Australian Politics Forum - Aboriginal culture

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: Aboriginal culture
Reply #60 - Feb 23^rd, 2010 at 4:18pm

Happy wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2010 at 3:49pm:

Total crap, they made few species extinct and just other species were lucky not to share the same fate.

... including the first wave of aborigines who were killed off or assimilated by the second wave, except in Tasmania, where they survived only due to , er, rising sea levels making Tasmania an island.

Back to top

IP Logged

NorthOfNorth

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 17258
Gender: male

Re: Aboriginal culture
Reply #61 - Feb 23^rd, 2010 at 4:18pm

Happy wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2010 at 3:49pm:

Heard somewhere that customs are part of culture but not culture itself.
Those who herald their achievements as culture are overly generous.

However, when our society disintegrates their method of survival will be good model for some time.
Live of the land, do no buildings, no nothing, just move around and start fire for food to come to you.

One more thing, which doesn't gel with me too is them proclaiming themselves as custodians of the land. Total crap, they made few species extinct and just other species were lucky not to share the same fate.

How many species have been lost by Europeans and Asians? And not just here in Australia but back in their native lands. The Chinese also have a habit of eating their native animals into extinction.

I'm sure the Chinese would consider themselves custodians of Chinese territory.

Back to top

Conviction is the art of being certain

IP Logged

Happy Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 559	Re: Aboriginal culture Reply #62 - Feb 23^rd, 2010 at 6:24pm Not wiping out native species was not point of consideration, it just happened that they did not manage to wipe more out. To get the badge of somebody nurturing, taking care and carefully looking after is laughable. Recently restrictions were put on number of dugong to be killed, as they would eat them all.
Back to top	IP Logged

NorthOfNorth

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 17258
Gender: male

Re: Aboriginal culture
Reply #63 - Feb 23^rd, 2010 at 6:37pm

Happy wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2010 at 6:24pm:

Not wiping out native species was not point of consideration, it just happened that they did not manage to wipe more out.

To get the badge of somebody nurturing, taking care and carefully looking after is laughable.

Recently restrictions were put on number of dugong to be killed, as they would eat them all.

So they're no worse than any other native human group anywhere else in the world and a whole lot better than all industrialised ones where the harvesting of animals are concerned. Not many aboriginal boat fleets killing dugongs by the thousands and turning it into a multi-million dollar commercial enterprise as Japanese whalers would do were they given free rein, for example.

Back to top

Conviction is the art of being certain

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: Aboriginal culture
Reply #64 - Feb 23^rd, 2010 at 9:00pm

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2010 at 6:37pm:

Happy wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2010 at 6:24pm:

Not wiping out native species was not point of consideration, it just happened that they did not manage to wipe more out.

To get the badge of somebody nurturing, taking care and carefully looking after is laughable.

Recently restrictions were put on number of dugong to be killed, as they would eat them all.

So they're no worse than any other native human group anywhere else in the world and a whole lot better than all industrialised ones where the harvesting of animals are concerned. Not many aboriginal boat fleets killing dugongs by the thousands and turning it into a multi-million dollar commercial enterprise as Japanese whalers would do were they given free rein, for example.

They are worse (as far as the animals are concerned) than industrialised societies because they would not have a clue whether thy have hunted something to extinction or if their prey just left because of some spirit story. Industrialised societies can halt hunting, as it has happened with all protected species. That very idea, protected species, is a non-primitive notion.

Aboriginal society is primitive and savage. It is mildly interesting how they have lived in the desert for millenia. But some other desert dwellers have found ways to distinguish themselves from other species. With aborigines, life 300 years ago was exactly as it was 2000 or 5000 or 20000 years ago. Stone age people, unchanged, stuck in pre-history like few others.

