Sign In
0 Items (
Search
Comments (26)
Recently, The Australian ran a story by Paige Taylor quoting Reconciliation Australia’s biennial survey which asserts four out of five Australians believe it is important to establish a representative indigenous body enjoying constitutional protection. She says:
Since 2008, Reconciliation Australia’s barometer survey has been gauging the attitudes and experiences of Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians, including towards each other.
The latest survey of 532 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and 1990 non-Indigenous people … found support for an Indigenous body in the Constitution was 79 per cent. In 2020, when the last survey was conducted, 81 per cent of people surveyed were in favour. The survey has an estimated margin of error of 1.9 per cent.
Obviously, very few Australian readers would have been included in the sample, judging by the comments thread of every story in that newspaper concerning this Voice. Among that cohort, I doubt support would get to even one in ten. This thought led me to wonder about the rigour of the survey. A sample of 2522 from a population of 25 million is not particularly convincing to begin with. I could not find online an explanation of the methodology used, but in 2008 they used Auspoll. According to the detailed report of that survey:
The research was conducted online using a managed panel of respondents who received a small incentive for their participation. Studies have shown that online research produces research which is at least as accurate (and sometimes more accurate) than telephone research. Some of the benefits include the removal of any interviewer bias, as well as the ability to conduct fast turnaround research. The sample was drawn in such a way as to be representative of the Australian population and data were weighted by sex, age and location.
That suggests to me a panel of semi-professional serial survey respondents. There may well be a left-leaning bias inherent in such a cohort. Be that as it may, the more interesting question relates to the vaguely defined concept of ‘reconciliation’.
On Wednesday, National’s Senator Andrew Gee broke ranks with his party and announced he would support the Voice. Naturally he was immediately snapped up by Voice advocate Chris Kenny for an interview on Sky’s The Kenny Report. Gee told us that ‘although we’ve come a long way towards reconciliation, we’ve still got a long way to go’ or words to that effect. Which suggests that Gee actually knows what reconciliation looks like. That would make him pretty much unique, at least among ‘whiteys’.
Other than in a financial context, ‘reconciliation’ has two meanings. You can become ‘reconciled to’ something, which means you accept the inevitability of what you cannot control. That is the form of reconciliation that Aborigines should embrace if they really want to eliminate disadvantage in that 20 per cent of their population that is still genuinely disadvantaged.
Or you can become ‘reconciled with’ someone, which means you put away your differences. This implies a compromise – some give and take on both sides.
But the form of reconciliation demanded by the Aboriginal Industry falls into neither category. It is an open-ended process: We will be reconciled with Aborigines when they tell us we are.
Here, from the Reconciliation Australia website, is what reconciliation means to them:
At its heart, reconciliation is about strengthening relationships between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and non-Indigenous peoples, for the benefit of all Australians.
For Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, Australia’s colonial history is characterised by devastating land dispossession, violence, and racism. Over the last half-century, however, many significant steps towards reconciliation have been taken.
Reconciliation is an ongoing journey that reminds us that while generations of Australians have fought hard for meaningful change, future gains are likely to take just as much, if not more, effort.
In a just, equitable and reconciled Australia, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children will have the same life chances and choices as non-Indigenous children, and the length and quality of a person’s life will not be determined by their racial background.
Our vision of reconciliation is based and measured on five dimensions: historical acceptance; race relations; equality and equity; institutional integrity and unity.
Here are the bullet points for all five. My comments are interposed:
Race Relations
All Australians understand and value Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and non-Indigenous cultures, rights and experiences, which results in stronger relationships based on trust and respect and that are free of racism.
Goal: Positive two-way relationships built on trust and respect exist between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and non-Indigenous Australians throughout society.
Action: Overcome racism
Overcome racism? Yes, that should work as an action plan. The definition of ‘racism’ is now a moveable feast. In the minds of many activists being white is synonymous with being racist, so this is a determinant of reconciliation that is never likely to be achieved.
