It's a very sad thing to say, but the degree of ignorance that 'white' Australians SHOW about their knowledge of our Indigenous FIRST NATION people is gob-smacking! Never, at any time in the past more than 60,000 years, have our First NATION peoples been MORE fractured to the extent that the colonizing white's have done so.

I am a member of the Wiradjuri people, the largest Nation of First Australians and despite the invading Colonizers BEST efforts to extinguish us and integrate us into their culture, we have remained. Diminished in number, but still here.

As I explained to Joydie, There's abundant evidence that our First Nation Australians FREQUENTLY gathered in places, all over this Continent, which has shocked and astounded many people, like yourself. The evidence is in locations ALL OVER AUSTRALIA, in the Rock Art, in their ORAL history which has been PROVEN to be more ACCURATE and correct than the written history from other Countries (History is written by the Victor, not the loser) , and from our First Nations traditional Celebrations. About 15 years ago, one such MEETING place was FINALLY recognised and acknowledge, near to Mt Annan, just south of Sydney.

The EVIDENCE, you ask? TREES, shrubs and various plants that were brought from locations as far North as Cape York and as far south as Melbourne. Purposefully brought to the 'Meeting Place'. Yandel'ora is the name the Dharawal people gave to Mount Annan, meaning 'place of peace between peoples'.
to answer your last question first, we can not know the answer to that question JayEdGeep. Reason why? Over the past 60,000 years and more, there have been at least a DOZEN catastrophic events that have hit our Earth and wiped out almost EVERY living thing on this Planet, NOT just the dinosaurs! But our Indigenous First Nation People survived these events and RECORDED them in their Oral History and their Rock Art!?

Paleontologists and Archaeologists LOVE to talk about 'things' they have dug up from " OVER 2,000 years ago... or even 3,000 !" ignoring the facts that 'civilization' is possibly many, MANY more 1,000's of years more ANCIENT than their small minds are able to comprehend!

A few years ago, my son was an underground diamond driller for deBears, up in the Arctic Circle, and from one mile down, he brought to the surface a piece of wood that was later dated to being 50 million years old! It WAS NOT petrified! It looked and felt like it was just felled. The Earth holds Her secrets close to her chest.

So back to your 1st question - Our First Nation people MIGHT have actually been the Nation's first people - or not! we can NEVER know the answer. I fully recommend Tim Flannery's book "The Future Eaters". I know you will find it riveting and full of answers for more of your questions I know that you have.
P.S Please vote 'yes' and give us back our Voice <3
Please don’t presume that I know little about indigenous customs, culture and traditions. If you, who knows nothing about me, thinks it’s appropriate to begin a reply saying something confrontational, ‘you are wrong’ in bold, then I have to assume that you’re looking at the question from an emotional rather than factual viewpoint.

I’m not going to justify my position, because no matter what I say, you won’t give my answer any credence or respect, but I will say this: Jacinta Price is my skin niece and her
mother Bess is my skin sister.
 
Ì'm sorry bùt no list of forgettable PMs is complete without including Scott Morrison and Tony Abbott.

Neither of these did anything for working and average Australians. Both pushed their particular brand of religion and Scummo is still absenting himself from parliament (on full pay) so that he can practise giving sermons at the Hillsong cult conferences.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nanna Josephine
Albo wants to be everyone's best friend, that is why he is bringing in the divisive "Voice" change to Parliament. Everything is hidden. no real information is being given to the public. The public will not know the ramifications until it is too late as an indigenous woman, I feel it will be an apartheid voice and will divide the nation. I thought "We are one, yet we are many....
so, let me get this right, you would PREFER to have NO VOICE in Parliament? interesting! Silence might be golden, but I've learned that it's the best way to get crushed and beaten up, if you don't scream and yell! We teach kids to "Yell and Tell" when they are being abused. This might be a lesson for adults to learn as well?
 
It's a very sad thing to say, but the degree of ignorance that 'white' Australians SHOW about their knowledge of our Indigenous FIRST NATION people is gob-smacking! Never, at any time in the past more than 60,000 years, have our First NATION peoples been MORE fractured to the extent that the colonizing white's have done so.

I am a member of the Wiradjuri people, the largest Nation of First Australians and despite the invading Colonizers BEST efforts to extinguish us and integrate us into their culture, we have remained. Diminished in number, but still here.

