This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

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

Jump to new
robots said:
hello,

yes great point B,

thankyou

robots
Click to expand...

x2

i just saw on the news that not only did we as the public pay for the bus tickets of aboriginals to canberra but they are asking for 1 minute silence from primary schools..

its going to be blown out of proportion - i am looking foward to the number of claims that go through
 
But that is the crux of this whole issue - these children were not necessarily taken from abusive homes; they were taken only because they were aboriginal, nothing more.

Only because they were aboriginal??
If that was the case then all of the kids from those communities would have been taken, since they were all aboriginal to varying degrees. They were selected on the basis of parentage......those who were half white were chosen. Whether it was fair or not, that's what happened...the half caste kids were selected while the full blooded kids were left.
The reason they were taken was NOT because they were aboriginal. They were taken because their environment was considered unsuitable for reasons of poverty, squalor, and lack of the type of education that would ever give them the means of breaking out of that environment and living better lives.
In some cases there would have been drunkenness and violence involved....it would be naive to believe otherwise.
Most Australians have never been in an aboriginal community to see what they're like. I have, on more than one occasion, both recently and forty odd years ago. And believe me, even back then, aboriginal communities had the problems they have today, although to a lesser extent.
I know. I was there. I SAW IT.
That's not to say that every one of those kids who were taken were from abusive homes and drunken parents. But even back then there was a degree of drunkenness and violence within those communities. And regardless of whether it was their own families or other people who were the perpetrators of this unfortunate behaviour, the kids would still be affected by it.
That, in combination with the poverty and squalor and lack of education, was the reasoning behind the decision to remove them to environments that were considered more suitable .
As for the sexual abuse, I can't comment - I never saw it if it existed.
I say to you again, Prospector, that I was personally in some of those communities 40 odd years ago, and I saw how things were. And believe me, even back then, it wasn't pretty.


Poverty is a relative term. What if a wealthy man took pity on you because your parents were obviously way, way poorer than he was. However, your parents were still adequately providing for you, and you were loved by them. Would you be grateful if he decided to 'save' you and took you away without your parents consent?


Your question assumes that kids in aboriginal communities were being adequately provided for. Pity you weren't with me 40 or so years back when my Dad and I visited some of those communities. If you had been, you would today have a more realistic viewpoint as to whether or not they were being adequately provided for.
I could go into more detail about what I saw in those communities, but I won't. Suffice to say that the standards in the lives of those kids, with regard to clothing, health, hygiene, diet and nutrition, respect for each other etc etc, fell far short of what you or I would consider adequate.
It really was, and still is, an eye opener to go to an aboriginal community and see it how it was/is. Not many Australians have ever had that experience.

Regarding your question of 'would I be grateful if someone decided to save me and took me away without my parents consent'?
My answer is a very definite NO - gratitude would be the furtherest thing from my mind. I'd be upset, lonely, frightened, a bit like I was when as a 12 year old bush kid I was sent away to boarding school for the first time.
I'd miss home and family so badly that I'd probably try to run away from my new home and family or orphanage or wherever I'd been sent. ....just like some of the white kids at my boarding school who went AWOL and were picked up a day or so later, walking along a road and trying to hitch a ride back home.
So no, I wouldn't feel even slightly grateful if I was one of those half aboriginal kids who were removed from their homes. But later in life, as I grew up and came to realise the value of education and income and work ethic, and the positive effect these things could have on my lifestyle and living standard, I believe I would be grateful and see that something positive came from removing me and others, and giving us opportunities for a better life.

And that, Prospector, is why I take issue with this whole 'sorry' business........because very few commentators are willing to present a balanced viewpoint by stating both the bad and the good in the situation.
The bad is that considerable heartache and trauma was inflicted on the children and the families from which they were removed.
The good is that in adult life, those children have become people who are, in most cases, responsible citizens with decent work ethics, incomes and jobs that have enabled them to live far better lives than they'd now be living if they'd stayed in their aboriginal communities.
 

Surely that is a contradiction - you just said that them being aboriginal played no part in whether they were taken, then you say that only the half caste kids were taken. Doesnt their aboriginality make them half caste And that makes this sorry tale even worse - only the ones looking most like us whities were taken, leaving the full blood aboriginal kids behind? If we did it for their welfare, then why leave any child?

bunyip said:
Pity you weren't with me 40 or so years back when my Dad and I visited some of those communities. .
Click to expand...

