Indigenous Sovereignty Demands

[Jerry_Atrick]

18 minutes ago, onetrack said:

With the recent conviction of the former ATSIC boss, Geoff Clark, on major theft charges from his local Aboriginal group in Victoria - I wonder if the authorities are now going to go back, and try to find out how much he defrauded ATSIC over the years he was in absolute charge there?

 

Fat chance, I'd say - it won't even be considered - even though Clark has proved himself to be a full-time criminal over many, many years - including rape convictions, as well as fraud and theft. 

The criminals, thieves and fraud merchants are drawn like a magnet to the Aboriginal Industry and its permanent pots of gold with little oversight.

Oh.. and the politica machineyry in Australia (and the rest of the world, for that matter) are whiter than kit gloves and when the rarity of fraud happens, the perpatrators are also broght to justice and the system has the checks and controls that ATSIC doesn't?

 

Please! I am not excusing fraudsters, but why single it out as an Aboriginal issue?

 

Edited September 20 by Jerry_Atrick

[spacesailor]

Yes I did get caught up with a " smoking ceremony " .

In the city got squashed by a great throng of people . Then that smoke came . It wasn't too bad , but I removed ( and possibly upset some people ) my self , as quickly as possible. 

spacesailor

Edited September 20 by spacesailor

[octave]

12 hours ago, spacesailor said:

I ,object strongly  .

As a father of an " acute asthmatic " .

Any polluting smoke should be banned .

I am also asthmatic but only a litte , when those ' deliberately lit fires are burning,  We have to put ourselves in jail , doors & windows shut tight running an 

' Air-filter  '.

400 people died in Sydney ,after the fire's started 

that huge choking smoke, that put the wife & I into hospital .

spacesailor

Spacey can I ask if the largest source of smoke is from Aboriginal  ceremonies. At my local national park I can often smell smoke from wood fired BBQs. To be clear would ban wood fired BBQs?

 

I find it bemusing when people bang on about a particular ceremony. As an atheist I think I think all ceremonies are bollocks (to me) however I am a well adjusted enough person to say"you know what, this means nothing to me, however it may mean something to someone else, so why have a panic attack over it.  Recently I went to an art exhibition at the Melbourne Town Hall.  At the opening there was a very short welcome to country and yes a tiny fire. The wording was short and to the point detailing the history of this place and welcoming all the people who have come since including all the waves of immigrants.  This in no way bothered me and I can't really see why it would bother any intelligent rational person. I see little difference between this and Christian pronouncements on ANZAC day etc.

The other thing that bothers me about this conversation is the idea that all Aborigines can be lumped into one category.  Once we start with Muslims this or Aboriginals thar or Men this or Women that then I am out.  

 

 

[nomadpete]

13 hours ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

an Aboriginal in the middfle of a sports field performing a ceremony to give some sort of social cedibility to the AFL. Yeah.. right.

 

Do you really believe that a paid performer acting out a smoking ceremony in a football field, creates 'social credibility' for a football game?

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

I honestly believe it helps the AFL pedal socially inclusive credentials.. yes... especially given there are segments which are alledged to have been not terribly sympathetic to First Nations culture.

Edited September 20 by Jerry_Atrick

[nomadpete]

13 hours ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

the system has the checks and controls that ATSIC doesn't?

 

Maybe. I might be wrong, but at least in the past the ATSIC was exempt from audit and any scrutiny.

[nomadpete]

1 minute ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

I honestly believe it helps the AFL pedal socially inclusive credentials.. yes.

I cannot see how that is.

[Jerry_Atrick]

Because if you incorporate recognition of the usual greeting, and then recognition in native land via Welcome to Country, you can say, "See, we are inclusive and are sympathetic/empathetic to First Nations culture.."

 

The the AFL Commissioners (the folks who worry about, amongst other things, the money) wouldn't spend the money they didn't think think there was a return involved.

 

That is not to say they couldn't care about First Nations cultures and racism, etc.

