Don,t Fly the Flag

[Azza]

How do you suggest our culture be "adapted" to accommodate Aboriginals?

My comment was in reference to tribal areas such as Kakadu -

In narrow terms, we could adapt by
- Learning to act in co-operation with elders
- Coming to deal with different clans and inter-clan rivalry
- enshrining aboriginal land tenure laws in native title lands

In broader terms all this means learning to be more flexible in dealing with cultural difference. Something that would benefit us globally in diplomacy and trade

In other areas, aboriginal people were supreme ecologists in Australia. Our culture could learn an immense amount from them about dealing with Australian soils, plants, animals, and water. We could also learn something about living sustainably.

 

[Joe Lynn Turnip]

My comment was in reference to tribal areas such as Kakadu -

In narrow terms, we could adapt by
- Learning to act in co-operation with elders
- Coming to deal with different clans and inter-clan rivalry
- enshrining aboriginal land tenure laws in native title lands

In broader terms all this means learning to be more flexible in dealing with cultural difference. Something that would benefit us globally in diplomacy and trade

In other areas, aboriginal people were supreme ecologists in Australia. Our culture could learn an immense amount from them about dealing with Australian soils, plants, animals, and water. We could also learn something about living sustainably.

They also manage to wipe out more species of native fauna than Europeans have. Albeit over a considerably longer period.

 

[Willo]

 

[Baloo]

The photo makes me want to watch American History X or Romper Stomper.

 

[glantone]

I'm pretty sure I remember some of the women from the communities around protesting about most of those things.

Baloo, I was thinking more along the lines of a visible and vocal mass movement of indigenous australians who aggressively demand change from indigenous australians right now – not just small numbers quietly working away. Maybe that’s not the indigenous way but things need to change and now - a mass movement would do their cause no harm at all in the eyes of the non indigenous community.

 

[glantone]

How do you suggest our culture be "adapted" to accommodate Aboriginals?

maybe changing the way we approach Australia day would be one small step. Australia day celebrates the arrival of the 1st fleet which set in motion a conquest in which the winner took all, enforced by projectiles of hot lead and sustained discrimination and ultra violence over a very very long period of time. Given that, and despite the efforts that have been made to heal the wounds, if flying the Australian flag and the nation partying in the name of the 1st fleet’s arrival is offensive to most indigenous aussies ( and I don’t know if it is cause I don't know any) then it would seem completely mindless to me, and totally insensitive to the people who got their arse kicked to keep on keeping on.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Australia day celebrates the arrival of the 1st fleet which set in motion a conquest in which the winner took all, enforced by projectiles of hot lead and sustained discrimination and ultra violence over a very very long period of time.

Needs to be put in context. It was debated at the time whether black people even had souls like the rest of us. They were effectively regarded as sub-human. Today, Aboriginals are accorded the same rights as everyone else, and afforded additional assistance.

If we need a new date for Australia Day, I'm fine with letting Aboriginals choose it and to have input into what the day officially symbolises, as long as it will assist them to move on to more productive things than protesting past injustices that can never be fully rectified.

 

[Big Cat Lover]

tigersnake, I agree with just about everything you say, however, reckon domestic violence, child abuse, substance abuse, unemployment and poor education trumps symbolic gestures - flags and tent cities. Wish our indigenous cousins could be seen to be as passionate and active and committed about those issues as the symbolic ones.

When are we going to see indigenous people protesting against domestic violence, child abuse, substance abuse etc perpetrated by indigenous australians?

This is an issue I've always thought relevant but is never posed to the likes of widely known inidigenous leaders like Michael Long. I've always assumed the reason is that the indigenous population cops enough stick from non-indigenous people that they don't necessarily need a brow beating from theor own.

I think you'll find Noel Pearson (a great Australian IMO) is one who does speak out against such acts, and was a supporter of the Intervention. He is a supporter of the indigenous population taking responsibility for their actions and taking control of their own lives.

 

[Big Cat Lover]

They burnt the flag to make a point and capitalise on media exposure from the Australia Day incident. It's a statement of what they're about, and lost them a heap of support.

The fact it wasn't illegal and there were no repercussions shows what Australia is about. I find the burning distasteful, but I'd rather see it being burnt than see a bunch of federal police storming in and arresting the people involved.

I reckon most people would agree that the flag is a symbol of tolerance. It may end-up getting burnt sometimes to demonstrate that tolerance. People can draw their own conclusions about the people who do the burning.

The greater aboriginal cause is a different matter. The disease, crime, and high mortality rate are massive issues. Whether we like it or not, the clash of cultures is a contributor. We can take the view that they just need to stop living in the past and wake up to themselves, then leave them to their lot. Or we can work with them to adapt both cultures and bridge the gap. The first option is easy, offers no lessons, and continues us down the path of a heartless, uncivil society. The second is much tougher, and requires creative, strong leadership, and a spirit of co-operation and unity. I know which I prefer for the sake of Australian society in general, but I wonder which one is most likely...

Hard to disagree with any of that Azza

 

[Azza]

They also manage to wipe out more species of native fauna than Europeans have. Albeit over a considerably longer period.

Firstly, you got any proof of that Joe? I think you'll find that there're no generally accepted butchery sites of megafauna in Australia. The only evidence for it is a general coincidence between aboriginal presence and disappearance of those species - over a long time period as you say. At the same time tho, the cycle of glacial and interglacial climate change was also at it's most extreme, likely to put stress on all flora and fauna.