As I explained to Joydie, There's abundant evidence that our First Nation Australians FREQUENTLY gathered in places, all over this Continent, which has shocked and astounded many people, like yourself. The evidence is in locations ALL OVER AUSTRALIA, in the Rock Art, in their ORAL history which has been PROVEN to be more ACCURATE and correct than the written history from other Countries (History is written by the Victor, not the loser) , and from our First Nations traditional Celebrations. About 15 years ago, one such MEETING place was FINALLY recognised and acknowledge, near to Mt Annan, just south of Sydney.

The EVIDENCE, you ask? TREES, shrubs and various plants that were brought from locations as far North as Cape York and as far south as Melbourne. Purposefully brought to the 'Meeting Place'. Yandel'ora is the name the Dharawal people gave to Mount Annan, meaning 'place of peace between peoples'.
I strongly resent your references to ‘colonising white’s‘ (sic), especially written in bold. This is racist and the assertions you’re making are factually incorrect.

You told me I need to learn about Aboriginal culture. I’ve actually been doing this for more than 30 years, so that ship’s well and truly sailed. If you cared to do some research on the arrival of the First Fleet, you’d discover that their treatment of the natives was overwhelmingly good.

By the way, your unnecessary use of bold type and capitals, both meaning shouting, doesn’t make your points more correct than anyone else’s.

It's a very sad thing to say, but the degree of ignorance that 'white' Australians SHOW about their knowledge of our Indigenous FIRST NATION people is gob-smacking! Never, at any time in the past more than 60,000 years, have our First NATION peoples been MORE fractured to the extent that the colonizing white's have done so.

I am a member of the Wiradjuri people, the largest Nation of First Australians and despite the invading Colonizers BEST efforts to extinguish us and integrate us into their culture, we have remained. Diminished in number, but still here.

As I explained to Joydie, There's abundant evidence that our First Nation Australians FREQUENTLY gathered in places, all over this Continent, which has shocked and astounded many people, like yourself. The evidence is in locations ALL OVER AUSTRALIA, in the Rock Art, in their ORAL history which has been PROVEN to be more ACCURATE and correct than the written history from other Countries (History is written by the Victor, not the loser) , and from our First Nations traditional Celebrations. About 15 years ago, one such MEETING place was FINALLY recognised and acknowledge, near to Mt Annan, just south of Sydney.

The EVIDENCE, you ask? TREES, shrubs and various plants that were brought from locations as far North as Cape York and as far south as Melbourne. Purposefully brought to the 'Meeting Place'. Yandel'ora is the name the Dharawal people gave to Mount Annan, meaning 'place of peace between peoples'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nana Zorak
Bob Hawk was our most Popular Prime minister and ranked 2nd as best over all prime minister.

according to historians and political scientists​

Survey of 66 political scientists and historians, 2020 vs 2010, Australia.
2020 RankingPrime MinisterRatings2010 ranking
1John Curtin49 outstanding1
2Bob Hawke45 outstanding/1 failure2
3Alfred Deakin39 outstanding3
4Ben Chifley33 outstanding4
5Robert Menzies28 outstanding/3 failure5
6Paul Keating19 outstanding8
7Gough Whitlam18 outstanding6
8Andrew Fisher10 outstanding7
9John Howard19 outstanding/4 failure9
10Edmund Barton2 outstanding10
"Survey of 66 political scientists and historians, 2020 vs 2010, Australia." Political scientists!? LOL Their 'perspective' on everything they report about is PAID FOR by their employers! unless they happen to be Academics teaching in Universities. But I would take their 'opinions' with a grain of salts at best. And let us ALL never forget that 'History' is always written by THE VICTORS! never the losers. Therefore, whatever a Historian has to say about anything has to be considered with suspicion.
Wikipedia doesn't even mention John Howard in this list. I applaud your choice for posting the Guardian's list. good choice, except John Howard was one of the most HATED Prime Minister and certainly not one of the most popular amongst the hoi polloi. Sadly I couldn't find a recent list of most popular Prime Ministers and NOT even one based on the opinions of the Common People :(
 
I will never accept that Bob Hawke is no 2 on anyone's list. He managed to ruin so many small business owners' lives including mine in fact my then-husband lost 1 job as soon as it became clear that Hawke would get into power for the steel manufacturing plant he worked for shut because of no ongoing orders as soon as it became known that an election was looming & that Hawke would probably win. he then invested his payout into a children's furniture manufacturing business we had one good year before Hawke reduced the loading on Asian imports this opened up the market to cheaper shoddy goods that people decided were cheaper than ours so we lost many sales because of his policy. Whereas our desks & beds would last a lifetime the ones from Asia fell apart at the most inconvenient times & needed to be replaced at more cost. I was always brought up to buy the best I could as it will last longer. I had to lower my standards after losing the business & consequently the house as well. Eventually, the marriage also went by the board.
 
