# What Is Australian Culture?



## wayneL (25 August 2006)

This is leading on from Snakes thread about what we don't like about Oz.

I made the comment that I hate the Americanized version of it; Ants responded with the fact that he hates the Englishized version of it. Though I find it quite charming; I like Bristish culture over American any day and the Brits did start the  place off (the whitefellas part that is), but I can't help but sympathize with his point of view.

Many accuse Australia has having no culture. I'm sure the Aussies will disagree (as do I, but feel it is disappearring) so what is Aussie culture? What does it mean to be an Aussie? And how should we go about preserving that?

Cheers


----------



## Realist (25 August 2006)

Good question.

More so than probably any other country Australian culture is very lifestyle focused.

(white) Australia does not have a long or proud history, and it is mainly a combination of English and becoming more and more Americanised, but there are European influences, particularly Italian and Greek. And there is also a reasonably strong Asian influence these days, especially food wise in the major cities.

Aussie's enjoy beaches, babeques, sports, drinking beer, taking the p*ss out of their mates, and taking it easy more so than other countries, maybe it is a huge rich Pacific Island? I think life is easy here compared to elsewhere, Australia is a huge and wealthy nation with beautiful beaches and very few people, it is the lucky country in many ways.

Unfortunately maybe this is changing, soaring house prices, and globalisation in particular cheap imports and offshoring of jobs is making life more difficult and young people can't take life so easy if they want to get ahead, infact if they just want to survive.

Is Australia becoming a brach office of America, a mine for China, and the 52nd state of the USA?

Are people becoming too image conscious, too money focused, determined to get ahead at the expense of others?  I think more so than 30 years ago for sure.


----------



## wayneL (25 August 2006)

This a remarkably difficuly question to answer as it kinda goes to the heart of the underlying question... i.e. "What is culture?"

Here's a bit of help on that question:

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=culture&x=31&y=8

and

http://www.reference.com/browse/columbia/culture


----------



## moola (25 August 2006)

Hahaha, when ever anyone mentions Australian culture it just reminds me of this one time in a night club in Darwin. This guy was on the dance floor wearing only a tea towl and a few words of grafitti. It was obviously his bucks night. Eventually the tea towl fell off and his butt was covered in bright red welts and bruises. One of the bouncers was about to kick him out but this little asian bouncer starts gesuring him back saying "No, no, no. Australian culture, Australian culture." in a hilariously surreal asian accent. So there you have it. That's now the only concept of Australian culture I'm ever going to have from that day fourth, it's torched into my mind.


----------



## wayneL (26 August 2006)

*bump*

Gee I thought Aussies would be all over this like a rash.

We do have a culture.....don't we?


----------



## wayneL (27 August 2006)

LOL


----------



## Big Jim (27 August 2006)

wayneL said:
			
		

> *bump*
> 
> Gee I thought Aussies would be all over this like a rash.
> 
> We do have a culture.....don't we?



Why are you asking so many questions? Probably because you were not born here? Maybe you should just get a life.


----------



## Big Jim (27 August 2006)

Realist said:
			
		

> Good question.
> 
> More so than probably any other country Australian culture is very lifestyle focused.
> 
> ...




lol Are you for real? I love working OS. I don't know what drugs you are on but they have evidently fried what few brain cells remain in your vacuotious skull. Keep up up the therapy and maybe, just maybe, you might get by.


----------



## wayneL (27 August 2006)

Big Jim said:
			
		

> Why are you asking so many questions? Probably because you were not born here? Maybe you should just get a life.





Big Jim....such a small comment. Tsk Tsk!


----------



## tech/a (27 August 2006)

> More so than probably any other country Australian culture is very lifestyle focused.




In a nut shell.
There is no better.---but then Im 100% aussi.
Ill add to that the People--the real people--the real Aussie fair dinkum--no airs and graces---Aussie---those that would give you the shirt off their back,give as much as they take,and are as loyal as your Blue heeler.

Australia is developing its Culture---but it appears that other cultures wish to dominate rather than Adopt!

Dont agree with all that american rubbish over priced housing blah blah---go have a look Australia is CHEAP!


----------



## Wysiwyg (27 August 2006)

Hi Wayne,

                  I think that Australia is a combination of many cultures with the English,Italians and Greeks being higher of number.So for me  Australia has no definitive culture......maybe in a thousand years.


----------



## Knobby22 (27 August 2006)

We are a positive people but not overly sentimental or patriotic.
We are outward looking which makes us very different to most other peoples.
We do have a culture but it isw constantly changing and under attack from many influences particuarly mass media and advertising.


----------



## Julia (27 August 2006)

Big Jim said:
			
		

> lol Are you for real? I love working OS. I don't know what drugs you are on but they have evidently fried what few brain cells remain in your vacuotious skull. Keep up up the therapy and maybe, just maybe, you might get by.




Big Jim

Well, what's your contribution to the question which, incidentally, I think is great.  It has made me think.  I can't come up with anything more appropriate than Realist's comments (did I say that!) which sum up what Australia is about really well.

Perhaps it's you, Big Jim, who should "get a life".

Julia


----------



## visual (27 August 2006)

Realist said:
			
		

> Good question.
> 
> Is Australia becoming a brach office of America, a mine for China, and the 52nd state of the USA?



5 years ago my husband was informed by an Malaysian business man,who had retired to Australia that Australia was a good retirement village! :


----------



## visual (27 August 2006)

tech/a said:
			
		

> In a nut shell.
> There is no better.---but then Im 100% aussi.
> Ill add to that the People--the real people--the real Aussie fair dinkum--no airs and graces---Aussie---those that would give you the shirt off their back,give as much as they take,and are as loyal as your Blue heeler.
> 
> ...




Tech,
How would you define a 100% Aussie?
I know you have already listed the personal qualities but could he be other than anglo saxon? originally?
just asking,


----------



## wayneL (27 August 2006)

The very first noticeable thing about Aussie culture for me was the language. Being from SoCal, I could hardly understand a word anybody said LOL. I was completely lost.

Once tuned in, there was all the charming abbreviations, smoko, brekky, arvo. My name wasn't Wayne any more, it was Wayno. 

Then there is all those colloquialisms which had me in fits of laughter for years and years.... e.g. As miserable as an orphan bandicoot on a burnt ridge etc.

Sadly, the language is becoming Americanized and I think it's a damned shame. It is something that should be preserved IMO.

The other thing is the Aussie sense of humour and is something we share with the Brits, though slightly different to each other. We have the ability to laugh at ourselves and it's amazing how good friends can take the p!ss out of each other nonstop and not take offence.

Australian humour involves what I call verbal sleight of hand... double entendre's etc. It actaully very intellectual but without pretense. Very funny! Our humour goes completely over the head of the Yanks which is even funnier.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (28 August 2006)

Yeh well I like Australia and America. 

Language
Food
Lifestyle and ideology of peaceful aussies.

It doesn`t involve rape, religious hatred, nor cave man style thinking with respect to women.


----------



## nelly (28 August 2006)

Hi y'all

I like Australia 'coz it's free............i can even burn a flag.........

cheerful always


----------



## tech/a (28 August 2006)

> How would you define a 100% Aussie?




Both My parents were born in Australia.
True we are all basically immigrants but my definition was based around influence from other cultures,be it Italian,Greek,Polish,English,Asian---you get the picture.We originated evidently from Wales.
My view is that as we go from generation to generation we lose the identities,cultures and traditions of our origin and take up(Or should) that which we are now part of.

Like ---Its not the *AUSTRALIAN WAY*

IE
Not sticking by your mates.
Welching on a bet.
etc


----------



## watsonc (28 August 2006)

There is more culture in a tub of yogurt, then there is Australian culture in Australia.


----------



## Sean K (28 August 2006)

watsonc said:
			
		

> There is more culture in a tub of yogurt, then there is Australian culture in Australia.




And we obviously can't check our grammer and spelling either.

I think Realist caught some of the common things Australia culture is considered to be. Good work Veteran!


----------



## visual (28 August 2006)

tech/a said:
			
		

> True we are all basically immigrants but my definition was based around influence from other cultures,be it Italian,Greek,Polish,English,Asian---you get the picture.
> 
> IE
> Not sticking by your mates.
> ...




I`m confused by this sentence,are you saying that peope who come from these backgrounds would nt embody the qualities that you consider honourable?

When the Italian hostage was killed in Iraq,he was said to have told the rest of his friends also hostages ,'don`t worry,I`ll show them how an Italian dies "I`m assuming he meant without fear and with honour,how does that differ from your desription of a real Australian?

My husband I would consider very Australian yet everywhere he goes he`s referred to as Italian,by the way he has always considered himself Australian,way before it became a political issue.He embodies the hard working,honest,  there`s another word I`m looking for,you know when you need something but can`t buy it there and then ,then he`ll just make it himself and carries on,now more Australian than that,I don`t know,  yet for Australia he is considered something he`s not.A bit confusing if you were to ponder the point which by the way he doesn`t.


----------



## tech/a (28 August 2006)

It doesnt.
Everybody is uniquely of their culture.
Many aspects of other cultures I and I'm sure others admire.
My point is though that when you make Australia home particularly after a few generations,the Australian culture,(Which could well be argued is becoming a blend of Many Cultures,but with a uniqueness already mentioned) should be embraced.

Im not saying abandon your families original culture but have it blend with and embrace the Feedom and independance,carefree,stand by your mates,help those in need,enjoy life which we as the Lucky country can enjoy.


----------



## visual (28 August 2006)

tech/a said:
			
		

> It doesnt.
> Everybody is uniquely of their culture.
> Many aspects of other cultures I and I'm sure others admire.
> My point is though that when you make Australia home particularly after a few generations,the Australian culture,(Which could well be argued is becoming a blend of Many Cultures,but with a uniqueness already mentioned) should be embraced.
> ...




And that`s where people lose me  
They  talk about culture as though it`s static ,culture evolved thats how it got to be where it is.

And by the way are you saying that my husband isn`t Australian? that will come as news to him,and I won`t say what he`ll think of your opinion,

Why do people have to erase or forget where they came from in order to be Australian,I certainly never intent to deny or obfuscate my origins but thats what they are origins,I have spent most of my life here ,the influences that affect my life my decisions are Australian based whatever you think that means.So why not refer to people born here or living here as Australian even if it is just to be inclusive.
When people say things like ,oh that`s how it`s done in Italy or whatever ,take my word for it,they are talking ancient history or particular aspect that the rest of the country would`nt recognise.Because as you would know being influenced by Welsh culture ,people like doing things that reflect their particular surroundings and that applies everywhere.