Back to top

IP Logged

aikmann4 Gold Member Offline Posts: 2093 canberra	Re: Aboriginal culture Reply #65 - Feb 23^rd, 2010 at 10:29pm I killed all the Kangaroos. It was me, guys.
Back to top	« Last Edit: Feb 23^rd, 2010 at 10:36pm by aikmann4 » IP Logged

Big Donger

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 102675

Re: Aboriginal culture
Reply #66 - Feb 24^th, 2010 at 4:00pm

Soren wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2010 at 9:00pm:

Industrialised societies can halt hunting, as it has happened with all protected species. That very idea, protected species, is a non-primitive notion.

Yes - I've seen the results of such industrialised fishing methods using dynamite.

200 year-old (protected) turtles washed up on the Orissan shore every few metres.

Protection!

Back to top

IP Logged

Happy

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 559

Re: Aboriginal culture
Reply #67 - Feb 24^th, 2010 at 9:34pm

Big Donger wrote on Feb 24^th, 2010 at 4:00pm:

Soren wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2010 at 9:00pm:

Industrialised societies can halt hunting, as it has happened with all protected species. That very idea, protected species, is a non-primitive notion.

Yes - I've seen the results of such industrialised fishing methods using dynamite.

200 year-old (protected) turtles washed up on the Orissan shore every few metres.

Protection!

You described crime here and it has nothing to do with protection, nor conservatism.

Back to top

IP Logged

Big Donger

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 102675

Re: Aboriginal culture
Reply #68 - Feb 25^th, 2010 at 11:01am

Happy wrote on Feb 24^th, 2010 at 9:34pm:

Big Donger wrote on Feb 24^th, 2010 at 4:00pm:

Soren wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2010 at 9:00pm:

Industrialised societies can halt hunting, as it has happened with all protected species. That very idea, protected species, is a non-primitive notion.

Yes - I've seen the results of such industrialised fishing methods using dynamite.

200 year-old (protected) turtles washed up on the Orissan shore every few metres.

Protection!

You described crime here and it has nothing to do with protection, nor conservatism.

And you think Indian authorities are doing anything about it?

Back to top

IP Logged

aikmann4

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 2093
canberra

Re: Aboriginal culture
Reply #69 - Feb 27^th, 2010 at 9:55am

Quote:

And you think Indian authorities are doing anything about it?

What does that have to do with anything? Just because some "industrial" (this is India we're talking about here) civilizations do not choose to care about conservation does not invalidate Soren's argument; that purposeful conservation of a species is made possible or faciliated greatly by civilization, and likely is not a viable option for primitive man.

The problem is, primitive hunter-gatherer societies always have the ability to point their finger at the 'crimes' of civilization seemingly without hypocricy because they themselves (claim) to never have engaged in them. They are special people, not predicating their voyage through history on material want or the superficialities of the civilized man, but rather a deeper understanding with the natural world and a satisfication in the simplistic. This is of course big bullshit; there is nothing intrinsically innocent about any of these peoples or their ways of life. It has been primarily their capability that has left them without real achievement, not cognizant refusal to achieve. They cannot damage the environment to the extent that civilizations can because they have always lacked the ability to be able to. Like Soren said, they are stagnant drifters through history; affecting their environment without seriousness not because its corruption would have been abhorrent to them, but because they simply couldn't.

Now they have been graced with that ability. Check out a local football field after a special Aboriginal only league match. You would think you were in the tip.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Feb 27^th, 2010 at 10:07am by aikmann4 »

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: Aboriginal culture
Reply #70 - Feb 27^th, 2010 at 10:11am

aikmann4 wrote on Feb 27^th, 2010 at 9:55am:

Quote:

And you think Indian authorities are doing anything about it?

What does that have to do with anything? Just because some "industrial" (this is India we're talking about here) civilizations do not choose to care about conservation does not invalidate Soren's argument; that purposeful conservation of a species is made possible or faciliated incredibly by civilization, and likely is not a viable option for primitive man.

