Aboriginal child abuse and the NT Intervention

[Bells]

I'm using standard English language. And I'm not obliged to respect inefficiency or exploitation regardless of what guise it comes under.

Of course. You whine about their mistreatment and then refuse to acknowledge their requests and demands for respect.

So they are unwilling to take responsibility for their own communities. Were the welfare checks to these aboriginal elders also reduced? Or was it only the community which suffered?

Elders are the community you dick.

Are you now accusing the Elders of not knowing what is best for the communities they live in and manage and guide?

Why? Because it doesn't fit into what an Aboriginal should be or needs to be striving for in your book?

So inspite of the rampant child abuse they do not wish to impart sex education to their children. Thats their prerogative and one which they can enforce when they undertake the education, however, foreign social workers are not required to be bound by local politicians when it comes to education.

Which has been a point of contention in the report. Elders reported that they were teaching the children in their communities about the old ways and about no sex before marriage or promise of marriage - in an attempt to combat rampant teenage pregnancies. They reported that teenagers and children were going to the health clinics and being taught about contraception and being given free condoms and told that if they have sex, they need to use protection. They also commented on the Baby Bonus Scheme which paid mothers $5000 per child born and the report discusses whether some teenage girls were falling pregnant to benefit from that bonus.

In their view, the Government should not be encouraging their children to have sex before marriage and should not be telling these teenagers that it was acceptable if they used protection.

And this was a point of contention. Health clinics are bound to respect the wishes of their patients and teenagers who are already sexually active will be treated as such and won't be brow beaten by medical staff into not having sex. Trying to find a balance between tribal beliefs and respecting those beliefs and teenagers living in this century is a delicate game.

In India, social workers are not even bound by our own politicians when it comes to education. How many of these elders are educated and trained to make informed decisions about aboriginal health? What do aboriginal doctors and social workers have to say in this matter?

They are trained so far as they are the Elders - the leaders of their community. Again, this is a clash between Western culture and Indigenous culture. We need to cater for all and children who are sexually active need to be taught about respecting their bodies and the use of protection. Health clinics run by Aboriginal communities do teach sex education and offer counselling as per their comunity's belief system (remember, few Aboriginal communities have the same beliefs or culture).

I hope you are kidding me. Its the aboriginals who have to respect their elders. Not me

Then you are exactly like the Howard Government that you so openly and continuously criticised throughout this whole thread.

I'm certainly not obliged to pander to these elders anymore than I am obligated to bow to the Queen of England.

Again, you are exactly like the Australian Government that you so openly criticise in this thread because of their lack of respect for Aboriginal culture and traditions.

Do you understand that non-interference in other societies does not mean you have to follow their laws in your own?

And do you understand that their culture forms part of the Australian culture?

That if we cannot respect their traditions and culture, then we will continue to fail?

Australians on this board do not seem to comprehend that if you do not support killing people you disapprove of, it does not imply that you support their choices.

Non-interference means supporting their choices, whatever they may be. Many communities, for example, opt for tribal laws for certain crimes committed in their communities. Such Tribal Laws can result in the infliction of pain and torture on those accused and found guilty (eg being stabbed with spears). Should we tell them no, they are not allowed to? Deny them their cultural beliefs and practices? They are the traditional owners. The least we can do is respect them and their culture, which they are trying to maintain in the face of massive Western culture that is permeating their communities and in some instances, resulting in conflict in said communities.

It seems to me the role of the elders in aboriginal society is that the buck does not stop here. If, as you say, they advocate the use of Australian military and police and stripping off the hard won land rights of aboriginals and, inspite of a significant failure of the policies continue to avoid taking responsibility for their own communities, what exactly is it that I am supposed to admire about them? And yes, I am applying the Indian perspective. Dalit leaders exploit the Dalit community the same way as the high caste people did. Are we supposed to pretend its okay because they are Dalit leaders?

You cannot apply an Indian perspective to a culture that is not your own.

That is akin to what the Australian Govnernments of the past and present continue to do, which continues to cause massive social and economic issues for them as a people.

The hard won land rights was won by the Elders you so easily dismiss now. They put in the hard yards for their communities and those land rights should never have been lost. As has been repeated countless of times, the Howard Government overstepped its own boundaries in their intervention. But many aspects of the intervention itself was requested by the tribal leaders and Elders who Govern their communities and are trying to cope with an increase in suicides, sexual abuse, rape, incest, teenage pregnancies, rampant unemployment, truancy, health care issues and lack of access to education. You may not agree with it, but them's the breaks. They have a say because that is their life and those of their families in their communities. Until you can understand that, then you really have no reason to criticise them for the choices they make for their individual communities.

Being the moral police is a difficult job, especially when the people you police have no self determination. The results of the NT intervention make it clear that this is just continued genocide and that it will continue until even the 2% of aboriginal population does not exist any more.

And your demands that we only respect Elders if they say what you think they should be asking for is acceptable? Is that self determination?

These communities need direct funding. Not given lectures about what is morally acceptable according to an Indian persepective. They know what is acceptable for their community based on their cultural heritage and history. They have the ultimate say. Their role at the moment is to try to slow the decline in their communities and it is no easy feat considering they get little to no funding and the issues that dog their communities continues to mount.

 

[S.A.M.]

Of course. You whine about their mistreatment and then refuse to acknowledge their requests and demands for respect.

I respect their sovereignty. I don't have to respect their inefficiency

Elders are the community you dick.

Are you now accusing the Elders of not knowing what is best for the communities they live in and manage and guide?

Based on the evidence? Yeah.

Why? Because it doesn't fit into what an Aboriginal should be or needs to be striving for in your book?

No, because the evidence shows that they are either corrupt or incapable of leading their communities, based on the fact that they have apparently agreed to an intervention which has lost their community jobs and land rights, apart from the ever increasing descent into substance abuse and child abuse. Or is elder an euphemism for "no longer viable"?

