WOULD YOU ABORIGINES HAVE PREFERRED THE JAPANESE AS LANDLORDS?
Four-time Walkley Award winning political commentator and Churchill Fellow, has returned to the fray over concern that the integrity of news dissemination is continually being threatened by a partisan media.
The British have, at some point, invaded and established a permanent presence in 171 of the almost 200 current UN member States. It is quicker to list those nations the Brits haven’t invaded:
Central African Republic
Republic of Congo
Sao Tome and Principe
During the Golden Age of Spain the sun never set on its massive empire.
The French invaded its European neighbours, the Pacific and much of equatorial Africa.
We haven’t even mentioned the Chinese, the Mongols, the Barbarians of northern Africa’s Barbary Coast, the Dutch, the Brazilians, the Saudis or Russians.
The Roman Empire invaded swathes of Europe, Arabian Asia, Africa and most of Britain, with most of Europe having changed hands multiple times under the Romans. All invaded nations at one time benefited immensely in terms of water reticulation, agriculture, architecture and the sciences.
The modern world can thank invading nations for its development, and no race bears a permanent grudge against those who once invaded and improved it, except, that is, the Australian Aborigine.
Australia was rather fortunate in that it was considered inaccessible and not arable by many. Cook and Joseph Banks (above) wrote of the Aborigines: “They are a naked and treacherous lot. A collection of cowardly, unfriendly and vindictive savages belonging to the lowest order in creation”. Hmmmm, how un PC of them!
Although it was widely acknowledged that Cook had acted improperly towards the indigenous occupants, it mattered little to his peers. By declaring the continent “terra nullius” (no man’s land) the English discovered a Latin expression to justify taking custody of it.
The modern Aborigine has been internationally successful in casting white Australians as racist. Go anywhere in the World and you’ll find people prepared to call us heartlessly racist. That is not fair, because we are the least racist of any country I know. In fact the way we have tried over a century to assist the development of the Aborigine has worked against them and us!
Because legally no Australian needs to prove his or her Aboriginality, a verbal claim is sufficient and it can’t be challenged. White activists have encouraged endless land claims, a separate flag, a Mabo agreement, treaties, voluminous welfare handouts, “say sorries” and now they want Parliamentrary representation without election and their very existence included in a rewritten Constitution.
It is quite common for European Australians to identify, de-identify, or re-identify as Aboriginal on Census forms, making it a statisticians nightmare. The unfortunate truth is there are actually very few full-blood Aborigines left alive. None in Tasmania.
Many people mistakenly consider Aborigines as full-bloods because of their distinctive appearance, but that is not an accurate assessment.
Mixed breeding has diluted the Aboriginal gene pool and many apparent European whites actually carry Aboriginal blood, as little as one 32nd, and it’s confusing as to how a person can possibly identify as an Aborigine. But legally anyone can, one 32nd or not!
Thirty billion dollars a year is spent on improving conditions for Aborigines, (and that is just Commonwealth expenditure) with little result. We have attempted giving them self determination (ATSIC) with lump sums to be distributed where needed. Unfortunately that was also a disaster as elders spent the money on acquiring better footballers for various clubs and grog became a serious killer.
But that is their culture, tomorrow has no significance, only what is wanted, or needed, today. And the entire tribe must share in any windfall.
Warren Mundine (above) uses the most accurate and up-to-date estimates of Government spending on Indigenous Australians – about $30.3 billion is spent on people claiming Aboriginality according to the Productivity Commission. Q & A fact checking disagrees but who checks the fact checkers? I’ll stick with Mr Mundine rather than Q & A thankyou.
Now to the greatest of lies that Aborigines were Australia’s first inhabitants. No full blood Aborigine has any memory of living anywhere else but Australia, therefore they assume they were the first. But there are proven genetic links to Indonesians and it is assumed South Africans.
Anthropologists have found some Northern Australian tribes were able to cross the small distance over water to the more prolific New Guinean and Indonesian Islands.
Australia’s Aborigines are unarguably the most primitive race on planet Earth:
Despite inhabiting Australia for between 40,000 and 60,000 years before we arrived, Aborigines did not invent the wheel, which would have been a godsend to carry their belongings as they were nomadic. They had not even invented numbers other than the number “one” and simply “more than one” despite trade existing between tribes.
But they had developed incredible navigation skills by foot and had an innate knowledge and memory of where to find foods and water holes but moved on as those foods and water holes were depleted rather than using seeds for agriculture. Water in the north was always plentiful. Such was the fecundity of Australia that the original explorers were not aware of until later.
We Europeans have developed this land into a South East Asian economic, agricultural and mineral success which is the envy of the world, despite the poor modern day administrations that are determined to wind the clock back.
To vainly salve a mistaken conscience, Australia spends on each claimed Aborigine twice what it spends on those who don’t claim Aboriginality. Is that fair?
All I know is that I was born here in this country long before any of those Aboriginal activists,
... so surely it’s as much my country as theirs, and I don’t expect any special treatment.