Reconciliation - Page 3

sjastro · #41 07-02-2008, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Argonavis

The "stolen generation" is a romantic myth. There are no documented cases of aboriginal children being removed from their families for anything other than welfare reasons. For abuse and or neglect. There have been court cases on this....

This is not true.
The most telling fact against this argument is that only PART ABORIGINAL children were removed.

This leads to three possibilities:

(1) Only part aboriginal children were abused. (Naive and highly unlikely).
(2) Only part aboriginal children were rescued from abuse (This is highly racist).
(3) The removal of aboriginal children had very little to do with welfare reasons.

In the late 19th century the conclusion reached by State governments was that the Aboriginal race was doomed to extinction.

Policies were implemented to hasten this extinction by removal and institutionalization of part aboriginal children. Part aboriginals were to be used as an underclass to service white society.

There is nothing "mythical" about this. Go read the various State governments "Half Cast Acts" which sprang up in the late 19th century and were finally repealed by 1970.

Steven
http://users.westconnect.com.au/~sjastro/small

tbentley · #42 09-02-2008, 09:47 PM

Apologies in advance if I offend anyone with my language or opinions or confuse my perceptions with actual facts. I feel there are no absolutes in this sort of subject and what may be reasonable to one is deeply offensive to another.
My personal view is that very little will come directly from what will be a very legally correct "sorry." I will not be surprised to find that what ends up being said is little more than a simple acknowledgement that some of these injustices occurred in our past.
I live in the Pilbara region of WA and as such I see many different sides of the aboriginal people. I see some (primarily elders) who are proud, confident people trying to retain their traditional way of life. I see (and work with) many who are living life like the rest of us, working hard to give them and their families a better life. These are some of the most inspirational people I know.
Unfortunately the vast majority of aboriginals that I see are listless, sad people. They live in squalid conditions in government housing, spending much of their time drinking or waiting for their dole cheque so that they can get their next drink. Physical violence is a daily occurence, most commonly between people who were friendly five minutes before and will be tomorrow. They have almost no interraction with the "white" community and on the rare occasions that they do my personal experience is that they are almost apologetic in their mannersim.
I must say that I do not pity these people. Having seen what others are doing with their lives I know that they have a choice in life like all of us. Their road may be much harder (and I believe it is) but they can make that decision and take action. The ones that I feel sorry for are the children. They know only what they see and act accordingly. Their futures will be shaped (not dictated but certainly influenced) by their experiences. The actions and words of their parents and family tell them that they don't deserve any better.
That is what I feel is holding back this group of aboriginal people. They don't believe that they deserve any better and frankly we don't do anything to convince them otherwise. As a society we are happy to let this continue, perhaps for fear of it becoming our problem, because we don't know what to do or just glad it's not us.
Over the years it seems that we have gone from a situation of being completely intolerant to one of complete tolerance. Neither is a good situation. We have "positive discrimination" ocurring throughout society where exceptions and allowances are being made based on a person's race, upbringing, medical conditions (yes I mean addiction), etc. By our actions we say that we do not think they are capable of living to these standards and therefore should not be held to them. I believe that we do this not just for aboriginals but also for many others within society.
If you tell a child that they are useless (as I hear being said everyday up here) and society reinforces this by not expecting them to be anything but useless it is no surprise that they grow into adults who believe that they do not deserve anything better than they have.
I hope beyond reason that this apology tells them that we believe that they deserve better. That they need to believe that they deserve better. That we apolgise for holding them to standards different to that of other members of society, both by removing children who weren't in danger and by returning those that are. I hope that the apology means that we no longer hold our heads in shame (us for our past actions and they for their shame at being what they are) and instead can all lift our heads high and believe we have the right to expect better for and from ourselves as well as others.
Sorry for the rant folks.

I'll get off my soapbox now.
Travis

PS - Inspirational story to start this discussion Darryl. I hope that you have all the luck, love and life that you deserve.

CoombellKid · #43 11-02-2008, 03:09 AM

An interesting article...

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599...007146,00.html

regards,CS

fringe_dweller · #44 11-02-2008, 02:34 PM

I don't normally read anything by the dangerous mouthpiece's of the haters, along with the prepostorous piers ackerman - sheeeesh haters get over it, you lost - democracy prevailed thank goodness.
students of goebbels i think so
the haters didnt utter a sound about the hate party spending 2 billion dollars on utter and pure propaganda slandering and villifying the non ruling corporate classes filling our tv screens endlessly for years on end
oh sure sure yeah right it was all lovey dovey cotton glove treatment of the original australians from the oh sooooo caring haters from the gitgo

edwardsdj (Doug) · #45 11-02-2008, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoombellKid

An interesting article...