Which has been a point of contention in the report. Elders reported that they were teaching the children in their communities about the old ways and about no sex before marriage or promise of marriage - in an attempt to combat rampant teenage pregnancies. They reported that teenagers and children were going to the health clinics and being taught about contraception and being given free condoms and told that if they have sex, they need to use protection. They also commented on the Baby Bonus Scheme which paid mothers $5000 per child born and the report discusses whether some teenage girls were falling pregnant to benefit from that bonus.

In their view, the Government should not be encouraging their children to have sex before marriage and should not be telling these teenagers that it was acceptable if they used protection.

And thats all fine. My parents also have antiquated notions about sex, its called a generation gap.

And this was a point of contention. Health clinics are bound to respect the wishes of their patients and teenagers who are already sexually active will be treated as such and won't be brow beaten by medical staff into not having sex. Trying to find a balance between tribal beliefs and respecting those beliefs and teenagers living in this century is a delicate game.

And this is true everywhere. Social workers in India have been dismembered because they protested the marriage of very young children to adult men.

They are trained so far as they are the Elders - the leaders of their community. Again, this is a clash between Western culture and Indigenous culture.

Education and social welfare is not bound by cultural norms. There needs to be better education of the aboriginal community, more doctors, social workers and policemen coming from within the community rather than treating them like naughty children and sending them to bed without their bottle and porn.

We need to cater for all and children who are sexually active need to be taught about respecting their bodies and the use of protection. Health clinics run by Aboriginal communities do teach sex education and offer counselling as per their comunity's belief system (remember, few Aboriginal communities have the same beliefs or culture).

So its not as if you have to start from scratch. Unless of course, these services have closed down due to the intervention

Then you are exactly like the Howard Government that you so openly and continuously criticised throughout this whole thread.

Only if you think that opposing capital punishment means supporting murderers.

Again, you are exactly like the Australian Government that you so openly criticise in this thread because of their lack of respect for Aboriginal culture and traditions.

Huh? Is child abuse and alcoholism an aboriginal culture and tradition?

And do you understand that their culture forms part of the Australian culture?

That if we cannot respect their traditions and culture, then we will continue to fail?

I think you need to distinguish between respecting culture and avoiding discrimination. Its not hard. Think of the elders as the Ayatollah. And the culture and tradition as hanging homosexuals.

Non-interference means supporting their choices, whatever they may be.

No it does not. Do you support child marriages? hanging homosexuals?

Many communities, for example, opt for tribal laws for certain crimes committed in their communities. Such Tribal Laws can result in the infliction of pain and torture on those accused and found guilty (eg being stabbed with spears). Should we tell them no, they are not allowed to? Deny them their cultural beliefs and practices? They are the traditional owners. The least we can do is respect them and their culture, which they are trying to maintain in the face of massive Western culture that is permeating their communities and in some instances, resulting in conflict in said communities.

Like I said, think of the elders as the Ayatollah and the infliction of pain and torture on the accused as hanging homosexuals. Maybe it will give you a fresh perspective on the difference between non-interference and constructive criticism

You cannot apply an Indian perspective to a culture that is not your own.

I believe in the universality of human rights

That is akin to what the Australian Govnernments of the past and present continue to do, which continues to cause massive social and economic issues for them as a people.

Actually quite the reverse. In Asguards example, what would you say if airport security checks were conducted only on aboriginal peoples?

The Australians do not treat the aboriginals as they treat themselves - this is a major reason for the decline of aboriginal society under Australian rule.

The hard won land rights was won by the Elders you so easily dismiss now. They put in the hard yards for their communities and those land rights should never have been lost. As has been repeated countless of times, the Howard Government overstepped its own boundaries in their intervention. But many aspects of the intervention itself was requested by the tribal leaders and Elders who Govern their communities and are trying to cope with an increase in suicides, sexual abuse, rape, incest, teenage pregnancies, rampant unemployment, truancy, health care issues and lack of access to education. You may not agree with it, but them's the breaks. They have a say because that is their life and those of their families in their communities. Until you can understand that, then you really have no reason to criticise them for the choices they make for their individual communities.

Your position is hard to ascertain. Australians control most of the land which used to "belong" to the aboriginals. Any land rights they possess now are essentially at the whim of the Australian government.

And your demands that we only respect Elders if they say what you think they should be asking for is acceptable? Is that self determination?

Its self determination for the elders, but not for the aboriginal people. If the aboriginals started slicing off the noses of their women, what would be your position?

These communities need direct funding. Not given lectures about what is morally acceptable according to an Indian persepective. They know what is acceptable for their community based on their cultural heritage and history. They have the ultimate say. Their role at the moment is to try to slow the decline in their communities and it is no easy feat considering they get little to no funding and the issues that dog their communities continues to mount.

Throwing money at a problem does not resolve it, it only extends the time frame for its persistance. What the aboriginal Australians need is the motivation for self governance. That is something which cannot be given by outsiders. Like Dalit children who sit outside the class even in democratic India, you cannot force them to accept equality. They have to believe in it themselves.

 

[Gustav]

But many aspects of the intervention itself was requested by the tribal leaders and Elders who Govern their communities and are trying to cope with an increase in suicides, sexual abuse, rape, incest, teenage pregnancies, rampant unemployment, truancy, health care issues and lack of access to education.

i like see some evidence of the consultations you anglos had with the natives



do you know where i can find them? videos, summaries of meetings and survey as outlined in section 16 of the quote above. a mere assertion is hardly enough. the dissenters have voices and names.i am curious to hear the other side of the argument. a first hand account please

as it stands now, you sound like a shill for big brother yapping about some nameless and faceless......... ABORIGINAL ELDERS

 

[Bells]

i like see some evidence of the consultations you anglos had with the natives



do you know where i can find them? videos, summaries of meetings and survey as outlined in section 16 of the quote above. a mere assertion is hardly enough. the dissenters have voices and names.i am curious to hear the other side of the argument. a first hand account please

as it stands now, you sound like a shill for big brother yapping about some nameless and faceless......... ABORIGINAL ELDERS

Read the report and see for yourself. I linked it earlier. They provide the names of those they interviewed and spoke to in the report itself. Happy reading.