And it is a pity Bunyip, that you weren't in my class some 40 years ago watching this displaced aboriginal boy desperately missing his family, even if, by your standards, he was not well cared for! And I am just betting that no-one would have checked whether or not he was well cared for, they would have taken him anyway! Guess he was a half caste too and therefore more worthy of "saving".


Well, how can you say that? How many of these kids just didn't make it at all?
 
I do need to reaffirm that if there is evidence that any child suffers abuse or neglect from their caregivers, then of course we must act immediately to protect the child. But my premise in the case of the Stolen Generation, is that the children were taken, without consent, and without any evidence of abuse - they just happened to have aboriginal blood.
 

No contradiction at all. Your claim is that they were taken only because they were aboriginal. I say that if kids were removed only because they were aboriginal, then all of the kids, not just some of them, would have been removed, since they were all aboriginal, some more than others, but all aboriginal nevertheless.

As for the half caste kids being favoured by the government while the pure aboriginal kids were left behind in what the government considered to be an unsuitable environment.....that was definite discrimination.
It's clear that the kids with half white blood were looked upon as better and therefore more worthy of being rescued than the full blood kids.
But that does not alter the fact that the environment was considered unsuitable, which was I believe the primary purpose in moving them.
I do not, however, agree with the governments apparent view that the full aboriginal kids were in some way inferior to the half castes.


That's right.....he was considered more worthy of saving because he was a half caste. And I've already stated that I don't agree with that sort of discrimination. But it happened.
As for the boy being desperately unhappy and missing his family - I don't doubt you for a moment.
But long term, as an adult, he may well have been pleased that he grew up in white society and got an education and a job and a decent living standard, rather than growing up in poverty and squalor in an aboriginal community.
Then again, perhaps he never did get a job, and he never did see any benefit of his whitefella upbringing.
Or maybe he ended up going back to his own people. Who knows what became of him.

Prospector said:
Well, how can you say that? How many of these kids just didn't make it at all?
Click to expand...

No doubt there were some who didn't make it.
I expressed the view that these children have become people who are, in most cases, responsible citizens with decent work ethics, incomes and jobs that have enabled them to live far better lives than they'd now be living if they'd stayed in their aboriginal communities.
Perhaps the last word should go to Noel Pearson who, as an aboriginal himself, almost certainly has more knowledge of his people than either you or me. Noel makes positive comments about the generally sound work ethic and responsible attitude of those who were removed as children and raised in white society.
 
OK Bunyip, I can see your logic in all that.

I still contend to remove a child from its family, without consent, on the basis of colour alone (in this case, half colour) without evidence of abuse is a crime against humanity, whatever the outcome. And for that I am sorry!
 
I'd take life in a supportive family with a sense of belonging in my own culture whilst living in 'poverty and squalor' over a a good job and a decent living standard any day.

(travel to a third world country and there are entire populations much larger than Australia happily living in 'poverty and squalor' but with the support and love of family - which includes parents, sisters, brothers, cousins, grandparents etc. - and with a strong cultural background and sense of belonging that counters the 'squalor' that they live in - cave men lived in 'squalor' as well).

I can't imagine what it would be like to grow up amongst people that are of a different race, religion and culture to me without knowing who my family was. We tend to define ourselves by family.

I'm very glad that someone is saying sorry for this debarcle and feel angry that people are still trying to excuse it as a 'good thing' - its is patronising to judge the lifestyle of these people at that time so harshly as to remove their children from it imo.

The liberal party's approach to this is about as gutless as it gets - they either support it or they don't - but to say "we'll support it but we don't agree with it" is just pathetic.
 
I've logged on this evening to this thread expecting to see heaps of comments on the actual content of the "Sorry Statement" as detailed on the 7.30 Report this evening and also included in ABC Radio News.

Nothing from anyone!!

After all the anticipation and anxiety?

Why?

Hasn't anyone heard it? Or is it just so great that it doesn't require comment?
Or so awful that those who don't want it can't bring themselves to contemplate it?

And did anyone see Kerry O'Brien's interview with Jackie Huggins, Lois O'Donaghue and Mr Chaney?
Jackie Huggins, imo, was gracious and conciliatory, had much dignity.
Less impressed by Professor O'Donaghue who seemed determined to hold on to her resentment.
 
Cos we haven't said it enough, we'll probably say it another 20,000 times between now and when I die. Hopefully I will die way before that.
 