Australia is no diferent to any other country,age thats all that`s different.And thats because we are following the white culture .

Courage,honesty,standing by your mate,ect how far would humanity have got if these were exscusively Austalian traits.


----------



## tech/a (28 August 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> And that`s where people lose me
> They  talk about culture as though it`s static ,culture evolved thats how it got to be where it is.




Exactly.Australia's is evolving as one of multi cultural however there is a uniqueness i believe in "The Australian" way.



> And by the way are you saying that my husband isn`t Australian? that will come as news to him,and I won`t say what he`ll think of your opinion,




No!!!where have I even inferred that?



> Why do people have to erase or forget where they came from in order to be Australian,I certainly never intent to deny or obfuscate my origins but thats what they are origins,I have spent most of my life here ,the influences that affect my life my decisions are Australian based whatever you think that means.So why not refer to people born here or living here as Australian even if it is just to be inclusive.
> When people say things like ,oh that`s how it`s done in Italy or whatever ,take my word for it,they are talking ancient history or particular aspect that the rest of the country would`nt recognise.Because as you would know being influenced by Welsh culture ,people like doing things that reflect their particular surroundings and that applies everywhere.




They dont! But they should not force their cultures on us if we decide to adopt them then fine.
If they are radical and not generally accepted as "Australian" and forced upon a community in Australia purely as part of a culture left to come to Australia,then my veiw is that it should remain in the country in which it is part of THAT countries culture.Dont *force* it upon your new or adopted countries way of life.



> Australia is no diferent to any other country,age thats all that`s different.And thats because we are following the white culture .
> 
> Courage,honesty,standing by your mate,ect how far would humanity have got if these were exscusively Austalian traits.




Well some have gone farther than others---these are but a few traits mentioned and while not uniquely Australian I find they are identified with here more so than in other parts of the world.

I'll add to them.
Open mindedness.
Willingness to "give it a go".
A sence of whats fair and just.
Not easily influenced.
Generous.
Unpretentious.
Free thinking.
Sympathetic.


----------



## Sean K (28 August 2006)

Vis,

I get the impression you are confusing being officially Australian, with living as an Australian. ie, adopting Australia's general culture. I think there is a difference. 

Foreigners who have a very different general culture can migrate to Australia, become citizens, and then call themselves Australian. But, if they continue to live by their original country of origins culture, are they really living as Australians? 

Semantics perhaps. 

I do agree that Australia is characterised by many difference cultures blending together, but we are by the most part an anglo saxon race dominated by people who originated in GB. Now we are blending but, that cultural background is the main, and the culture that most Australians identify with. My generalisations of course. And yes, Italians are a very important part of our heritage, but only in small numbers really, centered along Lygon St in Carlton, and the Market Gardens. Italian culture is not Australian culture, but we are taking the bits we like and making it ours. Like pizza, pasta and good coffee. Although, we even make these the Australian way.


----------



## visual (28 August 2006)

So essentially what both you and Tech are saying is,being Australian means being exclusive.So having an Italian surname will for all eternity mean being Italian.You are both so far off the mark of what an Australian is it`s frightening.Australian culture is being influenced both by good and bad,we keep and modify if need be the good bits and reject the awful bits,we know the awuful bits because of the technology that as Australians we take for granted,papers,books,televisions,in other words things that can be grouped as educational tools,that is if used correctly,which at the end of the day above all else defines freedom.

People stay in their little ethnic groups because often they are made to feel excluded.Now days for some reason they are being encouraged to stay in their little ethnic groups.I can`t decide if its a bigger political picture or it`s the old story of keeping people excluded which now unfortunately is blowing up in everyones faces.

In any case as far as I`m concerned everyone who lives in Australia is either Australian or confused.When the confused go back to 'their country'for a visit generally and especialy if they have`nt kept up and progressed with the culture in which they have spent the major part of their lives they will be seen as backward Australians .Or bogans in whatever language they are being thought of.


----------



## Rafa (28 August 2006)

Tech, Kennas, I think what Vis is trying to say... 
is that the traits we call uniquely australian...

1. Hard Working
2. Honest
3. Fair Go

Are actually traits of most average, working class people around the world... Italians, English, Irish, etc... 

The reason this is Australia's pre-dominant culture, is beacuse Australia, being founded by minor convicts, migrants and refugees, is actually a collection of working class citizens from around world, who have come to Australia to start a NEW life, away from the Lords/serfs, class structures, etc that permieate thru european, asian countries... 

The people who moved to Australia, moved over for the very reason to get away from that.... so they can have a fair go, where is doesn't matter what family wealth they were born into.... they can make it happen, for themselves.


----------



## Sean K (28 August 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> So essentially what both you and Tech are saying is,being Australian means being exclusive.So having an Italian surname will for all eternity mean being Italian.You are both so far off the mark of what an Australian is it`s frightening.Australian culture is being influenced both by good and bad,we keep and modify if need be the good bits and reject the awful bits,we know the awuful bits because of the technology that as Australians we take for granted,papers,books,televisions,in other words things that can be grouped as educational tools,that is if used correctly,which at the end of the day above all else defines freedom.
> 
> People stay in their little ethnic groups because often they are made to feel excluded.Now days for some reason they are being encouraged to stay in their little ethnic groups.I can`t decide if its a bigger political picture or it`s the old story of keeping people excluded which now unfortunately is blowing up in everyones faces.
> 
> In any case as far as I`m concerned everyone who lives in Australia is either Australian or confused.When the confused go back to 'their country'for a visit generally and especialy if they have`nt kept up and progressed with the culture in which they have spent the major part of their lives they will be seen as backward Australians .Or bogans in whatever language they are being thought of.




Vis, 

I actually think most 2nd/3rd generation Italians are living as 'Australians'. ie, have adopted and adapted to display most of the general values that the 'average' Australian has. ie, a love of footy, meat pies, kangaroos and Holden cars. Some Italians might even like Vegimite and have a Hills Hoist in the back yard. And I'd also expect many italians to go to the beach and go surfing. Maybe, even eat fish n chips. Or, go to the pub and drink VB.   

I think there are some immigrants who are still holding onto their own cultural heritage and not adapting and adopting and therefore, still, in my eye, living in their cultural past, and not according to Australian culture. 

Immigrants who come to this country and get upset by Aussie women sun baking on the beach should, well, we've discussed this one on some other thread ago. 

kennas


----------



## Sean K (28 August 2006)

Rafa said:
			
		

> Tech, Kennas, I think what Vis is trying to say...
> is that the traits we call uniquely australian...
> 
> 1. Hard Working
> ...




Yeah, agree with those general traits Rafa, but not every culture works hard, is honest, or gives everyone a fair go. Does every culture like vegemite and icy cold beer?


----------



## The Mint Man (28 August 2006)

Australia is one of 2 things:
1.
I came from the dream time
From the dusty red soil plains
I am the ancient heart
The keeper of the flame
I stood upon the rocky shore
I watched the tall ships come
For forty thousand years I'd been
The first Australian

We are one but we are many
And from all the lands on earth we come
We share a dream and sing with one voice
I am
You are
We are Australian

I came upon the prison ship
Bowed down by iron chains
I cleared the land, endured the lash
And waited for the rains
I'm a settler, I'm a farmer's wife
In a dry and barren run
A convict then free man
I became Australian

I'm the daughter of a digger
Who sought the mother lode
The girl became a woman
On a long and dusty road
I'm a child of the depression
I saw the good times come
I'm a bushy
I'm a battler
I am Australian

I'm a teller of stories
I'm a singer of songs
I am Albert Namajera
And I paint the ghostly gums
I'm Clancy on his horse
I'm Ned Kelly on the run
I'm the one who waltzed Matilda
I am Australian

I'm the hot wind from the desert
I'm the black soil of the plains
I'm the mountains and the valleys
I'm the drought and flooding rains
I am the rock, I am the sky
The rivers when they run
The spirit of the great land
I am Australian

2.
'Ahh who gives a rats ****'.

Ill take number 2


----------



## Julia (28 August 2006)

I think one thing which is uniquely Australian is the laid back, laconic sense of humour.

Not long after I came to live here there were dreadful floods up in north Qld somewhere.  Many people were homeless.  A reporter was interviewing one homeowner who was surveying the remains of his house.  She said how devastating the flood was.  He grinned and said "Yeah, it's a bit wet!"
It's that casual understatement which demonstrates both the humour and the capacity for stoicism in the face of what to many would be an impossible situation.

Julia


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (28 August 2006)

Julia said:
			
		

> I think one thing which is uniquely Australian is the laid back, laconic sense of humour.
> 
> Not long after I came to live here there were dreadful floods up in north Qld somewhere.  Many people were homeless.  A reporter was interviewing one homeowner who was surveying the remains of his house.  She said how devastating the flood was.  He grinned and said "Yeah, it's a bit wet!"
> It's that casual understatement which demonstrates both the humour and the capacity for stoicism in the face of what to many would be an impossible situation.
> ...




Yes Julia good point!

We are not emotional cave men.


----------



## visual (28 August 2006)

kennas said:
			
		

> Vis,
> 
> I actually think most 2nd/3rd generation Italians are living as 'Australians'. ie, have adopted and adapted to display most of the general values that the 'average' Australian has. ie, a love of footy, meat pies, kangaroos and Holden cars. Some Italians might even like Vegimite and have a Hills Hoist in the back yard. And I'd also expect many italians to go to the beach and go surfing. Maybe, even eat fish n chips. Or, go to the pub and drink VB.
> 
> ...




Kennas,
what do you call real Australians who don`t like vegemite? traitors! : 

Thats what happens when you generalise,you end up saying that some Italians from 3 generations back!gee Italy will be surprised that 3 generations ago it lost thousands of people who now live in Australia and like or might not like vegemite and might or might not use hills hoists ect,,, :


----------



## Sean K (28 August 2006)

Talking about 'what is culture' we have to generalise Vis. Some weirdo 5th gen Aussies don't like Vegemite either. 

I am sure you could pick out some uniquely Italian things that are not Australian cultural traits. 

I might be wrong here, but how about the irrational overprotectiveness of Italian fathers to their daughters. Or, that Italian girls must marry Italian men. And, Italians must have fluffy dice hanging from the rear view mirror....


