was a Dutch Colony until the middle of the 20th century. The Dutch were well aware of Australia, had explored the west and Northern coastline for a couple of hundred years before Captain Cook showed up, and had showed absolutely zero interest in either claiming Australia, or in colonising it. Essentially the only Countries that could viably conduct a colonisation of Australia during the era in which it did happen were England or France (Captain Arthur Phillip stated in his diaries that his greatest fear was a landing and attack on the colony by the French) and less likely Spain, Portugal, Italy or Germany. And out of all the countries listed, England has the worst record when it comes to colonisation and the impact of it upon indigenous people. Your argument that whatever we've done isn't so bad because others would have done worse is one that is simply not backed up by the facts. It is beyond stupid. Which is something that is the rule and not the exception when it comes to your arguments. Oh for gawd's sake! Do you not understand a hypothetical question? Who knows when or if some other nation would have eyed off the great south land as a potential colony always assuming the British rejected it? This has nothing to do with history.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2013 9:06:17 GMT 10
What a great and beautifull land if Australia had not been colonised by anyone but the Aborigine.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2013 9:11:12 GMT 10
Well that was never going to happen. But of course according to Kiwi, anyone would have been better than whitie. Which prompted my hypothetical answer ... would he have preferred the chinky chonks or nips or Indos.
|
|
|
Post by bender on Feb 26, 2013 9:11:37 GMT 10
Stellar, your grasp of history is abysmal. The Chinese and the Japanese didn't have the capability to mount a colonisation of a country like Australia till the end of the 19th century (the 1800's) and Indonesia was a Dutch Colony until the middle of the 20th century. The Dutch were well aware of Australia, had explored the west and Northern coastline for a couple of hundred years before Captain Cook showed up, and had showed absolutely zero interest in either claiming Australia, or in colonising it. Essentially the only Countries that could viably conduct a colonisation of Australia during the era in which it did happen were England or France (Captain Arthur Phillip stated in his diaries that his greatest fear was a landing and attack on the colony by the French) and less likely Spain, Portugal, Italy or Germany. And out of all the countries listed, England has the worst record when it comes to colonisation and the impact of it upon indigenous people. Your argument that whatever we've done isn't so bad because others would have done worse is one that is simply not backed up by the facts. It is beyond stupid. Which is something that is the rule and not the exception when it comes to your arguments. Oh for gawd's sake! Do you not understand a hypothetical question? Who knows when or if some other nation would have eyed off the great south land as a potential colony always assuming the British rejected it? This has nothing to do with history. It has nothing to do with history Stellar? Well, you may as well have argued that if England hadn't colonised Australia then Alien Invaders from Mars would have done it. I explained to you the historical perspective because that shows you the reality of the time. That is, what actually happened, now we all know that reality and you are subject to a DVO and have been ordered to remain 500m apart at all times but really Stellar, to make an argument like you have above, and then to try and claim that it was just a hypothetical question shows more then anything else, a resistance to accepting reality whenever it conflicts with your petty, insular, bigotted beliefs. Perhaps you should just accept that you made a bone stupid comment, and were corrected instead of trying to make even sillier excuses for your idiocy. And do try to actually learn something about the history of your own country. You should be more embarrassed about that then anything else you wrote.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2013 9:20:05 GMT 10
Oh ffs! Don't lecture me on history!! As you have mentioned, the only other nation capable of colonising this land at the time was France. And they're whities, aren't they?? Kiwi's statement was always about whitie colonising this land, hence my hypothetical question.
|
|
|
Post by bender on Feb 26, 2013 10:29:59 GMT 10
Don't lecture you on history?
Stellar a prerequisite to making that type of statement would you be demonstrating that you actually know something of history.
As we can see from your posts on this thread it is clearly apparent you do not.