 

[Gustav]

hear ye hear ye

i, gustav of the indigenous blood, hereby decree that from this moment on, the term "aboriginal elders" shall be presented in the following form...

*all caps
*size 6
*color blue
*font garamond
*underlined

example:

ABORIGINAL ELDERS

any deviations from the prescribed form will result in cruel and unusual punishment. you have been warned

 

[Gustav]

Read the report and see for yourself. I linked it earlier. They provide the names of those they interviewed and spoke to in the report itself. Happy reading.

which report, bells
link please

who was consulted, who approved of......

all that?

 

[Bells]

which report, bells
link please

who was consulted, who approved of......

all that?

No, all this..

The Government based their responses off what was said in that report. And yes, the report itself spoke to Indigenous communities and Elders throughout the Northern Territory.

Your approval or disapproval of what these individuals may have requested for their community is really nothing.. zip.. nada.. You don't factor into the equation. Your level of importance falls to below that of an ant with what they have decided. Do you know why? You are not an Aboriginal living in any of these communities. You are a true foreigner who has probably never even spoken to an Aboriginal, let alone know of their diverse culture and laws.

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

I respect their sovereignty. I don't have to respect their inefficiency

Great. I am sure they'll really appreciate that some upstart from India does not respect their inefficiency or who thinks they are inefficient in how they govern their individual communities.

Based on the evidence? Yeah.

Wait.. So you, who has never spoken to, probably never even seen an Aboriginal in person, has never visited an Aboriginal community, has no understanding of the diversity of their culture across the country, their language and different laws and customs, who does not understand how their communities continue to carry on and their traditions, who has no inkling about Aboriginals except from what you've been able to gauge from international socialist sites, think the Elders do not know what is best for the communities they live in and help hold together, based solely off what you have read from these sites?

HAH!

And you accuse the Australian Government of genocide? You are happy to completely disregard what the Elders know their communities need, based on your Indian beliefs, which are in no way applicable to the Aboriginal conditions.

No, because the evidence shows that they are either corrupt or incapable of leading their communities, based on the fact that they have apparently agreed to an intervention which has lost their community jobs and land rights, apart from the ever increasing descent into substance abuse and child abuse. Or is elder an euphemism for "no longer viable"?

What evidence do you have that all these Elders are corrupt and incapable of determining what is best for their own communities? Evidence or a diffence of opinion? What? Aren't they complying with how the Indians do it or how you'd do it?

And you keep harping on about self determination?

You only think it is applicable if they do what you think they should be doing. Read through my previous posts and actually see what was said. I stated clearly, many times, that the Elders across the NT requested different forms of intervention for their individual communities. The Government came through and applied certain forms of intervention, some with what they requested, and others that were not requested based on what they felt was necessary. Do you understand that? Is there any way I can make this clearer for you?

And yet, here you are, telling the Elders who requested forms of intervention for their dying communities, that they are corrupt and inefficient.. you.. who has never even spoken to an Aboriginal, does not even know or understand their actual culture or plight.. Who are you again?

And thats all fine. My parents also have antiquated notions about sex, its called a generation gap.

Ermm no. It is a tradition and culture gap. In some areas, girls and boys do not have sex until they are married or are promised to each other and this is a tradition and cultural aspect that has existed in these tribes for thousands of years. Do you understand that your parents beliefs aren't exactly the same thing here?

The Elders are fighting to keep their culture alive, because they feel that for their communities, it is essential as they feel and know that going back to the cultural norms and values that have been handed down for generations will result in a stronger community - instead of a wishy washy community where some are breaking the cultural norms and values by embracing the complete opposite and they are seeing that embrace is resulting in confusion amongst the young and an increase in promiscuity and teenage pregnancy, not to mention the violene (sexual and non sexual) that is accompanying it.

And this is true everywhere. Social workers in India have been dismembered because they protested the marriage of very young children to adult men.

Hmmm..

Education and social welfare is not bound by cultural norms. There needs to be better education of the aboriginal community, more doctors, social workers and policemen coming from within the community rather than treating them like naughty children and sending them to bed without their bottle and porn.

No one is disagreeing with you in that regard. But many communities have noticed that their relatives don't care if their children don't go to school. And the kids do what they want, when they want and where they want. There was no incentive. They didn't care. The mindset is they just get the dole and do whatever they want. The kids turn 16 and get their own payments. There was never any incentive.. So many Elders around the country looked at what applied to non-Aboriginal families - where truancy can be connected to one's welfare payment and in some cases, parents can be fined or even jailed. And as one Community stated in the report, make it so that if their children do not attend school, then the parents lose a portion of their welfare payments - as an incentive to get the parents off their arses and interested in getting their children into schools. Some communities had special buses, that would go to each house and physically drag the kids to school, but that is also not always successful. It is getting the parents involved and many felt that tying it to the parents welfare payments would force them to become involved.

As for porn and alcohol. The report is quite clear. In some communities, it is essential it be banned. You may find it insulting, but it was a necessary step. I don't think you quite grasp how big a problem alcoholism is in Aboriginal communities. Or the extent of addiction and violence that stems from said addiction. You can't get more doctors, nurses, teachers, social workers, police officers from the community if the greater majority are drunk 24/7. Their attempt to ban alcohol and push education is their hope that the children will not follow in the same footsteps and it also forces the others in the community to get off their butts and do something beneficial for the community.

You can set up as many schools and doctors as you want, but you need to get the children in those schools and off the grog and you need the parents to actually participate in their children's lives and get off the grog. It's all well and good to increase schools and medical staff.. but for that to work, the children need to be made to go to school and their parents need to be made to send them to school.

That is their reality.

So its not as if you have to start from scratch. Unless of course, these services have closed down due to the intervention

Some communities have these services in place and no, they were not shut down due to the intervention. Quite the contrary.