Equality and Equity
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples participate equally in a range of life opportunities and the unique rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are recognised and upheld.
Goal: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians participate equally and equitably in all areas of life – i.e. we have closed the gaps in life outcomes – and the distinctive individual and collective rights and cultures of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are universally recognised and respected. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are self-determining.
Action: Renew focus on Closing the Gap
So, when Aborigines have their own parliament and are governed by their own rules, will that mean we are reconciled?
Institutional Integrity
The active support of reconciliation by the nation’s political, business and community structures.
Goal: Our political, business and community institutions actively support all dimensions of reconciliation.
Action: Capitalise on the RAP Program to create a wider range of opportunities for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians.
Let me translate the ‘action’ plan: blackmail woke corporations to flush shareholders money down the toilet in devising programs and jobs to make otherwise unemployable people feel good about themselves.
Unity
An Australian society that values and recognises Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures and heritage as a proud part of a shared national identity.
Goal: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories, cultures and rights are a valued and recognised part of a shared national identity and, as a result, there is national unity.
Action: Achieve a process to recognise Australia’s First Peoples in our Constitution.
How much more recognition do they need – for a primitive and not-fit-for-purpose culture and a history of violence, cannibalism, infanticide and superstition – above and beyond the incorporation of Aboriginal themes in every facet of our lives at almost every moment of the day?
Historical Acceptance
All Australians understand and accept the wrongs of the past and their impact on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Australia makes amends for past policies and practices ensures these wrongs are never repeated.
Goal: There is widespread acceptance of our nation’s history and agreement that the wrongs of the past will never be repeated— there is truth, justice, healing and historical acceptance.
Action: Acknowledge our past through education and understanding.
How much further do they want to penetrate our education system beyond the fact that an Aboriginal perspective is mandated as a cross curriculum priority for all subjects? That children are being taught Wiradjuri rather than becoming proficient in English?
So far, non-indigenous Australia has done all the reconciling — witness the ubiquity of the Aboriginal flag, the constant refrains of ‘we acknowledge the traditional owners’, the Aboriginal domination of the opening ceremonies of all major public events, the Aboriginal-only study grants and job placements, the constant and sickening and patronising deferral to Aboriginal ‘deep spirituality’ and ‘connection to country’, the relinquishment of 60 per cent of our land mass to some form of native title, and so on almost ad infinitum.
It’s time for the Aboriginal people to throw off the shackles of the Aboriginal Industry and do some reconciling ‘to’ the fact that the vast majority have never had it so good and wouldn’t come within a bull’s roar of their current lifestyle under traditional culture.
‘Reconciliation’ is a mystical entity. To those like Andrew Gee it is a Holy Grail. To the Aboriginal industry it is a magic pudding.
Peter O’Brien’s latest book, Villian or Victim? A defence of Sir John Kerr and the Reserve Powers, can be ordered here
We could learn from NZ if we think reconciliation, whatever it means, will ever be achieved. David Round has long followed the saga of Treaty of Waitangi claims by Maori. His conclusions:
” during the most recent round of full and final settlements we were constantly assured that after those settlements we could put the past behind us and finally move forward as one nation. You and I predicted that this would not happen, and we were absolutely right. Now we face claims for water, air, wildlife, and for sovereignty itself. Our every act of generosity is simply followed by another demand. We have no assurance that even current demands are the last word. Grant them, and further demands will follow. To be frank, we would be fools if we were to believe any of the assurances of iwi leaders that this or that demand is the very last one. …”
Spot on, Doug D. New Zealand is showing us exactly what can happen but, just as we do re the lessons about renewable energy courtesy of Germany and the UK, we will just blithely ignore what is patently before our eyes.
You mean that placating the demands of tyrants will not achieve peace in our time? Surely not!
“For Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, Australia’s colonial history is characterised by devastating land dispossession, violence, and racism.”
Devastating land dispossession and violence was characteristic of colonial history in the Torres Strait?