----------



## happytrader (28 August 2006)

According to me that is, Australian and Aboriginal Culture is alive and well right here in North Queensland. By the looks of the construction and pet industry there is no shortage of takers who want to live, study, work, play and retire here and be part of it. Commodores, Queenslanders (houses that is), pie with peas, sunshine all year long encourages many outdoor pursuits such as the barbie, fishing in the tinnie, swimming, 4 wheel driving, cricket, NRL, vigaro, golf and the standard ownership of thongs, shorts, sunnies and stubbie cooler. Roadtrains and Akubras and that honest open look in the eye you get from country people and westerners abound. Friday night and the Sunday session are serious pub nights after all this is a work hard play hard culture. Also I don't know anyone who doesn't have a punt in one way or another. This one is big, you can forget the xmas turkey but never ever forget the prawns.

Cheers
Happytrader


----------



## Rafa (28 August 2006)

You'd be surprised how many 'cultures' like an icy cold beer... I don't think we have monopoly on that... Germans, Croatians... even Russian i beleive. Same with surfing, beach, sun tans, etc...

Vegemite, that is certainly uniquely Australian...

But I think we are getting confused with Australia Icons and Australia Culture.


To me, Australia Culture is still....
1. Hard Work
2. Fair GO for all
3. Anti establishment, sticking it up to the rules/authorities...
4. Cutting everyone down to size.
5. She'll be right (as per Julia's example)


----------



## Sean K (28 August 2006)

Rafa said:
			
		

> You'd be surprised how many 'cultures' like an icy cold beer... I don't think we have monopoly on that... Germans, Croatians... even Russian i beleive. Same with surfing, beach, sun tans, etc...
> 
> Vegemite, that is certainly uniquely Australian...
> 
> ...




I like your list Rafa. Esp No 3. We tend to like to mix it up a bit. Something established by the ANZACs and their cohorts around WWI.


----------



## rub92me (28 August 2006)

Culture is a moving target. It is a shame though that not much of the aboriginal culture appears to have survived in what most of the posters currently consider to be the Australian culture. Fair go for all?


----------



## Sean K (28 August 2006)

I'm not sure if there's much value in maintaining and applying Aboriginal culture to the modern Australia. Some good dot paintings look OK, but what else can we use and apply to the modern world? Their sence of justice for a start is pretty warped to me. Anyway, that's been discussed on the aboriginal thread.


----------



## watsonc (28 August 2006)

More Australian culture:

Bigger is better (Australians love their big cars like Commodores and Falcons, big back yard etc)

Tall Poppy Syndrome (Australians can get very jealous of other people's success)

Foods: Fish and chips - derives from Britain
          Dim Sim - derives from the 1800s Chinese Gold Rush

Australian society should be concerned about the growth of US-based media companies and TNCs.


----------



## visual (28 August 2006)

kennas said:
			
		

> Talking about 'what is culture' we have to generalise Vis. Some weirdo 5th gen Aussies don't like Vegemite either.
> 
> I am sure you could pick out some uniquely Italian things that are not Australian cultural traits.
> 
> I might be wrong here, but how about the irrational overprotectiveness of Italian fathers to their daughters. Or, that Italian girls must marry Italian men. And, Italians must have fluffy dice hanging from the rear view mirror....




You see Kennas,
that is the problem with defining culture in such narrow terms,so far we have narrowed Italian culture to mean pizza and pasta,therefore turning Italy into a shadow of her former self,not to mention completely obliterating the many millions  of Italians whose staple diet is made up of rice and polenta.

And I seriously hope that you are joking when you talk about overprotective fathers being an Italian trait.
Lets see there 56million Italians in Italy and all of them behave like the stereotypes that you seem to think represents Italian culture,so in Italy no woman marries a man from another country.
You are defining ignorance as Italian culture, thats like saying that the six o`clock swill represented Australians then and now.

Also you seem to be saying that Australian fathers are all welcoming to  in laws from different cultures ,not my experience.

At the end of the day culture is not and should not be defined in such narrow terms .To me Australia represents an egalitarian society even if at times I know that thats not really true,however if push comes to shove I know that no social class can hold me back,
have to go now hubby needs the computer to earn a crust :


----------



## Sean K (28 August 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> You see Kennas,
> that is the problem with defining culture in such narrow terms,so far we have narrowed Italian culture to mean pizza and pasta,therefore turning Italy into a shadow of her former self,not to mention completely obliterating the many millions  of Italians whose staple diet is made up of rice and polenta.
> 
> And I seriously hope that you are joking when you talk about overprotective fathers being an Italian trait.
> ...




Yep, I might be wrong...  

So, what is Italian culture? Pizza, pasta *plus * rice and polenta? Vespas and gelati?


----------



## wayneL (28 August 2006)

Hey True Blue, don't say you've gone
Say you've knocked off for a smoko
And you'll be back later on
Hey True Blue, Hey True Blue

Give it to me straight
Face to face
Are you really disappearing,
Just another dying race,
Hey True Blue.

True Blue, is it me and you?
Is it Mum and Dad, is it a cockatoo?
Is it standing by your mate
When he's in a fight?
Or will she be right?
True Blue, I'm asking you...

Hey True Blue, can you bear the load?
Will you tie it up with wire,
Just to keep the show on the road?
Hey True Blue, Hey True Blue, now be Fair Dinkum

Is your heart still there?
If they sell us out like sponge cake
Do you really care?
Hey True Blue.

True Blue, is it me and you?
Is it Mum and Dad, is it a cockatoo?
Is it standing by your mate
When she's in a fight?
Or will she be right?
True Blue, I'm asking you...

True Blue, is it me and you?
Is it Mum and Dad, is it a cockatoo?
Is it standing by your mate
When he's in a fight?
Or will she be right?
True Blue ... True Blue.


----------



## visual (28 August 2006)

kennas said:
			
		

> Yep, I might be wrong...
> 
> So, what is Italian culture? Pizza, pasta *plus * rice and polenta? Vespas and gelati?




Kennas,you seriously thought you could define Italian culture with pasta,pizza,gelati,ect...and violence against women  

Well you could`nt  do worse than looking it up yourself.

Italy is the birthplace of many of the things we enjoy today. More specifically, ancient Romans invented many of the conveniences we use daily. They invented window panes approximately 2,400 years ago! They were also responsible for inventing concrete and paved roads, candles, metal locks and the first daily newspaper dating back 59 B.C. Schools paid for by the government were opened more than 1900 years ago by the Romans and today that concept is known as public schooling. 


Wonder how many Italians in Australia know that?


----------



## wayneL (28 August 2006)

Here's another bit of Aussie culture that epitomizes the sprit of the outback Aussie (which I can recite by heart BTW   )



> THERE was movement at the station, for the word had passed around
> That the colt from old Regret had got away,
> And had joined the wild bush horses ”” he was worth a thousand pound,
> So all the cracks had gathered to the fray.
> ...


----------



## visual (28 August 2006)

The man who backbites an absent friend, nay, who does not stand up for him when another blames him, the man who angles for bursts of laughter and for the repute of a wit, who can invent what he never saw, who cannot keep a secret - that man is black at heart: mark and avoid him.

Cicero (106 BC - 43 BC)

sums it up well,does`nt he


----------



## Wysiwyg (28 August 2006)

The Westminster system allows for freedom and choice to the people.The rules in Australia are easy to follow.....damage someone or their property and you get punished.Give others  space, of which there is an abundance, and most Aussies are good people .I`m not into polly tics but the Westminster system seems the best alternative to other country systems from what I know...


----------



## Sean K (28 August 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> Kennas,you seriously thought you could define Italian culture with pasta,pizza,gelati,ect...and violence against women
> 
> Well you could`nt  do worse than looking it up yourself.
> 
> ...




Yep, you're right Vis, the Romans created some great stuff.

They were also the greatest military conquers of history and were the first to use slaves so extensively. And was it the Christains who were fed to the lions? Great culture. Probably the greatest cause of death per capita ever. 

Having said that, great gelati! And Tuscany is a nice place. Oh, I rate Venice too.


----------



## wayneL (28 August 2006)

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

and for those interested in Rome

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


----------



## moola (28 August 2006)

kennas said:
			
		

> And we obviously can't check our grammer and spelling either.
> 
> I think Realist caught some of the common things Australia culture is considered to be. Good work Veteran!




My god, I can't believe no one spotted it. Oh, goody! I get to point it out. It's 'grammar' smartarse! And you're right, obviously no body cares.


----------



## visual (28 August 2006)

kennas said:
			
		

> Yep, you're right Vis, the Romans created some great stuff.
> 
> They were also the greatest military conquers of history and were the first to use slaves so extensively. And was it the Christains who were fed to the lions? Great culture. Probably the greatest cause of death per capita ever.
> 
> Having said that, great gelati! And Tuscany is a nice place. Oh, I rate Venice too.




Kennas,
is it possible that your comprehension is a bit lacking ,like your grammar,you have been arguing that culture is static,you know ,defined by only anglosaxon influences,I`ve been telling you that it`s ever changing so you concentrate on things completely unrelated to the subject,  Australian culture is being influenced by everyone who lives here,
And if you had any comprehension of the subject you would`ve realised that Cicero was way ahead of you in defining Australian culture,so perhaps the qualities that Australians are now claiming as their own ,came from somewhere else,hhhhhhhmmmmmmm,
like being spoon fed ,dont you  
So,in conclusion,we threw out slavery,but kept public education,paved roads,glass,better !simple enough!


----------



## visual (28 August 2006)

kennas said:
			
		

> Yep, you're right Vis, the Romans created some great stuff.
> 
> They were also the greatest military conquers of history and were the first to use slaves so extensively. And was it the Christains who were fed to the lions? Great culture. Probably the greatest cause of death per capita ever.
> 
> Having said that, great gelati! And Tuscany is a nice place. Oh, I rate Venice too.




and following from 52.
How can you appreciate Italian culture or it`s great cities if in fact you don`t comprehend how they have affected your live?seems a bit superficial to me,but there you go,

A mind without instruction can no more bear fruit than can a field, however fertile, without cultivation. 
Cicero


----------



## Sean K (29 August 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> and following from 52.
> How can you appreciate Italian culture or it`s great cities if in fact you don`t comprehend how they have affected your live?seems a bit superficial to me,but there you go,
> 
> A mind without instruction can no more bear fruit than can a field, however fertile, without cultivation.
> Cicero




Vis, I do envy Italians and their history and culture. Having travelled though Italy, I was in absolute awe of what was created and it's history. Well, you can see that in England too. Bath is a great old Roman town too. 

Perhaps in 2000 years Australia will have the same thing, instead of a few hands painted on rocks. 

Interesting you're quoting Cicero so much after your little Italian plugs. Wasn't he Greek?


