[Swagman]

don't pretend to be an expert so I won;t comment on specifically Aboriginal issues Wht I would like to ask Asarchist is to show me a single issue where he backs a white position over a non white one or does he just back the non white position in every case (obviously an out and out bigot like maas will always do so)

secondly I hope every American who attaks Australia wants to give all the land of the USA back to the native Americans and leave as soon as possible or does their 'manfst destiny' gove them special rights of conquest>

As a 'non-indigenous' Australian I find it bemusing that leftist anti-racists condemn non-indigenous citizens of Aust such as I, for an event that occurred in 1788?

No one alive today participated in the (depending upon your individual viewpoint) the settlement of, colonisation of, invasion of, conquest of, migration to the country now called ' Australia'.

One does not prosecute the son for the deeds of his father.

I myself (my family) have been here since around 1800 when an ancestor was transported here against his will. He didn't invade, conquer, migrate or settle but was transported. I've (my family) have been here since before the current nation existed.

My attitude towards aboriginals (indigenous Australians) is that they are just 'Australians' in exactly the same way that I am an 'Australian'.

Segregating them out for special benefits and describing them in a different sense is in reality 'racist'.

Ironically the lefty anti-racists are contradicting themselves with their own ideology by advocating so IMO....

[Solastalgia]

As a 'non-indigenous' Australian I find it bemusing that leftist anti-racists condemn non-indigenous citizens of Aust such as I, for an event that occurred in 1788?

No one alive today participated in the (depending upon your individual viewpoint) the settlement of, colonisation of, invasion of, conquest of, migration to the country now called ' Australia'.

One does not prosecute the son for the deeds of his father.

I myself (my family) have been here since around 1800 when an ancestor was transported here against his will. He didn't invade, conquer, migrate or settle but was transported. I've (my family) have been here since before the current nation existed.

Who accused you of being personally culpable for crimes committed in 1788?

My attitude towards aboriginals (indigenous Australians) is that they are just 'Australians' in exactly the same way that I am an 'Australian'.

You're contradicting yourself.

You say that you and aboriginals are "exactly the same" australians, yet at the beginning of your post, made the distinction that you're a non-indigenous australian. There is a difference between you and aboriginals.

Segregating them out for special benefits and describing them in a different sense is in reality 'racist'.

The reason why they get "special benefits" is the same reason that anywhere else in the first world, the poorest in society get piecemeal help from their respective government (& no that's not racism ). The way you say "special benefits", though, makes it sound like aboriginals have it better off than anyone else in australia, which is far from the case. Those "benefits" have historically been entirely insufficient, to say the least, and most aboriginals remain in abject poverty (even while collecting their so-called "benefits").

Ironically the lefty anti-racists are contradicting themselves with their own ideology by advocating so IMO....

I haven't read much of the recent posts in this thread. But the only contradiction that I've seen, came from you.

Also, for as much as you accuse people of "anti-racism", are you implying that you're a racist?

[Swagman]

Who accused you of being personally culpable for crimes committed in 1788

I didn't say that 'I' had been personally accused.

You're contradicting yourself.

You say that you and aboriginals are "exactly the same" australians, yet at the beginning of your post, made the distinction that you're a non-indigenous australian. There is a difference between you and aboriginals.

'I' did not make that distinction. The thread title has. I am mearly commenting in relation to the thread.

The reason why they get "special benefits" is the same reason that anywhere else in the first world, the poorest in society get piecemeal help from their respective government (& no that's not racism ).

If that was indeed the case we would not be discussing 'aborginals' but 'marginalised' Australians in general.

I haven't read much of the recent posts in this thread. But the only contradiction that I've seen, came from you.

Good for you. I suggest you do some more reading then.

Also, for as much as you accuse people of "anti-racism", are you implying that you're a racist?

No, are you?

[Solastalgia]

I didn't say that 'I' had been personally accused.

Yes, you did.

"As a 'non-indigenous' Australian I find it bemusing that leftist anti-racists condemn non-indigenous citizens of Aust such as I, for an event that occurred in 1788?" - Swagman

'I' did not make that distinction.