But in many communities, they do have to start from scratch.

And they need funding and they need their children to go to school. It is not an easy process or one that can happen within a month's time.

Huh? Is child abuse and alcoholism an aboriginal culture and tradition?

No. But it is replacing their culture and tradition. And that is the problem. They are losing touch with their culture and history because of the alcoholism and substance abuse. I remember reading a report many years ago about suicide amongst Aboriginal teenagers. The report basically discussed how the loss of culture and tradition often drove some of these children to suicide. And a lot of the time, that loss came from alcoholism and substance abuse. It disconnects them from their link to the community, which is vital to their culture.

I think you need to distinguish between respecting culture and avoiding discrimination. Its not hard. Think of the elders as the Ayatollah. And the culture and tradition as hanging homosexuals.

Not the same and you know it Sam.

The role of elders is not like the Ayatollah and the culture or tradition does not involve singling out individuals in the community and hanging them for being different. It does not work that way. I think this statement shows you have little understanding of Aboriginals and their culture and tradition.

No it does not. Do you support child marriages? hanging homosexuals?

Nope. But that is not their culture, is it?

Aboriginal culture involved the protection of their children.

Are you saying that hanging homosexuals is a cultural thing? You're actually going there?

Like I said, think of the elders as the Ayatollah and the infliction of pain and torture on the accused as hanging homosexuals. Maybe it will give you a fresh perspective on the difference between non-interference and constructive criticism

Nowhere near the same. Tell me, is hanging homosexuals a cultural tradition in Iran?

I don't like their laws, but it is their laws and culture and Aboriginals who opt into it go in with eyes wide open. They don't have the death penalty and punishment has to be agreed by all parties involved. The more violent aspects are being pushed out by those who recognise that it is no longer acceptable and there are calls within the Indigenous population to not have tribal laws apply for crimes now, since they are not in sync with the laws of the land and they are quite rare. But for some crimes (such as rape for example), being stabbed with a spear can occur in some communities.

I believe in the universality of human rights

No you don't. If you did, you would respect that some people know more than you when it comes to their own communities. You believe in the universality of human rights if it applies as you think it should. In other words, treat the natives well and give them self determination, but only if they comply and do things how I think they should do things and if I disagree with them, then they should not be allowed to do it or support it.

Actually quite the reverse. In Asguards example, what would you say if airport security checks were conducted only on aboriginal peoples?

The Australians do not treat the aboriginals as they treat themselves - this is a major reason for the decline of aboriginal society under Australian rule.

It would be tantamount to racial discrimination.

As I said, a balance needs to be found. When Aboriginals are treated like everyone else, we get complaints from the likes of you, saying we deny them their rights by cancelling their welfare payments if their children do not attend school and by denying them access to alcohol and porn (measures that also exist in the general non-Aboriginal communities as well).. So which is it? Damned if you do and damned if you don't. You are even condemning the Elders who determine how they want to be treated, because it does not fit into how you think they should want to be treated.

Your position is hard to ascertain. Australians control most of the land which used to "belong" to the aboriginals. Any land rights they possess now are essentially at the whim of the Australian government.

My position is very clear and always has been when it comes to the traditional owners of this land. Maybe if you got off the talking points, you'd see that.

Its self determination for the elders, but not for the aboriginal people. If the aboriginals started slicing off the noses of their women, what would be your position?

I would protest and they would be thrown in jail. Do you know why? Because it is illegal.

You don't understand the dynamics of the role of Elders and who they are in communities. They are the parents and aunties and uncles. They are the owners of the traditions and they attempt to do what is right for their communities. They try to maintain peace - in effect - loss of Elders is a loss of tradition and culture.

Throwing money at a problem does not resolve it, it only extends the time frame for its persistance. What the aboriginal Australians need is the motivation for self governance. That is something which cannot be given by outsiders. Like Dalit children who sit outside the class even in democratic India, you cannot force them to accept equality. They have to believe in it themselves.

You do realise that Aboriginals Elders are the 'self governed', don't you? They lead their communities. They attempt to motivate their communities. And they need the financial support and funding to help their communities build houses, schools, health care clinics, etc. That is what we should be giving them. Funding and resources to motivate their communities into rebuilding themselves. That is what they are asking for. Non-centralised decision making and funding and that is what they need. Few people would deny that.

 

[Gustav]

No, all this..

The Government based their responses off what was said in that report. And yes, the report itself spoke to Indigenous communities and Elders throughout the Northern Territory.

of course bells
that explanation only works for govt shills and white supremacists. others know a con job when they see one. for instance, Alastair Bothwick Nicholson (Chief Justice of the Family Court of Australia from 1988 until 2004.) had this to say about your pernicious report...

Alastair Nicholson – 1:16:10 - No doubt that this was discriminatory, and in fact the Howard government knew that it was. The reason that it excised the operation of the RDA was for that reason and that reason alone. How can this happen in a democratic society? Well it can because in Australia we do not have any protection of individual rights, in any serious way. We have rejected constantly the demand for a Bill of Rights. We are one of the few democratic countries in the world that does not have a Bill of Rights. Recently this government, which had a policy of introducing one, once again the Rudd government showed its strength if character by abandoning that proposal. So this and perhaps, earlier on the asylum seeker matters , that are again raising their head, again show that this country is not committed to the protection of human rights, preventing racial prejudice. All of these Intervention measures fell into that category.

The worst aspect though, the behaviour of the current government is I believe equally reprehensible because it came into office with a policy to reinstate the RDA and said that it would do so. There is currently a bill that has passed the House and is before the Senate that purports to reintroduce the RDA in the NT, but it has other very difficult strings attached to it. Those strings are that the government claims a lot of the Intervention measures can be continued because it has consulted the Aboriginal communities and they have agreed with the proposal to maintain restrictions on alcohol, on pornography, to agree to have lease restrictions and various other restrictions which are imposed by the Intervention, they are purported to have agreed with those.

