The Necessity of Reparation for Historic Injustices

bluediamond's picture
bluediamond started the topic in Sunday, 25 Jul 2021 at 1:26pm

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

Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19 Wednesday, 15 Sep 2021 at 9:59am

Not funny BD !

Craig's picture
Craig's picture
Craig Wednesday, 15 Sep 2021 at 10:02am

Hutchy, lighten up a bit eh.

bluediamond's picture
bluediamond's picture
bluediamond Wednesday, 15 Sep 2021 at 10:02am

Hey Hutch. Not trying to be funny. I meant it. Have a good day mate.

bluediamond's picture
bluediamond's picture
bluediamond Wednesday, 15 Sep 2021 at 10:15am

That's messed up Udo. Thanks for sharing. So,... can be citizen..check. Can't live your natural life of existence before 'other' came along onto your land, took your land and then decided to allow you to be a citizen. Not check. Is there a problem here?

bluediamond's picture
bluediamond's picture
bluediamond Wednesday, 15 Sep 2021 at 10:26am

Hey hutchy19. You seem a sincere fella. I'm personally not on any vendetta against you but it seems you're out to block this conversation as soon as it gets started. I'd really like to see you engage in this debate. I cannot be more polite than that. You have an opportunity to explain to me why this resentment you talk about exists. Without explaining this, which i believe will answer your own questions, this conversation is stalled.
Don't answer Hutchy's question with no room for critical analyis.......debate stops.
Do present Hutchy with an option to move the conversation forward, .....conversation can move forward. Just as you demand of everyone else on here.
Saying there's an Elephant in the room but not addressing it....conversation stalled.
Mate i wanna chat to you and help put the idea of solutions and moving forward as a priority, but this is a one sided convo if you don't engage in the questions put back at you.
As always Hutchy, respect. I get the impression you're a fella with good morals and a great conviction. But would be good if you could allow the space for others so we can solve all the problems of the world together. I genuinely care for you and your well being. Wanna work with you and not against you. Cheers mate.

Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19 Wednesday, 15 Sep 2021 at 10:37am

Craig - I believe strongly that it is very poor form to respond on social media under the influence .

BD and I are having a much better tone of discussion and I would hate to see it ruined due to a alcohol affected comment .

HaHa was not appropriate imo and I let him know it . It is as light as I get .

Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19 Thursday, 16 Sep 2021 at 2:59pm

Bluediamond

Here are some of the comments I have made on resentment .

"A wonderful start . A resentment can cause anger/rage , fear , lack of self worth , reduce ones ego , sadness , hopelessness , and other similar emotions .

I am not the best person to ask about what exactly are the main causes of Aboriginal resentment but maybe the feeling of racial discrimination is up there ."

"It is only one issue and it does cause resentment . You can loose trust in someone and not resent them as they might not affect you.

If you loose trust in a system and it causes you anger , despair or makes you feel disrespected it naturally causes terrible resentment . The longer the resentment lasts the worse it gets and causes all types of abuse ."

"It has been caused by many issues including having a lack of trust , a feeling of hopelessness , lack of respect and so many other things that I would hope you could show me ."

Then you write this .

"I have put forward a simple question to you....what is resentment in indigenous Australia and why does it exist.
If this is not a logical first step to a debate, i'm not sure what is."

I have tried to avoid putting a "White Mans " perspective on what is causing so much resentment to our wonderful Aboriginal community . I have asked you and others to do it but you still can't even work out the question let alone give me suggestions on how we can repair it .

Your suggestions eg giving them 50% of our voting power and industry are ridiculous and will never be approved in our democracy .

I will , under duress , give you two issues that I believe would cause massive resentment .

1. Stolen Generation and 2. Genocide .

If have tried to point out that both issues were never state sponsored . Both have been determined to be not government policy in both Federal and State Courts ( 15 times ) .

I we could prove to all Aboriginals that it wasn't government policy it would be a great start .

BUT I can not even get you and others to accept this .

I have decided that I am wasting my time trying to help find ways and solutions to help reduce resentment .

I will explore other forums .

All the best !

bluediamond's picture
bluediamond's picture
bluediamond Thursday, 16 Sep 2021 at 3:16pm

No worries hutch. I was curious on your thoughts regarding my other post about the referendum which I thought was worth discussing but no problems if its pick and choose to what suits your agenda. Happy to leave it at that. This forum was created for many voices. Not just mine, that's for sure. All the best

bluediamond's picture
bluediamond's picture
bluediamond Thursday, 16 Sep 2021 at 3:17pm

Whoops. Double posted

Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19 Thursday, 16 Sep 2021 at 4:05pm

BD

Happy to give my view ( not informed ) on this but really would think your sources would be the ones to ask .

