[colliric]

As for the right of conquest, this is even more laughable, since there was never a war or any military occupation.

Funny, I must have missed the Great War of Australian Conquest in my history classes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_frontier_wars

You must not know Australian history.

You must not know Australian history... Or you were taught during the bullshit era when they began pretending the Frontier Wars were just all massacres and "no there's never been war on Australian Soil".

[anarchist23]

Frontier Wars were just all massacres and "no there's never been war on Australian Soil".

^
2,000 whites killed in total.
20,000 aborigines killed in total.
The aborigines were massacred.

[colliric]

^
2,000 whites killed in total.
20,000 aborigines killed in total.
The aborigines were massacred.

I never said they weren't....

It was a one-sided series of colonial wars, in which the Aboriginals were slaughtered but also managed to kill 2000 Europeans.

Point is, it was still warfare(with losses on both sides) and it was warfare over landownership.

[Solastalgia]

It's a waste of time to debate a racist like Rejn. It's not about debating the facts, but his bigoted opinions.

[anarchist23]

Collric.There was no war by any stretch of the imagination.There were skirmishs in which 2,000 whites were killed and 20,000 native Australians were massacred/slaughtered armed with only spears and clubs in the majority of cases.
The behaviour of the white Australians and the suffering that they are inflicting on the native Australians is indefensible.

[Pants-of-dog]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_frontier_wars

And that link does nto mention a war or military occupation. It talks mostly about massacres and brutal police forces. Thank you for supporting my point.

You must not know Australian history... Or you were taught during the bullshit era when they began pretending the Frontier Wars were just all massacres and "no there's never been war on Australian Soil".

Feel free to quote the text that describes the war and the military occupation.

I never said they weren't....

It was a one-sided series of colonial wars, in which the Aboriginals were slaughtered but also managed to kill 2000 Europeans.

Point is, it was still warfare(with losses on both sides) and it was warfare over landownership.

No. Neither side was an organised military force nor was there any military occupation.

Besides, even the Crown does not claim Australia through right of conquest. Instead, they claim that that no humans were living in Australia, since the Aborigines did not put up fences the same way that Brits did.

[Solastalgia]

Nvm

[Fasces]

Aborigines lost, big deal. Might makes right. They don't deserve that land.

[Pants-of-dog]

Aborigines lost, big deal. Might makes right. They don't deserve that land.

They still have more power than fascists.

[Solastalgia]

Aborigines lost, big deal.

As if they had a chance... They were massacred. It was genocide. Not a fair fight.

Might makes right.

Um, no it doesn't...

They don't deserve that land.

Deserve it? They've been there for 60,000+ years compared to a couple hundred years of the colonists. They actually lived on the land, compared to colonists who abused the land (& continue to do). The Australian aboriginals deserve their land more than anything else.

[Fasces]

They still have more power than fascists.

What do fascists have to do with aboriginals? Please do not go off topic, PoD, or show some evidence.

As if they had a chance... They were massacred. It was genocide. Not a fair fight.

They had the same 60,000 years as everyone else to develop a civilization. It's their own fault they never got past the Stone Age.

Um, no it doesn't...

Just checked again - yes, it does.

Deserve it? They've been there for 60,000+ years compared to a couple hundred years of the colonists. They actually lived on the land, compared to colonists who abused the land (& continue to do). The Australian aboriginals deserve their land more than anything else.

They deserve nothing. They failed to defend their land. Their culture is clearly unable to compete with that of Anglo Australians, and thus must go the way of the dodo.

[Pants-of-dog]

What do fascists have to do with aboriginals? Please do not go off topic, PoD, or show some evidence.

Well done.

If nothing else, I have to give you a point for effective satirisation of my posting style.

They had the same 60,000 years as everyone else to develop a civilization. It's their own fault they never got past the Stone Age.

Funny that the Brits were unable to beat Stone Age nomads, despite their guns, germs and steel.

Just checked again - yes, it does.

Not always.

They deserve nothing. They failed to defend their land. Their culture is clearly unable to compete with that of Anglo Australians, and thus must go the way of the dodo.

And yet they are still there, while settler Australians whine about multiculturalism.

[Fasces]

Funny that the Brits were unable to beat Stone Age nomads, despite their guns, germs and steel.

The Prime Minister of Australia is named Tony Abbot. Is that a traditional Aboriginal name? Is English an Aboriginal language?

Not always.

Yes, always.

And yet they are still there, while settler Australians whine about multiculturalism.

At the mercy of their conquerors. It's like one of those zoo animals that's extinct in the wild.

[anarchist23]

Fasces.You are trolling.

[Fasces]

Well, you're a sheep that believes the man's multiculti propaganda.

I, for one, don't blindly base my beliefs on what bankers tell me is good.

[Pants-of-dog]

The Prime Minister of Australia is named Tony Abbot. Is that a traditional Aboriginal name? Is English an Aboriginal language?

Does that mean the Aboriginals were wiped out or no longer exist?

Yes, always.

No. Most people frown on raping babies, for example.