 

 

[nomadpete]

49 minutes ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

Because if you incorporate recognition of the usual greeting, and then recognition in native land via Welcome to Country, you can say, "See, we are inclusive and are sympathetic/empathetic to First Nations culture.."

Personally, if the shoe was on the other foot, and I was a member of a marginalised minority being 'recognised' in this way, I would be insulted. I would see it as a vacuous mockery.

 

But that's just how it would affect me. Maybe the aboriginals get a warm reconciled feeling from it. More likely, they are rolling on the floor laughing about it.

[nomadpete]

54 minutes ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

The the AFL Commissioners (the folks who worry about, amongst other things, the money) wouldn't spend the money they didn't think think there was a return involved.

So its all about money, not about honor.

[nomadpete]

Octave, I  am not picking on just one of the many annoying ceremonial procedures that waste our time. As you point out, it's not hard to disregard a relatively brief smoking ceremony.

 

There are many other such unavoidable annoying things in our society. Individually they are inconsequential.

[Bruce Tuncks]

While I have to admit that "wood-fired barbes" are of similar problems for asthmatics, I have to point out that "smoking ceremonies" are illegal these days at least for whitefellers. They would be caught up in the "anti-smoking net".

[old man emu]

I'm pretty sure that what Spacey is talking about is the smoke from "controlled burns" carried out by the Rural Fire Service in the bushland around Sydney, especially in the Blue Mountains to the west. These burns are carried out in winter when high pressure areas create very calm conditions which, in the areas being burnt, do not introduce the risk of winds causing the fire to become uncontrollable. If there is any air movement it is from the higher country in the Blue Mountains into the Sydney Basin. 

 

The problem is that the Sydney Basin is a bit like a soup bowl with one side (along the coast) being broken off. The smoke-ladened air flows into the Basin from the west and meets onshore air off the ocean. That stop if moving eastwards and it circulates in the basin, getting more polluted with particulates from the smoke. 

[spacesailor]

Any potential fires that could ignite a major ' bush-fire ' ,

Should / no must  be banned . Irrespective of the reason 

For it's lighting .

Whenever there's a total ' fire-ban ' . why should any Australian be exempted.   ( please sir, it's only my dinner cooking ) .

spacesailor

[Jerry_Atrick]

2 hours ago, nomadpete said:

So its all about money, not about honor.

I said a return - not necessarily a direct monetary return.. But, at the end of the day, when the VFL became the AFL, money became a more priortised element of the game. Despite me thinking that one of the reasons for welcome to country at AFL games will be for them to present themselves in a better light, it really has bugger all to do with the imposition on society that seems to be perceived of Welcome to Country when there are so many other rituals we have to endure that no one seems to complain about.. but these are complained about as if one is obligated to attend and respect them.. which they aren't.

 

2 hours ago, nomadpete said:

Personally, if the shoe was on the other foot, and I was a member of a marginalised minority being 'recognised' in this way, I would be insulted. I would see it as a vacuous mockery.

 

But that's just how it would affect me. Maybe the aboriginals get a warm reconciled feeling from it. More likely, they are rolling on the floor laughing about it.

I agree with the first statement.. .However, the other way of thinking is that it helps promote and understainding of the culture and I will take that opportunity. Sometimes we should be looking at the potential upsides rather than the downsides.

 

Unless you have intimate knowledge of First Nations peoples feelings (which I certainly do not claim to have), suppositions of how they may react or feel should probably be muted. One person who probably had a closer affinity to how First Nations people would react has declient to continue his valuable contributions on these good forums.. for reasons well known.

[nomadpete]

9 minutes ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

other way of thinking is that it helps promote and understainding of the culture and I will take that opportunity

By what measure does anyone 'know' it does this? I suspect it is just a hopeful guess by all in favor of it. I call it window dressing.

 

At the end of the day, it achieves nothing toward improving the health, education, culture, or wellbeing of the most disadvantaged people. Thatu is my real gripe.