"It made me think of the 1967 referendum that formally acknowledged Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders as citizens of Australia ."

I don't think that this issue has anywhere near the influence as the two I mentioned . It was very late but the right decision was made as nearly all Australians agreed ( 93%- the most overwhelming ref ever ) .

Surely this must have let our first Australians know the we believed it was about time that an obvious wrong needed to be righted urgently .

indo-dreaming's picture
indo-dreaming's picture
indo-dreaming Thursday, 16 Sep 2021 at 4:19pm

Wow it' quite amazing at that stage in time over 50 years ago the vote was so high it's a figure i would have expected today not back then.

Certainly goes against the picture some like to paint of Australia and Australians.

Constance B Gibson's picture
Constance B Gibson's picture
Constance B Gibson Thursday, 16 Sep 2021 at 5:11pm

THE HISTORY.

"On 27 May 1967 a referendum was put on removing the impediment in s.51 (xxvi) to the Commonwealth Government making special laws with respect to Aborigines and on removing the impediment in s.127 to counting Aboriginal people in the census. The result, a 90.77% ‘yes’ vote, opened the way for much greater Commonwealth Government involvement in the area of Aboriginal affairs.

The significance of the referendum has, however, been obscured by popular myths.

These include that it was whole-heartedly supported by both sides of politics, that it conferred the vote, equal wages and citizenship on Indigenous Australians and that it ended legal discrimination. None of this was the case.

The Menzies Government had not been enthusiastic about altering s.51(xxvi) and the Holt Government’s motives were mixed. The repeal of the discriminatory state legislation, clarification of the Indigenous right to vote, securing of equal wages and access to full citizenship entitlements involved a process which had begun earlier and was independent of the 1967 referendum. Moreover, the referendum did not automatically make the Commonwealth more involved and indeed little changed for five years.

Although it is possible to question the efficacy of having both the Commonwealth and the states involved in Indigenous affairs, it is not possible to question the fact that the referendum provided a head of power for some significant Commonwealth legislation.

Similarly, although it is possible to question the referendum’s practical significance, it is not possible to question the referendum’s symbolic significance. The referendum has, indeed, come to act as a form of historical shorthand for a decade of change which began in the early 1960s and ended in the early 1970s."

https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id...

Constance B Gibson's picture
Constance B Gibson's picture
Constance B Gibson Thursday, 16 Sep 2021 at 5:18pm

THE MYTHS.

"The passage of time, along with some of the emotional statements broadcast at the time of the
referendum itself, appears to have ensured that many popular notions associated with the
1967 Referendum belong in the category of myths.

a) That it had whole-heart support from both sides of politics:

Although held up as a moment of national unity, the Menzies Government had been less than
enthusiastic about altering s.51 and the Holt Government focused most of its attention on
other non-Aboriginal related questions being put in referenda on that same day.

b) That it gave Aboriginal people citizenship:

From 1902 until well into the 1960s and even 1970s successive governments and
administrators, through legislative provisions and administrative practices, excluded
indigenous people from a range of what might today be regarded as citizenship rights and
entitlements. This exclusion was not, however, the result of an exclusion explicit in the 1901
Constitution and it did not need the 1967 Constitutional amendment to change this situation.
Most of the provisions and practices relevant to the denial of what might be thought of as
citizenship rights was able to be dismantled in processes preceding and unrelated to the
referendum of 1967.

It is worth noting, moreover, that ‘citizenship’ was not a term used in the 1901 Constitution.
It was not by creating a notion of ‘citizenship’ with core attendant values, rather than by
explicitly excluding Aborigines from citizenship, that the Constitution was able to allow the
subsequent systematic discrimination against Aborigines by state and Commonwealth
governments. Thus, even the passage of the Nationality and Citizenship Act 1948, though
creating for the first time the legal status of Australian Citizen, had little impact upon the
effect of legislation and practices which discriminated against Aborigines.