The problem is, primitive hunter-gatherer societies always have the ability to point their finger at the 'crimes' of civilization seemingly without hypocricy because they themselves (claim) to never have engaged in them. They are special people, not predicating their voyage through history on material want or the superficialities of the civilized man, but rather a deeper understanding with the natural world and a satisfication in the simplistic. This is of course big bullshit; there is nothing intrinsically innocent about any of these peoples or their ways of life. It has been primarily their capability that has left them without real achievement, not cognizant refusal to achieve. They cannot damage the environment to the extent that civilizations can because they have always lacked the ability to be able to. Like Soren said, they are stagnant drifters through history; affecting their environment without seriousness not because its corruption would have been abhorrent to them, but because they simply couldn't.

Now they have been graced with that ability. Check out a local football field after a special Aboriginal only league match. You would think you were in the tip.

Just so.
And karnal, since when is India an example to be emulated in anything - except, of course, for socities that are even more half-arsed about adapting.

And some Aborigines (thankfully not all), are true to their historic form and are betting the wrong way again: they fashion their own 'modern' minds and attitudes after black liberationists and post-colonialists. Some even find expression for their resentment in that word-historical phenomenon of pure resentment, Islam.

Back to top

IP Logged

aikmann4

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 2093
canberra

Re: Aboriginal culture
Reply #71 - Feb 27^th, 2010 at 10:25am

Aboriginal adoption of the nugatory African-American culture is troubling, I agree. Truly, as of late, African-Americans have been the powerhouse of the world in producing some of the most valueless, sickening cultural claptrap, and frankly, we don't need a league of adopters here (that includes the pathetic whites that continue to patronize and panegyrize it as well).

Back to top

IP Logged

Big Donger

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 102675

Re: Aboriginal culture
Reply #72 - Feb 27^th, 2010 at 7:59pm

aikmann4 wrote on Feb 27^th, 2010 at 9:55am:

Quote:

And you think Indian authorities are doing anything about it?

What does that have to do with anything? Just because some "industrial" (this is India we're talking about here) civilizations do not choose to care about conservation does not invalidate Soren's argument; that purposeful conservation of a species is made possible or faciliated greatly by civilization, and likely is not a viable option for primitive man.

The problem is, primitive hunter-gatherer societies always have the ability to point their finger at the 'crimes' of civilization seemingly without hypocricy because they themselves (claim) to never have engaged in them. They are special people, not predicating their voyage through history on material want or the superficialities of the civilized man, but rather a deeper understanding with the natural world and a satisfication in the simplistic. This is of course big bullshit; there is nothing intrinsically innocent about any of these peoples or their ways of life. It has been primarily their capability that has left them without real achievement, not cognizant refusal to achieve. They cannot damage the environment to the extent that civilizations can because they have always lacked the ability to be able to. Like Soren said, they are stagnant drifters through history; affecting their environment without seriousness not because its corruption would have been abhorrent to them, but because they simply couldn't.

Now they have been graced with that ability. Check out a local football field after a special Aboriginal only league match. You would think you were in the tip.

I certainly agree that we've over-romanticised the indigenous, at times to the point of glorification (or in new-age mythology to the point of deification) - but to then go on to say that Aboriginals are stagnant drifters through history and without any achievement or "capability to achieve" is just silly.

You must have a very Boys' Own notion of achievement and history - or read too many Enid Blighton books - to believe that our shared stories should all be of the adventure genre.

The idea that our histories must be about conquest and expansion - or be stagnant - shows how easily our previous policies of erradication could occur. That Aboriginal societies are/were too weak and powerless to transform their environment (outside of football), andare therfore undeserving of a place in history - undeserving of a place - has an almost Nazi ring to it. You can hear Wagner playing in the background.

You're right that there's big bullshit out there, but to regress to a reactionary ideology about Aboriginals and tips shows me what lurks beneath Australia, and how easy it must have been to take kids away from their families and attempt to breed out blacks from half-caste to quarter-caste to quadroon, octoroon, etc, etc, etc.

For people to say "but that had nothing to do with me!" and "I wasn't responsible!" - and then quote the very arguments used - shows me how far civilization has really come since eugenics and the Stolen Generation.