[old man emu]

3 hours ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

the other way of thinking is that it helps promote and understainding of the culture

Making a big hoo-ha about this ceremony and saying that it helps promote and understanding (did you mean 'an understanding'?) doesn't seem to be having good outcomes. Too much concentration on something that there does not seem to be any agreement from Aborigines that such a ceremony was indeed common across the cultures of the many different sub-cultures, detracts from the exposition of those parts of the culture which could be absorbed by the Western culture that is now dominant in Australia. 

 

I don't want to consider the spiritual and legal aspects of the culture as I say this. I think that more effort should be made to learn the management skills used to maintain the environment. Things like the correct way to use fire in managing native forests, and the possible cultivation of plants for food and medicines should be high on the list of studies of Aboriginal culture. Surely there are some precious gems amongst the cultural mullock. 

[Jerry_Atrick]

7 hours ago, nomadpete said:

By what measure does anyone 'know' it does this? I suspect it is just a hopeful guess by all in favor of it. I call it window dressing.

By what measure? I don't know. I should have used to the words, "may help" (I had had a few last night so forgive me not entirely lucid in my expressions). But, if you have an audience of people that you can express part of your culture to who, as it turns out know very little about it, then does that nor afford them the opportunity to instill some interest in some of that audience to learn a bit more? It is obviously not successful, and is enduring a tirade in all walks of Aussie society. But why is it offending of people's sensitivities when people can, like many other things that offend their sensitivities, ignore it.

 

Everyone, including the senator talks about wokeism and how bad it is, but isn't getting upset about Welcome to Country, an example of wokeism in the sense that it seems to be offending delicate sensitivities and whipping up a frenzy about it? It really is simple - if you don't like it, ignore it. No one is forcing to you watch or listen to, or attending it.

 

BTW, it has no meaning to me and when it comes on when I am watching something (usually an AFL final), I don't actually recall what I do.. I choose not to take too much notice of it.

 

 

4 hours ago, old man emu said:

Too much concentration on something that there does not seem to be any agreement from Aborigines that such a ceremony was indeed common across the cultures of the many different sub-cultures, detracts from the exposition of those parts of the culture which could be absorbed by the Western culture that is now dominant in Australia.

From what I read (even from the supposedly "dissenting" Aboriginals, of which there don't seem to be too many), there is much more agreement on the ceremony. But just like the myth that propagated that Welcome to Country was invented by Ernie Dingo, I am less likely to believe press and more likely to believe more reputable sources which almost all conclude Welcome to Country is an authentic tradition in Aboriginal culture but there are differences in what that ceremony is in different First Nations countries. I would suggest you read the Guardian article I posted (irony of referring you to the press) or go to Google Scholar and search origins of Welcome to Country. Here is an easily digestible article which touches on it (see P 124, extracted from a bigger journal): https://openjournals.library.sydney.edu.au/LA/article/view/14269/12768. I find it really odd that in the overwhelming evidence that Welcome to Country is authentic, people dig their heels in about its inauthenticity.. without citing any real evidence to support their position.  I would take and those from similar origins, whether they state Welcome to Ceremony, that over anything messrs Murdoch, Stokes, Costello, and the like, which is what we normally do, right?

 

4 hours ago, old man emu said:

I don't want to consider the spiritual and legal aspects of the culture as I say this. I think that more effort should be made to learn the management skills used to maintain the environment. Things like the correct way to use fire in managing native forests, and the possible cultivation of plants for food and medicines should be high on the list of studies of Aboriginal culture. Surely there are some precious gems amongst the cultural mullock. 

You learn a new thing every day. I had never heard of the word, mullock, before. I am going to use it at work on Monday "there's a lot of mullock around here".

