America does not need another Revolution

Discussion of current events
User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 4132
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Who is an Australian Aboriginal?

Post by cassowary » Sat Jul 04, 2020 12:03 am

neverfail wrote:
Fri Jul 03, 2020 7:14 pm
cassowary wrote:
Fri Jul 03, 2020 4:48 pm


There are only 50,000 abos in Australia. They are already given special land rights.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aborigi ... _Australia
Thank you for mentioning that Cassowary.

I must correct your impression of the demographic size however. There are many times more "Abos" than that:

https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/austral ... ustralians

In 2016, an estimated 798,365 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were in Australia
, representing 3.3% of the total Australian population (ABS 2018b). The Indigenous population is projected to reach about 1.1 million people by 2031 (ABS 2019).

The vexed question seems to be "who (or what) exactly is an Aboriginal"?

50,000 or less might be a good estimate of the number of full blood Aboriginals (the ones who have no ancestry other than Austaloid forebears) : the rest are comprised of part aboriginals - the majority of whom have less (often far less) than half Australoid ancestry.

They can easily fool you. A full blood Aboriginal has a skin complexion equivalent to that of a Negro, a Dravidian or a Melanesian. But when a pale complexioned Caucasian (i.e. a white person) intermarries with a peson of another race (be that person Negro, Chinese or whatever): even if all of the offsprings/children look white one of the descendents probably a generation or two later is bound to give birth to a baby who is a genetic throwback to the non-white forebear and approximates his/her physical appeaerence. But Australian Aboriginals are unique in that, as long as the descendents of the mixed race intermarriage keep on marrying white spouses, there has never been a known recorded instance where a descendent has been born looking like the full Aboriginal ancester.

Genetically, they blend in just so beautifully with us.

I even have an old Aboriginal university chum who is convinced that it is from her race that my own originally evolved. She may even be right.

So what it means is that we have a lot of part-aboriginals who might have only one of his 8 great grandparents (or even one in 16 of his great-greast grandparents) Aboriginal who look perfectly like white people but are adament that they are Australian aboriginals (like the apprentice concreter who formed the concrete slab in our backyard, for instance).

Some have such pale skins and blond hair that they look like English aristocrats.
........................................................................................................................

P.S. They do have special land rights. These include around 55% of the entire area of the Northern Territory and similarly vast swathes of the state of South Australia. Swathes of land as big as several ave5rage sized European countries put together. If you wish to venture on to any of these lands these days (and you are not a member of any of the tribes to whom these lands have been awarded) you cannot legally do so unless you apply for and receive permission from the local (aboriginal) Land Council.

(So I hope that yuou can see by now Sertorio; you do not know what you are talking about.
Hahaha. I smell a scam. Given the privileges associated to being an abo, it is financially advantageous to be one. So even if you only have one drop of abo blood, it is better to claim to be an abo. Why don’t you wholeheartedly agree with your chum and say that yes, I agree with the abo myth that all races descended from abos. Can I now get my share of the land, and perks I am entitled to?

Keep intermarrying. When everybody in Australia can claim abo ancestry, it all becomes meaningless.
The Imp :D

neverfail
Posts: 5603
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: Who is an Australian Aboriginal?

Post by neverfail » Sat Jul 04, 2020 4:43 am

cassowary wrote:
Sat Jul 04, 2020 12:03 am


Hahaha. I smell a scam. Given the privileges associated to being an abo, it is financially advantageous to be one. So even if you only have one drop of abo blood, it is better to claim to be an abo. Why don’t you wholeheartedly agree with your chum and say that yes, I agree with the abo myth that all races descended from abos. Can I now get my share of the land, and perks I am entitled to?

Keep intermarrying. When everybody in Australia can claim abo ancestry, it all becomes meaningless.
I thought that you may have been interested Cass.

(No, you don't!)

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 2693
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: America does not need another Revolution

Post by Milo » Sun Jul 12, 2020 11:07 pm

Sertorio wrote:
Fri Jul 03, 2020 2:08 am
Milo wrote:
Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:36 pm
neverfail wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 10:29 pm
Milo wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 10:00 pm
neverfail wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 1:48 pm
Milo wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 1:33 pm

They were dying of preventable diseases and living in ignorance, filth and poverty on the reservations. They still are.

Residential School was the best thing that ever happened to them. Now we can't even do them that favour.
Born losers?
If you make people live in the middle of nowhere and prevent them learning anything practical, the results are quite predictable.

It is all the 'settlers' fault, just not at all in the way the popular wisdom would have it.
1) were they "made" to live in the middle of nowhere or was that their choice?

2) are you suggesting that they were never taught anything practical at those residental schools?

Please clarify for me Milo. You seem to be going against what your compatriot Apollonius put forth.
1 Reservation land was set aside in the middle of nowhere and a thicket of rules made it very difficult to leave. Residential schools got many First Peoples off the reservations and on to a better life.

2 Residential schools taught practical things that also helped literally millions of First Peoples be better off.

But because civilizing influences were deemed evil by a bunch of white privileged wanna be Marxists, we put a stop to that. Now our First Peoples must only be educated in things that have no practical application whatsoever and must stay on reservation land, because it is 'sacred'. This deliberate strangling of opportunity will apparently cure their poverty.

It is very difficult to covey the facts without it sounding absurd but everything I say is true.
Maybe Canada should try and give the First Peoples the right to decide by themselves how they want to live. But I suppose that would be seen as a betrayal of the right of superior peoples ruling over the inferior ones...
Our constitution says:
35. (1) The existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed.

(2) In this Act, "aboriginal peoples of Canada" includes the Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples of Canada.

(3) For greater certainty, in subsection (1) "treaty rights" includes rights that now exist by way of land claims agreements or may be so acquired.

(4) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the aboriginal and treaty rights referred to in subsection (1) are guaranteed equally to male and female persons.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section ... _Act,_1982

In other words, the law does what you say. The problem is that a bunch of non-aboriginal people use a huge administrative apparatus, supported by a lot of academic moralizing, to suborn First Nations' freedom.

Post Reply