Back to top

IP Logged

aikmann4

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 2093
canberra

Re: Aboriginal culture
Reply #73 - Feb 27^th, 2010 at 10:31pm

Quote:

but to then go on to say that Aboriginals are stagnant drifters through history and without any achievement

Judging from the historical record, this is exactly what they are. For 40,000 (50,000? 60,000? It actually amazes me people are willing to stack on more years to this seemingly ever growing period of time Aboriginals supposedly have existed on the Australian continent, as if it actually makes them look more impressive rather than worse. Frankly I'd much rather say "we''ve been here six hundred years" or something; maybe I'll recommend that they change the dates) they "achieved" one of the most staggeringly basic of cultures in the history of all human groups. To suggest it is silly that I call them stagnant drifters in this sense because they never left the stone-age, then you've got some incredible explaining to do. But don't worry, you can always remove your verbal equivocation skills from your mental skillset , polish them up a little and then put them to use trying to bicker with me on the definition of "achievement", as if I was ever talking about achievement beyond that as it pertains to civilization.

Quote:

You must have a very Boys' Own notion of achievement and history - or read too many Enid Blighton books - to believe that our shared stories should all be of the adventure genre.

Ah, we've already begun.

Quote:

The idea that our histories must be about conquest and expansion

I don't know what this even means. Are you trying to put words in my mouth by attempting to suggest that I was saying that achievement of civilization concerns directly or entirely to 'conquest' and 'expansion', or is this the launching point for a vaguely related harangue?

Quote:

That Aboriginal societies are/were too weak and powerless to transform their environment

Weren't they? For a people to truly achieve civilization as it is tradtionally known -- and thus transform the environment around them with ease and real control -- they need not only the will but the tools. A rough analogy to draw perhaps would be the field of astrophysics -- even the most ardent egalitarian would find it difficult to convince himself that every human being is capable of exceeding in such a mentally demanding field. Not just drawing upon the building block of intelligence as it is known, but other personality traits just as pertinent; curiosity, diligence, conscientiousness, etc. Why I am using astrophysics here to make my point is because it is the most extreme example that I could possibly draw, and this makes my point clear. Astrophysics, as nobody would ever try to deny, is not for everybody! Likewise, civilization, with its constant demand for the ability to comprehend, process and respond to complexity, a complexity that only becomes more convoluted as civilization continues to grow, is simply not for everybody, or all groups. With the aid of other groups more inclined, a group may just scrape by (perhaps just barely), but I cannot bring myself to believe that such a group by itself can. There is no reason to imbue myself with the inane egalitarian optimism of the current vogue because it is an optimism predicated upon nothing!

Quote:

therfore undeserving of a place in history

Again, don't know what this means. A prominent location in the annals of history is not owed, it is earned. Despite postmodern attempts to distort and modify this obvious fact for the sake of sensitivity, some cultures will only be remembered as curious paleolithic relics notable primarily for a longstanding, deeply ensconced position in a seemingly endless cultural and social stagnation. The aboriginals are one of them..

What exactly do you mean that they don't deserve a place in history?

Quote:

You're right that there's big bullshit out there, but to regress to a reactionary ideology about Aboriginals and tips shows me what lurks beneath Australia, and how easy it must have been to take kids away from their families and attempt to breed out blacks from half-caste to quarter-caste to quadroon, octoroon, etc, etc, etc.

Linda S. Gottfredson has written extensively that it is just as easy to get away with draconian terror aided by egalitarian claptrap as the other, opposing theories that attempt to explain human behavior. I am tired of the inappropriate dichotomy presented by progressives that propounds that environmental disparities=benign, fixable and unproblematic, while genetic disparities=invariably a road to ethnic cleansing or eugenics. If anything, 'taking aboriginals away from their parents' and raising them in white households sounds an awful lot like 'if we change their home environment, the gap between them and whites will disappear'. You can construct all sorts of schemes to remedy disparities between groups justified from either extreme view of the determinant of human behavior that you would find very disturbing. Let's get the bugger over it, realize that bad people can use just about any kind of justification whatsoever to do bad things, and focus on what is real. Let's not drive ourselves into a panic whenever race and these matters are brought up. We must talk about it openly or simply, we are doomed.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Feb 27^th, 2010 at 10:47pm by aikmann4 »

IP Logged

Big Donger

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 102675

Re: Aboriginal culture
Reply #74 - Feb 28^th, 2010 at 1:41am

It sounds like Linda Gottfredson is right. I'm not even attempting to place any egalitarian or utopian veil onto Aboriginal culture. Bugger that.