 

Why would you want to exclude learning about an aspect of someone's culture.. Surely the "legal" (social?) aspect of one's culture is what drives much of everything else about that culture. In fact, understanding some of the differences between the "legal" aspect of their culture helps understand some of the perceived difficulties in living alongside them (I am not only referring to Aboriginal culture, by the way). Surely you can both learn about their sociological aspects as well as the more scientific aspects. And it is the sociological aspects that hold the key to successful integration, is it not?

 

Or, are you saying, as I am rejecting their culture, I don't want to learn about it and they just have to succumb to our culture?

 

This is what I am observing. There is a culture that is on display that you don't have to a) partake in; or b) even watch. That actual performance may or may not be authentic , but the ceremony as a concept is real and proven. It may, like the performance referenced, contain scientific inaccuracies based on a mistake, or, let's go with the senator; factual inaccuracy based on their religion (or spiritual beliefs).

 

Let's look at another  couple of ceremonies, both within the same religion foisted upon us. Christmas and Easter. Same broad religion, worshipping the same (arguably fictional) god. Let's start with Christmas. One country starts the ceremonial rituals on the 5th of December and it runs through to the actual celebration and opening of presents on Christmas eve (Germany). Others have their dates on the 5th/6th January. So we can't even agree on the date of the birth of the fella (nor as it turns out the death/supposed resurrection as orthodox Easters are on a different date). and the ceremonies/riutuals performed are very different between different counties... And even the central character through which we celebrate - Santa Claus - is not the embodiment of anything other than Coca Cola's invention in the 30s. How authentic is that in 2,000 years of Christianity? Yet no one complains or is offended by it.. Or the other myriad of ceremonies we are continually creating or modifying as society moves.. So, even if Welcome to Country is a "new" ceremony and is not rooted in 60,000 years of tradition, or it has changed over the years, so what? When I was a kid no one heard of Halloween or Valentines Day, but f! me if another kid comes around asking for a treat and tries to stuff hs hands full of them, he will meet an early end (just kidding, but you get my drift). All of these other ceremonies are foisted on us.. Go to a shop in October and they have the Chrissie decorations up and belting out tunes that have been repeated time and time again. Well, actually, even my kids complain about that.

 

Why are Aboriginals held to a standard others aren't?

 

Well, I am going to call it out. I don't think it is positive racism. I am sure everyone of us, if interviewing candidates for a job would pick the Aboriginal who is marginally better over a caucasian who is equally competent in all but a minor area. But it is the unconscious bias that pervades our society and this is just one area where it looks like it is rearing. In the face of credible evidence to the contrary, people are still claiming Welcome to Country was made up by Ernie Dingo or not autentic, but can't offer evidence to the contrary. And the standard is that the ceremony is different (or new) as if it has to stand still over miillenia, yet our ceremonies are forever changing; we are inventing new ones (or invigorating irrelevant ones) and have dropped others (isn't there talk about what to do with the Azac Day ceremonies). 

 

We are all getting upset at something that we can totally ignore if we don't like, and it does not make one shred of difference to our lives. Even if Welcome to Country is totally unsuccessful at providing xome appreciation of Aboriginal culture, given we now (as a country) recognise native land rights, if it is an important spiritual ritual for those that have a native connection to the land, why deny them that? It masy be spiritually important to them. Geez, I was in church not too long ago for a wedding. When the, in my mind, religous crap was being spurted, I started singing my currently favourite songs to myself and ignored their resurrection rubbish (in my view - but I am only putting it here to highlight that I can choose to believe/listed to it or not, and I am not saying someone who believes it is somehow being divisive, because I beleieve people the right to believe what they want. If I was to make a hoo-hah about it, it would not be them that is divisive. It would be me.

 

And that is my point about the divisiveness thing.. It's not the Aboriginals that are being divisive; They are not forcing anyone to do anything. They are partaking in what is a cultural ceremony that has been around for millenia. It has no impact on you or I; why are we (non Aboriginals) making such a hoo-hah about it? Who is being divisive? Comes back to unconsious bias, IMHO.