The islands weren’t colonized until the 1870s, there was no land dispossession (see Mabo) and the violence was a part of the inter-island headhunting raids which ceased with the arrival of Christian missionaries and colonization.
@Blair – exactly:
[Devastating land dispossession and violence was characteristic of colonial history in the Torres Strait?
The islands weren’t colonized until the 1870s, there was no land dispossession (see Mabo) and the violence was a part of the inter-island headhunting raids which ceased with the arrival of Christian missionaries and colonization.]
May I add the violence towards White shipwreck survivors must be included.
Eliza Fraser was a passenger on ‘Stirling Fraser’ brig which was on it’s way tp Moreton Bay from Singapore.
It was shipwrecked and Eliza gave birth soon after.
We all know the story of how she was kept enslaved by the natives – and hidden when passing ships went by.
Other shipwreck victims were cannibalised.
The Torres Strait Islands were annexed in 1879 by Queensland, becoming part of the British colony of Queensland. After 1901, the Islands became part of the Australian State of Queensland, despite some islands positioned off the New Guinea coast.
TSI were not
What you say might be true, Narelle – except that Fraser Island is not in the Torres Strait.
Fully agree, Blair, yet now they’re blaming us for their shrinking islands (which has gone on since those islands first started forming ca. 8-10 thousand years ago), and demanding yet more compensation. Meanwhile, well over 90% of the TS Islander population now lives on the mainland!
As an aside, I read yesterday that PNG’s population might be far higher than the official 9.5 million, and couldn’t help thinking that this signals big problems ahead for us, as some of those unemployed people start drifting southwards — the TS islands provide obvious stepping stones to a far better life, and we’ll have plenty of fun trying to sort out genuine TSI residents from PNG blow-ins.
Good onya Peter. But whitefellas guilt-trippin’ ain’t reconciliation. The idea of an Aboriginal flag is lunacy. ‘First nations’ is an oxymoron. I respect the ability of the most resilient stone-age culture to make the best of a harsh environment and survive sometimes extreme climate change. Cannibalism and infanticide have been documented in more advanced European cultures under extreme stress before ‘human climate change’. Surveyor-General Mitchell respected abilities of Aborigines and also recorded the deceptions of those who tried to kill him. He’s been labelled as a mass-murderer by wokes for defending himself.
https://spectator.com.au/2022/06/will-the-abc-tell-the-whole-story-about-mount-dispersion/
There’s currently a competition between greens and politically correct foresters to try and capture the high ground of fire management or so-called cultural burning. Aboriginal burning was economic and effective, but it wasn’t Black Magic as Gammage and Pascoe would like us to believe.
I would say that aboriginal fuel reduction practices would have been quite minimal. From SA through Victoria into Southern NSW most of the fuel reduction burns would have been a consequence of lightning strikes. These occur so frequently that the locals wouldn’t have needed to do anything themselves and that is how the land was kept in such good condition without the over-forestation that occurs now because we have stopped the fires burning all the little trees that grow up between the bigger surviving trees (as happens in our national and state parks) and which then clogs up all the space with flammable rubbish and results in the devastating crown fires that can’t be stopped.
Nature was the clever one in pre-European history, the locals only had to sit back and let her take her course.
The largesse of our country towards those who are or claim to be aboriginals is a great demo of what happens when you give almost anyone heaps of privileges, goods and services, money or whatever, for the more you give them, the more they want, and they certainly want with this voice. We are all supposedly equal under the constitution so let’s have some equality for we supposed white people and treat us all the same. People on the land as in Cape York cattlemen copied their yearly burns for mustering cattle for just before the wet sets in you burn off places, it rains, green shoots start, the cattle gravitate towards the “burns” and are easily mustered. The problem with aboriginals burning the country out each year was that although the tinder as in shed bark and leaves burnt off kept major fires away, it also burnt out the smaller animals who couldn’t outrun or out burrow to escape the fires as did the wallabies, kangaroos, emu’s etc. so they really weren’t the ecologists popular opinion brands them, just getting pre cooked tucker the easy way, stone age takeaways as it were.