----------



## visual (29 August 2006)

Kennas,
unless Australians learn to include,I doubt that things are going to change all that much,who knows we might still have Italians and Greeks ect then..
And as for the few hands on a rock  Kennas,this is our beginning as Australians,the Aborigines and their culture,you can`t have Australian culture without a beginning,can you?

Anyway here is your answer.

To make it easier for you,in case you don`t want to read the all thing I`ve marked it with smileys.

3. Cicero's thought
As has been said, Cicero subordinated philosophy to politics, so it should not surprise us to discover that his philosophy had a political purpose: the defense, and if possible the improvement, of the Roman Republic. The politicians of his time, he believed, were corrupt and no longer possessed the virtuous character that had been the main attribute of Romans in the earlier days of Roman history. This loss of virtue was, he believed, the cause of the Republic's difficulties. He hoped that the leaders of Rome, especially in the Senate, would listen to his pleas to renew the Republic. This could only happen if the Roman elite chose to improve their characters and place commitments to individual virtue and social stability ahead of their desires for fame, wealth, and power. Having done this, the elite would enact legislation that would force others to adhere to similar standards, and the Republic would flourish once again. Whether this belief shows an admirable commitment to the principles of virtue and nobility or a blindness to the nature of the exceedingly turbulent and violent politics of his time, or perhaps both, is impossible to say with certainty. 
: 
Cicero, therefore, tried to use philosophy to bring about his political goals. Like most intellectual endeavors in Cicero's time, philosophy was an activity in which Greece (and especially Athens) still held the lead. The Romans were more interested in practical matters of law, governance, and military strategy than they were in philosophy and art (many of Cicero's writings include justifications for his study of philosophy and arguments that it ought to be taken seriously). But for Cicero to really use philosophy effectively, he needed to make it accessible to a Roman audience. He did this in part by translating Greek works into Latin,   including inventing Latin words where none seemed suitable for Greek concepts (including the Latin words which give us the English words morals, property, individual, science, image, and appetite), and in part by drawing on and idealizing Roman history to provide examples of appropriate conduct and to illustrate the arguments of philosophy. He also summarized in Latin many of the beliefs of the primary Greek philosophical schools of the time (and he is the source of much of our knowledge about these schools). These included the Academic Skeptics, Peripatetics, Stoics, and Epicureans. Cicero was well acquainted with all these schools, and had teachers in each of them at different times of his life. But he professed allegiance throughout his life to the Academy.


----------



## Sean K (29 August 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> Kennas,
> unless Australians learn to include,I doubt that things are going to change all that much,who knows we might still have Italians and Greeks ect then..
> Anyway here is your answer.
> 
> ...




I'm not sure what all that had to do with Australian or Italian culture. As I said, wasn't Cicero Greek? I think yes, so it's the Ancient Greek Culture we should be studying. 

I do like Cicero, but his philosophies are really just for the elite, and not the masses. His highbrow beliefs on what is virtuous and the best way to live etc, are only relevant for the wealthy and for those with sufficient leisure time for contemplation. Not for those trying to search for meaning in everyday existance.

Geting back to Aussie culture, I'm sure there are heaps of yobbos out there in their flannel shirts and Blundstones eating a 4 n 20 analysing Cicero with the Blue Healer dry rooting their leg right atm.


----------



## visual (29 August 2006)

Culture not being static,can be said to have started somewhere!History being a good teacher is telling us that.
But you think that Australian culture is so special that it started with Captain Cook,or maybe with the people who made the initial decision to use this land as a prison,so either Cook started something or the people who made the decision started this thing called Australian culture,they in turn were influenced by ............and there you go,round in circles we go.


----------



## rub92me (29 August 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> Culture not being static,can be said to have started somewhere!History being a good teacher is telling us that.
> But you think that Australian culture is so special that it started with Captain Cook,or maybe with the people who made the initial decision to use this land as a prison,so either Cook started something or the people who made the decision started this thing called Australian culture,they in turn were influenced by ............and there you go,round in circles we go.



Very true, and the Italian subculture in Australia is one of the internal forces that has shaped part of that. But so have the English, Asian,Greek, German, Dutch etc. As pointed out by others, there is also an external force that appears to be growing in influence (predominantly American), due to globalisation. As a fairly recent migrant I can see a lot of 'American culture' in Australia (shopping malls, takeaway fast food, etc.), more so than in many European countries.


----------



## Knobby22 (29 August 2006)

kennas said:
			
		

> I'm not sure what all that had to do with Australian or Italian culture. As I said, wasn't Cicero Greek? I think yes, so it's the Ancient Greek Culture we should be studying.
> 
> I do like Cicero, but his philosophies are really just for the elite, and not the masses. His highbrow beliefs on what is virtuous and the best way to live etc, are only relevant for the wealthy and for those with sufficient leisure time for contemplation. Not for those trying to search for meaning in everyday existance.
> 
> Geting back to Aussie culture, I'm sure there are heaps of yobbos out there in their flannel shirts and Blundstones eating a 4 n 20 analysing Cicero with the Blue Healer dry rooting their leg right atm.




Cicero was of Roman nobility, all the educated Romans could speak Greek.
I'm 6th gen on all sides and I study Roman history as a hobby. 

The trouble with trying to define culture is that it is slippery. The flannel shirt is now an anachronism. Most people prefer to buy Doc Martins even though Blunstones are better quality.  Blue Heelers are a country dog. people who own them in the city are wankers. 

I consider any 2nd generation Australian as firm Australians despite themselves. You can't avoid the Australian culture and you can't avoid being Australian no matter how much you pretend to be pommy stc. I have a few Italian and Polish friends, they mix in very well and intermarry also.

Some generalisations - Chinese food (aussified) is any every country town.
Horse racing (country and city meets), wineries are very Aussie, our accents, our outward view of the world, our slowness to anger, very different to most cultures. 

Our strongest cultural trait in my view is the cultural cringe. This thread shows how strong it is.


----------



## Sean K (29 August 2006)

Knobby22 said:
			
		

> Cicero was of Roman nobility, all the educated Romans could speak Greek.




Yep, wrong again kennas.    Bad memory, bad!


----------



## visual (29 August 2006)

Amen, : 
to all of the above, :


----------



## wayneL (29 August 2006)

Another piece of Aussie culture emboddied in verse... a tad downmarket from Banjo Patterson however.

I have X'ed out any racist tags which may cause offence.

From the infamous Dave Warner-



> Maybe it’s because of our Convict Streak
> We wanna fight everyone we meet
> Anzac Day is our day of the year
> We march our march, we drink our beer
> ...


----------



## Happy (4 November 2006)

> From ABC, November 4, 2006
> 
> 'Multiculturalism' faces Govt axing
> 
> ...





Probably Australia is old enough to have its own identity now and not rely indefinitely on  -pot with mixture of distinctive elements-  in it.


----------



## Tisme (5 April 2017)

Sometimes the best way to find the things you don't like is to contrast them:

so at risk of luutzu blaming westerners and Noco  Bill Shorten for this behaviour:


----------



## luutzu (5 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> Sometimes the best way to find the things you don't like is to contrast them:
> 
> so at risk of luutzu blaming westerners and Noco  Bill Shorten for this behaviour:





I thought I'm also a Westerner. Why would I blame, or take credit, crimes or good deeds done by people I don't know?

As US president Eisenhower once said, we must never mistake constructive criticism as disloyalty or betrayal. 

As Confucius says 2,500 years before that [], when a person correctly point out my goodness I thank him; when a person point out my weakness and errors, I also thank him. 

Why Master?

Because both help me to be a better person. 

The first encourage me to keep doing the right and the good; the second so that I may correct my shortcoming.



You welcome


----------



## Tink (6 April 2017)

in my view, Australian Culture is Western Culture.

Our foundations are Christian heritage, based on our laws etc.

_Australia maintains the traditions of the Western, Judeo‑Christian Civilisation, the finest Civilisation of all time._

----------------------------------

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Western_civilization


----------



## luutzu (6 April 2017)

Tink said:


> in my view, Australian Culture is Western Culture.
> 
> Our foundations are Christian heritage, based on our laws etc.
> 
> ...




Not to burst your bubble because I also think that Australia is a pretty decent country with good people... but...

Define "finest" and "all time".

I mean, since when did Western civilisation include "Judeo" in with its Christian value?

Since when did all Christian and European see themselves as one people? They still don't.

You do realise that Europeans aren't all English people right? I mean, they're speaking a different language and having a different culture for a reason.


----------



## Junior (6 April 2017)

Probably need to include indigenous australians in this discussion.  Since they've been here around 50,000 years longer than white european folk have.


----------



## pixel (6 April 2017)

Junior said:


> Probably need to include indigenous australians in this discussion.  Since they've been here around 50,000 years longer than white european folk have.



Absolutely!
And they have maintained a Culture of ecological sustainability far beyond anything that "Western" societies have achieved or could ever dream of achieving. 
No Nationalism, "Britannia Rules" or "Deutschland Uber Alles" or "Allons Enfants".
No border wars, religious nutters, "Mine is bigger than yours" jealousy.

Sadly, the British delusion of superiority put a stop to that culture, in true Judaeo-Christian fashion following the Spanish conquistadors and their genocide in the Americas.


----------



## luutzu (6 April 2017)

pixel said:


> Absolutely!
> And they have maintained a Culture of ecological sustainability far beyond anything that "Western" societies have achieved or could ever dream of achieving.
> No Nationalism, "Britannia Rules" or "Deutschland Uber Alles" or "Allons Enfants".
> No border wars, religious nutters, "Mine is bigger than yours" jealousy.
> ...




Saw Brad Pitt's Allied recently... it's pretty crap, didn't finished the movie.. anyway... It's kinda weird watching a British spy [Pitt] working with a French spy [don't know her name] fighting against the Nazi invaders in... French Morocco 

Get out of my, ours, their, land you bad Nazi. 

I guess setting it in France isn't exotic enough.


----------



## bellenuit (6 April 2017)

pixel said:


> Absolutely!
> And they have maintained a Culture of ecological sustainability far beyond anything that "Western" societies have achieved or could ever dream of achieving.
> No Nationalism, "Britannia Rules" or "Deutschland Uber Alles" or "Allons Enfants".
> No border wars, religious nutters, "Mine is bigger than yours" jealousy.
> ...




That is absolute nonsense.

No disrespect to our indigenous people but their culture is primitive and capable of only sustaining a small subsistence level population. The ecological sustainability you refer to is not something inherent in their culture but purely related to the fact that their population (prior to the arrival of Europeans) was self regulating through high mortality rates due to diseases and natural events. This was not something planned or acquired through a primitive science, but a consequence of their subsistence level existence and inability to overcome common illnesses and catastrophic events and safely deal with routine life events such as childbirth.