FCAATSI had campaigned for a plethora of ‘citizen rights’ in the decade before the
referendum, but never intended to give the impression there was one single right which
would make indigenous people citizens let alone that the 1967 referendum would grant it.
The only ‘right’ of relevance that was denied by the 1901 Constitution and instated by the
1967 referendum, was that to be counted in the Federal Census. Nevertheless, it is apparent
that FCAATSI’s energetic ‘talking-up’ in the course of the campaign of the implications of a
‘yes’ vote, contributed to the myth that ‘citizenship’ itself was at stake.

c) That it gave Aborigines the right to vote:

Technically male Aboriginals had the right to vote since colonial times. When Victoria, New
South Wales, Tasmania and South Australia framed their constitutions in the 1850s they gave
voting rights to all male British subjects over 21. In 1895 when South Australia gave women
the right to vote and sit in Parliament, Aboriginal women shared the right. Few Aborigines
knew their rights so very few voted, but Point McLeay, a mission station near the mouth of
the Murray, got a polling station in the 1890s. Aboriginal men and women voted there in
South Australian elections and voted for the first Commonwealth Parliament in 1901.
A proposal, however, to use the Commonwealth Franchise Act 1902 (Cth) which was being
framed to extend the federal franchise to women, to extend it also to Aborigines, failed and
in the end, section 4 of the 1902 Act specifically denied the voting rights of 'Aboriginal
native[s] of Australia ... unless so entitled under Section 41 of the Constitution'.

The first Solicitor-General, Sir Robert Garran, later interpreted this as giving Commonwealth
voting rights only to people who were already state voters in 1902. Accordingly, in the 1920s
and 1930s some Aborigines even lost their voting rights. Even South Australian Aborigines
enrolled before 1902, were having their right to vote taken away. In 1921 South Australia
adopted a joint Federal-State electoral roll, as did other states during the 1920s, and the
wording of the new enrolment form implied that no Aborigines, Asians or Pacific Islanders
could vote in Commonwealth elections. On the new, joint roll a small circle beside any name
indicated 'not entitled' to vote for the Commonwealth'.

Garran’s interpretation of section 41 was first challenged in 1924—not by an Aborigine but
by an Indian who had recently been accepted to vote by Victoria, but rejected by the
Commonwealth. He went to court and won. The magistrate ruled that section 41 meant that
people who acquired state votes at any date were entitled to a Commonwealth vote. The
Commonwealth passed an Act giving all Indians the vote (there were only 2 300 of them and
the then immigration policy would see there were no more), but continued to reject
Aborigines and other ‘coloured’ applicants under its own interpretation of section 41.
Exclusions multiplied in the 1930s. In 1945 the Chief Electoral Officer had erroneously
declared that to vote in Federal elections an Aborigine must not only have obtained state
enrolment before the Franchise Act of 1902 was passed but must have 'retained that
enrolment continuously since'.

In the early-1940s Professor Elkin at the University of Sydney questioned the Electoral
Office's interpretation of the law and his case was taken up by Group Captain Thomas White,
Federal member for Balaclava. The then Minister for the Interior, Herbert Johnson, declared
that he was interested in extending the franchise ‘as early as possible to Aborigines whose
education has reached such a standard that they are able to appreciate its value’. The Menzies
Government gave the Commonwealth vote to all Aborigines in the Commonwealth Electoral
Act 1962. Western Australia gave them state votes in the same year and Queensland, the last
jurisdiction to do so, followed in 1965."

https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id...

Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19 Thursday, 16 Sep 2021 at 6:06pm

Conny

All you post means nothing . What was so important at the time was how the Australian people felt and voted . I feel proud that the vote was so one-sided . A pity you aren't !

Unfortunately you have nothing positive to say on the matter ( or any other matter I have seen you comment on ) . Your posts are always cryptic and often splattered with big words . In my experience people who write like this are attempting to make up for other shortcomings !

"Cultural competence. The 1967 Referendum was the most successful in our history winning 93 percent of votes cast. This empowered the national government to make laws in respect of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples that could assist in addressing inequalities.29 May 2017"

bluediamond's picture
bluediamond's picture
bluediamond Thursday, 16 Sep 2021 at 6:18pm

Great post Constance and thanks. There's heaps in there that i was unaware of regarding the voting rights. Appreciate the education and you adding to the bigger picture. Probably gonna be worth a second read so i'll do that now. Cheers.

indo-dreaming's picture
indo-dreaming's picture
indo-dreaming Thursday, 16 Sep 2021 at 6:37pm
Hutchy 19 wrote:

Conny

Unfortunately you have nothing positive to say on the matter ( or any other matter I have seen you comment on ) . Your posts are always cryptic and often splattered with big words . In my experience people who write like this are attempting to make up for other shortcomings !

Trust me, you aint see nothing yet.

Constance B Gibson's picture
Constance B Gibson's picture
Constance B Gibson Thursday, 16 Sep 2021 at 6:58pm

BD, if you've got some time, check out the various 'protection acts' passed into law and enacted by Australian government/s.

Here's another parliamentary source:

https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Legal_an...

The WA Aborigines Act of 1905 is a ripper!