Come to Alice Springs, they don't give a Rats **** about it, you guys from the big smoke should spend 1 weekend in Alice to see the waste of time, effort and money, it's all about piss, piss and more piss for them.
 

I believe that the primary reason for removing those kids was to get them out of an environment which the government, rightly or wrongly, considered unsuitable for the upbringing of children. And to get them into an environment that the government considered, again rightly or wrongly, was more suitable for giving those kids the sort of upbringing and education and life skills that would best equip them to lead fulfilling and worthwhile lives in Australian society.
Did the government achieve its objective, and has it proven to be a worthwhile objective? You be the judge.

One thing for sure is that all this arguing about the right or wrong or the benefit or lack of benefit of the governments actions in regard to the stolen generation, isn't going to do a damn thing towards helping aboriginal people.
Another thing that will do nothing towards helping them is a sorry message from our Prime Minister. It might make some of them feel better, it might make some white people feel better, but it won't do anything towards addressing the problems of aboriginal people.
And until those problems are addressed, nothing much will change in aboriginal communities.


Prospector, you said you're sorry. Could you elaborate? Are you sorry in as much as you regret what happened to aboriginals? Or are you actually apologising for what somebody else did before your time?

Another thing I'd like to ask you, if you care to answer, is what you thought of the sorry message that my friend sent to me, and which I passed on for the interest and discussion of this forum. I'm talking about the one which apologised for all the help we give aboriginals.
I thought there'd be numerous rebuttals of that message, but not a single person has even commented on it.
I respect your opinions more than I respect most other views on this forum....even though I don't always agree with you. I'm genuinely interested to hear whether you think there was any truth in that sorry message. Or anything else you might want to say about it.
 
Julia said:
Nothing from anyone!!
Click to expand...
The pervading mentality is that because a very small number of aborigines have done ok, we really shouldn't be apologising.
And this thread has been more about $$$ that might flow from an apology, than the substance of an apology, or its need at all.

If you are white and are reading this, the 99% chance is that you just don't get it.
The 99% chance is that you haven't read the "Bringing Them Home" report.
The 99% chance is that you didn't know that there were over 700 pieces of government legislation legitimising forcible removal, and at least 67 definitions of "aboriginality" that made it work a treat.
The 99% chance is that you did not know the assumptions underlying forcible removal were predicated on "breeding out" all traces of aboriginality in Australia - within 100 years!

If you are white and reading this, your views will have been shaped by an education system as good as the German's or the Japanese, where the truth about past atrocities lies in waiting for those that venture to find it: It won't find you!
 
We are saying sorry to aborginals because there is a good lessons learnt from Johnny to divert people's attention to trivial matters. It is trivial in my opinion because there is more merit to educate the Ãb"original" people than dishing money out to them to buy grog; there is more meaningful tasks to get many of them back to workforce and to taste how it looks like to earn own respectful labour and livelihood, there is more meaningful tasks than to exploit emotions. If money could buy the remorseful tasks of stolen generation then God bless you. It wil be unending.
The Rudd Government and media should pay focus on issues like Chinese taken over our country : MGX, Rio, FMG would be just tip of the iceberg. watch Sino Steel, CYU and like many others. Unfortunately many of us Australians have memories like fish and we tend to forget everything.
THis is time to say sorry and then get back to business - creating growth for nation, uplift our children against high migrant growth from South Africa, UK, China, INdia, Singapore, Malaysia. There are more meaninful tasks than saying Sorry by stopping the refugees intake who do not need any qualification or health test to live in this country. No racism here but look at the loyality or contribution many people came on refugee visas and their involvement in crime.

It is just eye wash and not a 'white wash'by Mr Rudd and company to put name in history book and opening a can of worm.

My
 

There are people in third world countries who are leaving there in droves and coming to Australia. Maybe they're not as happy as you think.

However, I do take your point that people can be happy even in poverty, if they have the love and support of family and a close knit community.

But.....do you really think there's much love and support and sense of close knit community in aboriginal towns?
 

As well motivated as everybody involved may have been, or that the decision makers that set this process into play may have been, the reality is that they had no right to make this arbitrary judgement, and the result of their intervention has been catastrophic for a large proportion of those affected. To raise the example of the few that came through this system, vs those that didn't come out of it well, does not justify it. No society has the right to completely remove children from their entire extended family and culture on an arbitrary basis. When DOCS takes a child from harm their first step is to try to place the child with relatives that won't put the child in harm. The child is also kept within the same cultural environment from which they were removed.