Yes, there is huge destruction of our natural eco-system by "Western" societies, but those same "Western" societies are able to sustain populations of 10's of millions of people in mega-cities like New York, London or Tokyo, most living in conditions beyond the dreams of early aboriginal society. It would be debatable if Aboriginal eco-culture could sustain a population of even 100,000 in an area the size of greater Sydney say. Our "Western" culture could provide the same unnoticeable ecological footprint as Aboriginal culture if we simply didn't develop the science and medicine that allows childbirth to be a fatality free experience and that allows an average lifespan of more than 30 - 40 years. If you think Aboriginal sustainability is so great, which 6.5 billion people should be removed from earth so that the remainder can maintain an ecological footprint similar to indigenous culture.

The reason that Aboriginal culture has survived for 40,000 years is not a reflection of the strength of the culture as many suggest, but purely to the fact that they have been very much isolated for the most of those 40,000 years. "Western" culture that you seem to despise is the result of the mingling of thousands of sub cultures that in a way reflects the evolution of humans. Elements of those sub-cultures that add to society tend to become adopted, those that don't get rejected. It is not a hard and fast rule, but to decry a society that has sent men to the moon, created products like mobile phones, produced music like Beethoven and literature like Shakespeare seems petty and small minded.

One only has to look at those societies that have had the greatest blending of cultures to see the staying unchanged is not an asset but a huge liability. Some of the West's (and East's) greatest advances came from the intermingling of cultures and it was the cities and towns where this happened that prospered most. The silk road, the trade routes etc. were what made cities like Singapore, Istanbul, Venice, London etc great. Each took a little bit from those that passed through and added it to their own culture. Those societies away from this intermingling did not experience this cultural enhancement and growth. It was only with the advent of plane travel that some of these societies came into the "modern" world.

Yes, Aboriginal culture doesn't have "Deutschland Uber Alles" as you say, but there are a lot of things that they don't have. Go though all the things that makes living worthwhile; music, arts , literature, science, travel, architecture, etc. etc. and list the contribution to these from Aboriginal culture and from the Western culture you seem to despise and there will be very little to write home about from the former.

It may look like I am putting down Aboriginal culture, but I am just being realistic. It is primitive and not sustainable beyond a comparatively small population. But the reason for its primitiveness is historical. Their isolation from the happenings in the rest of the World meant that their culture had no outside influences to draw on. It is not a reflection of the aboriginal people. It is the same in many societies that have been isolated, such as Amazon Rainforest inhabitants.


----------



## luutzu (6 April 2017)

bellenuit said:


> That is absolute nonsense.
> 
> No disrespect to our indigenous people but their culture is primitive and capable of only sustaining a small subsistence level population. The ecological sustainability you refer to is not something inherent in their culture but purely related to the fact that their population (prior to the arrival of Europeans) was self regulating through high mortality rates due to diseases and natural events. This was not something planned or acquired through a primitive science, but a consequence of their subsistence level existence and inability to overcome common illnesses and catastrophic events and safely deal with routine life events such as childbirth.
> 
> ...




Again, why does respecting another culture have to somehow imply the putting down or hatred of "our" own culture? One can respect both, and be critical of both on merits.

Let's be realistic, as you say, and go through why the so-called advanced civilisations aren't so great.

First, your argument is that the Native Australians [and other indegenious cultures around the world I'm assuming] are primitive because it couldn't send men to the Moon, have no Beethoven or a Shakespeare... 

How many people have gone to the Moon since the first 16 or so? At what cost? And purely for scientific and peaceful purposes or to develop and perfect intercontinental ballistic capability and dominance of space as the next theatre of war? That the space race was a feel-good excuse to mask massive pentagon funding and advanced weapons development. 

That's no conspiracy theory.

As to Beethoven and Shakespeare... the Aborigines don't have their own version of those? By the campfire, maybe there's this dude named Bob who's a magician with the didgeridoo, and grandma Rose can tell stories like you won't believe. 

And who read Shakespeare or listen to Beethoven anyway? Not many. But ey, the Aborigines don't know what they're missing out.

So argument along that line... that art and culture are high and non-primitive if it's "great" like Mozart and Michelangelo. That's like some idiot yank saying our Holden is a gas guzzling mule. 

---------------------

When was medicine that enable fatality free childbirth developed in the West? Not until about WW1 or WW2?

And how do we know Aborigines all have a short lifespan? Were European or other cultured civilisation's lifespan and healthcare more advanced compare to their at the same period in history we're looking at?

And how many non-Aborigines town and cities back, say, up to the 17th century, could really be capable of housing and feeding more than 100,000 people in relative health and safety?

They all have running water? Flushing toilet? No rats and other pestilence? Last night's toilet weren't just emptied over the balcony and onto the street? All live happily and cleanly like Les Miserable or Charles Dickens portrayals are just dramatisation? 


And how many modern-day mega cities could really sustain the million or two that live in it? 

NONE.

Stop any import and export for a week and watch which group of civilisation starve first.

But that's unrealistic right? Logistics and import/export is part and parcel with advanced civilisation.

Is it sustainable? Is it equitable? No exploitation? Those who work and serve our modern civilisation are also having it as good as we do in the West?

The kids in S.Americas or Asia can go to their fridge and take out any food they feel like snacking on? Why not right? Their parents and country export rice and wheat and fruits and vegetables. 

We in the West have a very good system of taking from others to feed ourselves. We send in our economists, our theorists, then our IMF, World Bank... then we show them our military, buy off their politicians... then they somehow find it to their interests to export food overseas while their own people starve. 

So before we look to the shiny skyscrapers, the cool iPhones and pricey handbags as measure of progress and civilisation. Maybe those whose labour feed those cities, whose farmland destroyed to mine those silicone and iron... they too contribute to the high tech and high art of moving money around.

-------

As to "primitive" civilisation only living some 30 to 40 years while we double theirs. Assuming that Western civilisation back then have a longer life expectancy like they do now... what are we spending most of that extra time doing? Not living it that's for sure.

Beside the very few who were born into wealth, most "civilised" people living in cities spent all their waking hours working like heck. Often at jobs they do not like. Earn and save a bit each year to "get away" and go see the natural world where the air is fresh and life is simple. Wow. compare that to the primitives who work maybe an hour or two a day, spend the rest of the time with their family hiking around with no care in the world. 

But, but we civilised the world, feed more people and made possible all those millions and billions of people who now live.

Well... some 20 to 160 million natives were wiped off the map across North and South Americas. 

Our grazing and food production practices consumes enormous amount of water; devastate the land to the point that grass don't grow anymore.

Then we inject the cattles, the chicken and every kind of meat we consume with hormone and anti-biotics. Killing both them and us... and we're just a couple of serious pandemic away from wiping tens of millions of ourselves out from a virus that adapted to outsmart the tonnes of anti-biotic we pumped into everything.

Then there's the nuclear weapons. Capable of blowing the entire world up, a few times over, just to be sure.

Then there's the potential disaster of global warming. One that would make God's wrath against the Hebrew like a primer. 

--------

So while Western civilisation, or modern/developed ones, have a lot to be proud of. Should learn a few things from the primitives who know how to live with nature and shiet where they eat and sleep.


----------



## pixel (6 April 2017)

My reply should not imply that I "despise" anybody's culture. It was a reply to Tink's one-sided assertion that Aussie Culture be Western Culture, culminating in the pinnacle of arrogance "_the finest Civilisation of all time" - which _Junior picked up on as well.

I can appreciate the cultural values and wisdom of a people that some call "primitive", even if they have not built New York, the Parthenon, or Eiffel Tower. I can appreciate Dreamtime stories and still be fascinated by creation myths of Norse or Mesopotamian origin. A didgeridoo recital may not compare in complexity to JS Bach's d-minor double concerto, but to their accustomed audiences, both carry the same emotional content.

By "colonising" this vast "terra nullius" and dismissing the natives as uncultured primitives, the "finest civilisation" proved it is neither fine nor civil.

PS: Thanks Luu; you spoke my mind; had I waited a little longer, I could've saved my own reply because you said it better and in greater depth than I could have.


----------



## sptrawler (6 April 2017)

I believe Australian culture, is about giving everyone a fair go, and I'm sure we do.
I see lots of different cultures, making a go of it, and it has to be applauded.
We seem to be critical, of those who are not making an effort, but we can't say anything.


----------



## bellenuit (7 April 2017)

pixel said:


> My reply should not imply that I "despise" anybody's culture. It was a reply to Tink's one-sided assertion that Aussie Culture be Western Culture, culminating in the pinnacle of arrogance "_the finest Civilisation of all time" - which _Junior picked up on as well.
> 
> I can appreciate the cultural values and wisdom of a people that some call "primitive", even if they have not built New York, the Parthenon, or Eiffel Tower. I can appreciate Dreamtime stories and still be fascinated by creation myths of Norse or Mesopotamian origin. A didgeridoo recital may not compare in complexity to JS Bach's d-minor double concerto, but to their accustomed audiences, both carry the same emotional content.




Now you are asserting equivalence based on the perspective of the audience. But that is not what you said and that is not what I was referring to when I said what you wrote was absolute nonsense. These are your words: _And they have maintained a Culture of ecological sustainability *far beyond anything that "Western" societies have achieved or could ever dream of achieving*.
_
Their ecological sustainability is a product of their relative low population in a  vast continent and that low population was not the result of some attribute of their culture, but the result of a subsistence level existence that was dependent on the whims of nature and diseases. Yes, put a group of Europeans in the remote outback and they would not survive more than a few months if they had to live off the environment which they are in with no outside help. Most non-urban aborigines would have no problem surviving in such circumstances. 

But put 127M Aborigines in an area  the size of Japan within Australia or even in Japan itself and see how sustainable that population would be without Western help. 

Attributing their low ecological impact to their culture is missing the point. It is only low impact so long as they have a subsistence level existence. If they aspire to, and it is the case, the same comforts and trappings of a Western society, their ecological footprint will become just as devastating as that of advanced western and eastern cultures.


----------



## luutzu (7 April 2017)

pixel said:


> My reply should not imply that I "despise" anybody's culture. It was a reply to Tink's one-sided assertion that Aussie Culture be Western Culture, culminating in the pinnacle of arrogance "_the finest Civilisation of all time" - which _Junior picked up on as well.
> 
> I can appreciate the cultural values and wisdom of a people that some call "primitive", even if they have not built New York, the Parthenon, or Eiffel Tower. I can appreciate Dreamtime stories and still be fascinated by creation myths of Norse or Mesopotamian origin. A didgeridoo recital may not compare in complexity to JS Bach's d-minor double concerto, but to their accustomed audiences, both carry the same emotional content.
> 
> ...




