ian wrote on Jul 5
th, 2014 at 9:28am:
Enquiring mind wrote on Jul 5
th, 2014 at 12:32am:
ian wrote on Jul 4
th, 2014 at 11:00pm:
Enquiring mind wrote on Jul 4
th, 2014 at 10:52pm:
ian wrote on Jul 4
th, 2014 at 10:13pm:
40,000 years of stagnant progress. Do you think their life expectancy would be any higher if we added another 200 years to the 40,000? You think they would have invented penicillin?
Most of the Eora Sydney Aboriginal population died from smallpox.
Penicillin didn’t do them much good.
and yet their life expectancy is around 65 now. Despite their decisions to make appalling lifestyle choices. Im a realist, cultural collision was inevitable as a result of inevitable colonisation. The stronger culture took over the weaker one, what is strong about the aboriginal culture will survive and will become part of our australian culture. Pretending that aboriginal culture was something that it wasnt doesnt serve their future, the future is assimilation.
By this measure, the Indonesians are the stronger culture because they have a bigger army.
Aboriginal culture was a lot of things, as was 18th century British culture. Neither was perfect or evil.
One just happened to borrow gunpowder from the Chinese before the other.
Our ancestors didnt conquer the abos because they had a bigger army, it was culture and technology. The sort of culture that made them develop technology to increase the food supply in response to population growth rather than practise infanticide.
There is
nothing intrinsically superior about "British culture", but Britain did have something colonisers like the Spanish didn’t have: an interest in other cultures and places.
Really... at a time when Aboriginals ran around naked and threw spears at each other the British had; guns, swords, cannon, rode horses, built and sailed ships, farmed, had Pubs, created cities, an army and navy, global trade and exploration, etc, etc, etc... what was your point again?
This came down to the influence of groups like the Royal Geographic Society. Where Spain wanted to capture souls for the church and nakedly exploit the resources of their colonies to pay back their loans, the British establishment wanted to map the world.
Which according to you is not intrinsically superior....
Britain - like the French - were genuinely curious about local people and their customs. This is displayed all through the letters of the First Fleet. The British officer class placed importance on their role in naming species, mapping terrain, and learning local languages and customs. They were passionate about ethnography. Artefacts from newly discovered (or captured) people sold for a fortune back in London.
Ah yes artifacts and those places of study that used them and the museums, Britain 1st museum in the world 1753... but not intrinsically superior...
This, of course, was the knowledge of empire. The British Empire didn’t succeed because of any intrinsic cultural trait in the British,
but through the connections of the empire itself.
Which they had no part in creating apparently
Britain prevailed by bringing the right people on side. It had to. Half the world was held by a handful of British soldiers. Britain prevailed through treaties and relationships with local leaders, but always with gunships in the harbour, always muskets on display.
This made Britain rich, and the homes of wealthy were filled with Chinese porcelain and silver, Morrocan carvings, Indian tapestries, Venetian glass - loot from all over the world. British manufacturing and craftsmanship did not develop a name for itself until the 18th century, when Britain started copying the designs and production processes of other cultures.
It wasn’t anything intrinsically "British" that drove British Empire to prevail, but the British adaption of other cultural processes, and its ability to bring them into the fold of empire.
Today, the US has prevailed for the very same reason. The US is one of the most multicultural powers in the world today, and along with its military and industrial strength, its success is due to its pluralism, its cultural diversity, and its cultural networks.
As a multicultural nation in Asia, Australia’s success also relies on such adaptation. It’s not the strength or predominance of any one ethnic group that will bring prosperity to Australia, but the willingness to learn and adapt to new ways of living.
Forum
Pages: 
Abbott Claims Oz Unsettled B4 British (Read 11245 times)