Here's an internet-researcher friendly summation from a mate in The South West Aboriginal Land & Sea Council:

https://www.noongarculture.org.au/impacts-of-law-post-1905/

And for those that think this is all in some dark, dusty past, a while ago I had the pleasure and honour of having a chat with one of Australian football's true legends. The first-hand stories of his, and our, quite frankly apartheid (there is no other word for it) history were, well...

https://www.carltonfc.com.au/news/798526/syd-jacksons-epic-story-of-will...

velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno Thursday, 16 Sep 2021 at 7:00pm

"Trust me, you aint see nothing yet."

Ain't that a fact. O, how the discourse will evolve from here

Constance B Gibson's picture
Constance B Gibson's picture
Constance B Gibson Thursday, 16 Sep 2021 at 7:03pm

And Hutchy, why so erm, resentful, hun? I love your incessant contributions...here, there and everywhere.

You've out Indo'd Indo, and blown away Blowin. Good stuff, all for a good cause. Cheers for the public service.

Roker's picture
Roker's picture
Roker Thursday, 16 Sep 2021 at 7:08pm

There have only ever been ten Aboriginal members of the Federal Parliament.

The Federal Parliament should make the Northern Territory a State. Not particularly democratic if you believe in one vote one value, but we already have Tasmania.

With another 10 senators now accorded to the Territory, and perhaps an extra member or two of the House of Representatives, Aboriginal representation in Parliament would presumably immediately increase.

This change would increase the size of the Senate to 86 and the HoR to, say, 172.

Legislation would then provide that the size of the Senate be increased to 14 members per state, and mandate that at least two senators from each state be Aboriginal.

Eligibility would be decided by an appropriate statutory authority, and the two Aboriginal senators would be responsible to the whole state, as per normal.

There would now be 100 Senators, meaning the size of the HoR would have to increase by 28, bringing the total to 200. Too many politicians, but that’s the price of doing business, and it’s a nice round number.

Legislation would be gazetted creating superimposed national electorates, complimenting the existing ones, the latter operating as normal. The new electorates would be based on the size of the Aboriginal population, roughly 800,000. Only Aboriginal people, eligibility decided by the aforementioned statutory authority, would be eligible to be elected in these districts.

This would seemingly create electorates of roughly only 33000 people, compared to say, 165000 for the existing ones, and vary greatly in area.

However, each of the 28 Aboriginal members of these special overlayed electorates would be responsible to the entire population of the electorate, ie not just the Aboriginal population. Voting would be compulsory.

Constance B Gibson's picture
Constance B Gibson's picture
Constance B Gibson Thursday, 16 Sep 2021 at 7:10pm

VJ, you can't put a price on SN forum discourse. Or turn a buck.

Or maybe you can?

Hmmm, the price of everything, and the value of nowt. Was that Hayek or Rand?

maddogmorley's picture
maddogmorley's picture
maddogmorley Thursday, 16 Sep 2021 at 7:11pm

As per usual a Swellnet thread that started as an interesting topic has turned into a mud slinging match (Rolled eyes emoji)

GuySmiley's picture
GuySmiley's picture
GuySmiley Thursday, 16 Sep 2021 at 7:28pm
bluediamond wrote:

Great post Constance and thanks. There's heaps in there that i was unaware of regarding the voting rights. Appreciate the education and you adding to the bigger picture. Probably gonna be worth a second read so i'll do that now. Cheers.

X2

bluediamond's picture
bluediamond's picture
bluediamond Thursday, 16 Sep 2021 at 7:54pm

Cheers for those links Constance.

Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19 Thursday, 16 Sep 2021 at 8:33pm

Con - sorry I was a bit resentful and negative . I have posted on this thread and have felt I am going nowhere regarding a repeated question of reducing resentment .

I was asked for a comment and I responded and referred to a very positive vote .

You then have smashed the positive vibes and added many issues that cause resentment Not reduce it .

That sort of response has been felt by me many times hence my decision to leave this thread and try elsewhere .

brutus's picture
brutus's picture
brutus Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 8:11am

CBG, great work in putting all the links together , which really tells part of the story in how White Australia , slowly but surely has recognized and had to deal with the issue of what to do with Australia's Blackfellas........from the white Australia policy to the Stolen generation to todays inequalities / systemic racism...which once again , slowly but surely is being dealt with as Australia embraces its changing demographics and becomes a cosmopolitan country.