@Botswana –
[The problem with aboriginals burning the country out each year was that although the tinder as in shed bark and leaves burnt off kept major fires away, it also burnt out the smaller animals who couldn’t outrun or out burrow to escape the fires as did the wallabies, kangaroos, emu’s etc. so they really weren’t the ecologists popular opinion brands them, just getting pre cooked tucker the easy way, stone age takeaways as it were.]
‘firesticking’ was a hunting tool used by all stoneage hunter-gatherers globally.
will let the aborigines to stake the claim of ‘drop bears’ too as the koala heading up and got their bums burnt.
No doubt why they were not seen by Whites till 2 years after the settlement – they were good tucker.
Narelle G. Koalas were rare in healthy mature forests. The first one was brought into Sydney 15 years after Phillip planted the Union Jack at Sydney Cove/Warrane. The first specimen was two feet obtained by Barralier’s Aboriginal guide Gory at the expensive price of 2 spears and a tomahawk. The least edible parts of the koala were precious. They shared possums freely. There are many more koalas over a much wider area now. They breed up in dense scrub and the young invade the suburbs lookin for tucker.
https://www.connorcourtpublishing.com.au/Vic-Jurskis_bymfg_35-0-1.html
@Vic – thank you Vic I didn’t realise it was 15 years.
yes there is an explosion of koalas from the Grafton region south through Coffs to the Nambucca Valley.
I fear it is not going to end well – but that is off topic.
I have your book The Great Koala Scam .
Thanks Narelle, the experts advised govt. that north coast koalas declined by 50%. so they’re now officially endangered
Nothing could be further from the truth. Our world record extinctions of small mammals occurred because scrub choked out ground layer diversity after Aboriginal burning was disrupted. The small mammals relied on the seeds, herbs, grasses and truffles that were choked out by explosive homogenous scrub. It’s happening now in forests with Lock It Up and Let It Burn ‘conservation policy.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Our world record extinctions of small mammals occurred because scrub choked out ground layer diversity after Aboriginal burning was disrupted. The small mammals relied on the seeds, herbs, grasses and truffles that were choked out by explosive homogenous scrub. It’s happening now in forests with Lock It Up and Let It Burn ‘conservation policy.
Reconciliation is just an exercise in “White Guilt” and ‘shifting goalposts..”
Andrew Gee is my local Member of Parliament.
Orange was once a true rural National seat.
Over the last few decades the NSW Department of Primary Industries has moved here, and with education, health, and an influx of dissatisfied Sydney residents during the Covid “pandemic”, we are now a repository of public servants.
Mr Gee has accordingly become a bastion of woke values, including advocating strict Covid measures.
And correction Peter, he is “Mr”, not “Senator” Gee.
A minor point but important.
Mea Culpa. Thank you.
Or “Hon Andrew Gee”.
I thought that 80% of Aborigines, or rather, those claiming Aboriginal heritage were reconciled. Most seem to have been reconciled in the fruits of marriage. Many more became reconciled to fluent use of the English language, ability to study and communicate in that language and use it to gain the benefits of education, business and public service.
Also one must note the reconciliation to the majority of Aborigines to roads, sewerage systems, modern ‘Western’ health care and mobile phones. Just saying, happy to share, folks. Along with Western diet, clothing and scuba gear.
Job done, I would say. What’s left to reconcile…oh, ownership of land. And that’s another Western concept being adopted…so officially, reconciled to that too!
A very good assessment Daffy.