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599...007146,00.html

regards,CS

I've never read anything by Andrew Bolt that wasn't utter propaganda. It has always only taken a couple of minutes of research into the subject matter and the sources he quotes to realise what a master of spin this guy is.

This article was no exception

CoombellKid · #46 11-02-2008, 03:33 PM

Well I'm sure if the article has statements or references to peoples past
he cites that are in correct. I'm sure they will come out and say so. Are
you able to prove otherwise? until then the statements in the two
preceding posts are also propaganda ; )

regards,CS

edwardsdj (Doug) · #47 11-02-2008, 03:41 PM

I never said he lies. Just that he is a master of spin. I've never known him not to quotes sources accurately.

Bolt has been found guilty of defamation by the Supreme Court of Victoria. I'm not keen to join him so this is all I'm going to say.

fringe_dweller · #48 11-02-2008, 03:59 PM

I cant help anyone who isnt aware of this guys (and his ilk) reputation, or leanings/affiliations, which surprises me by now!, or overlooks it - not far off shock jock/pot stirrer

and R murdoch is famous for his love of controversy, bottom line, it got him where he is today in fact, nothing sells like controversy and supposedly he doesnt care which side it favours, controversial, is all that matters

[1ponders] (Paul) · #49 11-02-2008, 04:16 PM

Please keep on topic and civil or the thread will be locked.

sjastro · #50 11-02-2008, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoombellKid

Well I'm sure if the article has statements or references to peoples past
he cites that are in correct. I'm sure they will come out and say so. Are
you able to prove otherwise? until then the statements in the two
preceding posts are also propaganda ; )

regards,CS

Bolt is not correct. For example he quotes "In Victoria, for instance, the state Stolen Generations Taskforce concluded there had been "no formal policy for removing children". Ever." Perhaps Bolt should read the Victoria Half Caste Act of 1886 which explicitly stated that part aboriginals were to be forcibly assimilated into white society.

CoombellKid · #51 11-02-2008, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjastro

Bolt is not correct. For example he quotes "In Victoria, for instance, the state Stolen Generations Taskforce concluded there had been "no formal policy for removing children". Ever." Perhaps Bolt should read the Victoria Half Caste Act of 1886 which explicitly stated that part aboriginals were to be forcibly assimilated into white society.

Perhaps the history of treatment of part aboriginal children living among
full blooded aboriginal tribes across Australia when the Victoria Half Caste
Act of 1886 was written should be investigated.

regards,CS

CoombellKid · #52 11-02-2008, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by edwardsdj

Bolt has been found guilty of defamation by the Supreme Court of Victoria. I'm not keen to join him so this is all I'm going to say.

But the magistrate did shake their hands and seemed pretty chummy.
"A Victorian Supreme Court jury has decided that a journalist (Bolt)
did defame a magsitrate but also said it was a reasonable thing to do".
Must of been done on legal point more than any real defamation. Like
being charged with Common Assualt.... the assault charge they charge
you with when they real cant say you have assaulted, but people try
to hint your a mass murderer.

regards,CS

CoombellKid · #53 11-02-2008, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjastro

Bolt is not correct. For example he quotes "In Victoria, for instance, the state Stolen Generations Taskforce concluded there had been "no formal policy for removing children". Ever." Perhaps Bolt should read the Victoria Half Caste Act of 1886 which explicitly stated that part aboriginals were to be forcibly assimilated into white society.

Perhap you should read the act you refer to as Victoria Half Caste Act of
1886 but is actually titled Aborigines Protection Act (1886). You can then
point me to where it states "part aboriginals were to be forcibly assimilated
into white society" it only refers to orphaned children being removed to
the department of neglect, something that is done today by DOC's if your
white, black or whatever

You can read a copy of it here
http://museumvictoria.com.au/encount...n%20Act%201886

Actually if you read Aborigines Protection Act (1869) under section 6 you
will see there were stiff penalties for the removal of aboriginals from the
state of Victoria

regards,CS

sjastro · #54 11-02-2008, 09:39 PM

Let me make some specific observations.