I strongly resent your references to ‘colonising white’s‘ (sic), especially written in bold. This is racist and the assertions you’re making are factually incorrect.

You told me I need to learn about Aboriginal culture. I’ve actually been doing this for more than 30 years, so that ship’s well and truly sailed. If you cared to do some research on the arrival of the First Fleet, you’d discover that their treatment of the natives was overwhelmingly good.

By the way, your unnecessary use of bold type and capitals, both meaning shouting, doesn’t make your points more correct than anyone else’s.
Marun Bun Mirra, Sweetie. Marun Bun Mirra. And before you take insult and get your nickers in a knot, I will translate it for your, although, as you say, "I need to learn about Aboriginal culture. I’ve actually been doing this for more than 30 years"
In Wiradjuri it translates to: Be kind to each other.
 
There are already 11 Indigenous members of Parliament, have you not been keeping up with the times nana?
Aboriginal people make up approximately 3% of the Australian population. Eleven indigenous members of parliament is 14.3%, which means our indigenous Australians are actually over represented in parliament.


I always think it’s best to do some research before you start throwing around wild, unfounded accusations. Thank you Linwar for pointing out the bleeding obvious.
 
I strongly resent your references to ‘colonising white’s‘ (sic), especially written in bold. This is racist and the assertions you’re making are factually incorrect.

You told me I need to learn about Aboriginal culture. I’ve actually been doing this for more than 30 years, so that ship’s well and truly sailed. If you cared to do some research on the arrival of the First Fleet, you’d discover that their treatment of the natives was overwhelmingly good.

By the way, your unnecessary use of bold type and capitals, both meaning shouting, doesn’t make your points more correct than anyone else’s.
It seems to me that you first nation people want to get rid of us Whites I am sick & tired of being the bad guy in all this I certainly won't agree to a' voice in parliament' regardless of what the rest of the country decides, as there is no disclosure as to what exactly it means to everyone else apart from the first nations people. Albo is a crawler in this idea.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joydie
Marun Bun Mirra, Sweetie. Marun Bun Mirra. And before you take insult and get your nickers in a knot, I will translate it for your, although, as you say, "I need to learn about Aboriginal culture. I’ve actually been doing this for more than 30 years"
In Wiradjuri it translates to: Be kind to each other.
Please don’t patronise me with syrupy names.

If you actually cared to check what I wrote, it was, in full: ‘You told me I need …..’ A very different meaning from : ‘I need ……’ Those who edit what others say to benefit their argument, cannot be relied on.
 
The ‘Forgettables’: 5 Australian Prime Ministers You May Not Know Much About

The idea of a “forgotten prime minister” may seem laughable. For Australian historians, it is the governed rather than the governors who need rescuing “from the enormous condescension of posterity” as the English historian E. P. Thompson famously put it.

Our First Nations histories especially were for too long silenced and concealed in what the anthropologist Bill Stanner called a “cult of forgetfulness practised on a national scale”.



Prime ministers, on the other hand, are stitched into the tapestry of national history thanks to extensive newspaper coverage, the dogged pursuits of political biographers, and the quest of archivists and librarians to collect their personal papers. Deceased leaders’ names adorn buildings and streets, federal electorates, and dedicated research centres, and in Harold Holt’s case, a memorial swimming pool.

But some, of course, are better known than others. So which prime ministers, if any, can be considered “forgotten” by contemporary Australia? And what does that act of forgetting reveal about our political culture? Commemorative rituals and opinion surveys suggest that some have very much receded from memory.

Here are a few prime ministers who deserve to be a little better known.

Edmund Barton 1901-03​


View attachment 11213
Edmund Barton, Australia’s first prime minister. National Archives of Australia


Barton was a hugely significant figure in his day. A leading advocate of federation, he was summoned by the Governor-General Lord Hopetoun (after a false start) to form the first Commonwealth government.