As with most contentious issues, it’s always important to clarify definitions, so thank you, Peter, for this contribution. I would suggest reconciliation starts at home, so that for the residents of many (most?) remote communities, such as Yuendumu, Aurukun, Wadeye, Palm Island, Doomadgee etc., maybe the locals need to sort out all their own parochial squabbles before engaging with the rest of the nation. From my experience, the greater, outside world hardly features in their thinking (except for the food, grog, vehicles and other material goods it magically pumps in; cargo cultism is the prevailing philosophy, even among the leaders). Of course, the past practice of forcing people from mutually antagonistic tribal groups to settle onto missions and reserves contributed to this problem, but their descendants today, with land rights, welfare and freedom of movement, do have the capacity to move elsewhere, even to towns and cities, were they so motivated. Many seem to prefer remaining at home, to perpetuate their cultural vendettas — there’s no doubt this provides their lives with some purpose. They certainly travel far and wide, and often, for “sorry business”.
Others above have mentioned the spurious claims of land dispossession in the Torres Strait, but the thoughtless lumping of TS Island people with Aborigines also pertains to “reconciliation”. These two groups are culturally and ethnically very different, perhaps incompatible, with hostility between them going back well before 1788. To repeatedly go on about ATSIs as if they were a cohesive group reflects extreme ignorance. It would be fascinating to hear what insiders on both sides think about this, although their leaders no doubt would be too diplomatic to reveal much in public.
As for: “All Australians understand and accept the wrongs of the past and their impact on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Australia makes amends for past policies and practices ensures these wrongs are never repeated”, I’d guess that, seeing the past cannot be changed, but sure can be manipulated and constantly bleated about, it will forever be rubbed in our noses. By far the greatest “wrong” was the occupation of the land itself, which can be “corrected” in only one way, to my mind – I suppose true “reconciliation” will finally be achieved when full amends are made, and that occupation ceases. Just who gets to stay, and who gets to go (and just where they might go), would be fascinating points for discussion. Oh, another possibility just came to mind: but who will have to pay rent, and to whom, in perpetuity?
Pmprociv, a perceptive comment, gives a good picture of what I would also guess is the situation in remote communities.
.
The answer in my thinking is to enable those described by pmprociv to join the 80% mentioned by Daffy.
.
My suggestion is that there needs to be an offer to enable those among the 20% the ability to voluntarily relocate to join the 80% .
.
The hard part is how do you do that. Firstly, it has to be recognized that travel out in those areas is not cheap if you don’t have a government funded Land cruiser. The second concern is that family ties should not be broken because those relocating will not want to go if they can never return to visit.
.
My answer to those concerns is to concentrate the offer to the young people before they are in the vicious trap of hopelessness and potential suicide.
.
Unfortunately, because of the fixation of the aboriginal “industry” on its own profitable perpetuation it will be unlikely to happen. However, I make this comment in case there are at least some politicians in Australia with statesmanlike qualities who may be reading this or who can be influenced this way by others.
They start the white guilt brainwashing young here in Melbourne. It permeates through all layers of education if you can call it that, until eventually most graduates are singing from the same song sheet. No wonder they are trying to lower voting age to 16 in socialist NZ. Labor voters galore.
Anyway story relating to my 10 year old grandson in a class in Melbourne where every morning the “we acknowledge the traditional owners” mantra took place. She spoke to teacher expressing her disapproval and telling her, her son would be arriving in class after this nonsense. So he went in later every day.
In his 2015 book “The Story of Australia’s People: The Rise and Fall of Ancient Australia”, Geoffrey Blainey makes the observation that “the present Aboriginal generation might well be living now in a time of peace which their ancestors, century after century, did not experience.” He estimates that the Aboriginal death rate through intertribal warfare rivalled that experienced by Europeans during some of the most bloody episodes in their history.
British settlement actually imposed a lasting peace on a continent that had been beset by brutal intertribal conflict. Blainey acknowledges that such a statement will be disputed by some present-day Indigenous people but in his view “the evidence of some of the most ruthless battles is not yet public knowledge.”
So, in the interests of balance, why not some acknowledgement that the pre-1788 Aboriginal tribes were hardly “reconciled” with each other? Why not some recognition that it was the British who brought an end to the bloody intertribal warfare and introduced a sustained peace?