[anarchist23]

[Pants-of-dog]

[neopagan]

Well, now that its over, it will probably become un-newsworthy until next year. But there are some points that need to be considered. Do aboriginal Australians have a legitimate grievance? Damn right thy do. Should it be addressed? Yes, but it is not that simple. First of all, any reasonable person knows that this chunk of real estate was going to be taken over by one of the European powers, so lets not pretend there was any better alternative than British colonisation. Secondly, the Australian continent was not populated by powerful tribes with strong cultural identities like the native Americans or the Papuan tribes to our north. Australian aboriginals were small family clans of stone-age hunter gatherers. There was no central hierarchy of authority among the clans. Another point is that pure aboriginals today live up to European values and obey Australian Law. The old ways are gone, no matter what is represented as passed down to them from their culture. Most so-called Aboriginal culture today, is learned from what is recorded after contact. And apart from Australia Day, there are the issues of a call for a treaty, and constitutional recognition of the original inhabitants of Australia.

Changing the date of Australia Day will not change any of this, but if we want to see the country divided, this would be good way to do it. Labor MP Albanese proposed a referendum to find some common ground. The referendum would gauge support for an Australian Republic, and constitutional recognition of Aboriginal people, to be held on the 26th of January. Its an interest idea, because for one, its the best chance Australian Republicans have had in years, and it appeals to the basic generosity of the people. It takes the venom out of a contentious issue and makes the 26th an important day for indigenous people as well as the anniversary of the coming of Europeans. Tell the average Australian that he is an invader, and a racist, and he'll probably tell you where to go, but ask him to be fair in the face of injustice and you would probably win them over. We are not inherently nasty people. Just what all our African, Asian, and Middle Eastern immigrants think of all of this is anyone's guess. They have been mostly quiet on the subject.

[Pants-of-dog]

Well, now that its over, it will probably become un-newsworthy until next year. But there are some points that need to be considered. Do aboriginal Australians have a legitimate grievance? Damn right thy do. Should it be addressed? Yes, but it is not that simple. First of all, any reasonable person knows that this chunk of real estate was going to be taken over by one of the European powers, so lets not pretend there was any better alternative than British colonisation.

I can think of a better alternative.

Secondly, the Australian continent was not populated by powerful tribes with strong cultural identities like the native Americans or the Papuan tribes to our north.

I am not sure what you mean by this. Are you arguing that they were not distinct enough from each other to merit things like human rights and recognition of their sovereignty?

That seems like a subjective opinion.

Australian aboriginals were small family clans of stone-age hunter gatherers. There was no central hierarchy of authority among the clans.

Please provide evidence for this claim. Thank you.

There is evidence of permanent dwellings made from stone, practised agriculture, and farmed fish.

Another point is that pure aboriginals today live up to European values and obey Australian Law. The old ways are gone, no matter what is represented as passed down to them from their culture. Most so-called Aboriginal culture today, is learned from what is recorded after contact.

Yes and no. While it is true that Australia tried to destory Aboriginal cultures, they were not wholly successful. Many cultural artefacts survived, as well as languages, rituals, etc.

And apart from Australia Day, there are the issues of a call for a treaty, and constitutional recognition of the original inhabitants of Australia.

Is this a problem?

Changing the date of Australia Day will not change any of this, but if we want to see the country divided, this would be good way to do it. Labor MP Albanese proposed a referendum to find some common ground. The referendum would gauge support for an Australian Republic, and constitutional recognition of Aboriginal people, to be held on the 26th of January. Its an interest idea, because for one, its the best chance Australian Republicans have had in years, and it appeals to the basic generosity of the people. It takes the venom out of a contentious issue and makes the 26th an important day for indigenous people as well as the anniversary of the coming of Europeans. Tell the average Australian that he is an invader, and a racist, and he'll probably tell you where to go, but ask him to be fair in the face of injustice and you would probably win them over. We are not inherently nasty people. Just what all our African, Asian, and Middle Eastern immigrants think of all of this is anyone's guess. They have been mostly quiet on the subject.