At the mercy of their conquerors. It's like one of those zoo animals that's extinct in the wild.

Lol. Your trolling needs work.

We all know that the Australian gov't has less power than ever in terms of getting rid of Aboriginals.

[Fasces]

Does that mean the Aboriginals were wiped out or no longer exist?

All I said was that Britain beat the Aboriginals. Why does that imply complete genocide?

The USSR beat the Germans in WW2. Germans still exist.

No. Most people frown on raping babies, for example.

That's because it violates the moral and legal codes which govern our society, which are enforced with... force.

Similarly, throwing weak or retarded babies off of cliffs would be immoral today, yet perfectly acceptable in a stereotypical Spartan society. The murder of individuals for religious ceremony is frowned upon in Mexico today, but under the Aztecs was one of the highest honors. Our moral codes are only as rigid as the ability to enforce them.

We all know that the Australian gov't has less power than ever in terms of getting rid of Aboriginals.

Yep. Like Israel, they should have dealt with their native problems in the 1940s. Now they have to wait for US hegemonic power to wane, and a restoration of the Westphalian system under Chinese leadership.

Fasces.You barge into a conversation.Your intent is to provoke an emotional response.

My intent is to make a point.

[Pants-of-dog]

All I said was that Britain beat the Aboriginals. Why does that imply complete genocide?

The USSR beat the Germans in WW2. Germans still exist.

Oh. You are also one of those people that (wrongly) think there was a war of conquest.

Try reading the wiki article linked to above.

That's because it violates the moral and legal codes which govern our society, which are enforced with... force.

Similarly, throwing weak or retarded babies off of cliffs would be immoral today, yet perfectly acceptable in a stereotypical Spartan society. The murder of individuals for religious ceremony is frowned upon in Mexico today, but under the Aztecs was one of the highest honors. Our moral codes are only as rigid as the ability to enforce them.

In other words, having the might to do something does not magically make it right, even if enforcing rightness sometimes requires might.

Yep. Like Israel, they should have dealt with their native problems in the 1940s. Now they have to wait for US hegemonic power to wane, and a restoration of the Westphalian system under Chinese leadership.

What do Westphalian Chinese have to do with aboriginals? Please do not go off topic, Fasces, or show some evidence.

My intent is to make a point.

That making fun of oppressed or marginalised people is funny?

[AFAIK]

If anything the fact that this can happen points to the young white Australians of today having an even worse view of black people than older generations. I find this hard to fathom, after all haven't views been going the other way in the rest of the world with younger people being less bigoted? I just find it strange to imagine that this generation of Australians can be ever more racist than the last but as the article suggests, what other explantion is there for the lack or reaction from ordinary Australians to this travesty of "justice"?

Understanding of this issue eludes me so I would hope that my fellow PoFoers would be able to help me understand what is is about the views of young Australians today that allowes to government to get away with these henious crimes without being punished for them. I would particulaly welcome insights from Australians who would no doubt a have a firmer grasp of the situation than I.

My brother moved from London to Sydney about 10 years ago. He told me he has encountered a lot of casual racism similar to that in the UK 30 years ago. Judging from asylum seeker policies I'd say that Australia is significantly more racist than Europe.

I feel that the article you posted is deeply biased. It quotes at length the negative experience of one family, which is a brutal miscarriage of justice if the report is accurate but gives little insight into the social problems and institutions operating to address them. There was no comment made by the authorities operating in aboriginal communities. Were they invited to comment? Surely they'd offer an explanation if given the oppourtunity, no? The Guardian has a left wing bias and I don't trust it to provide the full story on many social issues. It seems to be more interested in providing a dose of liberal guilt than accurate reporting.

[Fasces]

Oh. You are also one of those people that (wrongly) think there was a war of conquest.

There was. Not all wars are fought with trenches.

In other words, having the might to do something does not magically make it right, even if enforcing rightness sometimes requires might.

I'm not talking about individuals when I say might makes right. I'm talking about the creation of moral systems on a societal level. All moral codes stem from a central authority that has the power to enforce them on the population.

For more information, read Foucault.

What do Westphalian Chinese have to do with aboriginals? Please do not go off topic, Fasces, or show some evidence.

The Westphalian system is an arrangement of international relations that holds that states have supreme authority within their own borders. This system was in place until the 1920s and the Treaty of Versaille, as a consequence of the religious wars in Europe.

Under an internationalist system, international laws, such as human rights or the prohibition of genocide, can be enforced by external actors, such as the UN or, more practically, the USA. State authority is not supreme over certain international agreements, and states which violate them lose their legitimacy. Under a Westphalian system, this would not occur - if Australia wanted to torture and exterminate every last aboriginal, no foreign power would have any right to intervene for any reason at any time.

As a result, Australia only has to tolerate the Aboriginals until that window of time when no major power has an established global hegemony.

That making fun of oppressed or marginalised people is funny?

Sure.

Fasces.You just barge into a conversation.Where are your manners,don't they teach you manners in USA.

Why don't you get on topic before I have to start issuing Rule 15 violations?