A really interesting event prior to the referendum was the test match between West Indies and Australia played at the MCG in 61'...with Frank Worrell and Richie Benaud being the respective Captains. One of the best test matches ever played , entertaining competitive but most of all the attitude and style of the West Indians was loved and accepted by the Melbournians , there was a huge tickertape parade through Melbourne with hundreds of thousands of lining the streets cheering and clapping. Richie Benaud made a speech at the end of the parade , where he made the statement something along the lines of" these wonderful men who have come here and entertained us with Calypso cricket , what an amazing test , but just so we all know , these wonderful people/team who have just played us will not be allowed back into Australia as individuals as tourists because Australia doesn't give visas to Black people!!
I think this was a turning point for the Australian public in realizing "blacks are humans also!"

brutus's picture
brutus's picture
brutus Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 8:14am
Hutchy 19 wrote:

Con - sorry I was a bit resentful and negative . I have posted on this thread and have felt I am going nowhere regarding a repeated question of reducing resentment .

I was asked for a comment and I responded and referred to a very positive vote .

Hutchy , you cannot control the narrative for you....you keep talking about resentment, when in fact as we have previously discussed ...there is a lack of trust and respect from our First peoples towards our current system...

You then have smashed the positive vibes and added many issues that cause resentment Not reduce it .

That sort of response has been felt by me many times hence my decision to leave this thread and try elsewhere .

Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19 Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 8:24am

Con

With your smarts and knowledge of the parliamentary web sites I would VERY much appreciate hearing your opinion on the question "was the stolen generation and genocide ever State or Federal Government policy in Australia" ?

Other new and informed opinions would also be welcomed !

bluediamond's picture
bluediamond's picture
bluediamond Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 9:42am
Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19 Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 10:05am

BD - I had a quick perusal of the link . It seems to prove that there was NO government policy to remove children based on race . Definitely no policy to commit genocide .

If there is anything in there that says otherwise , you prove to me why you have said the opposite to what I believe . I have given previously links to prove my case . Time for you to do the same WITHOUT giving me links to large papers and expecting me to find them .

So please state clearly ( don't make me guess ) if you believe is was or wasn't Australian government policy to steal Aboriginal children and commit genocide on the Aboriginal people due to their race .

This is the elephant in the room !!!!!!! Please answer the question ( anyone else please do as well ) .

I am the ONLY one so far that has said it was NOT our governments policy !!!!!!!!!!

brutus's picture
brutus's picture
brutus Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 10:07am
brutus wrote:
Hutchy 19 wrote:

Con - sorry I was a bit resentful and negative . I have posted on this thread and have felt I am going nowhere regarding a repeated question of reducing resentment .
I was asked for a comment and I responded and referred to a very positive vote .
You then have smashed the positive vibes and added many issues that cause resentment Not reduce it .

That sort of response has been felt by me many times hence my decision to leave this thread and try elsewhere .

Hutchy , you cannot control the narrative for you....you keep talking about resentment, when in fact as we have previously discussed ...there is a lack of trust and respect from our First peoples towards our current system...
When you cut and paste material , it would help if you gave us your opinion on the links you provide?
BD has just posted all the relative legislation have a read , then give us your conclusion.......and try to move on from that word ...resentment!

bluediamond's picture
bluediamond's picture
bluediamond Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 10:22am

Hutchy, the creation of specific laws to target a specific group of people in specific situations using the power of those laws to their own discretion, in my humble opinion posits legislation/policy.

Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19 Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 10:36am

Brutus ".there is a lack of trust and respect from our First peoples towards our current system..."

I have acknowledged this and it causes RESENTMENT . I can feel it in all your posts . You have huge resentments . Acknowledge it !!!!!!

Resentment are the MAJOR cause of addictions . Addictions are a major cause of abuse . Abuse of aboriginals , the women and the children is what I want rectified .

I am not trying to control the narrative . I am planing on leaving the thread ( which I believe would make you very happy ) because the existing narrative will not change its minds on the facts I have provided . It will not prove its views with facts .

It will not address and fails to acknowledge the ELEPHANT in the room . It is good at pointing out problems but is fucken hopeless at providing ANY realistic solutions !!!!!!!

GuySmiley's picture
GuySmiley's picture
GuySmiley Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 10:42am

A more pertinent question for me is what is the ongoing fascination of knobs like hutchy and his fellow co-conspirators from the shallow end of the gene pool to this topic. It’s been rehashed every six months or so for seemingly years and always ends with the same or similar inane arguments. Its at best a tedious waste of time. Fuck off hutchy.

bonza's picture
bonza's picture
bonza Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 10:46am

"I am planing on leaving the thread"

how can we help?

Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19 Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 10:49am

I am going to Smiley . Due to people like you starting to cause me resentment that is unhealthy for me .