Now last year we launched report, in fact in this room, by Prof Larissa Behrendt and others, which made it very clear that that consultation was not a consultation at all. It was a sham and it was a dishonest piece of spin and there is no doubt that that remains the case. The minister first of all said that the evidence that we had only related to four communities, but she didn’t produce any evidence of what happened in other communities. She then went on to say that there had been 500 consultations with individuals. No records were ever produced of what took place in those consultations or between whom. For all the value of that is concerned, they might as well have gone down the pub and asked a few people down there about what is happening and claimed that as consultation, or held a street poll. It really is not evidence of any consultation at all. Now the government has said in this legislation, this very legislation where it reintroduces the RDA that these are special measures for the Aboriginal people, that have been consented to by the Aboriginal people, so therefore they won’t offend the new legislation they will not offend the RDA when it is introduced. That to me is a piece of absolute dishonesty.

One area that they found they really could not get away with that approach was Income Protection. So again the dishonest spin comes in because with Income Protection they now purport to apply to potentially the whole community. That of course is aimed at being able to say, well, we’re not discriminating against the Aboriginal community, we’re just going to discriminate against everyone on welfare. They have no real intention of doing that of course. What they intend to do quite clearly is to maintain the Income Protection regime in the NT. Even if they do extend it to some members of the white community, the bulk of the people that will be recipients of the Income Protection regime will be Aborigines. And if it is extended to other states, as may well be, you’ll find it for example in SA in the midlands you’ll find the same sort of thing in Queensland. This is some of the most retrograde and worst legislation that I think, that any government has introduced into this country. It is an infernal disgrace in my view, of both the Liberal, National Party and the Labor Party, this legislation, that’s ever seen the light of day.​

i eyeballed the report. found a smattering of ridiculous soundbites by some purported and nameless elders best exemplified by this rubbish...

these nutjobs could be my neighbors....

they express a bogus sentiment echoed around the goddamn world sans the hysterical "anarchy","rampant promiscuity" and whatnot terminology utilized to enrage and frighten the "civilized" white folks

 

[Gustav]

..your lap dog...

pardon
allow me to amend....

that explanation only works for govt shills, white supremacists and their house negroes

 

[S.A.M.]

No, all this..

The Government based their responses off what was said in that report. And yes, the report itself spoke to Indigenous communities and Elders throughout the Northern Territory.

Your approval or disapproval of what these individuals may have requested for their community is really nothing.. zip.. nada.. You don't factor into the equation. Your level of importance falls to below that of an ant with what they have decided. Do you know why? You are not an Aboriginal living in any of these communities. You are a true foreigner who has probably never even spoken to an Aboriginal, let alone know of their diverse culture and laws.

And never having spoken with an aboriginal, we are objectively assessing their ongoing genocide. Or do we need to see them actively raping children in drunken orgies to understand what child abuse and alcoholism is doing to their society?

Great. I am sure they'll really appreciate that some upstart from India does not respect their inefficiency or who thinks they are inefficient in how they govern their individual communities.

Its not an opinion. Its a fact based on the evidence. They are classified by the Australian government as unviable communities

Wait.. So you, who has never spoken to, probably never even seen an Aboriginal in person, has never visited an Aboriginal community, has no understanding of the diversity of their culture across the country, their language and different laws and customs, who does not understand how their communities continue to carry on and their traditions, who has no inkling about Aboriginals except from what you've been able to gauge from international socialist sites, think the Elders do not know what is best for the communities they live in and help hold together, based solely off what you have read from these sites?

Feel free to use your personal acquaintance with them to demonstrate how well they are doing. Simply show me the money.

HAH!

And you accuse the Australian Government of genocide? You are happy to completely disregard what the Elders know their communities need, based on your Indian beliefs, which are in no way applicable to the Aboriginal conditions.

I do not need special aboriginal standards to recognise that as a culture and and as a nation, they are being wiped out.

What evidence do you have that all these Elders are corrupt and incapable of determining what is best for their own communities? Evidence or a diffence of opinion? What? Aren't they complying with how the Indians do it or how you'd do it?

The evidence? Their ratings on simple social indicators like health, education, socio-economic status, life expectancy, poverty, crime and political representation.

You only think it is applicable if they do what you think they should be doing. Read through my previous posts and actually see what was said. I stated clearly, many times, that the Elders across the NT requested different forms of intervention for their individual communities. The Government came through and applied certain forms of intervention, some with what they requested, and others that were not requested based on what they felt was necessary. Do you understand that? Is there any way I can make this clearer for you?

Sure, show me one which led to improvement in the social indicators I have mentioned.

And yet, here you are, telling the Elders who requested forms of intervention for their dying communities, that they are corrupt and inefficient.. you.. who has never even spoken to an Aboriginal, does not even know or understand their actual culture or plight.. Who are you again?

Someone who would like to see evidence that the elders are not corrupt or inefficient.

Ermm no. It is a tradition and culture gap. In some areas, girls and boys do not have sex until they are married or are promised to each other and this is a tradition and cultural aspect that has existed in these tribes for thousands of years. Do you understand that your parents beliefs aren't exactly the same thing here?

It is, they are neither of them natives of cities and come from socially backward communities with prehistoric notions of sex and marriage.

The Elders are fighting to keep their culture alive, because they feel that for their communities, it is essential as they feel and know that going back to the cultural norms and values that have been handed down for generations will result in a stronger community - instead of a wishy washy community where some are breaking the cultural norms and values by embracing the complete opposite and they are seeing that embrace is resulting in confusion amongst the young and an increase in promiscuity and teenage pregnancy, not to mention the violene (sexual and non sexual) that is accompanying it.

That is called transgenerational trauma and is a significant causative factor in CSA (child sexual abuse). It is also a significant etiological factor in teen suicide.