But even assuming that aboriginals did contribute to those extinctions, most likely through burning regimes in conjunction with climate change. At the time Europeans arrived, the evidence is that aboriginal populations and food animals and plants were stable and managed at levels that provided enough for the population during droughts, while living extremely well during good years. This is contrary to nearly all other practice, which sees populations expand in times of plenty, then crash drastically during poor times.

 

[Azza]

This is an issue I've always thought relevant but is never posed to the likes of widely known inidigenous leaders like Michael Long. I've always assumed the reason is that the indigenous population cops enough stick from non-indigenous people that they don't necessarily need a brow beating from theor own.

I think you'll find Noel Pearson (a great Australian IMO) is one who does speak out against such acts, and was a supporter of the Intervention. He is a supporter of the indigenous population taking responsibility for their actions and taking control of their own lives.

Agree on Noel Pearson BCL. Have you seen this speech (it's hard going at times, but worth persisting with)? - http://www.themonthly.com.au/john-button-oration-2010-noel-pearson-2737

I shamelessly nicked some of it's thrust in my post.

 

[Massive Tiger]

That won't help. Violence or the threat of violence is self-defeating.

 

[ssstone]

Indeed. Gillard was lucky to be extricated from this position:

dear mld
go and ask a WHITE FEMALE how they were treated on the beaches by middle eastern bogan/yob morons PRIOR to this
course you wont as it doesnt suit your s.m.h tish

 

[ssstone]

But even assuming that aboriginals did contribute to those extinctions, most likely through burning regimes in conjunction with climate change. At the time Europeans arrived, the evidence is that aboriginal populations and food animals and plants were stable and managed at levels that provided enough for the population during droughts, while living extremely well during good years. This is contrary to nearly all other practice, which sees populations expand in times of plenty, then crash drastically during poor times.

1 what was the population
2 so climate change was around then?

 

[Massive Tiger]

dear mld
go and ask a WHITE FEMALE how they were treated on the beaches by middle eastern bogan/yob morons PRIOR to this
course you wont as it doesnt suit your s.m.h tish

As I see it, women of all backgrounds have trouble with men from all backgrounds. it's not restricted to incidents that suit our own personal political, racial and social views. And this has been historically as well as in the present.

 

[mld]

dear mld
go and ask a WHITE FEMALE how they were treated on the beaches by middle eastern bogan/yob morons PRIOR to this
course you wont as it doesnt suit your s.m.h tish

As this response doesn't have anything to do with what happened on Australia Day, I'm assuming it is pavlovian.

 

[Azza]

1 what was the population

No census was taken. Estimates vary from 315,000 to 1 million plus.

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/0/415B7843ACA11A17CA25773700169C5F?opendocument

2 so climate change was around then?

Of course.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoclimatology
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glacial_cycle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovic_cycles

 

[Total Tiger]

dear mld
go and ask a WHITE FEMALE how they were treated on the beaches by middle eastern bogan/yob morons PRIOR to this
course you wont as it doesnt suit your s.m.h tish

Make sure you ask them how they go walking past a construction site full of bogan caucasians too.

 

[Massive Tiger]

I think they based indigenous population circa 1788 on observable numbers, plus a rough estimate of how these numbers would extrapolate over the larger land mass. This took into account the more arid areas having a smaller population, and the more moderate, fertile areas having larger populations. Over time these figures were adjusted as the continent was explored. There is a theory that there were maybe 300 different language groups, broken down into smaller family/clan units. These smaller units were typcially 25-40 in number. So to the Europeans numbers in local areas probably seemed very small.

Climate change was occurring of course. As well as natural events such as earthquake, tidal variations and so on, the Indigenous Australians knew how to use fire to rejeuvenate the bush and grassy areas. i am sure this would have been a very inexact science and would have got way out of control at times.

There is evidence too that some groups changed the direction of waterways, farmed eels, planted crops and made fairly permanent dwellings. Of course, most things in their natural world were used in some way to enable them to subsist or to enhance their standard of living. Areas were mined for ochre for example, trees cut down or sliced up for canoes, animals and vegetation killed for food and clothing.

I guess these examples fall under environmental change rather than climate change. However, it was happening on the continent as it was all around the world.

 

[Panthera tigris FC]

I think they based indigenous population circa 1788 on observable numbers, plus a rough estimate of how these numbers would extrapolate over the larger land mass. This took into account the more arid areas having a smaller population, and the more moderate, fertile areas having larger populations. Over time these figures were adjusted as the continent was explored. There is a theory that there were maybe 300 different language groups, broken down into smaller family/clan units. These smaller units were typcially 25-40 in number. So to the Europeans numbers in local areas probably seemed very small.

Climate change was occurring of course. As well as natural events such as earthquake, tidal variations and so on, the Indigenous Australians knew how to use fire to rejeuvenate the bush and grassy areas. i am sure this would have been a very inexact science and would have got way out of control at times.

There is evidence too that some groups changed the direction of waterways, farmed eels, planted crops and made fairly permanent dwellings. Of course, most things in their natural world were used in some way to enable them to subsist or to enhance their standard of living. Areas were mined for ochre for example, trees cut down or sliced up for canoes, animals and vegetation killed for food and clothing.

I guess these examples fall under environmental change rather than climate change. However, it was happening on the continent as it was all around the world.

Good posting.

Just an aside, I thought that indigenous Australians had no domesticated crops to plant? To this day the only native Australian plant (or animal for that matter) to be domesticated is the macadamia, AFAIK.