Referendums are problematic in that they grant the majority the right to withhold human rights from the minority. Do you have more information about this proposed referendum?

[skinster]

[Igor Antunov]

From my 20-something years here, in-so far as I can determine, the only institutionally racist thing about Australia is the way the government discriminates against white people and east Asians. Aborigines get so many more perks, welfare options, education options, freebies, etc and still do shit. My conclusion is that they don't deserve such preferential racial treatment and that the government should implement equal treatment, regardless of your background. Unfortunately, like in most of the west, we are a long ways off from equality. Mediocrity will continue being rewarded, white Caucasians and east Asians will continue being discriminated against.

[skinster]

From my 20-something years here, in-so far as I can determine, the only institutionally racist thing about Australia is the way the government discriminates against white people and east Asians.

[colliric]

From my 20-something years here, in-so far as I can determine, the only institutionally racist thing about Australia is the way the government discriminates against white people and east Asians. Aborigines get so many more perks, welfare options, education options, freebies, etc and still do shit. My conclusion is that they don't deserve such preferential racial treatment and that the government should implement equal treatment, regardless of your background. Unfortunately, like in most of the west, we are a long ways off from equality. Mediocrity will continue being rewarded, white Caucasians and east Asians will continue being discriminated against.

I've lived here for nearly 34 years(lol!).

In my view they should eliminate the word "Aboriginal" from the question "are you of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent?" that gets asked on practically every single form you'll ever get in Australia.

0.9% of Melbournians are Aboriginal. Lowest in the entire country. Yes because they were "wiped out" a hundred or so years ago, but still the population is negligible and most other ethnic groups outrank them in population.

It makes sense only to ask "Are you of Torres Strait Islander descent?" Due to how far away from the mainland that place is(so yes they may need extra support if they come from there).

I tell you Igor, going to other parts of the country from Melbourne (and possibly also Tasmania) is a culture shock. Always a culture shock.

YOU NEVER SEE DRUNK ABORIGINAL MEN LITTERING THE STREETS IN VICTORIA...... Anywhere....

You're lucky to see 1 Aboriginal in a whole month and even then you never know he might be Maori instead.

Only place you see Aboriginals frequently in Melbourne is on the Melbourne Cricket Ground pitch during winter chasing a pigskin and kicking the crap out of it, and they've come from another state usually, even if playing for a Victorian team.

Or on TV on Neighbours when they decide to do a "Gay Black guy" storyline like they did recently, because for some stupid reason that's considered edgy in Victoria....

[ThirdTerm]

I think if Australia is trying to integrate Aboriginal Aussies, it's not going to work. Recent genetic studies revealed that Aboriginal Aussies carry the highest level of Denisovan DNA (up to 6%) among living human populations. The Denisovan or Denisova hominin is an extinct species or subspecies of human in the genus Homo. The Papuan and Australian ancestors diverged early from the rest, around 58,000 years ago, and European and Asian ancestral groups only become distinct in the genetic record around 42,000 years ago. The Papuan and Australian groups reached a prehistoric supercontinent that originally united New Guinea, Australia and Tasmania around 50,000 years ago, and these regions were separated by rising sea levels approximately 10,000 years ago.

Like other populations outside Africa, the Australian Aboriginal man owes small chunks of his genome to Neanderthals4. More surprisingly, though, his ancestors also interbred with another archaic human population known as the Denisovans. This group was identified from 30,000–50,000-year-old DNA recovered from a finger bone found in a Siberian cave5. Until now, Papua New Guineans were the only modern human population whose ancestors were known to have interbred with Denisovans.

A second study incorporating genomic surveys from different Aboriginal Australians paints an even clearer picture of their ancestors' exploits with the Denisovans. Researchers led by Mark Stoneking at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, calculated the portion of Denisovan ancestry found in the genomes of 243 people representing 33 Asian and Oceanian populations. Patterns of Denisovan interbreeding in human populations could reveal human migration routes through Asia, reasoned the team. The paper is published today in the American Journal of Human Genetics6.