It is contended that transgenerational trauma — the transfer of the impacts of historical trauma and grief across successive generations of Aboriginal people — is manifest in the current social issues of interpersonal violence, suicide and sexual abuse in remote communities and towns of the Kimberley region. For Aboriginal youth, exposure to multiple layers of trauma results in a cumulative effect on the emergence of trauma symptomatology, which includes an increased risk of self harm, destructive behaviour and suicide.Research conducted in this region between 2000 to 2002 found support for a relationship between Aboriginal youth suicide, trauma exposure and post traumatic stress disorder. These findings were echoed in the daily work of staff with the Kimberley Aboriginal Medical Services Council (KAMSC) Regional Centre for Social and Emotional Well Being, who had become increasingly aware of the interaction between child sexual abuse and youth suicide. At this time a young Aboriginal woman asked KAMSC to “do something” about child sexual abuse in her community, and started what became a powerful movement for the prevention of child sexual abuse, leading to the development of the KAMSC “We’re Not Gammin” sexual assault and child sexual abuse package.

http://www.pimatisiwin.com/online/?page_id=367

You can also see this in immigrant communities where parents come from one kind of background and children are brought up in a completely different one. It has also been studied in South Africa in the context of the humiliation of the native peoples and post-apartheid adaptations

Hmmm..

No one is disagreeing with you in that regard. But many communities have noticed that their relatives don't care if their children don't go to school. And the kids do what they want, when they want and where they want. There was no incentive. They didn't care. The mindset is they just get the dole and do whatever they want. The kids turn 16 and get their own payments. There was never any incentive..

Again nothing new. Very common among the poor uneducated and disenfranchised. Slums in India for example:

Alcoholism is a disease endemic to slums and it leads to moral and economic degradation. Many men take to consuming alcohol; this limits the amount of their income that can be spent for their family, and it leads to social diseases of domestic abuse as well as serious health problems. In order to advance any program in slum areas, alcoholism must be discussed openly and managed.

Finally, apathy is a major contributor to suffering in slums. Slum residents, men and women alike, hail from villages and come to the cities looking for better work. Viewing themselves as ‘temporary workers’ they tend to neglect the importance of economic and social advancement. From medical to educational issues, residents of slums are unwilling to make changes – however simple – to improve their lives. This is not something that can or should be blamed on the residents themselves. However, no program directed towards the social advancement of slum residents can deny the role of motivation and positive reinforcement.

http://www.sangamindia.org/index.php?page=introduction-slums-in-india

As for porn and alcohol. The report is quite clear. In some communities, it is essential it be banned. You may find it insulting, but it was a necessary step. I don't think you quite grasp how big a problem alcoholism is in Aboriginal communities. Or the extent of addiction and violence that stems from said addiction. You can't get more doctors, nurses, teachers, social workers, police officers from the community if the greater majority are drunk 24/7. Their attempt to ban alcohol and push education is their hope that the children will not follow in the same footsteps and it also forces the others in the community to get off their butts and do something beneficial for the community.

What about the supply side? Instead of banning alcohol why not increase the severity of punishment for supplying it? Why are bootleggers allowed to drive long distances into these remote communities and make alcohol available?

You can set up as many schools and doctors as you want, but you need to get the children in those schools and off the grog and you need the parents to actually participate in their children's lives and get off the grog. It's all well and good to increase schools and medical staff.. but for that to work, the children need to be made to go to school and their parents need to be made to send them to school.

That is their reality.

People without motivation will not study, work or stop drinking. All the efforts seem to be towards taking away from the aboriginals. How will this empower them?

Some communities have these services in place and no, they were not shut down due to the intervention. Quite the contrary.

But in many communities, they do have to start from scratch.

According to this site:

A spokesperson for the Gurindji strike, John Leemans, said in a media statement on October 20: “Prior to the Intervention we had nearly 300 CDEP workers employed in municipal services, construction and maintenance roles. When the government took over and abolished the community council and CDEP everything came to a halt. We went two years without regular rubbish collection because the truck was seized. Houses and buildings are in desperate need of repair but there’s no funding for workers or materials.

“If you go out to Dagaragu you’ll see the evidence these cuts have had on our people. Everything we built has gone - the old CDEP office, the brick making shed, the nursery, the health clinic, the old family centre. Soon we may lose the bakery. Houses that are now under Territory Housing control are overcrowded and falling apart. The damage is just overwhelming.

http://directaction.org.au/issue28/aboriginal_communities_fight_return_to_ration_days

Could you give me an example of where the intervention has led to improved facilities and services?

And they need funding and they need their children to go to school. It is not an easy process or one that can happen within a month's time.


No. But it is replacing their culture and tradition. And that is the problem. They are losing touch with their culture and history because of the alcoholism and substance abuse. I remember reading a report many years ago about suicide amongst Aboriginal teenagers. The report basically discussed how the loss of culture and tradition often drove some of these children to suicide. And a lot of the time, that loss came from alcoholism and substance abuse. It disconnects them from their link to the community, which is vital to their culture.

Which is how the Taliban were born. Refugee camps, poverty and disease while being cut off from all social support systems.

Not the same and you know it Sam.

The role of elders is not like the Ayatollah and the culture or tradition does not involve singling out individuals in the community and hanging them for being different. It does not work that way. I think this statement shows you have little understanding of Aboriginals and their culture and tradition.

The Ayatollah sets down the cultural norms, religious values, civic rules and community infratructure. Along with the grand council they determine law and order and accountability.

What do the elders do different?

Nope. But that is not their culture, is it?

Aboriginal culture involved the protection of their children.

Are you saying that hanging homosexuals is a cultural thing? You're actually going there?

We've already discussed how importing western values imported homophobia into Iranian society. Is child abuse endemic to aboriginal society? When did they start sexually exploiting their children?

No you don't. If you did, you would respect that some people know more than you when it comes to their own communities. You believe in the universality of human rights if it applies as you think it should. In other words, treat the natives well and give them self determination, but only if they comply and do things how I think they should do things and if I disagree with them, then they should not be allowed to do it or support it.