 

If anyone has credible evidence that Welcome to Country is not a very long standing feattur of Aboriginal Country (i.e. made up recently), then I will happily eat my words if it stands up to scrutiny. And I am not talking about an individual ceremony, or even possibly single Aborignal nations that didn't have them, bvut, as is claimed, it is totally unauthentic or never pre-dated Ernie. If anyone has evidence that our veremonies have survived intact without change for millenia, then I will also eat my words (again, not individual ones, but, most of them)  It doesn't mean one has to want to do it, like it, agree with it, etc. etc. But if one is basing one's judgements on facts they continually reject without being able to offer evidence to the contrary, quite frankly, we are in MAGA terrirtory..

 

(Flameproof, kevlar jacket on)

Edited September 21 by Jerry_Atrick

[red750]

Jerry, how would you feel if every time you went into the pub for dinner, you had to get on your knees and prey to Allah to appease the Muslims? This is how people feel about going to the football, cricket and just about everything else, and having to sit through the Welcome to Country.

[Jerry_Atrick]

15 minutes ago, red750 said:

Jerry, how would you feel if every time you went into the pub for dinner, you had to get on your knees and prey to Allah to appease the Muslims? This is how people feel about going to the football, cricket and just about everything else, and having to sit through the Welcome to Country.

I don't have to. You don't have to, and neither do Muslims.

 

Can you please advise where you have to attend or listen to Welcome to Country. Because I was in Aus not that long ago.. and didn't see it once - not even on the telly, let alone the pubs I visited (and I made sure I went to a few). My brother who is visiting here at the moment and I had a couple of drinks last night and got talking about it; and he has never been to one and can't remember sitting through one. ever. I watched the GWS Sydney game on the telly and I didn't see it.

 

Why is it imposed on you and not him, nor I when I watch Aussie events where Welcome to Counry is staged?

 

(Actually I may make a point of watching one now to see what the hoo-hah is about).

 

Again, statements don't seem to tally with observable facts, and presented in a way that is... divisive.

 

I should be very clear - I personally don't give a toss about what anyone thinks about welcome to country.. But when people start spouting BS to justify their, or apply double standards, then I get riled, because they are tyring to impose nothing more than an opinion as fact or are discriminating with no basis for that discrimination.

 

So give me the evidence and fine.. I may not agree with your position but we are all different.

 

Edited September 21 by Jerry_Atrick

[octave]

If I were to compile a list of ceremonial or celebratory events that I don't believe in I doubt that smoking ceremonies would be top of the list.  Are smoking ceremonies more numerous than Christmas festivities or Christian ceremonies?   

I am a pretty hard line atheist however I don't really mind what others do.  I understand that things that mean little to me may be meaningful to others.  For me it comes down to kindness and empathy. 

I really can't understand why you guys spend so much emotional effort on this.  

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

To be clear as I am workign at the same time and didn't edit in the timeframe allowed what I wanted to say, I meant this: I should be very clear - I personally don't give a toss about what anyone thinks about welcome to country.. But when people start spouting BS as facts to justify their position, or apply double standards, then I get riled. What you think of it is of consequence to me.. But don't tell me BS to try and have me form an opinion. I do prefer facts. (That is not aimed specifcally at you, @red750, it's rhetorical).

[red750]

If you go to a football match, particularly a finals match, you are obliged to sit or stand throgh it. The same just about anywhere 20 or more people are gathered together. If you are are supporter of a sport with a members ticket and want to see you team play a final, you have no choice. If you watch it at home you have to have it stuffed down your throat.

 

 

[red750]

18 minutes ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

I watched the GWS Sydney game on the telly and I didn't see it.

Then it musst have been edited from the version you watched.

[Jerry_Atrick]

Really.. My brother is a member of the Tigers and goes to their games (even this year) and yes, they have the ceremonies but he isn't forced to watch them.

 

Your not forced to watch them on telly. Make a cuppa  and calm down.