Stop making idiotic claims that illustrate your complete and utter ignorance of history Stellar and nobody will need to lecture you on the subject.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2013 11:04:48 GMT 10
Abel Tasman certainly had a squizzy at Oz and the Maoris had him running shit scared away from NZ .. Yep....Abel Tasman buggered off from Aotearoa quick-smart after Maori attacked in force, killing several of his men. Even cannon fire from Tasman's ships didn't deter the Maori warriors. Tasman named the place Murderer's Bay, but us Kiwis know it as Golden Bay today.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2013 12:03:05 GMT 10
Don't lecture you on history? Stellar a prerequisite to making that type of statement would you be demonstrating that you actually know something of history. As we can see from your posts on this thread it is clearly apparent you do not. Stop making idiotic claims that illustrate your complete and utter ignorance of history Stellar and nobody will need to lecture you on the subject. The only idiot here is you Bender. I've told you that it's got nothing to do with history. It's like arguing with a robot programmed with a one-track mind. Your comprehension leaves a lot to be desired so I'll leave it to others more astute to judge. And now I am off to work, so argue with yourself all afternoon seeing as you have nothing better to do.
|
|
|
Post by bender on Feb 26, 2013 12:38:48 GMT 10
What a great and beautifull land if Australia had not been colonised by anyone but the Aborigine. Complete ignorance. Read books on how they lived and the initiation and defloration ceremonies and the death rates and the way they made war against other tribes and payback and complete lack of understanding of how children were brought into the world. With this post you have shown yourself to be a complete looney. You know nothing about aborigines. Buzz I'm never going to criticise anyone for actively seeking out ways to educate themselves about Indigenous History, Society and Culture, but as I've pointed out to you before it's important not to limit yourself to single or minimal sources of information, and one area in which I have criticised your debating style is the way you latch onto a single idea to the exclusion of all othes. Whilst there are aspects of Aboriginal Culture that are unpleasant in the abstract, not to mention illegal in practice, I believe that if you look at the totality of what is known now and you see not only the general behavioural characteristics that allowed Aboriginal People to maintain what is most likely the longest unbroken run of a single culture anywhere in human history, but also features that contradict the idea that they were simple nomadic hunter gatherers within each tribes range. If you look at the society and cultural behaviour of Aboriginal Tribes from the West and Northwest of Australia you see very different behaviour from that of the East Coast of Australia, and once again in the South of the Country where evidence of not just permanent settlement but of planned agriculture exist that appear to predate it's appearance in Europe. We know from the reports of the Military Officers of the First Fleet that Aboriginal's (up to the point of our arrival here) were physically far superior to the average European on pretty much every key indicator. They were stronger, had an average life span that was considerably greater then whites, and studies have shown that the hours of labor Vs providing the requirements of life of Aboriginals was far lower then any other society of the time. Two writers might particularly interest you, and best of all you can read their books online. One is of William Buckley the convict who lived for about 30 years with the tribes of Port Phillip Bay before the establishment of a colony in (what became) Victoria. openlibrary.org/books/OL6571577M/The_life_and_adventures_of_William_BuckleyThe other is of Thomas Petrie, the son of the Surveyor Andew Petrie and for a large part of his childhood the only white child in the Moreton Bay Penal Colony. His memoirs were found after his death and are an incredible read because it both details a time before white habitation had seriously encroached upon the local tribes here and also covers the time in which the Black Wars were raging throughout a region from Bathurst north to Cairns. www.seqhistory.com/tom-petrie/95-part1chpt1?start=1Neither of those two books is politically correct, and they are a product of their times (1820 and 1850's respectively) and they are by no means comprehensive in their scope. But you might find them illuminating.
|
|
|
Post by pim on Feb 26, 2013 13:48:52 GMT 10
Can we please stop this silly race to the bottom where you get KTJ leading the chorus on "whitefella guilt"? It's bullshit. Let me put it to you this way: I have a family member who had the grandiloquent title of "Communications Manager for Northern Australia" for Centrelink. She's since been promoted to a senior policy area in Canberra where, under the Gillard Government, Centrelink and Health and Indigenous Affairs are being meshed - with huge implications for indigenous people. Part of the unsung policy legacy that the Gillard Government will leave. I wonder what an Abbott Government will do with it? But I digress ...