This comparison revealed a patchwork in which some populations, including Australian Aboriginals, bore varying levels of Denisovan DNA, while many of their neighbours, like the residents of mainland Southeast Asia, contained none.

https://www.nature.com/news/2011/110922 ... 1.551.html


Abstract
The population history of Aboriginal Australians remains largely uncharacterized. Here we generate high-coverage genomes for 83 Aboriginal Australians (speakers of Pama–Nyungan languages) and 25 Papuans from the New Guinea Highlands. We find that Papuan and Aboriginal Australian ancestors diversified 25–40 thousand years ago (kya), suggesting pre-Holocene population structure in the ancient continent of Sahul (Australia, New Guinea and Tasmania). However, all of the studied Aboriginal Australians descend from a single founding population that differentiated ~10–32 kya. We infer a population expansion in northeast Australia during the Holocene epoch (past 10,000 years) associated with limited gene flow from this region to the rest of Australia, consistent with the spread of the Pama–Nyungan languages. We estimate that Aboriginal Australians and Papuans diverged from Eurasians 51–72 kya, following a single out-of-Africa dispersal, and subsequently admixed with archaic populations. Finally, we report evidence of selection in Aboriginal Australians potentially associated with living in the desert.

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature18299

[Igor Antunov]

I've lived here for nearly 34 years(lol!).

I had a half aboriginal friend (legit aboriginal dad from NT) all throughout primary school. Spent time at his house often. He was rash, always made poor decisions and generally ignored school, despite being a really friendly guy and great company. Today I see them occasionally at fast food places and on trains. It's a sorry state of affairs. No matter if you treat them like retards and give them special treatment 24/7, there is not going to be any uplifting or integration. I firmly believe the only solution is for continued mixing until there are none left. I don't say this out of malice, or a sense of superiority. Simply out of practicality. To integrate a people so different to a society so out of place for them, simply absorb them genetically. They should be assimilated. Resistance should be futile. My cousin dates a one quarter aboriginal girl. She's hot and well integrated. If they have kids, they will be even more integrated.

[colliric]

In Melbourne you see none.....

You don't realise the rest of Australia(excepting Tasmania) isn't like that until you visit or live elsewhere.

It's a real shock.

P.S. I live 10 mins drive from Ramsay Street(Pin Oak Court, Vermont)....

There are no Gay Aboriginals in The City of Erinsborough(The City Of Whitehorse)..... There's plain no Aboriginals at all.... Having an Aboriginal appear on the show at all was actually highly unrealistic let alone having a him in a gay storyline.

It was a lie. The actor came from Kalgoorlie, WA! Lol!

No wonder that show's ratings are tanking. Sad.

[Decky]

I had a half aboriginal friend (legit aboriginal dad from NT) all throughout primary school. Spent time at his house often. He was rash, always made poor decisions and generally ignored school, despite being a really friendly guy and great company. Today I see them occasionally at fast food places and on trains. It's a sorry state of affairs. No matter if you treat them like retards and give them special treatment 24/7, there is not going to be any uplifting or integration. I firmly believe the only solution is for continued mixing until there are none left. I don't say this out of malice, or a sense of superiority. Simply out of practicality. To integrate a people so different to a society so out of place for them, simply absorb them genetically. They should be assimilated. Resistance should be futile. My cousin dates a one quarter aboriginal girl. She's hot and well integrated. If they have kids, they will be even more integrated.

The irony of a slav advocating genocide against untermensch.

[ness31]

I think if Australia is trying to integrate Aboriginal Aussies, it's not going to work. Recent genetic studies revealed that Aboriginal Aussies carry the highest level of Denisovan DNA (up to 6%) among living human populations. The Denisovan or Denisova hominin is an extinct species or subspecies of human in the genus Homo. The Papuan and Australian ancestors diverged early from the rest, around 58,000 years ago, and European and Asian ancestral groups only become distinct in the genetic record around 42,000 years ago. The Papuan and Australian groups reached a prehistoric supercontinent that originally united New Guinea, Australia and Tasmania around 50,000 years ago, and these regions were separated by rising sea levels approximately 10,000 years ago.