Between 1901 and 1903, Barton’s government, with the dynamic Alfred Deakin as its attorney-general, established some of the national institutions we now take for granted, such as the public service and the High Court. Barton and Deakin’s deeply racial vision of a White Australia was also enacted in legislation in these years.

Australia’s first prime minister (known to detractors as Tosspot Toby) helped to establish the machinery of federal government out of nothing. But this earned him no special place in Australian collective memory. Resigning in 1903, he spent the remainder of his life as a reticent statesman and High Court judge.



George Reid 1904-05​

View attachment 11214
George Reid, a political enemy of Barton’s, held office from 1904-05. Museum of Australian Democracy

Reid was a political opponent of Barton’s. The defining issue of the early Commonwealth was tariff policy, and all other matters – industrial development, employment, and individual liberty – were refracted through the “tariff question”. Reid, a former New South Wales premier who had earned the moniker “Yes-No Reid” for his prevarications during the earlier federation debates, was a devout advocate for and leader of the Free Trade movement.

Reid was summoned to form a government in August 1904. Hamstrung by his lack of a parliamentary majority, he remarkably passed the Conciliation and Arbitration Bill. This was core business for the early Commonwealth, and two previous ministries had failed to secure it. But Reid’s attempts to settle the tariff question with Deakin’s Protectionists failed, and his ministry was defeated in parliament in July 1905.



Joseph Cook 1913-14​


View attachment 11215
Joseph Cook, together with Reid, was instrumental in establishing the two-party system that continues today. National Archives of Australia

Out of office, Reid and his Free Trade colleague Joseph Cook played a crucial role in making the two-party system that endures today. Whatever their differences with Deakin and the protectionists, Reid and Cook (himself a former Labor MP in New South Wales) saw the rising Australian Labor Party as the real enemy.

Reid travelled the country establishing anti-socialist leagues and building the groundwork for a united anti-Labor Party. When the tariff schedule was finally settled in 1908, and the mutual animosity between Deakin and Reid seemed the only barrier to a Liberal fusion, the latter sacrificed himself and resigned so that the former could join forces with Cook on his own terms.

In 1913, Cook led the new Commonwealth Liberal Party to a federal election, winning by the narrowest of margins. He oversaw the opening weeks of the Great War the following year, committing 20,000 Australian troops and the Australian Navy to Britain, but soon lost power in Australia’s first double dissolution election.



Stanley Melbourne Bruce 1923-29​

After the war, the task of national leadership fell to Stanley Bruce, a young businessman and ex-serviceman from Melbourne. In 1923, as leader of the non-Labor forces (now reconstituted as the Nationalist Party), Bruce formed government with Earle Page’s Country Party (forerunner of today’s rural National Party). In doing so, Frank Bongiorno has recently explained, Bruce and Page ‘inaugurated the Coalition tradition on the conservative side of Australian federal politics’.

View attachment 11216
Stanley Melbourne Bruce (pictured with his wife Ethel) had the task of leading the country after the first world war. National Archives of Australia

Bruce’s government was ambitious for Australia in the “roaring ‘20s”. He envisioned a future underscored by British migrants, British money and imperial markets. In power for six years, he presided over the creation of the Loans Council and the federal parliament’s move from Melbourne to Canberra in 1927.

But like others before him, he came unstuck on the issue of centralised arbitration. His attempt to abolish the federal arbitration court (with a view to restraining wage growth) saw his government defeated and his own seat lost in the 1929 election.



Arthur Fadden 1941​


View attachment 11217
Arthur Fadden was chosen to lead his party after Robert Menzies resigned. National Archives of Australia

In the early 1930s, conservatives once again reorganised in the form of the United Australia Party, and dominated politics for the ensuing decade. But by 1941, after two years of wartime leadership, the young leader Robert Menzies appeared to falter. His colleagues disliked his brisk manner and the public lacked confidence in his government’s war efforts. A hung parliament after the 1940 election, in which two Independents held the balance, confirmed this. With his position untenable, Menzies resigned in August 1941 and the coalition unanimously chose Fadden, the Country Party leader, to replace him.

“Affable Artie” was a widely respected figure and apparently the only one who could hold together a decade-old government too consumed by infighting to meet the demands of the moment. His premiership lasted just 40 days, at which point the Independents offered John Curtin and Labor their support. The sole Country Party leader to become prime minister on a non-caretaker basis, Fadden was one of a small handful of men to lead the nation in a global war.