One of the things my rellie had to do in her role in northen Australia was to explain government policy on health and centrelink to groups of indigenous people. She invariably found herself talking to indigenous women. They want their kids to be educated. They want their kids to be skilled up and employable. They understand that their kids are under an imperative to find their place in the whitefella economy. The last thing they need is for bullshit artists like KTJ who are so caught up in their political correctness that their brains have turned to mush and their obsession with some silly theoretical PC model of ideological "perfection" blinds them to what is achievable and bebeficial. It truly is an example of the lollipop "left" being the enemy of progress because wih them the perfect is the enemy of the good. KTJ should talk to some of the indigenous leadership such as Noel Pearson, and he should ask himself why it is that in the recent NT elections the biggest swing towards the conservative LNP end of politics came from the indigenous vote.
One more thing: I wouldn't have put what Stellar posted in the way that she did. But dig underneath all of that and what do you get? You get the insight that as world history progressed through the 19th century and into the 20th century, the blackfella original inhabitants of this continent weren't going to be allowed to pursue their hunter/gatherer lifestyles and cultures indefinitely. The so-called global economy is nothing new. The 18th and 19th centuries saw the economies of Europe progressively globalise. Marx describes it very cogently and succinctly in his Communist Manifesto and develops this theme in Capital. You don't have to agree with his politics to acknowledge the value of his analysis. The Wide Brown Land Down Under with its Stone Age inhabitants was never going to survive as such intact through the 19th century right up to our lifetimes after WW2 as type of Rousseau "noble savage" zoo and theme park. Some external power was going to get their hands on it and I agree with Bender's analysis of why it ended up being the British and who the probable alternatives were - and weren't!
Because, KTJ, and I hope you're paying attention here - that's the nub of the blackfella criticism of the lollipop left - especially the Greens. They accuse the Greens of wanting to reserve for the Aborigines a type of blackfella "mascot" role where they act as "rangers" in pristine nature "parks". When in fact many indigenous Australians want a slice of the "real" economy and they want the skills to be able to get it. It isn't just Labor people like me who see your ideologically blinkered ill-informed poliotical correctness as an obstacle to progress, it's a lot of indigenous people too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2013 14:30:12 GMT 10
Because, KTJ, and I hope you're paying attention here - that's the nub of the blackfella criticism of the lollipop left - especially the Greens. They accuse the Greens of wanting to reserve for the Aborigines a type of blackfella "mascot" role where they act as "rangers" in pristine nature "parks". When in fact many indigenous Australians want a slice of the "real" economy and they want the skills to be able to get it. It isn't just Labor people like me who see your ideologically blinkered ill-informed poliotical correctness as an obstacle to progress, it's a lot of indigenous people too. The truth is actually a whole lot simpler.
I've simply worked out which buttons to push to get a reaction from Stellar, that Flaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaag idiot, Matty-boy and Altair (when he is around).
|
|
|
Post by caskur on Feb 26, 2013 15:20:23 GMT 10
Urban slang. perfectly acceptable...
|
|
|
Post by caskur on Feb 26, 2013 15:21:34 GMT 10
Because, KTJ, and I hope you're paying attention here - that's the nub of the blackfella criticism of the lollipop left - especially the Greens. They accuse the Greens of wanting to reserve for the Aborigines a type of blackfella "mascot" role where they act as "rangers" in pristine nature "parks". When in fact many indigenous Australians want a slice of the "real" economy and they want the skills to be able to get it. It isn't just Labor people like me who see your ideologically blinkered ill-informed poliotical correctness as an obstacle to progress, it's a lot of indigenous people too. The truth is actually a whole lot simpler.
I've simply worked out which buttons to push to get a reaction from Stellar, that Flaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaag idiot, Matty-boy and Altair (when he is around).And I have been pushing your button for a decade... yayyy me!
|
|