Too kind pixel.

You said in a few words what I was blabbering on over a bunch of paragraphs.


----------



## luutzu (7 April 2017)

bellenuit said:


> Now you are asserting equivalence based on the perspective of the audience. But that is not what you said and that is not what I was referring to when I said what you wrote was absolute nonsense. These are your words: _And they have maintained a Culture of ecological sustainability *far beyond anything that "Western" societies have achieved or could ever dream of achieving*.
> _
> Their ecological sustainability is a product of their relative low population in a  vast continent and that low population was not the result of some attribute of their culture, but the result of a subsistence level existence that was dependent on the whims of nature and diseases. Yes, put a group of Europeans in the remote outback and they would not survive more than a few months if they had to live off the environment which they are in with no outside help. Most non-urban aborigines would have no problem surviving in such circumstances.
> 
> ...




How did you arrive at them living a "subsistence" life? Based on what?

Don't tell me you based that on watching starving Africans kids on World Vision ads; or watching modern-day Aborigines living in the desert "out of their own choice" because that's their lifestyle, they've always lived in the desert where nothing much grow or breed.

Let say that the Australian Aborigines didn't live up to Western standard when the First Fleet arrived... they did managed to live, procreate and survive for some 50,000 years (10,000?) "in the wild".

Then suddenly, most of them kinda disappeared and moved into the desert for some reason. 

------
Again, the argument that.. .well the Aborigines wouldn't managed to feed themselves if there's 127M of them living in a modern city...

First, no Japanese or Chinese or Christian could managed to survive on that scale in that space if no food or power or medicine etc. etc. are imported in.

So they technically are not living on or off of that size land. They are, in reality, buying, and hence, living off of land and resources far larger than that size. Right?

Food and meat raised in Australia and elsewhere; rice and etc. from elsewhere; energy from elsewhere.

So your argument that Civilised city sleekers managed to feed all those hundreds of millions on that Japan-sized land and resources are wrong.

But let say the civilised people create real wealth and things that are of real valuable. And that value, having created on just that landmass, afford them the lifestyle and lifespan they have.

Is it sustainable? Are those value created by civilised people returned the same wealth and standard of living to those that feed them? I'd imagine stocks and iPhone might be quite useless to the farmers in Brazil. That or maybe the paper money that's being paid to them are just made up stuff; maybe civilised people are exploiting those savages. And then there's those finite fossil fuel.

-----
If the (civilised) world were to keep doing exactly what it has been doing since, say, the 1900s. How many more century do you reckon human civilisation have left? How many more generations could this kind of standard of living be afforded?

Civilised nations are fast running out of easy target to colonise and exploit. They're about to face each other and use all that ingenuity on one another. Just read the headlines... US/NATO going up against Russia; US and China positioning themselves to fight over resources and hegemony.

Keep this up and if great civilisations don't kill each other, its standard of living and all that smoke will cause Mother Nature to clean house.


----------



## Tink (7 April 2017)

My reference was how our country was established, including our rule of law, which includes everyone.
Our amenities, our hospitals, our education, the list goes on...

-----------------------------------------------------

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_Australia


----------



## Tisme (7 April 2017)

bellenuit said:


> Now you are asserting equivalence based on the perspective of the audience. But that is not what you said and that is not what I was referring to when I said what you wrote was absolute nonsense. These are your words: _And they have maintained a Culture of ecological sustainability *far beyond anything that "Western" societies have achieved or could ever dream of achieving*.
> _
> Their ecological sustainability is a product of their relative low population in a  vast continent and that low population was not the result of some attribute of their culture, but the result of a subsistence level existence that was dependent on the whims of nature and diseases. Yes, put a group of Europeans in the remote outback and they would not survive more than a few months if they had to live off the environment which they are in with no outside help. Most non-urban aborigines would have no problem surviving in such circumstances.
> 
> ...





Hunter gathering requires vast spaces for food sources compared to agriculture. Also hard to know how much damage to the landscape, flora and fauna was done by continuous massive burning and focused hunting over the years by aborigines.

Domestication and cultivation began to take hold 10 thousand or more years elsewhere in the world before whitey set foot on Surfers Paradise. I'm not sure we should be revering something that mankind itself does naturally to survive in the absence of organised society.

Of course China would have invented agriculture in Asia long before it's ancestors left Africa.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 April 2017)

bellenuit said:


> Their ecological sustainability is a product of their relative low population in a vast continent and that low population was not the result of some attribute of their culture, but the result of a subsistence level existence that was dependent on the whims of nature and diseases. Yes, put a group of Europeans in the remote outback and they would not survive more than a few months if they had to live off the environment which they are in with no outside help. Most non-urban aborigines would have no problem surviving in such circumstances.




But surely, that relatively low population is the reason why they have survived, in contrast to the current trend of having the biggest population we can, and basically raping the environment to try and feed them ?

Our problems these days can basically all be traced back to burgeoning population and the resources that have to be used to feed, clothe and supply essential services like power, water and medicine.

If the world's populaion was halved by some disaster , I certainly hope this doesn't happen, but I think its likely that after the event those remaining would be better off as long as natural resources were not deprecated.

It's all about cakes sand the number of slices you have to cut it into to supply the population.


----------



## Junior (7 April 2017)

I don't think anyone here 'despises' western culture.

We are lucky to be in this country, Australia is a great part of the world, with an enviable and overwhelmingly peaceful and free multi-cultural society.

Having said that, I think it is disrespectful not to recognise and denounce the awful crimes committed by those early settlers, and the terrible way the indigenous population has been treated up until only a few decades ago.


----------



## Tisme (7 April 2017)

Junior said:


> I don't think anyone here 'despises' western culture.
> 
> We are lucky to be in this country, Australia is a great part of the world, with an enviable and overwhelmingly peaceful and free multi-cultural society.
> 
> Having said that, I think it is disrespectful not to recognise and denounce the awful crimes committed by those early settlers, and the terrible way the indigenous population has been treated up until only a few decades ago.





How does that play into the theme of this topic? Do you think our culture would be different for the better if we had a different history with the aborigines?


----------



## Tisme (7 April 2017)

Here's Ozzie culcha right here: 
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/thefeed/...epsi-ad?cx_navSource=related-side-cx#cxrecs_s


----------



## pixel (7 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> Here's Ozzie culcha right here:
> http://www.sbs.com.au/news/thefeed/...epsi-ad?cx_navSource=related-side-cx#cxrecs_s



replace Pepsi by Fosters or the new Hawke Lager, and you may have a point. 
It all depends on your definition of Culture; we live in a  Multi-Cultural Society.


----------



## Junior (7 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> How does that play into the theme of this topic? Do you think our culture would be different for the better if we had a different history with the aborigines?




This topic poses the question 'what is australian culture', some of the initial responses only address the question as though culture only commenced a couple of hundred years ago.  I'm simply pointing out there was a pre-existing culture on this island for tens of thousands of years before that.


----------



## Tisme (7 April 2017)

Junior said:


> This topic poses the question 'what is australian culture', some of the initial responses only address the question as though culture only commenced a couple of hundred years ago.  I'm simply pointing out there was a pre-existing culture on this island for tens of thousands of years before that.




I understand that, however our culture is different today compared to e.g. the 1970s, so it's a dynamic, but presumably with remnant threads. I'm interested in your wanting aboriginal recognition, because it may legitimately play into those threads or even come into play in more recent times as they take on more community, political and business roles.


----------



## luutzu (7 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> Hunter gathering requires vast spaces for food sources compared to agriculture. Also hard to know how much damage to the landscape, flora and fauna was done by continuous massive burning and focused hunting over the years by aborigines.
> 
> Domestication and cultivation began to take hold 10 thousand or more years elsewhere in the world before whitey set foot on Surfers Paradise. I'm not sure we should be revering something that mankind itself does naturally to survive in the absence of organised society.
> 
> Of course China would have invented agriculture in Asia long before it's ancestors left Africa.





It's "our" ancestors leaving Africa McGee. Western science did some fine work and found that all us humans came from Africa. 

Yea sure, Aborigines does who knows what damage with their back-burning and focused hunting with a couple spear and boomerangs. Moving from one place to another with the season, allowing the land to recover and all that. 

Just look at modern fishing technologies... dragging everything up from the ocean. Big fish, small fries, corals that nurse and house fishies. 

I read before that Kidman from SA became quite successful because he was smart enough to buy massive pastoral land all across Australia. Moving his cattle around so it doesn't eat and kill everything on the one spot. But that's stupid right? We all know cattle eat corn and takes antibiotics; we all know crops love those fossil-derived fertilisers that when farmer stop using them, their land will be barren for quite a while.

As some smart person once said, if something can't go on forever, it will stop.


----------



## Tisme (7 April 2017)

luutzu said:


> It's "our" ancestors leaving Africa McGee. Western science did some fine work and found that all us humans came from Africa.
> 
> Yea sure, Aborigines does who knows what damage with their back-burning and focused hunting with a couple spear and boomerangs. Moving from one place to another with the season, allowing the land to recover and all that.
> 
> ...





Be interesting to apply Bayesian inference to the prospect that aborigines stuffed up a utopia over 60k years. Trouble is it might hurt peoples feelings...letting facts get in the way of fantasy:

http://www.convictcreations.com/aborigines/megafauna.html


----------



## luutzu (7 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> Be interesting to apply Bayesian inference to the prospect that aborigines stuffed up a utopia over 60k years. Trouble is it might hurt peoples feelings...letting facts get in the way of fantasy:
> 
> http://www.convictcreations.com/aborigines/megafauna.html




A few species gone extinct 20,000 years after the Aborigines arrived on terra nullius? 

Vandals!

I think the average rate of species extinction is 1 per 100 years.

Modern civilised and industrious people of the world, may or may not, cause extinction at 1 per year on average since the 1900s. 

That's the same rate of extinction back some 150M years ago when an asteroid wiped out the dinosaurs.

A few species in 20,000 years seems natural? No?


----------



## Tisme (7 April 2017)

luutzu said:


> A few species gone extinct 20,000 years after the Aborigines arrived on terra nullius?
> 
> Vandals!
> 
> ...





I don't know, but I think we are talking a continental catastrophe over the 60k years in a non industrial, non combative, non political, non empire building, non agrarian, etc ... a supposed docile loose knit community that has been presented as a sublime example of coexistence with nature, when anecdotally it could be said they were indeed vandals on a large scale.