Australia and Its Forgettables​

Why is it that these five prime ministers are largely absent from national memory? Four factors seem particularly significant.

First, contemporary Australian political discourse offers only a shallow sense of history. Political reporting rarely reaches for historical depth, and when it does, the second world war tends to be the outer limit.

Moreover, when Australians are asked to rank their prime ministers and select a “best PM”, they rarely reach beyond living memory.

The federation generation, overshadowed by the first world war, fare especially poorly. In the 1990s, with the centenary of federation fast approaching, surveys revealed that Australians knew less about its federal founders than they did about America’s 'founding fathers’. What kind of country, the civics experts implored, could forget the name of its first prime minister? Tosspot Toby was no match for Simpson and his donkey.

Second, Australians prefer to think of their political history in terms of heroes and villains (often embodied by the same individuals). Those binary roles require gregariousness, dynamism, some controversy, and the occasional serving of larrikinism. “Tall poppy syndrome” notwithstanding, partisan heroes like Menzies and Gough Whitlam, or infamous rats such as Billy Hughes, make for easy storytelling.

The forgettables are more often reserved, restrained or even polite characters. The Primitive Methodist Joseph Cook was “olemn and humourless”. The patrician Bruce was judged “too aloof and reserved to be an Australian”. And Frank Forde, in his old age, maintained that all of his colleagues and opponents had been “outstanding” and “capable men” for whom he had only “friendly feeling”. This is not exactly the stuff of masculine political legend.

Alfred Deakin has tended to absorb the historical limelight and cast long shadows over his contemporaries, not least because he furnished historians and biographers with rich personal papers. (Barton scrupulously destroyed most of his). But as Sean Scalmer has argued, we ought not to overlook the influence of Deakin’s contemporaries in the making of Australian politics as we know it.


View attachment 11218

Alfred Deakin (front row, second from right) has tended to cast a long shadow over his contemporaries.
Australian Parliamentary Library

Third, prime ministers are rendered immemorable if they were judged to be temporary, or presiding over some kind of interregnum. Australians have valorised the longevity and stability of Menzies and Howard, or the sense of epochal change that accompanied Whitlam and Hawke. Men like Reid, Cook and Fadden seem transitory in comparison.

Fourth, public memory has often depended on the sponsorship of major parties and their affiliated scribes and institutes. The corollary is that those who preceded the two-party system are harder to commemorate. Labor has been excellent at proselytising its great leaders and their great reforms, and demonising the rats and renegades. The Liberal Party, on the other hand, has struggled to memorialise its antecedents and influences (Deakin perhaps excepted). Menzies and Howard predominate in the collective Liberal psyche, and Liberal forerunners from Barton to Bruce rarely get a look-in.

This article was first published on The Conversation, and was written by Joshua Black, PhD Candidate, School of History, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University
like everything, the past is easily forgotten. hope there aren't any statues, they will be pulled down. leave history alone. I guess each one tried their best. here we are in the 2000's complaining or derogating them.
 
It seems to me that you first nation people want to get rid of us Whites I am sick & tired of being the bad guy in all this I certainly won't agree to a' voice in parliament' regardless of what the rest of the country decides, as there is no disclosure as to what exactly it means to everyone else apart from the first nations people. Albo is a crawler in this idea.
I so agree with you. Funny! I thought we were all black-white brindle in Australia. do we not all vote? That is when you have a voice. Do not carry on with protests and blaming everyone for your plights. We, the whites have our plights too.
 
This has been doing the email rounds, and quite a few are quoting from it. However, I dont really understand how it went from an article on unknown politicians to the yes vote crap.

All the "Welcome to Country", and all the “Smoking Ceremonies”

A former indigenous politician who received a prestigious award from Barack Obama has described Aboriginal 'welcome to country' ceremonies as 'bullshit'. Quote from former indigenous NT minister Bess Price (mother of Jacinta Price). 'All the "Welcome to Country", all the "Smoking Ceremonies" and all the made up bullshit rituals about "pay our respects to elders past and present" is just one big lie. The 'welcome to country' was adopted into Australia's parliamentary protocols in 2008, after the then prime minister Kevin Rudd delivered his apology to the ‘stolen generation’ (who were in fact mostly half-cast children taken into protective and educational care). However, two years after that decision, Aboriginal entertainer Ernie Dingo claimed that he invented the concept in 1976 when visiting Pacific Island dancers demanded they receive a traditional welcome. The Aborigines have supposedly been here for at least 50,000 years, exterminating their predecessors the Mungo Man of light boned Chinese origin and the Know Swamp Man of heavy boned Java Man origin (some say more like 60,000 years, but they came in waves when sea levels fell). The fact is, as uncomfortable and as unfashionable as it is, aboriginal Australia had not produced anything resembling a Shakespeare, nothing much in the way of technology, never discovered the wheel, could not boil water, kept no written history, had no conception of the size or location of this continent, and no philosophy to speak of in the 50,000 years available to it.