The definition of resentment -"bitter indignation at having been treated unfairly."

brutus's picture
brutus's picture
brutus Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 10:57am
Hutchy 19 wrote:

Brutus ".there is a lack of trust and respect from our First peoples towards our current system..."
I have acknowledged this and it causes RESENTMENT . I can feel it in all your posts . You have huge resentments . Acknowledge it !!!!!!
Resentment are the MAJOR cause of addictions . Addictions are a major cause of abuse . Abuse of aboriginals , the women and the children is what I want rectified .
I am not trying to control the narrative . I am planing on leaving the thread ( which I believe would make you very happy ) because the existing narrative will not change its minds on the facts I have provided . It will not prove its views with facts .
It will not address and fails to acknowledge the ELEPHANT in the room . It is good at pointing out problems but is fucken hopeless at providing ANY realistic solutions !!!!!!!

hutchy..OK resentment is "your" word....I have gone from pure hatred of white Australia because of my personal experiences of racism....to realize that is a very destructive emotion and only polarizes people including myself in dealing with the issues...
Having spent the better part of the last 3 decades interacting with Indigenous elders through surfing, I have learnt there is a sense of hopelessness /despair and frustration from Indigenous Australians ( and no Pauline isn't indigenous) in that Government policies and funding have not succeeded bettering their lives ........so the good news is there is a move back to the traditional culture of elders/dreamtime etc and a sense of belonging that comes from their culture not ours..
So the solution is simple, more education , more understanding of the history of Indigenous Aussies.....and also the past injustices need to be acknowledged so we have a History of Truth as this is the foundation of our Nation, not some white Pommy colonial history of Terra Nulus!

brutus's picture
brutus's picture
brutus Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 11:03am
Hutchy 19 wrote:

I am going to Smiley . Due to people like you starting to cause me resentment that is unhealthy for me .

The definition of resentment -"bitter indignation at having been treated unfairly."

Hutchy , why is just about everybody on SN forums telling you to fuck off??

You keep spitting the dummy and threaten to leave because you can't understand that you are Johnny come lately on forums and a lot of us have tried to be civil and explain your shortcomings....on a positive note , you sure have tested the patience of us all...and some of us are really making an effort to talk civilly to you.....so its a test for us.....

can we survive Hutchy and become better communicators/educators and not haters!

goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot's picture
goofyfoot Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 11:13am
GuySmiley wrote:

A more pertinent question for me is what is the ongoing fascination of knobs like hutchy and his fellow co-conspirators from the shallow end of the gene pool to this topic. It’s been rehashed every six months or so for seemingly years and always ends with the same or similar inane arguments. Its at best a tedious waste of time. Fuck off hutchy.

X 2
This is fucking pathetic. Time for a spell hutchy

Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19 Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 11:28am

"You keep spitting the dummy and threaten to leave because you can't understand that you are Johnny come lately on forums and a lot of us have tried to be civil and explain your shortcomings.."

So wrong Brutus as usual . I am leaving this thread as I am over the negativity and bullshit on this thread .
People like you wallow in your resentments and refuse to provide anything to help your people move forward with optimism .

You are in some strange world that allows you to lie -"lot of us have tried to be civil " . Ha ha

Look again at the definition of resentment . It is EXACTLY how you feel .

The truth can hurt Brutus .

I will keep an eye on this thread and call out bullshit when I see it . I won't try and offer solutions as dick heads don't want them . They are happy to let Aboriginals suffer . I am not !

This thread has made me realise what are the impediments to improving the lives of Aboriginals . It has proven to me they are insurmountable which makes me so sad .

I also feel sad for you Brutus . Your life will never change for the better if you don't change .

brutus's picture
brutus's picture
brutus Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 11:33am
Hutchy 19 wrote:

"You keep spitting the dummy and threaten to leave because you can't understand that you are Johnny come lately on forums and a lot of us have tried to be civil and explain your shortcomings.."

So wrong Brutus as usual . I am leaving this thread as I am over the negativity and bullshit on this thread .
People like you wallow in your resentments and refuse to provide anything to help your people move forward with optimism .

You are in some strange world that allows you to lie -"lot of us have tried to be civil " . Ha ha

Look again at the definition of resentment . It is EXACTLY how you feel .

The truth can hurt Brutus .

I will keep an eye on this thread and call out bullshit when I see it . I won't try and offer solutions as dick heads don't want them . They are happy to let Aboriginals suffer . I am not !

Hutchy, see ya later dude.....you have not offered one meaningful solution....you have come onto SN , like a meth crazed narcissist ...you insult people with derogatory names.....I have read just about everyone of your posts.....think you need to come down to Bells and have a surf with me to calm you down.....
As for you being able to read me, LOL.....forgiveness is something we all should learn and put into actions...there is enough division in the World and you just seem to part of a very divisive narrative......ah but you are an Abbot lover....say no-more!!! LOL!!!