Yes, you did.

"As a 'non-indigenous' Australian..." - Swagman

If that was indeed the case we would not be discussing 'aborginals' but 'marginalised' Australians in general.

Yes, it is the case that aboriginals get government help like other poor people in australian society. But this thread is about aboriginals, specifically.

Good for you. I suggest you do some more reading then.

Suggestion taken. I just read through the recent posts, and still can't find any contradictions besides the one you just made.

No, are you?

So you're not a racist, but insist on angrily accusing others of being "anti-racist" .

If you really aren't a racist here, then you must be troll, especially on account of asking me if I'm racist in response...

[Swagman]

non-indigenous citizens of Aust such as I

That is explaining that I am just one citizen of Australia and that I am non-indigenous. Those being condemned are non-indigenous Australians as a 'collective'.

Nasty mean white folk that invaded and stole the land you would call us....

Yes, you did.

"As a 'non-indigenous' Australian..." - Swagman

......it's not my distinction it is the thread's

Yes, it is the case that aboriginals get government help like other poor people in australian society. But this thread is about aboriginals, specifically.

I agree, but it shouldn't be, which is my point.

Suggestion taken. I just read through the recent posts, and still can't find any contradictions besides the one you just made

You missed the one that I pointed out.

So you're not a racist, but insist on angrily accusing others of being "anti-racist" .

If you really aren't a racist here, then you must be troll, especially on account of asking me if I'm racist in response...

Angry? I'm not angry and I'm not a racist. I've already had that discussion with the Anachist although he thinks much like you.

Having a contrary viewpoint is not trolling?.

[Solastalgia]

That is explaining that I am just one citizen of Australia and that I am non-indigenous.

Exactly! See, again, you make the distinction for yourself, and yet continue to claim that you haven't:

"......it's not my distinction it is the thread's" - Swagman

Nasty mean white folk that invaded and stole the land you would call us....

Oh wow, who would've thunk that a conservative would pull out the "bad whitie" card!?!? Haven't heard that one before from you guys.

I agree, but it shouldn't be, which is my point.

So you agree that this thread is about aboriginals, but your point is that it shouldn't be. Great point, good sir.

You missed the one that I pointed out.

Nope, I didn't. I just re-read the recent posts. Nobody made the contradiction that you're claiming. Please point me to the post where you saw that. The only contradiction I've seen here, was made by you.

Angry? I'm not angry and I'm not a racist.

You're not racist, yet you condemn the anti-racists from what position exactly? The anti-anti-racist?

I've already had that discussion with the Anachist although he thinks much like you.

What a surprise, a couple anarchists think similarly and an old conservative doesn't agree.

Having a contrary viewpoint is not trolling?.

Never said that. I asked if you were a troll because of the way you responded to me when I confronted you on your shtick against anti-racists. It's called poe's law. Sometimes it's hard to distinguish between a crazy conservative, and a trolling parody of one.

[Great Smell of Brut]

There is much to condemn 'anti racists ' for . ANti racists are a subsect of those who beleive themselves against racism but the 'anti racist' praxis actually involves racsm against white people and a slew of leftist agenda that actually encourages racial hatred, both amongst theose they beleive marhinalised and also those who the anti racists want to discriminate against.

[anarchist23]

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

The native Australians only had spears.

Australia has a racist constitution and the Australians are in the main,racists. Swagman has a reputation of behaving like an apologist for Australian racism.
My sister lives in Australia and she says the Australians are openly racist, that boat people are towed and dumped in open waters, and the aborigines are treated terribly. My sister is an educated woman, a retired headmistress.
At least she recognizes Australians have a problem unlike suburban Swagman.

[Pants-of-dog]

As a 'non-indigenous' Australian I find it bemusing that leftist anti-racists condemn non-indigenous citizens of Aust such as I, for an event that occurred in 1788?

No one alive today participated in the (depending upon your individual viewpoint) the settlement of, colonisation of, invasion of, conquest of, migration to the country now called ' Australia'.

One does not prosecute the son for the deeds of his father.