The English brought the rule of law, the Westminster system, a work ethic, the notion of progress and all the benefits of the science, technology and ingenuity of the modern European world. On 26 January 1788 when the First Fleet ships unloaded their ~ 750 convicts, 245 Royal Marines and 15 officials, not a shot was fired. As they looked around what's now Circular Quay, they saw nothing other than bush. Not a single building, planted field, domesticated plant or animal - nothing at all. Very few natives were seen along the coast and it was considered there would be even fewer living inland. It was seen as "terra nullius" - a vacant land owned by no [1] one. There was no indigenous army to defeat, no Aboriginal flag to lower, no national leaders to consult. There was nothing to claim as the spoils of victory. There was just wild bush. There was no "invasion". The few Aborigines who came out to have a look at these strange people were completely illiterate and innumerate and those on the south side of the harbour spoke a language completely unintelligible to those on the north side of the harbour, and they'd been constantly at war with each other for as long as anyone can remember.

Australian Aboriginal languages consist of around 290- 363 dialects belonging to an estimated 28 language families and isolates. Since the arrival of the English, only about 250 years ago, Australia has prospered and developed into a modern first world country, along with all other Western democracies. Today, Aborigines enjoy many of these modern day benefits in preference to a harsh traditional Aboriginal life-style. Yet for at least 50,000 years (prior to the arrival of the British) the Aboriginals seemed to have not progressed one step. To put this into perspective, Aboriginals had inhabited our great land for at least 47,000 years prior to the ancient Egyptian empire. The Greek empire was at its peak in the period 500 BC to 300 BC and the Roman empire was at its peak around 117 BC. Each of those empires were highly advanced and contributed enormously to the advancement of the modern world. It therefore beats me why the stagnant Aboriginal culture is now so revered? In 1967, under the Holt Liberal government, 90.77 per cent of Australians voted to remove race from the Constitution, putting ‘indigenous’ Australian people on the same legal footing as all other Australians and allowing them to be counted in the Commonwealth Census. It was a momentous shift towards equality, removing the 1901 Commonwealth ban, which had been designed to prevent political exploitation of the aborigines, whose ignorance and malleability made them easy vote getters.

Half a decade later, the Albanese Labour government wants to insert RACE back into the Constitution! To enshrine a special place in the Constitution, based purely on racial grounds, is racism pure and simple. Length of ancestry on this continent, whether it be 50,000 years, 250 years or 10 years, shouldn’t be the determinant for any special consideration to any population cohort in the Constitution. Furthermore, most 'Aborigines' today are of mixed ancestry and they live a non-traditional lifestyle in urban areas. JUST A LITTLE SOMETHING TO CONTEMPLATE BEFORE SIGNING UP TO A RACE-BASED "INDIGENOUS VOICE” BEING INSERTED INTO IN OUR CONSTITUTION. TAKE CARE - WE ALREADY HAVE A PARLIAMENT THAT REPRESENTS “ALL” AUSTRALIANS! OUR Federal parliament already has 11 Aboriginal members, which is proportionately higher than the rest of us. In addition, EACH of our State governments, plus our Federal government, have Ministers for Aboriginal Affairs who oversee Departments that provide for the particular needs of Aborigines.
 
when I was at school this was not taught properly if at all i don't know about now but our system needs a big overhaul our history should be taught from the first day till the last day. pre white settlement and after white settlement all the good and the bad so we know what has happened and so we can remember
Not knowing your age or when born it is obvious you were taught even less than me. Going to school from 1958 onwards all our "social Studies" lessons were about America, New Zealand and England. Never touched on our Indigenous people nor Australia itself. Learnt all about the American wars and England.....WHY!!!!! I live in AUSTRALIA. I learnt a lot from our Indigenous throughout different states when I worked as a Store Manager. We were treated with respect, if we gave the same respect. They love to joke and have fun. When there was trouble brewing or fighting going on we were told NOT to interfere, they will sort it out, whether men or women. It was an interesting experience. They don't care what is happening in the big cities and certainly don't like what so-called "city brothers" are saying.
 