(1) This original discusion was based on Andrew Bolt's assertion that there was no formal policy for removing aboriginal children in Victoria. The information provided by you proves Andrew Bolt is clearly wrong.

(2) With regards to the naming of the act and the removal of part aboriginal children I draw attention to your own link.

"Aborigines Protection Act (1886)
The Aborigines Act of 1886 is often referred to as the 'half-caste' Act, as it was through this legislation that the colonial government of Victoria, through the control of the Board for the Protection of Aborigines, attempted to break up Aboriginal families and communities on the reserves. Under the 1886 Act the government had the power to remove any Aboriginal person from a reserve who was under the age of 34 and was categorised as less than 'full blood'.

(3) Your remark "....it only refers to orphaned children being removed to the department of neglect, something that is done today by DOC's if your
white, black or whatever" is fundamentally flawed as it assumes the legislators of 19th century possessed 21st century values.

If you read the parlimentary extracts of the time you will note that the aborigines are referred to as an inferior race doomed to extinction. This was the motivating factor behind the removal of children. Parents had no custodial rights whatsoever.

Argonavis (William) · #55 11-02-2008, 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjastro

If you read the parlimentary extracts of the time you will note that the aborigines are referred to as an inferior race doomed to extinction. This was the motivating factor behind the removal of children. Parents had no custodial rights whatsoever.

No. The only motivating factor was the welfare of the child. The alleged stolen generation was not stolen, it was looked after.

Whilst there are some Ordinances and Act both Commonwealth and State, that allowed the removal of aboriginal children, none were removed for anything other than welfare reasons. There is not one case of removal from a family for purely racial reasons. If there is one, please produce it so we can all say sorry on behalf of governments past and pay compensation.

A well researched article is here:
http://www.quadrant.org.au/php/artic...rticle_id=1395

"the contemporaneous anthropological record contains nothing about genocide and little about removals. "

and

"When half-caste children were taken it was on grounds of welfare, not race."

Argonavis (William) · #56 11-02-2008, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjastro

This is not true.

This leads to three possibilities:

(1) Only part aboriginal children were abused. (Naive and highly unlikely).
(2) Only part aboriginal children were rescued from abuse (This is highly racist).
(3) The removal of aboriginal children had very little to do with welfare reasons.

Steven

Yes it is. Try (1) in your smug simple response - half caste were not accepted by black communities. They tended to be abandoned and abused. Aboriginals were covered by protective legislation that would now be considered paternalistic. It was a different set of rules that applied than white welfare.

and now we don't have any of that, we have:

http://www.facs.gov.au/internet/mini...in_02oct07.htm

"And those who have not read the report, Little Children are Sacred, its two authors visited 45 communities in the Northern Territory. They didn't find sexual abuse in some of those communities, they didn't find it in most of those communities, they found it in every single community; 45 out of 45. Think about that, the enormity of that for a moment. People coming forward with the most horrendous stories. We have children as young as three with gonorrhoea, we have twenty-four year old grandmothers, we have so many babies being born with alcohol foetal syndrome that their capacity to pass on the oral history of their people is gone before they're even born. We have physical and sexual abuse of boys and girls and men and women. It knows no boundaries. "

are you happy now Steven? They're not stolen anymore.

skeltz (Rob) · #57 12-02-2008, 12:09 AM

To apoligise for what you have not done is absurd..please explain otherwise!
Secondally aboriginal means native to the land what ever country you are from.
thirdly it is the educated ...oh sorry stolen generation that are pushing for reconcilliation and because of us they are educated,
and recentley i was in egypt and have seen boomerangs in the ciaro museum that are thousands of years old.
I call a spade a spade and a shovel a shovel
I would like to add my own crusade and that is the senseless slaughter of whales in the antartica sanctuary by the japanese under the pretense of ..science ,our aboriginals can speak for themselves ..the whales can not i urge all to support the sea shepherd and its volunteers inn protecting what the australian goverment will not! a whale harpooned drowns in its on blood for 15 minutes,lovely thought is int it?
And remember mankinds stupidity and hatred are only overshadowed by his ....GREED
here is a link for anyone who cares for this planet http://www.seashepherd.org/
By the way i put my money where my mouth is i have donated substantially amounts

fringe_dweller · #58 12-02-2008, 12:35 AM

Quote: