Why are we saying 'sorry' to the aboriginals?!

rederob said:

why begrudge an apology to people who have suffered deep hurt?

Click to expand...

spot on for mine.
btw, this youtube is just a bit of soulful mellow music.- plus some thoughtful images.

"come in out of the rain - to a better place"

John Howard's failed legacy on Aboriginal Reconciliation.

rederob said:

I admit to being disgusted by the attitudes of many who seem to want to get something back from aborigines. If you didn't do anything to be sorry for, then why begrudge an apology to people who have suffered deep hurt?

Click to expand...

i don't have anything to be sorry for, but if we are going to say sorry to the aborigines then they should accept so we can all move on. and give the whole "deep hurt" bleeding heart a rest, every culture has suffered deep hurt, its not like this stone age tribal society is unique. maybe we should go around the world and apologise to everyone!

the aborigines would do well to accept an apology and work towards a settlement because if we are still here going through this crap in 10 - 15 years there will be zero sympathy left for them and the only advice the rest of society will have for them is to shut the fk up.

no point you apologising disarray - with that attitude

tigerboi said:

with all this sorry saga as it serves no purpose,the children were taken legally as most were 1/2 castes rejected by their own community,

Click to expand...

Well, that is just the point of this whole thing. It seems that you haven't read any of their stolen generations story, have you?

Children were not taken legally - they were taken on the basis simply because they were aboriginal, and not because of any abuse issues. The decision to remove children was totally based on racial origins.

Do we say sorry? I think as a community we can say that we are sorry that the colonisation of Australia has seen some grave injustices done. But this does not mean that we accept responsibility for them.

When I was in primary school, there was an aboriginal boy in our class. He was one of the stolen generation - he had been removed from his family and placed in a Children's home and came to our school every day. At the time I thought, that was OK, he was getting an education and food and clothes etc. But he kept running away. He longed to join his family and go back to the country. As an adult, I feel ashamed that we thought we were doing the right thing for him, we had taken away his free will. How could we, as a society, have done that to a group of people.

disarray said:

i don't have anything to be sorry for, but if we are going to say sorry to the aborigines then they should accept so we can all move on. and give the whole "deep hurt" bleeding heart a rest, every culture has suffered deep hurt, its not like this stone age tribal society is unique. maybe we should go around the world and apologise to everyone!

the aborigines would do well to accept an apology and work towards a settlement because if we are still here going through this crap in 10 - 15 years there will be zero sympathy left for them and the only advice the rest of society will have for them is to shut the fk up.

Click to expand...

Wait a minute... you are saying

i don't have anything to be sorry for

Click to expand...

yet are quite happy to generalise about an entire race? Oh dear.

disarray said:

but if we are going to say sorry to the aborigines then they should accept so we can all move on.

Click to expand...

Considering aboriginal leaders have been requesting an apology for decades, you think they will not not accept one? Have you even thought about the issue?

disarray said:

its not like this stone age tribal society is unique.

Click to expand...

Not unique. Ah, never mind. You obviously have little idea. Maybe less time "whittlin' and bango playin" and more time reading will give you some seblance of knowledge.

disarray said:

maybe we should go around the world and apologise to everyone!

Click to expand...

What are you talking about? This is a national, not an international issue. Where else did Australia forcibly remove children solely based on race? We are talking about people who weren't even granted the right to vote in their own country until 1967!

disarray said:

the aborigines would do well to accept an apology and work towards a settlement

Click to expand...

A number of aboriginal leaders have suggested that they want an apology, not a handout or compensation. An acknowledgement of the past wrongdoings so everyone can move on. Not sure why the word has you so upset.

disarray said:

if we are still here going through this crap in 10 - 15 years there will be zero sympathy left for them and the only advice the rest of society will have for them is to shut the fk up.

Click to expand...

Classy, real classy. Fortunately our modern political leaders aren't so prone to making racial generalisations on little knowledge to the issue.

2020hindsight said:

kennas, sure there will be informal responses from various leaders of the Ab community.

but the more genuine our apology, the more graciously we acknowledge past wrongs, the more effective it will be in healing the scars that Abs have - and indeed the entire nation still bears on this issue.

It should not be a conditional apology... as implied in Buddy's post...:-



Buddy , Obviously there will be speeches by individual Ab leaders in response. but AFTER (not before ) the apology (I think you are requesting before yes? - making it a condition yes?.

We won't "know how it will be received" until the apology in made, and especially, "how we apologise", and with "how much sincerity". (imo)

Click to expand...

I don't know why you think Buddy's suggestion meant an apology would be 'conditional' on an acceptance. I didn't read that into his post at all.
Of course an acceptance wouldn't be made before the apology!!!

Fred Chaney from (I think) Reconciliation Australia was the guest on an ABC talkback programme in the small hours of this morning and this very question of an acceptance was put to him, as was a further question about 'what exactly is reconciliation and is the apology going to assist in achieving it?'

Contrary to your reaction, 2020, Mr Chaney responded that both questions were indeed valid and that he expected various responses would be made by individuals though unfortunately there was no single 'figurehead' person who would speak on behalf of all indigenous people.

rederob said:

First, Julia said "some sort of response would be reasonable".
So it's a reasonable conclusion that 2020 drew.

Click to expand...

Beats me how you can interpret "some sort of response would be reasonable" as saying "an apology being made would be conditional on a response being received for that apology".

vida said:

Rudd is apologising for more than rude and inflammatory remarks towards the aboriginal people.

Click to expand...

You have misunderstood my comment. If you read my post you would see that I wasn't suggesting Mr Rudd was apologising for rude and inflammatory remarks. I was trying to offer 2020 a simple example of what usually happens when one person (or group of persons) apologise to another.
So I used the example of 2020 apologising to me, in which case I would without hesitation accept and thank him. OK?

He is apologising for grave injustices that have caused devastating loss grief and damage in the past which suffering continued through the generations and is still being felt in their communities.

Click to expand...

Yes, we know that. This is not in dispute as far as I know.

Prospector said:

When I was in primary school, there was an aboriginal boy in our class. He was one of the stolen generation - he had been removed from his family and placed in a Children's home and came to our school every day. At the time I thought, that was OK, he was getting an education and food and clothes etc. But he kept running away. He longed to join his family and go back to the country. As an adult, I feel ashamed that we thought we were doing the right thing for him, we had taken away his free will. How could we, as a society, have done that to a group of people.

Click to expand...

Prospector, this sad tale does something that all the syrupy words will never do. It puts a human, personal face on what happened.
It's a bit like all the statistics about road deaths, cancer or whatever.
They're just abstracts and numbers, until we actually come into personal contact with someone who has had that experience.

Julia said:

1. I don't know why you think Buddy's suggestion meant an apology would be 'conditional' on an acceptance. I didn't read that into his post at all. Of course an acceptance wouldn't be made before the apology!!!

2. Fred Chaney from (I think) Reconciliation Australia was the guest on an ABC talkback programme in the small hours of this morning and this very question of an acceptance was put to him, as was a further question about 'what exactly is reconciliation and is the apology going to assist in achieving it?'

3. Contrary to your reaction, 2020, Mr Chaney responded that both questions were indeed valid and that he expected various responses would be made by individuals though unfortunately there was no single 'figurehead' person who would speak on behalf of all indigenous people.

Click to expand...

Julia
Buddy wants to know now how they will react after the statement.

buddy said:

I think it is is also important to know how the statement is going to be received. It is now time for the indigineous leaders to say something about this. ...... No good just to hang back, wait for the sorryness statement, sit back and say "well that was fine, now what do we do?"

Click to expand...

He wants to know now how they will react in advance - you agree?

Is it not an implied condition that "depends what they say" whether he would apologise (or support an apology by the govt or whatever)?

It could be argued that he wants to guess what they will say - and choose words that will maximise the positive outcome. If he is heading in that direction, then great! But you'd be crazy to read that into words like "the sorryness statement"

2. As for Fred Chaney speculating on what it will achieve, we are all doing that surely.

3. Contrary to your assumptions Julia
Fred Chaney's comments are exactly what I am saying as well. It will be important to hear what they say - in response.
After the apology.

buddy said:

And to those people that will reply to me saying something like "to be truly sorry it has to come from the heart without strings attached" (or something like that), I say No

Click to expand...

Julia
you agree with Buddy I assume that apologies should come with strings attached?

2020hindsight said:

Julia
Buddy wants to know now how they will react after the statement.


He wants to know now how they will react in advance - you agree?

Is it not an implied condition that "depends what they say" whether he would apologise (or support an apology by the govt or whatever)?

It could be argued that he wants to guess what they will say - and choose words that will maximise the positive outcome. If he is heading in that direction, then great! But you'd be crazy to read that into words like "the sorryness statement"

2. As for Fred Chaney speculating on what it will achieve, we are all doing that surely.

3. Contrary to your assumptions Julia
Fred Chaney's comments are exactly what I am saying as well. It will be important to hear what they say - in response.
After the apology.


Julia
you agree with Buddy I assume that apologies should come with strings attached?

Click to expand...

2020, I have asked you before not to twist what I say or attempt to put words into my mouth.
I have been quite clear about how I feel about the apology.
I am simply not going to be drawn into further pointless discussion with you.

Julia said:

2020, I have asked you before not to twist what I say or attempt to put words into my mouth.
I have been quite clear about how I feel about the apology.
I am simply not going to be drawn into further pointless discussion with you.

Click to expand...

(groan)
and I was trying to break it up into little understandable steps as well sheesh

Julia said:

Prospector, this sad tale does something that all the syrupy words will never do. It puts a human, personal face on what happened.

Click to expand...

Thankyou Julia, the reality of the tragedy of the little boy (I still can only think of him as a 10 year old) only really came to me when the issue of the 'Apology' became a discussion point a few years ago. I remember, as a child at the time many (ie the teachers and parents) were saying how ungrateful he was when he would run away and then be found and he would come back to school. When he was happy, he was a lovely kid, but when he was down, he was very down.

They took us once on an excursion to the Children's home where he was living. The kids slept in dormitories, maybe 20 to a ward. It seemed like holiday camp to us, something exciting for a change, but that was the only life these kids would ever know. We went home to our mums and dads and pets and complained about homework. They couldn't complain to anyone, and if they did, they were seen as ungrateful. So they ran away. Often. Oh, we would laugh and say "ABC has gone walkabout again'. We just didn't get it and for that I am sorry.

I just cant get over the fact that as a child I thought it was OK for him to be treated like this, and only of late did I actually put it all together. I did not make him part of the stolen generation, I was only a kid, but I am desperately sorry for what my parent's generation did to him 'in his best interests'.

Two themes that I have often read on this thread and hear elsewhere are words to the effect of:

1) "Aborigines were still living in the Stone Age when Europeans arrived. They hadn't even invented the wheel." and

2) "Aborigines should just snap out of their problems, get a job and be like the rest of us."

The first statement implies that there is something inherently inferior about Aborigines, almost as if argueing that this race is less capable than other races.
The "hadn't left the Stone Age" statement neglects the historical context of why some countries developed agriculture, metallurgy and other technologies, became resistant to disease and set about invading other less developed countries rather than the other way around. The answer of course is Real Estate. Position, Position, Position.
Many thousands of years ago, the majority of the world's domesticatable plants and animals occured in and around the Fertile Crescent (Syria etc.). Animals that could be domesticated to become the modern day sheep and cattle are essential to the development of agriculture (ploughing, protein, manure etc..). Domesticatable plants include the long grain grasses, that over time have become the staples of modern agriculture. The vast majority occured in the Fertile Crescent which was also conveniently..fertile.
Once agriculture was possible, permanent non-nomadic communities could be established, populations could sustainably grow faster and human resources could be released for the development of metallurgy and other technologies. The greater population density further accelerated these advances as well as being a haven for diseases, which, over time, ensured greater resistance to disease. The combinations of these factors provide a population of (to quote Jarred Diamond) with a powerful arsenal of "guns, germs and steel". These advances soon spread throughout Europe.
Australia, on the other hand, is firstly an island, and so there was little movement in or out. It is the driest continent with the poorest soil, has no domesticatable animals suitable for agriculture, and has none of the previously decribed long grain grasses suitable for agriculture (which is the initial precursor of development). Whilst the landscape was used and transformed by Aborigines to their advantage, larger scale agriculture was simply untenable. In this situation, what the hell use would a wheel be to them? By necessity, and because of the hostile country they lived in, they survived in the only way possible, and that is largely a nomadic hunter/gatherer lifestyle. In short, Position, Position, Position. Nothing to do with the people themselves. If fate had placed the domesticatable plants and animals, and fertile soils in Australia, instead of elsewhere, in all likelihood, it would have been Aborigines invading Europe, rather than what did transpire. And yes, if they committed the same atrocities, an apology would also be warranted. Their ability to survive in such an environment is as much a testimony to human ingenuity as other more typically identified advances elsewhere. Essentially people are the same, and are differentiated historically only by circumstance and again, Real Estate.

The second "snap out of it, get a job and live like the rest of us" statement also reflects a complete ignorance of society and history. Prior to the arrival of Europeans, by necessity, Aboriginal society would have been at or near full-employment just to survive.
Their food sources were then taken from them, there way of life and their culture, which forms the cornerstone of any functioning society, was demolished, many were murdered, many more died of introduced diseases, and of course many were stolen from their families. Survivors were placed in reserves and their means of survival was increasingly dissipated. Those that migrated to cities lived on the fringe of society and were not welcome elsewhere. For the vast majority of the past 200 years, Australia was an openly racist country (eg. The Bullteins subheading - Australia for the White Man, White Australia policy was government policy, no voting for Aborigines until the late sixties, the list is endless) that continually and increasingly marginalised its indigenous population into marginal lands and urban slums. Discrimination and exclusion were the norm. In short, they were considered to be, and treated like vermin. If you tell an individual or community that they're scum for long enough, inevitably problems will arise. A situation such as this inevitably breeds a grossly disfunctional society encompassing high levels of subtance dependence, domestic violence, crime and on and on. Many still argue that large somes of money has been spent to little avail, even though the problems have only just started to be addressed in relatively very recent times. The destruction of the Aboriginal culture to what we see today was created over 200 hundred years. It will not be fixed in a year or two and probably not within a generation. Australia, as a nation, has a responsibility to do whatever it takes for as long as it takes. Lets not guild the lilly or stick our heads in the sand, we created it, we fix it, with their help. Australia Statements such as "snap out of it and get a job and live like the rest of us" reflect a complete lack of understanding of the extent to which the foundation of Aboriginal society has been destroyed.
Guilt is neither warranted, sought after or useful for Australians as individuals. However, we do, as a nation, owe an apology for not only the stolen generation, but also for the many other gross injustices suffered by Aboriginal peoples over nearly all of our brief post-European history.
Some may say this promotes a victim mentality. I disagree. Whilst it is important for individuals to avoid such a mentality, it is also necessary for history not to be denied and responsibility taken. To use an analogy, if a child is born with a serious illness, it is unhelpful to treat that child as "the sickly one". It is also not helpful to tell that child that their illness is all their fault.

For those that have taken the time to read my admittedly lengthy post, I thank you for taking the time.

skint - thanks for that post.

Herewith a couple more quotes on the subject, which make you realise how traumatic it was ... - who knows one of those mentioned in the first comment might have been prospector's schoolfriend (50-50 chance going on that article)
http://apology.west.net.au/

"Almost half of the Aboriginal people who died in custody and were investigated by the Black Deaths Royal Commission, had been removed from their families as children..." - Kirsten Garrett, Background Briefing, Sunday, 11 February 1996

Click to expand...

"They would not let us kiss our father goodbye, I will never forget the sad look on his face. He was unwell and he worked very hard all his life as a timber-cutter. That was the last time I saw my father, he died within two years after." - Jennifer , Bringing them Home Report

Click to expand...

hey kennas,
one thing you have to understand is that, over here, this apology next Wednesday is being billed as Bigger than Ben Hur. Seems to be getting a real momentum going (imo). Gough Whitlam, Malcolm Fraser and Paul Keating to be present etc. John Howard has declined.

Televised - large mobile screens being erected outside parliament ( because it will have overflowed) - and in the big cities - kids at school to watch etc.
Here's the currently-planned TV program for ABC next Wednesday.

2:00pm Opening of Parliament / Question Time. (think I'm right).

Then Bananas in Pyjamas - and a re-run at that ! lol.

Well, would you believe "almost as big as Ben Hur"

http://sydney.citysearch.com.au/tvguide/4/12:00#tvGuideTable_1

PS that program could well change btw.

Mick Dodson is bound to feature

http://www.monash.edu.au/alumni/prominent-alumni/mick-dodson.html

Professor Michael James "Mick" Dodson AM, (b. 10 April 1950 in Katherine, Northern Territory, Australia) is an Indigenous Australian leader, a member of the Yawuru peoples in the Broome area of the southern Kimberley region of Western Australia. His brother is Patrick Dodson, also a noted Aboriginal leader.

Following his parents death he boarded at Monivae College, Hamilton, Victoria. He graduated in law from Monash University in 1978.

He has been a prominent advocate of land rights and other issues affecting indigenous peoples in Australia and globally and has extensive involvement in United Nations indigenous peoples forums.

Career
He is Director of the Australian National University's National Centre for Indigenous Studies and Chairman of the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies.

He was Australia’s first Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner with the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (1993-1998).

He worked with the Victorian Aboriginal Legal Service from 1976 to 1981, when he became a barrister at the Victorian Bar. He joined the Northern Land Council as Senior Legal Adviser in 1984 and became Director of the Council in 1990.

From August 1988 to October 1990 Mick was Counsel assisting the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody

Click to expand...

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=1042

2020hindsight said:

(50-50 chance going on that article)
"Almost half of the Aboriginal people who died in custody and were investigated by the Black Deaths Royal Commission, had been removed from their families as children..."

Click to expand...

sorry - my maths was on walkabout when I said that.

I also posted this comment at another link, but I think relevent here also.
So you Aussies are to make an opology to your aboriganies next week, well I hope you have plenty of spare money, it cost us in NZ heaps and is still going on infact it will never stop. Is this what your tax suplasses are for or the "future" fund, your gonna need it. I bet there queing to make claims and the lawyers they'll have a field day too, goodluck

classic ! - as per Insiders this morning

Corey Delaney's Other Party

:topic heck - I might as well post this one here as well - by the same youtube poster (clever dude)
this thread could do with a smile

Kevin 007 - The Man With The Golden Jaw