Gosh, you must be talking about the current loser!
Both tarred with the same brush.
Aboriginal people make up approximately 3% of the Australian population. Eleven indigenous members of parliament is 14.3%, which means our indigenous Australians are actually over represented in parliament.


I always think it’s best to do some research before you start throwing around wild, unfounded accusations. Thank you Linwar for pointing out the bleeding obvious.
JJF, it seems no one is interested in the truth, or is it because they are too lazy to check or too lazy and only want to see current affairs programs which continue to flog for the "Voice" radio and TV are paid to flog the Voice, yet few actually check the facts....also the majority of the 11 are women, so they are over represented as well.
 
This has been doing the email rounds, and quite a few are quoting from it. However, I dont really understand how it went from an article on unknown politicians to the yes vote crap.

All the "Welcome to Country", and all the “Smoking Ceremonies”

A former indigenous politician who received a prestigious award from Barack Obama has described Aboriginal 'welcome to country' ceremonies as 'bullshit'. Quote from former indigenous NT minister Bess Price (mother of Jacinta Price). 'All the "Welcome to Country", all the "Smoking Ceremonies" and all the made up bullshit rituals about "pay our respects to elders past and present" is just one big lie. The 'welcome to country' was adopted into Australia's parliamentary protocols in 2008, after the then prime minister Kevin Rudd delivered his apology to the ‘stolen generation’ (who were in fact mostly half-cast children taken into protective and educational care). However, two years after that decision, Aboriginal entertainer Ernie Dingo claimed that he invented the concept in 1976 when visiting Pacific Island dancers demanded they receive a traditional welcome. The Aborigines have supposedly been here for at least 50,000 years, exterminating their predecessors the Mungo Man of light boned Chinese origin and the Know Swamp Man of heavy boned Java Man origin (some say more like 60,000 years, but they came in waves when sea levels fell). The fact is, as uncomfortable and as unfashionable as it is, aboriginal Australia had not produced anything resembling a Shakespeare, nothing much in the way of technology, never discovered the wheel, could not boil water, kept no written history, had no conception of the size or location of this continent, and no philosophy to speak of in the 50,000 years available to it.

The English brought the rule of law, the Westminster system, a work ethic, the notion of progress and all the benefits of the science, technology and ingenuity of the modern European world. On 26 January 1788 when the First Fleet ships unloaded their ~ 750 convicts, 245 Royal Marines and 15 officials, not a shot was fired. As they looked around what's now Circular Quay, they saw nothing other than bush. Not a single building, planted field, domesticated plant or animal - nothing at all. Very few natives were seen along the coast and it was considered there would be even fewer living inland. It was seen as "terra nullius" - a vacant land owned by no [1] one. There was no indigenous army to defeat, no Aboriginal flag to lower, no national leaders to consult. There was nothing to claim as the spoils of victory. There was just wild bush. There was no "invasion". The few Aborigines who came out to have a look at these strange people were completely illiterate and innumerate and those on the south side of the harbour spoke a language completely unintelligible to those on the north side of the harbour, and they'd been constantly at war with each other for as long as anyone can remember.

Australian Aboriginal languages consist of around 290- 363 dialects belonging to an estimated 28 language families and isolates. Since the arrival of the English, only about 250 years ago, Australia has prospered and developed into a modern first world country, along with all other Western democracies. Today, Aborigines enjoy many of these modern day benefits in preference to a harsh traditional Aboriginal life-style. Yet for at least 50,000 years (prior to the arrival of the British) the Aboriginals seemed to have not progressed one step. To put this into perspective, Aboriginals had inhabited our great land for at least 47,000 years prior to the ancient Egyptian empire. The Greek empire was at its peak in the period 500 BC to 300 BC and the Roman empire was at its peak around 117 BC. Each of those empires were highly advanced and contributed enormously to the advancement of the modern world. It therefore beats me why the stagnant Aboriginal culture is now so revered? In 1967, under the Holt Liberal government, 90.77 per cent of Australians voted to remove race from the Constitution, putting ‘indigenous’ Australian people on the same legal footing as all other Australians and allowing them to be counted in the Commonwealth Census. It was a momentous shift towards equality, removing the 1901 Commonwealth ban, which had been designed to prevent political exploitation of the aborigines, whose ignorance and malleability made them easy vote getters.