No I see no difference between the human rights of the Dalits, the Afghans, the Iranians and the Aboriginals/

It would be tantamount to racial discrimination.

As I said, a balance needs to be found. When Aboriginals are treated like everyone else, we get complaints from the likes of you, saying we deny them their rights by cancelling their welfare payments if their children do not attend school and by denying them access to alcohol and porn (measures that also exist in the general non-Aboriginal communities as well).. So which is it? Damned if you do and damned if you don't. You are even condemning the Elders who determine how they want to be treated, because it does not fit into how you think they should want to be treated.

Its not a balance when the Australian government sets aside the racial discrimination act and strips aboriginals of their land rights and jobs

My position is very clear and always has been when it comes to the traditional owners of this land. Maybe if you got off the talking points, you'd see that.


I would protest and they would be thrown in jail. Do you know why? Because it is illegal.

You don't understand the dynamics of the role of Elders and who they are in communities. They are the parents and aunties and uncles. They are the owners of the traditions and they attempt to do what is right for their communities. They try to maintain peace - in effect - loss of Elders is a loss of tradition and culture.

Then perhaps its time to hand over all power regarding aboriginal communities to them. Keep nothing in the hands of non-Aboriginals.

You do realise that Aboriginals Elders are the 'self governed', don't you? They lead their communities. They attempt to motivate their communities. And they need the financial support and funding to help their communities build houses, schools, health care clinics, etc. That is what we should be giving them. Funding and resources to motivate their communities into rebuilding themselves. That is what they are asking for. Non-centralised decision making and funding and that is what they need. Few people would deny that.

I can't understand how it is self government when the Australian military and police move in, strip the aboriginals of their land rights and jobs and racially profiles aboriginals as alcoholics and pedophiles.

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

Bells: But many communities have noticed that their relatives don't care if their children don't go to school. And the kids do what they want, when they want and where they want. There was no incentive. They didn't care. The mindset is they just get the dole and do whatever they want. The kids turn 16 and get their own payments. There was never any incentive.. So many Elders around the country looked at what applied to non-Aboriginal families - where truancy can be connected to one's welfare payment and in some cases, parents can be fined or even jailed. And as one Community stated in the report, make it so that if their children do not attend school, then the parents lose a portion of their welfare payments - as an incentive to get the parents off their arses and interested in getting their children into schools. Some communities had special buses, that would go to each house and physically drag the kids to school, but that is also not always successful. It is getting the parents involved and many felt that tying it to the parents welfare payments would force them to become involved.

You know what maybe they should just cut all welfare payments period and leave them to their own devices. Then non-aboriginal Aussies won't be seen as interventionists using their military for the purpose of genocide and the community can figure out whether they want to get their shit together or perish from their own self-destructive behaviour.

I believe in aid but only for those who are actively trying to better themselves through their own efforts otherwise that aid leads to cultures of dependency and bolsters laziness. if they want to sit around lamenting over lost land and lost heritage with a bottle of Thunderbird in their hands they should well have to do so with money they earn on their own.

I mean you see you can't win right?

If you help them then you are guilty of not helping them enough or in the right way.
If you leave them alone then you are callous and heartless.

I say leave them to natural selection. Those who want to survive will and those who are content to waste themselves can just start digging their own graves. As for the abused children, I say just take the kids away period.

 

[Gustav]

lets eyeball the schools and the "foreign aid" the anglos pour in to them

read and weep

MURRAY MCLAUGHLIN: A school at Dundee Beach opened in 1998. It's one of 13 one-teacher schools in the Territory which have an average role of fewer than a dozen pupils.

JOHN GREATOREX: They have computers, Internet access, distance learning, teacher accommodation, resourcing, all the things that you find in normal schools but that doesn't happen in black communities.

GARY BARNES, NT EDUCATION DEPARTMENT: In fairness to John Greatorex, I think it's a bit of a stretch to compare the two. Slightly different circumstances around which, both of those, as educational service deliveries, have come about.

MURRAY MCLAUGHLIN: At Mirrngatja, the community's been crying out for more than two decades for a new school building, and a teacher to go with it.

MANAY GULUYA, MIRRNGATJA COMMUNITY MEMBER (translated): Still nothing has happened, and we kept on asking for a proper school building for the kids.

GARY BARNES: Our service delivery model at that site, um, probably isn't, you know, what it should be. I think it was a makeshift solution to a request that probably came from public policy that was in the past.

MURRAY MCLAUGHLIN: Makeshift or not, the policy's prevailed for more than three decades and although the Education Department is now reviewing all its policies for establishing schools and Homeland Learning Centres, change may come too late at Mapuru, an outstation to the north of Mirrngatja.​

watch and weep

homeland learning center

school


the background...

1900 - 1940 Exclusion and segregation - Department policy gave the right to white parents to decide whether to allow Aboriginal children to attend public schools - most schools choose not to allow them to attend
1938 Assimilation Policy
1946 - 1948 Aboriginal children required a medical certificate to attend school ..... non-Aboriginal children do not.
1972 Withdrawal of the section in the teachers handbook - 'Principle right to refuse enrolment to the Aboriginal children in school'
1972 Withdrawal of regulation from Teachers' Handbook (NSW) which allowed principals the right to refuse to enroll Aboriginal children into schools.​

i suppose one would be in his 30's and 40's to be impacted by some of that discrimination. ja, they are still with us ie not ancestors

 

[Gustav]

As for the abused children, I say just take the kids away period.

since the child abuse that occur in indigenous communities is actually lower than the national averages, we can safely assume that the anglos are merely engaging in a hysterical pedohunt as a cover to dispossess and disenfranchise the natives

so it is "children" per se that lucy refers to
she supports the centuries old policy of forcible removal of millions of aboriginal children from their homes aka the stolen generation, and begs for a continuation

now...

“Article II. In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such: a) Killing members of the group; b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”​

thus, i, gustav, hereby decree that lucy be known as Genocidal Lucy henceforth.
thanks

 

[James R]

since the child abuse that occur in indigenous communities is actually lower than the national averages...