The reason I mentioned Bayes was to put a more objective view on the cultural history of Australia rather than forgiving, apologising for or worshiping it.


----------



## luutzu (7 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> I don't know, but I think we are talking a continental catastrophe over the 60k years in a non industrial, non combative, non political, non empire building, non agrarian, etc ... a supposed docile loose knit community that has been presented as a sublime example of coexistence with nature, when anecdotally it could be said they were indeed vandals on a large scale.
> 
> The reason I mentioned Bayes was to put a more objective view on the cultural history of Australia rather than forgiving, apologising for or worshiping it.




Saw a map of Australia - at Museum Australia - showing the indigenous nations before European arrival and there were some 100+ nations.

Seeing how they're not all one people, we're pretty sure there were war and politics and some sort of empire building too. Just maybe not on the scale and destruction we're all used to seeing as a measure of progress.

Who knows, the Mongols were wandering barbarians with "no industry" or culture or cities or fine art or whatever. Then they figured with fast horses and good bow and arrows, they could take over the civilised nations of the world and thereby become "civilised".

Didn't the Goth or Vandals, coming from humble backward origin, also sacked Rome?

So let's not assume that the Indigenous people are incapable of industry and empire... just maybe they were smart enough to know that maybe it's a bad idea to destroy the environment or otherwise killing the host. 

A mistake we all make is that we look at the world as it is today and assume that it has always been like that, and will always be like this into the future.

So we look at our own high standard of living today, our own progress and advances... then assume that we've always been this awesome. Since we've always been this awesome, why wouldn't be continue to be more so into the infinity. 

But it doesn't stop there. We see how great we are having it but also how crappy other race and culture are having it... then we automatically assume that they've always been like that. Always been the sick men of the world; always been living in famine and otherwise sub-standard living in filth and pollution.

Then we keep doing what we've been doing. Not realising that it's unsustainable. Not realising what crimes or ingenuity led to such greatness and downfall. 

That's the beginning of the end, to steal a phrase from that last great and independent Prime Minister of a once formidable empire who had since been playing little lieutenant without ever really admitting it.


----------



## bellenuit (7 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> But surely, that relatively low population is the reason why they have survived, in contrast to the current trend of having the biggest population we can, and basically raping the environment to try and feed them ?




That statement is the wrong way round and a bit contradictory. Their relatively low population is NOT the reason they have survived. It is because most HAVEN'T SURVIVED that they have a low population. 

And advanced cultures are not trying to have the biggest population they can (save for some specific groups). The population is growing because advanced cultures have eliminated the major causes of deaths within their populations: famine, disease, natural disasters etc. and a growing population is a consequence of that.

My point about the original statement that I disputed (Aborigines _have maintained a Culture of ecological sustainability far beyond anything that "Western" societies have achieved or could ever dream of achieving) _was that it is not something inherent in their culture that causes them to have a low ecological footprint, but factors outside their culture that apply to all subsistence level societies that ensure they have a low ecological footprint. They aren't sitting around, for example, saying that they should NOT develop antidotes to the various diseases that kill many of them at an early age because they believe getting those diseases will ensure they have the minimum impact on their environment.


----------



## Junior (7 April 2017)

They have/had a low life expectancy and population due to the fact that they were stuck on an island for tens of thousands of years right?  With no access to the global population, trade, sharing of knowledge etc. which is necessary in order to advance and rise above a simple, subsistence existence.  

They would have needed to harness the power of that magical black rock; coal, in order to lift their standards


----------



## SirRumpole (7 April 2017)

bellenuit said:


> It is because most HAVEN'T SURVIVED that they have a low population.




But still, they HAVE survived for over 50,000 years. I would suggest that many of the diseases they are now afflicted with are the result of exposure to Western processed foods, alcohol, sugar etc.

We don't really have any way of knowing how healthy aborigines were before white men arrived. Maybe adaptability to their environment and inherited natural immunity strengthened not weakened them.

No doubt western culture invented and discovered many useful things. Pity we have to squander that knowledge growing more obese , more greedy and more resource consuming.


----------



## luutzu (7 April 2017)

Junior said:


> They have/had a low life expectancy and population due to the fact that they were stuck on an island for tens of thousands of years right?  With no access to the global population, trade, sharing of knowledge etc. which is necessary in order to advance and rise above a simple, subsistence existence.
> 
> They would have needed to harness the power of that magical black rock; coal, in order to lift their standards




Black Rock, it's a beautiful thing. 

Was in an ad a few years back.


----------



## luutzu (7 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> But still, they HAVE survived for over 50,000 years. I would suggest that many of the diseases they are now afflicted with are the result of exposure to Western processed foods, alcohol, sugar etc.
> 
> We don't really have any way of knowing how healthy aborigines were before white men arrived. Maybe adaptability to their environment and inherited natural immunity strengthened not weakened them.
> 
> No doubt western culture invented and discovered many useful things. Pity we have to squander that knowledge growing more obese , more greedy and more resource consuming.




Who knows, maybe before the European came, the Natives were living around the wheat and food belt of Australia. The nice and fertile plains with plenty of reasonable sunshine and fresh clean water... places that have since been concreted over for civilisation.


----------



## bellenuit (7 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> But still, they HAVE survived for over 50,000 years. I would suggest that many of the diseases they are now afflicted with are the result of exposure to Western processed foods, alcohol, sugar etc.




Yes, many new diseases were introduced by Europeans that they couldn't survive against, but before Europeans they were subject to diseases associated with malnutrition, poor diet and subject to the ravages of nature that would destroy complete communities.

But we Europeans and other "advanced" cultures have also not just survived 50,000 years but have thrived. Just because we are mobile and of mixed races and cultures and are very different to our ancestor of 50,000 years ago, doesn't mean our culture is superficial and less resilient. Our culture goes back 50,000 years too, but it has been an evolving culture that has gone from the behaviours, practices  and manifestations of peoples whose main preoccupation was simply survival in a hostile environment to a culture that has to a certain extent risen above and taken control of its environment. That has allowed us to look beyond our immediate survival and apply our skills and knowledge to other pursuits that we find enjoyable and intellectually stimulating. 

When we go back to the original statement: Aborigines _have maintained a Culture of ecological sustainability far beyond anything that "Western" societies have achieved or could ever dream of achieving). _How true is that when we compare it to a "Western" society such as the Netherlands. 17 million people in an area of just 41,500 km² and much of it on land that is lower than sea level. If it were square that is just 200 X 200 kms. And these 17 million people are mostly well fed, educated, have life spans on average of 80 years, substantial leisure time and so on. Isn't it more correct to say that Aborigines have never achieved or could ever dream of achieving ecological sustainability even remotely like that of the Dutch.


----------



## luutzu (7 April 2017)

bellenuit said:


> Yes, many new diseases were introduced by Europeans that they couldn't survive against, but before Europeans they were subject to diseases associated with malnutrition, poor diet and subject to the ravages of nature that would destroy complete communities.
> 
> But we Europeans and other "advanced" cultures have also not just survived 50,000 years but have thrived. Just because we are mobile and of mixed races and cultures and are very different to our ancestor of 50,000 years ago, doesn't mean our culture is superficial and less resilient. Our culture goes back 50,000 years too, but it has been an evolving culture that has gone from the behaviours, practices  and manifestations of peoples whose main preoccupation was simply survival in a hostile environment to a culture that has to a certain extent risen above and taken control of its environment. That has allowed us to look beyond our immediate survival and apply our skills and knowledge to other pursuits that we find enjoyable and intellectually stimulating.
> 
> When we go back to the original statement: Aborigines _have maintained a Culture of ecological sustainability far beyond anything that "Western" societies have achieved or could ever dream of achieving). _How true is that when we compare it to a "Western" society such as the Netherlands. 17 million people in an area of just 41,500 km² and much of it on land that is lower than sea level. If it were square that is just 200 X 200 kms. And these 17 million people are mostly well fed, educated, have life spans on average of 80 years, substantial leisure time and so on. Isn't it more correct to say that Aborigines have never achieved or could ever dream of achieving ecological sustainability even remotely like that of the Dutch.




Dam it. I'm on your naughty list. 

Maybe there's a reason we shouldn't block people we don't agree with. They might save us from repeating the same old mistake.

Again, what evidence do you have that the Natives of the world were living in disease infested hell hole before the European arrives?

Of the nice, temperate, fertile land on, say, the East Coast of Australia... the Aborigines don't live there? They save those areas for other settlers to take advantage of?

As to Japan, the Netherlands, Hong Kong, Britain being so civilised and self-sufficient... let's have a blockade around anyone of them and see if they can keep going for a month.

There's a reason why the US does not permit Japan to have its own sources of energy - so that if the Japanese ever dream of empire again, Uncle Sam will just send in a couple of fleets and completely switch the lights off.

There's a reason why China is taking over coral seas that's definitely closer to other weaker states than to them. So that if the US or other potential enemies blockade those approaches, their military can still project power to let the goods into the mainland to feed the population.

Same reason Britain develop the finest sea going Navy in the world back when. It's not just to explore the Americas and liberate the Indians from themselves. it's so that if the Spaniards or the Nazi were to blockade the Island, the Navy will defend that starvation tactic.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 April 2017)

bellenuit said:


> Our culture goes back 50,000 years too, but it has been an evolving culture that has gone from the behaviours, practices and manifestations of peoples whose main preoccupation was simply survival in a hostile environment to a culture that has to a certain extent risen above and taken control of its environment.




Yes, well the environment seems to be fighting back. Climate change, rising sea levels, heatwaves, bushfires, cyclones, floods, or are you a subscriber to the theory that AGW is a hoax ?


----------



## bellenuit (7 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, well the environment seems to be fighting back. Climate change, rising sea levels, heatwaves, bushfires, cyclones, floods, or are you a subscriber to the theory that AGW is a hoax ?




Absolutely not. But it is clear that we probably could have reached the same advanced level that we now are at without causing the environmental damage that we have caused. But that is a byproduct of greed within our society where some seek personal prosperity without regard to and at the expense of others. 

Whether we can climb down from the brink or not, I do not know. But long term sustainability is within our grasp if we could act more cooperatively.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 April 2017)

bellenuit said:


> But it is clear that we probably could have reached the same advanced level that we now are at without causing the environmental damage that we have caused.




I'm not entirely sure about that.

Our standard of living is based on cheap power and there was nothing as cheap as burning coal for about a hundred years (and still isn't). Power production is the chief source of greenhouse gas emissions . I doubt if anyone realised at the time what damage they were doing burning coal, like using asbestos. Now that we do realise that burning coal is destructive, we can't even get global consensus about what to do about it.

OK, I'd rather have power than live in a cave, I'm just saying that our development has been pretty inevitable, we didn't really have any other choice but burning coal as there were no alternative power sources at the time.


----------



## Tisme (7 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I'm not entirely sure about that.
> 
> Our standard of living is based on cheap power and there was nothing as cheap as burning coal for about a hundred years (and still isn't). Power production is the chief source of greenhouse gas emissions . I doubt if anyone realised at the time what damage they were doing burning coal, like using asbestos. Now that we do realise that burning coal is destructive, we can't even get global consensus about what to do about it.
> 
> OK, I'd rather have power than live in a cave, I'm just saying that our development has been pretty inevitable, we didn't really have any other choice but burning coal as there were no alternative power sources at the time.





The parched earth of non coastal regions hasn't occurred in the last 200 odd years, it was happened on the aborigine's watch ... which beggars the question about the land being in the bosom of the natives or whether it's revisionism.


----------



## luutzu (7 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> The parched earth of non coastal regions hasn't occurred in the last 200 odd years, it was happened on the aborigine's watch ... which beggars the question about the land being in the bosom of the natives or whether it's revisionism.




My HS geography teacher said it was due to the mountain ranges. No?


----------



## Jorgensen (8 April 2017)

luutzu said:


> My HS geography teacher said it was due to the mountain ranges. No?



Ditto...we were in a rain shadow ..with a twelve inch annual rainfall.


----------



## pixel (8 April 2017)

luutzu said:


> My HS geography teacher said it was due to the mountain ranges. No?



was your HS teacher a greenie leftie Fabian commie?
I'm sure noco would claim that he had proof of that.


----------



## Tisme (9 April 2017)

luutzu said:


> My HS geography teacher said it was due to the mountain ranges. No?




Not sure, but desertification continues of course. 

My teaching was that it was man made:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0031018294901880


----------



## Tink (9 April 2017)

Australian Culture is not Political Correctness, imv.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/is-political-correctness-going-too-far.18326/page-19


----------



## luutzu (9 April 2017)

pixel said:


> was your HS teacher a greenie leftie Fabian commie?
> I'm sure noco would claim that he had proof of that.




He sure was 

Gave us assignment on man-made pollution; hiking to Nepal and climbed a fair way up Mt Everest. No doubt to enjoy nature and meet up with the Maoists.


----------



## luutzu (9 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> Not sure, but desertification continues of course.
> 
> My teaching was that it was man made:
> 
> http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0031018294901880




Now I have to read up on Aborigine-caused climate change. 

I guess it does show that the Natives were civilised. Not on the same scale as the industrialists and the fossil fuel... but them backburning and spear fishing sure desertified continental Australia.

It's like Reagan blaming rice paddies for CC all over again McGee.


----------



## pixel (9 April 2017)

Tink said:


> Australian Culture is not Political Correctness, imv.
> 
> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/is-political-correctness-going-too-far.18326/page-19



you're repeating yourself, Tinkerbell
Repetition doesn't strengthen an argument. It only makes the discussion more tedious.


----------



## Tisme (10 April 2017)

Yes investigate objectively and report back likewise.... no bleeding heart stuff, just the facts maam


----------



## basilio (17 June 2020)

Came across an excellent series on the ABC called   *Miriam Margolyes Almost Australian.  *
Thought provoking.  Who is Australian today ? What are our dreams ? What is our culture ?
A revealing documentary series; following celebrated film and television star Miriam Margolyes as she embarks on an epic two-month journey across the nation to discover what it means to be Australian today.

*Series 1 Episode 1 The Australian Dream*
Miriam is leaving the home she shares with her life partner, Heather, in the Southern Highlands of NSW to travel around the country to discover what it means to be an Australian in this eye-opening and timely series.
https://iview.abc.net.au/show/miriam-margolyes-almost-australian


----------



## Joe Blow (24 March 2022)

I've never been a fan of coarse language, although I understand it's very occasionally appropriate. I prefer Sean's German version of the S word, "schit" if it must be used.

The internet has become so much of an open sewer these days that having an online community without coarse language is like a breath of fresh air. Aim high ladies and gentlemen. Rise above the gutter talk that comes from the mouths of bogans and other assorted riff raff.

Let's be polite, genteel, and above all, respectful. Now, where are the cucumber sandwiches?


----------



## Telamelo (24 March 2022)

Joe Blow said:


> I've never been a fan of coarse language, although I understand it's very occasionally appropriate. I prefer Sean's German version of the S word, "schit" if it must be used.
> 
> The internet has become so much of an open sewer these days that having an online community without coarse language is like a breath of fresh air. Aim high ladies and gentlemen. Rise above the gutter talk that comes from the mouths of bogans and other assorted riff raff.
> 
> Let's be polite, genteel, and above all, respectful. Now, where are the cucumber sandwiches?



Having agreed with the gist of what you said we are Australian's though - can't think of any of the great Aussie "classic films" that never contained a reportoir of swear words lol it's ingrained within our Aussie culture.


----------



## wayneL (24 March 2022)

Just transferring this conversation from the gold thread about swearing, I hope you don't mind @Joe Blow.

I think you all know the subculture in which I inhabit ie the horsey world. Although, because of the cost of horse ownership, the general population tends toward the more upper deciles of Australian society... But with the full spectrum being present, including the lowest of the low.

Just the nature of how things are tends to orient the language towards the more base levels... that is, swearing like a sailor. 

I can swear along with the best of them, but tend to reserve that that where and around people I think it's appropriate, but sometimes the most cultured, educated, and beautiful women can make even me blush by the level of their swearing LOL.

It was actually brought home to me very recently by a Facebook post from a South African veterinarian who has recently moved here... I couldn't help but have a little smirk to myself as I read it, an abridged version as follows:


Australian lessons learned:
1. You think you have experienced heat, but nothing we have experienced could prepare us for this searing dry summer heat..! Highs in the  40’s and 36 degrees at bed time! Eish. Air conditioning is an absolute necessity, not a luxury. 🔥 
2. Grammar: the word F*CK can be inserted into absolutely any sentence as a verb, adverb, adjective, noun, pronoun.. Who knew?? 😳🤔...

4. “He with the biggest engine wins”! The bigger and louder the better. Doesn’t matter the size of the vehicle- throw in a bellowing V8 twin turbo with a free-flow exhaust..
5. Aussies really are as welcoming, appreciative and friendly as all the legends. And tough as nails. There is no choice other than to be self sufficient.. They say it like it is- with special reference to point 2..
So far so good. We love it here. 

***

Yep, our language may be rough as bags in our little subset of humanity, but there are positives.

That said, I never drop the f bomb unless I feel really comfortable with someone, even if they employ liberal use of the word, and almost never use the c bomb unless particularly triggered.

Additionally, some of the worst swearing I have ever heard has been from friends, not necessarily in the horse world, that are members of the professions... Lawyers and finance bods especially.

But yeah, probably on a forum such as this, best to tone it down a bit.


----------



## Ann (24 March 2022)

Joe Blow said:


> I've never been a fan of coarse language, although I understand it's very occasionally appropriate. I prefer Sean's German version of the S word, "schit" if it must be used.
> 
> The internet has become so much of an open sewer these days that having an online community without coarse language is like a breath of fresh air. Aim high ladies and gentlemen. Rise above the gutter talk that comes from the mouths of bogans and other assorted riff raff.
> 
> Let's be polite, genteel, and above all, respectful. Now, where are the cucumber sandwiches?



No wuckin forries @Joe Blow  I will try to curb my intelligence whilst posting here! 
	

		
			
		

		
	







Swearing Is Actually a Sign of More Intelligence - Not Less - Say Scientists ​


----------



## wayneL (24 March 2022)

Ann said:


> No wuckin forries @Joe Blow  I will try to curb my intelligence whilst posting here!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



My group of friends must be damned geniuses haha


----------



## Ann (24 March 2022)

wayneL said:


> My group of friends must be damned geniuses haha



...and I bet they are all fikncug funny as well!


----------



## wayneL (24 March 2022)

Ann said:


> ...and I bet they are all fikncug funny as well!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



We (the husbands) think so. The wives (judging by the eye rolling), not so much LOL.


----------



## wayneL (24 March 2022)

Ann said:


> No wuckin forries @Joe Blow  I will try to curb my intelligence whilst posting here!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I have thought about this casually from time to time @Ann.

Probably the people that I know who swear the most are actually people with the widest vocabulary.

Peter, my best man at my wedding is an Oxford educated commercial lawyer, with a three broad knowledge of literature and latin... And has two whole received pronunciation/plum in the mouth thing going on and one of the very few people on the planet who has me reaching for the dictionary still, even after 40 years.

And yet, the very first adjective he reaches for in most cases, is the F bomb.

Few make it sound quite so eloquent, however. Even the most prudish found it difficult to take offence when he (very frequently) dropped it lol


----------



## wayneL (24 March 2022)

Anyway a bit of digression away from swearing. 

As I've mentioned elsewhere I've bought a property recently... a "renovators dream" lol.

The very last thing that I want to do is use up my friends to help me with the renos, so have kind of have been fobbing off offers of help.

Perhaps it's because I wasn't born here, but I have bewilderingly found that my buddies take a bit of offence if I don't use them. They really want to give up their time for free to help me with my property.

This more than compensates for Anglo-Saxon linguistic transgressions... And that little bit of water welling up in my eye is obviously from a bit of sawdust.

'Straya!!!


----------



## sptrawler (24 March 2022)

wayneL said:


> Anyway a bit of digression away from swearing.
> 
> As I've mentioned elsewhere I've bought a property recently... a "renovators dream" lol.
> 
> ...



Yes there are still some with the aussie set of values, sadly you only have to be on this forum, to see how quickly it is dying and saying that I think this forum is quite civil and friendly.


----------



## wayneL (24 March 2022)

sptrawler said:


> Yes there are still some with the aussie set of values, sadly you only have to be on this forum, to see how quickly it is dying and saying that I think this forum is quite civil and friendly.



I think if I didn't have really good friends from 40 years ago when I left here before ,,my experience would be totally different no


----------



## wayneL (24 March 2022)

wayneL said:


> I think if I didn't have really good friends from 40 years ago when I left here before, my experience would be totally different.




So consider myself lucky to have really long term friendships, even if there has been great spaces in between.


----------



## Knobby22 (28 March 2022)

We can be a bit slow getting round to doing stuff.


----------