I think where you're mistaken is by assuming that intellectual complexity is somehow good. If that's all you can come up with as proof that modern Western culture is superior to Aboriginal culture (and Aboriginal people themselves) - because that's exactly what you're saying without any question or doubt - then I think you're grasping at straws to defend a very arrogant position.

I have no knowledge of Aboriginal culture/values. I have a fairly good knowledge of the West. I don't assume that I'm superior to anyone else just because I don't get their paintings.

What I understand about some cultures is that they place a greater emphasis on subjective experience to objective "achievement". I don't think this is a weakness. I don't want this to be seen as a dichotomy, and I would hate the strengths the west has in engineering and medicine to be smashed by a crowd of grunts with an axe to bear.

Like the Khmer Rouge, for example.

But these dichotomies are fictions. No need to panic about race or anything - as if we haven't panicked in Australia well before the White Australia Policy came into creation.

If you don't have a mind, I guess you're forgiven. They say God protects children and drunks. But if you've got any intelligence at all, you should be able to see the Ku Klux Klan coming a mile away. And if this is what you see as progress, God help us all.

I don't see Aboriginal culture as superior or "pure," but likewise, I don't engage in dumb racist cliches, just because I don't know anything about the people I'm talking about.

They say the Europeans who hated the Jews the most under German occupation were the ones who didn't know any. I don't know if this is true or not - a lot of people got mired in that machine.

But you're right. The "Welfare" had justifications for what they did. What I'm presenting to you is that you're using their very justifications.

And I don't think it was because anyone was bad or good. I think it was because that's the way the machine back then was set. And the machine was set that way because people thought they were better - stronger - than Aboriginals. They saught, through careful government policy, to breed them out. They saught to give them Christianity. They removed the white-looking ones from their families, whilst they lamented the black-looking ones dying off due to the spread of farmlands: progress. They rounded them up and put them in missions: natural selection.

The strong overcoming the weak.

History.

I don't think many were bad. Like most under German occupation in the war, they just didn't know what was going on. Or they had other things to think about.

It's just ignorance.

You're right. We must talk about these things openly, because if we don't we're doomed. No need to panic, but when some of these policies were enacted on people until the 1980s, it can get a bit close to the bone. Telling them to just get over it can be a tad insensitive. How would you feel if you were removed from your family at birth because of your skin tone?

I know people who this happened to and have heard their stories. It's not fiction, and is very real.

And it wasn't made real by natural selection. It was made real by people doing these things based on their beliefs about their own superiority.

Actually, I think I'm wrong about this. I think Westerners are very insecure about their superiority and need others to be superior over.

As Soren loves to point out, now it's the Mohammedans.

I actually think that white Australians have a deep fear and mistrust of Aboriginal culture. The original poster's attempted scoff points this out, I think. What he demonstrated was his own ignorance (which is no great sin if you live and learn).

But when you don't learn from your own history, you'll repeat it. I know this from attempts at giving up smoking. I have to watch my thoughts closely, or I'll cave in.

If we don't examine our own inferiority complexes - and there are many - we're doomed to be insensitive, dumb, and arrogant. Just the sort of thing we hate in certain others we meet travelling overseas.

I know nobody's lighting any crosses here. But being intellectual around deep-seated racism doesn't change it. We should be free to mouth off about other cultures occasionally - but the belief in our inherent superiority is something else entirely. It's racism, sure, but it's not strength - it's fear.i

Back to top

IP Logged