For example, DOCS doesn't take children from christian background drug addict parents that are neglecting or harming them, ship them off into a hindu community and prevent them from ever knowing who their grandparents, cousins, aunts etc. were and educate them into the hindu religion (I use hindu purely as an example). If it did there would be an outrage at this level of intervention - the primary goal is to place the children into an environment that is as close to where they came from but protects them from harm.

To portray the actions of the government with the stolen generation as some historical version of DOCS is a misrepresentation of the situation.

Knowing the bond I feel and how important family is in my own life I can only express deep sorrow for what occurred to these children that were removed from their family and their culture, and sorrow to the families that lost their children. The worst experience in the world for any parent, and particularly for a mother, is to lose their child, in particular in circumstance where they don't know what has become of them. Family is one of the most significant things in any persons life, as are friends and community. These children had it all taken away from them, and the parents and community had their children taken away from them without knowing what happened to them.
 
bunyip said:
But.....do you really think there's much love and support and sense of close knit community in aboriginal towns?
Click to expand...

Bloody oath and I say that with utmost certainty from first hand experience. The sense of community is one of the biggest downfalls of those that try to buck the system because family is such a big thing in these communities - this is not an unusual thing though and applies in any culture. You appear to have a very negative view of these people as human beings.
 
Cuttlefish

Family is one of the most significant things in any persons life, as are friends and community
Click to expand...

I have lived in the Pilbara, NQ and Darwin (very close to one of the most destructive 'communities'). My wife, as an RN has worked with these communities.

You should maybe read this...

http://www.aifs.gov.au/institute/pubs/papers/stanley4.pdf

How many times as a pre pubescent is Uncle Tom and his mates allowed have their way with you that maybe you need to be taken out? Once, six, a dozen?

What about this one? Tip of the iceberg or isolated? She'll be right look the other way?
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22906526-601,00.html
 

I have a negative view of anyone, regardless of race or skin colour, who subjects their own families and communities to drunkenness, violence, sexual assault, and vandalism, who bludge on the system and shun the efforts of decent people to help them by providing them with housing, healthcare, education, job training opportunities....you name it.
I have a negative view of anyone who constantly whines and whinges about their problems, and blames everyone else except themselves.
I have a negative view of anyone who complains about their lives, but shows only contempt, disdain or indifference when offered viable solutions to their problems.
I have a negative view of anyone who has nothing but criticism and lack of appreciation for those who care about them and try and help them.

As for the love and support and sense of close knit community that you seem to think is present in aboriginal towns....I can only say that I haven't seen any evidence of it. Quite the contrary in fact. When people are bashing each other and vandalising property, sexually assaulting little kids, getting drunk and having gang wars and assaulting womenfolk, I see that as evidence of a dysfunctional society, not a society of love and support and decent family values and close knit community.
 
Tinpusher - The second link you posted is one I've read about and abhors me - what abhors me most is that some twit of a judge thinks that in an aboriginal community this sort of behaviour is somehow ok whilst in a white community the perpetrators would be lucky not to be strung up and would be facing hefty jail terms. Clearly (to my mind at least) the perpetrators of this crime should have been punished and removed from the community and the victim protected.

I'm not naive enough to not acknowledge the serious problems that exist in aboriginal communities but that doesn't mean that a sense of community doesn't exist. The problem is those communities are terriblly affected by alcoholism. On the other hand the police and judicial system fails to remove the violent and dysfunctional members of the community through stupid decisions like that described above.

I don't know what the path forward is but imo it doesn't change that the wrongs of the past should be acknowledged.

Bunyip - alcoholism, dysfunction, violence and abuse isn't restricted to the aboriginal community, however I completely agree that its disproportionately represented in that community. That does not mean that aboriginals do not have a sense of community and that underlying the dysfunctional elements there isn't a sense of community. With policing/judicial decisions like that above its no wonder that violence and abuse are endemic in these communities. This is where 'political correctness' has caused more damage than good. Consistent policing in these communities would be a good start.

I don't know the way forward but I do believe in acknowledging the wrongs of the past.
 

You don't know the way forward? I thought you'd be full of ideas at least.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Competency and trying to maintain standards
2
Replies
27
Views
3K
sptrawler
How valuable are two parent families?
2
Replies
28
Views
3K
Value Collector
February 2025
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
ducati916
Ozempic: Magic Pill or Devils Bargain?
Replies
10
Views
2K
sptrawler
Bonds vs. HISA: some new insights
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
So_Cynical
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...