Rubbish.

Quote your source.

 

[Gustav]

man
these anglos will never be content until these natives are wiped out
i mean, just look at the sheer desperation......

/shocked

thats 10.2 vs 18.2

/snicker

 

[Asguard]

Wow, you really missed out when the teacher was teaching your class statistics didn't. You. That doesn't say ANYTHING about numbers, all it says is that for both groups if your abused your more Lilly to be the victim of.emotional abuse or neglect than physical or sexual abuse. I only said that 4-5 pages ago. Well done on finding a complete irrelevance

 

[Gustav]

oh dear
i fear the rhetoric is getting a bit edgy and overheated
lets all relax and find some mirth in....

..hahahaha

explain please, asguard

/puzzled

 

[James R]

Bells:

I have been out of this thread for a day or two. I'd like to say thankyou to you for doing such a great job of bringing SAM up to speed on some of the real issues. She started off knowing nothing about the NT intervention. By now she may be starting to get some inkling of the complexities.

Thankyou very much for providing useful links to reports etc. What this thread really needs is much less of SAM's socialist propaganda and more on-the-ground facts.


Gustav:

As SAM's lap dog, you have contributed next to nothing to this thread. Why don't you sit back and learn something rather than being a smart arse, just for a change? Try reading Bell's posts. SAM can look after herself without your "help".


SAM:

A few thoughts from me.

What is the consensus in Australia about using the army to combat child abuse in aboriginal communities?

Hopefully, by now you will have realised that the army wasn't marching in with guns ablaze. They were providing logistical support to a government action. And, as far as I am aware, the army is no longer involved.

Is it time to remove these children and assimilate them into Australian society rather than leave them to be abused?

Any child who is being abused at home should be removed for their own safety - that's if the perpetrator can't be removed.

Should the aboriginals be put under military rule so as to save the children?

No. And nobody has suggested such a thing.

Well I MUST support pedophilia since I am not supporting the removal of aboriginal children from their community. And the Australian government clearly considers all aboriginals to be pedophiles since they have sent the army to deal with child sexual abuse in their community. I guess, the aboriginals are the Australian Taliban.

This is emotive nonsense. What happened was that the government responded to some extreme cases of child sexual abuse, not by the entire Aboriginal population, but by some of the people in Aboriginal communities.

I find it really bizarre that the Aussies have singled out aboriginals for "intervention" by cops and the army. What is the rate of sexual abuse in poor white communities compared to the aboriginals? How many aboriginal children are abused by non-aboriginal Australians?

I hope that, having read the report that Bells so helpfully linked you to, you now have a better perspective on this and no longer find it "bizarre". Also, you'll be aware that the intervention was by no means restricted to "cops and the army".

As to rates of sexual abuse, Gustav is looking those up as I write. But you could read the report...

The problem is that in the aboriginals the alcoholism is a symptom not a cause of what is wrong with these communities.

Really? Please explain how you imagine the chain of causation works to lead to alchoholism in Aboriginal communities.

The problem is that Australians are so used to treating aboriginals like cattle, they cannot seem to comprehend how self determination works. And that is why they feel mo compunction in [once again] deciding what is "best" for the indigenous people - none of which includes the ability to resolve their own issues.

But indigenous leaders (Elders) have been working with the government to try to address the issues.

Where in the world do you see alcoholism being treated as a racial disease? Where else have communities been treated as though they were under occupation because of high alcohol consumption in some of their members? Is it any wonder that the aboriginals are becoming worse in their substance abuse?

I'm not sure, SAM. You seem to have an idea about "where else". Why don't you tell us?

I'm also not sure where you got the idea that communities are treated as though they were under occupation.

Do Australians believe that aboriginals are nothing more than alcoholic pedophiles who need to be transferred where they can be watched over?

In general, no.

What effect will it have on those communities when they are once more dispossessed from their lands and carted around to some other place?

Nobody has suggested moving communities or dispossessing them.

Is it the standard ROE in Australia to transfer entire communities based on their alcohol and porn consumption levels by race? How utterly racist is that?

Well, it would be racist if it happened. But it doesn't happen. How about we start dealing with reality rather than your fevered imagination?

Like the Afghan women, the aboriginal children are simply too good a red herring to pass up in the pursuit of land or resources.

Do you think that child abuse is not a major problem in Aboriginal communities? On what grounds?

Then lets speak no more about being concerned for the aboriginals. The way I see it, its just genocide in progress.

Then you have a particularly skewed view. I'd place a little less reliance on the kinds of sites you quoted as authorities in post #19, for example. That one, in particular, seems to be into conspiracy theories, and you're buying what they're pushing without even critically examining it. As is your usual inclination, you go out searching for any view that will confirm your own prejudices. Never mind the truth. Never mind that some issues are complex. Do your best to reduce them to an "us vs. them" simplistic crusade.

It seems to me the role of the elders in aboriginal society is that the buck does not stop here. If, as you say, they advocate the use of Australian military and police and stripping off the hard won land rights of aboriginals and, inspite of a significant failure of the policies continue to avoid taking responsibility for their own communities, what exactly is it that I am supposed to admire about them?

It is precisely because they are taking responsibility that they are speaking out so vocally and cooperating with the government to attempt to address the issues.

 

[James R]

Gustav:

Why post an irrelevant table from an unknown source about types of abuse, when your original claim was about the incidence of abuse?

You really don't have a clue, do you?

 

[Asguard]

You missread your own link. What it talks about is the rates of specific types of abuse as a percentage of the whole which makes it useless for the comparison you want to make.

For instance if group A has 10,000 cases of abuse and of that 1% of.these cases are sexual then that amounts to 100 cases

If group B has 100 cases of abuse but 50% of them are sexual then that's only 50 cases of sexual abuse.

If we looked at a break down like your then it would say that group be has ALOT more cases of sexual abuse: 50% compared to 1% where as in reality the real rates have group A with twice the number of cases