Constance B Gibson's picture
Constance B Gibson's picture
Constance B Gibson Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 11:41am

Hutchy, please don't go. As I said before, I think you're doing us all a service (of a kind). And not just through out Indo-ing Indo and blowing away Blowin!

And if you keep posting in the US thread, even out-stripping Sypkahn!

Having said that, that post above directed at Brutus is just plain shitful. Jeez, have a good look at yourself, love.

Why do you feel our first nations people want to hear 'your' 'solutions'? Have you looked at any ideas that they've got themselves?

For example, I'm sure you're across this?

https://ulurustatement.org/faqs

Constance B Gibson's picture
Constance B Gibson's picture
Constance B Gibson Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 11:46am

From that link:

"Makarrata is a Yolgnu word meaning ‘a coming together after a struggle’. A Makarrata Commission would have two roles: supervising a process of agreement-making, and overseeing a process of truth-telling.

Agreements between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and Australian governments have been negotiated for many years in Australia, for example under native title and land rights legislation. The Makarrata Commission would allow these processes to be struck at a national level and regionally with First Nations, by providing support and momentum and helping the parties reach agreement.

Another function of a Makarrata Commission would be to supervise a process of ‘truth-telling’: a process that allows the full extent of the past injustices experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to be uncovered and revealed. Such a process would allow all Australians to understand our history and assist in moving towards genuine reconciliation.

This process may be similar in form to inquiry that led to the Bringing Them Home report, which revealed the truth surrounding the Stolen Generations. The inquiry involved an extensive program of hearings in every capital city and in many regional centres. In 2008, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd apologised in Parliament for government law and policies that resulted in the Stolen Generations."

Hutchy, you seem to be quite resentful about history as presented here. You're not alone on SN. Here's an old comment from a similar thread:

"Krist on a stick, we're now on this?? Racial classifications used and defined in law (in the 'bad old days') to determine how Aboriginal people were to be classified and treated by THE LAW?

Look up 'Half-Caste Act'. The 'Stolen Generations' is but one part of what that produced. (In)Sensitive term, ya reckon?

Australian history! What gets taught? Who teaches it? What is it even??

“…more of Australia’s history took place outside the law than within it, and more attempt was made to hide it than record it.”

Les Murray (perhaps Australia's pre-eminent poet, old contrarian rat-bag, and contributing editor to the right-wing Quadrant magazine)

https://newmatilda.com/2015/08/11/welfare-and-protection-boards-removed-...

“The struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting” - Milan Kundera"

Constance B Gibson's picture
Constance B Gibson's picture
Constance B Gibson Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 12:11pm

Hmmmm, historical truth-telling is "negative bullshit"? In whose eyes?

Anyway, I've posted a lot to take in there, Hutchy. Here's a last story from a good egg that may give YOU some more positive feelings? I dunno. Give it a go.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-09-17/wonnerup-minninup-massacre-the-gh...

indo-dreaming's picture
indo-dreaming's picture
indo-dreaming Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 1:09pm
Hutchy 19 wrote:

I have acknowledged this and it causes RESENTMENT . I can feel it in all your posts . You have huge resentments . Acknowledge it !!!!!!

Resentment are the MAJOR cause of addictions . Addictions are a major cause of abuse . Abuse of aboriginals , the women and the children is what I want rectified .

I think thats a huge assumption to believe being resentful is a driver of these issues, it's also a big assumption to believe Indigenous people are resentful full stop, im sure some are im sure many are not

The same issues faced in Indigenous communities are also a huge problem in PNG communities, what are they resentful about???

BTW. Hutch, although i don't agree with a lot of your post and you push things too far or just go on and on, i think its refreshing to have someone here challenge others cliche tired worn out views, so hang around dude..just maybe a little bit less sometimes though.

Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19 Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 1:01pm

I have read the articles and in only one was there anything positive .

There has been children forcible removed and massacres taken place . All horrible !!!

But it was NEVER government policy as I have checked .

Even Pat OMalley wrote an article called Gentle Genocide .

The removal of children from their families and communities accelerated after 1910 and was one of the reasons for the rise of people like my grandfather, Fred Maynard, to try to stop that horrific process of institutionalising thousands of Aboriginal children. Aboriginal boys were put into institutions to train them as nothing better than farm labourers; the girls were placed in institutions to be trained as domestic servants.