I myself (my family) have been here since around 1800 when an ancestor was transported here against his will. He didn't invade, conquer, migrate or settle but was transported. I've (my family) have been here since before the current nation existed.

All of this would make more sense if the oppression of indigenous Australians had actually stopped at some point in history. Since it has not, it makes sense for anti-racists to condemn the Australian gov't and all those who support the racist policies of said gov't and the racist aspects of Australian society.

My attitude towards aboriginals (indigenous Australians) is that they are just 'Australians' in exactly the same way that I am an 'Australian'.

Segregating them out for special benefits and describing them in a different sense is in reality 'racist'.

Ironically the lefty anti-racists are contradicting themselves with their own ideology by advocating so IMO....

Actually, you're the more racist one, but let's ignore that.

Instead let's address your actual point: that the act of seeing indigenous Australians as being somehow different from other Australians is somehow damaging to Aboriginals.

You are proposing we ignore the fact that they are indigenous, that they have a special tie to this land because they have been living here for about 40 000 years. Because you want us to see them as just like white Australians.

You are proposing we ignore the fact that they have been historically oppressed, that they have had their land stolen, their children taken, targeted for forcible assimilation, and ravaged by disease. Because you want us to see them as just like white Australians.

You are proposing we ignore the fact that they are still being oppressed, how their children are still being taken away as the OP says. Because you want us to see them as just like white Australians.

You are proposing we ignore their languages, their arts, their music, their knowledge of the land, their poetry, their traditions, in short their whole culture. And not only that, but you think they should that too. And you forget that you guys have already tried that, and are still doing that, and it doesn't work. But you will still try to assimilate them without their consent. Because you want us to see them as just like white Australians.

I, on the other hand, wish to recognise their culture and their history and their sovereignty, and their basic dignity as human beings.

Which position is more damaging to Aboriginals?

[colliric]

2000 Greeks died
20000 Persian deaths....

The Persians were massacred....




Oh wait, no they weren't! they won that battle after they killed the last 300 Spartans!

The numbers game sucks doesn't it!

[anarchist23]

The numbers game sucks doesn't it!

^
They are an indicator.

Wikipedia.
Child fatalities in Israel,West Bank and Gaza between September 2000 and October 2012.
Israeli children..129
Palistinian children..992

[layman]

They are an indicator.

Of strength mostly, yes.

[Swagman]

There is much to condemn 'anti racists ' for . ANti racists are a subsect of those who beleive themselves against racism but the 'anti racist' praxis actually involves racsm against white people and a slew of leftist agenda that actually encourages racial hatred, both amongst theose they beleive marhinalised and also those who the anti racists want to discriminate against.

Yes, well put.

The Left uses racism as a political tool pretty much in the same way as they use environmentalism, IMO.

Instead let's address your actual point: that the act of seeing indigenous Australians as being somehow different from other Australians is somehow damaging to Aboriginals.

No, it's damaging to society. Segregating aboriginals from 'other Australians' as you propose is in itself a 'racist' act.

You are proposing we ignore the fact that they are indigenous, that they have a special tie to this land because they have been living here for about 40 000 years. Because you want us to see them as just like white Australians.

Yes I am proposing that.

Define "white Australians". My daughter would be classified as a 'white Australian' but she has lovely olive skin like her mother who whilst Australian born, had Maltese parents. She is not described as a 'Maltese Australian' she is just an 'Australian'.

[Pants-of-dog]

No, it's damaging to society. Segregating aboriginals from 'other Australians' as you propose is in itself a 'racist' act.

And letting handicapped people use a ramp or elevator instead of the stairs is an "ableist" act because it segregates people. And having urinals in men's bathrooms is also damaging and sexist because it segregates people. If you treat a woman in a wheelchair as someone "special" then how will they ever learn to stand at a urinal?

And if your best argument is that we're racist, then you have no good argument.

Yes I am proposing that.

Yes, I understand your racist proposition to ignore their history (and yours) as well as their culture, forcibly assimilate them, tell them its for their own good and more or less repeat every single policy mistake the Australian gov't has ever made in regards to Aboriginal people.

Those who live with conservatives and others who ignore the mistakes of the past are condemned to repeat it.