So, what does this stuff mean? That aboriginal Australians are the oldest living culture? The oldest blood? What? ‘splain...

[Igor Antunov]

The irony of a slav advocating genocide against untermensch.

The irony of what I presume to be an anglo-saxon colonial or former anglo-saxon run plantation denizen taking credit for crushing Germany (a fellow anglo saxon civ) in ww2. It was always the slavs who did that.

Anglo-saxons are good at beating up stone age natives and getting crushed by slavs.

[neopagan]

Pants of the Dog, you need to present your case that Australian aboriginals were anything more advanced than stone-age hunter gatherers. There is no record of stone dwellings or agriculture, unless you count some extremely tenuous claims based on interpretations of those elements that are so broad that they can only be used in wishful thinking. For example, a hole lined roughly with one row of stones is not a considered a dwelling in primitive societies anywhere. And the example recently found is not something found anywhere else on the continent. Also, you need to explain your rejection of the fact that Aboriginals lived in small clans without any political authority of sense of nation. Where is the evidence of such social organisation? But nothing of your attitude is important. People like you, both conservative and liberal alike, want to divide us for your own ideological reasons and bogus interpretations of anthropology. Australia needs unity, not bogus theories on a better nation without British settlement.

[ness31]

@neopagan You can keep your precious date, but there’s no need to denigrate in the process. That’s the only way some people can make an argument Maybe spend some time with Aborigines and learn what they’re about. You have a very western way of measuring what you deem to be ‘advanced’.

[Igor Antunov]

There is a proven empirical way of measuring social organization and technological advancement. It is consistent with neopagans sentiments in regards to indigenous Australians. That part can't be disputed in any serious capacity.

What can be disputed, and argued, is whether aborigines can integrate into the digital age. All signs thus far point to 'no'. But, as I suggested, if you can't bring the stone age people to the digital age, bring the digital age to the stone age people. This means comprehensive assimilation. Their identity must be absorbed and molded into something else entirely. Like the Han Chinese did to the Jurchen/Manchu and Mongols. Their backward culture must be appropriated then transformed, never to be seen again.

If something is suffering, you put it out of its misery.

[ness31]

There is a proven empirical way of measuring social organization and technological advancement. It is consistent with neopagans sentiments in regards to indigenous Australians. That part can't be disputed in any serious capacity.

Well then the empirical method of which you speak isn’t a comprehensive enough measure.

What can be disputed, and argued, is whether aborigines can integrate into the digital age. All signs thus far point to 'no'. But, as I suggested, if you can't bring the stone age people to the digital age, bring the digital age to the stone age people. This means comprehensive assimilation. Their identity must be absorbed and molded into something else entirely. Like the Han Chinese did to the Jurchen/Manchu and Mongols. Their backward culture must be appropriated then transformed, never to be seen again.

If something is suffering, you put it out of its misery.

Australian aborigines were intergrated into the digital age before any of us. I suspect you know this Igor, why you’re trolling I don’t know.

[Pants-of-dog]

Pants of the Dog, you need to present your case that Australian aboriginals were anything more advanced than stone-age hunter gatherers. There is no record of stone dwellings or agriculture, unless you count some extremely tenuous claims based on interpretations of those elements that are so broad that they can only be used in wishful thinking. For example, a hole lined roughly with one row of stones is not a considered a dwelling in primitive societies anywhere. And the example recently found is not something found anywhere else on the continent. Also, you need to explain your rejection of the fact that Aboriginals lived in small clans without any political authority of sense of nation. Where is the evidence of such social organisation?

I have presented evidence that they were more than stone age hunter gatherers.

I also think that their cultures and sovereignty should be respected even if they were only stone age hunter gatherers.

Please note that you were the one who originally claimed that they had no political authority or sense of nation. Please provide evidence for this claim. Thank you.

But nothing of your attitude is important. People like you, both conservative and liberal alike, want to divide us for your own ideological reasons and bogus interpretations of anthropology. Australia needs unity, not bogus theories on a better nation without British settlement.

My attitude, as well as your opinion of my attitude, are irrelevant.