Definition of genocide https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide-convention.shtml
Under Article 2 of the United Nations Genocide Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, ‘genocide’ is defined as the commission of any act
'with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as
such'.
The prohibited acts include:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical
destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Australia was only the second State to ratify the Convention, which entered into force on 12
January 1951. The treaty was adopted unanimously by the United Nations General Assembly
and opened for signature on 9 December 1948. Australia signed it two days later and soon
after ratified the Convention on 8 July 1949, enacting the Genocide Convention Act 1949
(Commonwealth) with bipartisan political support. This unanimity and prompt support were
largely in response to the recent genocides against Jews and gypsies perpetrated by the Nazis
in the Second World War. http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/SydLawRw/2000/24.pdf

This segregated institutionalisation also worked to keep them apart. If the girls and boys were kept separate, they couldn’t have children and the Aboriginal people would be ‘bred out’. However, significant numbers of these girls became pregnant to their white ‘carers’ and employers. These are stories we hear about the ‘Deep South’ in the US, but the same things were happening here and the actions of the Aboriginal Protection/Welfare Board have left a lasting impact on Aboriginal lives in this state.

Bringing the home report .

The report concludes that a principal aim of the child removal policies, even while
those administering the policy thought they were acting in the child’s best interests,
was to eliminate the child’s connection to their Indigenous heritage. Such mixed intentions and motives do not ‘negate or transform the intention to destroy.’17 Again, the
report looks to the discussions concerning the definitions of ‘genocide’ that took place
at the time the Genocide Convention was drafted in order to assert that ‘an act or policy
is still genocide when it is motivated by a number of objectives.’18
1999 Australian international Law Journal
However, before departing from this aspect of the case it is desirable
that I make certain observations as to the dangers of demeaning what
is involved in the international crime of genocide. Undoubtedly, a
great deal of conduct engaged in by governments is genuinely believed
by those affected by it to be deeply offensive, and in many instances
harmful. However, deep offence or even substantial harm to particular
groups, including indigenous people, in the community resulting from
government conduct is not genocide law.

1999 Australian international Law Journal was checked and confirmed that atrocities were committed but were never LAW .

velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno's picture
velocityjohnno Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 1:41pm
Constance B Gibson wrote:

VJ, you can't put a price on SN forum discourse. Or turn a buck.

Or maybe you can?

Hmmm, the price of everything, and the value of nowt. Was that Hayek or Rand?

1) Appeal to members' emails and spam with book offers from Marx, Polanyi through Solzhenitsyn through to Von Mises
2) ???
3) Profit

Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19's picture
Hutchy 19 Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 2:03pm

I will take your advice Indo . I agree I am trying too hard . I will leave with this .

Brutus - "Hutchy, see ya later dude.....you have not offered one meaningful solution....you have come onto SN , like a meth crazed narcissist ...you insult people with derogatory names.....I have read just about everyone of your posts.....think you need to come down to Bells and have a surf with me to calm you down....."

Would love to have a surf anywhere with you but the invitation is obviously not genuine .

What are Aboriginal children being taught by their roles models ? That 90% plus of Australians voted in 1967 to give them rights , that over $50k each is being provided to improve their lives , that most Australians believe in them and want to listen to ways that can make their lives safe and better etc ?

I don't think so going from what I have experienced here . How their forefathers and mothers were mistreated , stolen , massacred and are still being abused . How it is all the White Fellas fault etc.

Tony Abbott - facts . A loyal husband and loved father . Committed life saver and firefighter . Surfer . Taken many holidays to Aboriginal communities . Fitness fanatic . Raised $100's of thousands of dollars for charities . Religiously committed .

If I heard those facts about any person I wouldn't care if they were a commie or a fascist . I would respect them and like them .

It might not matter to Aboriginals if it was or wasn't government policy to have children removed from their families or have been subjected to genocide . It obviously doesn't matter to all of you .

It sure WOULD matter to me !

brutus's picture
brutus's picture
brutus Friday, 17 Sep 2021 at 4:34pm

Hutchy , OK I/we get it......you don't have much in the way of personal life experiences on a lot of the issues that are presented here on SN.
There are a lot of people here, that bring stories links etc to back up opinions and thoughts...I make a sincere offer come and have a surf, but somehow in your mind it's not genuine...based on what....making the observation you seem like a Meth head narcissist??
Anyhow it seems whatever is said here on SN , you take personally and if you don't agree, everybody else is wrong......to say " it obviously doesn't matter to all of you " is plain bullshit.....
The issue you are talking about , where you cut and paste "The Law, blah blah........is very serious and painful issue for some of us who have lived through the 50's/60's and 70's. you know like real first hand abuse etc....horrific stories of separation/physical and mental abuse , genocide of a culture.......the great news is that we embrace our history warts and all and try to work together to make Australia a better place..