Half a decade later, the Albanese Labour government wants to insert RACE back into the Constitution! To enshrine a special place in the Constitution, based purely on racial grounds, is racism pure and simple. Length of ancestry on this continent, whether it be 50,000 years, 250 years or 10 years, shouldn’t be the determinant for any special consideration to any population cohort in the Constitution. Furthermore, most 'Aborigines' today are of mixed ancestry and they live a non-traditional lifestyle in urban areas. JUST A LITTLE SOMETHING TO CONTEMPLATE BEFORE SIGNING UP TO A RACE-BASED "INDIGENOUS VOICE” BEING INSERTED INTO IN OUR CONSTITUTION. TAKE CARE - WE ALREADY HAVE A PARLIAMENT THAT REPRESENTS “ALL” AUSTRALIANS! OUR Federal parliament already has 11 Aboriginal members, which is proportionately higher than the rest of us. In addition, EACH of our State governments, plus our Federal government, have Ministers for Aboriginal Affairs who oversee Departments that provide for the particular needs of Aborigines.
A fantastic and true representation of the actual history of Australia for those who haven't looked into it before. I was a a "half caste", a terrible explanation of being 1/2 white and 1/2 black and was placed at St Saviour's Childrens Home in Goulburn for my protection. I learnt to read and write to prosper and to bring up well educated children who are an asset to society. I met my father when I was 32, I feel blessed to have been bought up the way I was. I will be voting NO to the Voice, I see it as being an apartheid document which will eventually be detrimental to all indigenous people. To me it seems the white people are the ones pushing the barrel for a yes vote.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joydie
to answer your last question first, we can not know the answer to that question JayEdGeep. Reason why? Over the past 60,000 years and more, there have been at least a DOZEN catastrophic events that have hit our Earth and wiped out almost EVERY living thing on this Planet, NOT just the dinosaurs! But our Indigenous First Nation People survived these events and RECORDED them in their Oral History and their Rock Art!?

Paleontologists and Archaeologists LOVE to talk about 'things' they have dug up from " OVER 2,000 years ago... or even 3,000 !" ignoring the facts that 'civilization' is possibly many, MANY more 1,000's of years more ANCIENT than their small minds are able to comprehend!

A few years ago, my son was an underground diamond driller for deBears, up in the Arctic Circle, and from one mile down, he brought to the surface a piece of wood that was later dated to being 50 million years old! It WAS NOT petrified! It looked and felt like it was just felled. The Earth holds Her secrets close to her chest.

So back to your 1st question - Our First Nation people MIGHT have actually been the Nation's first people - or not! we can NEVER know the answer. I fully recommend Tim Flannery's book "The Future Eaters". I know you will find it riveting and full of answers for more of your questions I know that you have.
P.S Please vote 'yes' and give us back our Voice <3
I think we need to be told which indigenous advisory bodies will be wound up or shut down to make way for the voice. Because if you just add another layer layer of advisors, well, what's that going to achieve. If the voice is needed? What other bodies are no longer needed?The National Indigenous Australians agency have 1300 staff members, that includes 42 executives, each earning more than $230,000 a year. So they've got 42 executives who are earning close to a quarter of a million bucks. How many of those executives are still needed? The National Indigenous Australians agency also funds a network of 14 local Native Title councils across the country. We have the Aboriginal community controlled health organisation, indigenous business Australia. These are all government agencies, the Torres Strait Regional Authority, the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander studies, Aboriginal hostels LTD. the indigenous land and sea Corporation.Surely there are enough VOICES already!! WHY DO WE NEED ONE MORE? I await your answer.!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joydie
to answer your last question first, we can not know the answer to that question JayEdGeep. Reason why? Over the past 60,000 years and more, there have been at least a DOZEN catastrophic events that have hit our Earth and wiped out almost EVERY living thing on this Planet, NOT just the dinosaurs! But our Indigenous First Nation People survived these events and RECORDED them in their Oral History and their Rock Art!?

Paleontologists and Archaeologists LOVE to talk about 'things' they have dug up from " OVER 2,000 years ago... or even 3,000 !" ignoring the facts that 'civilization' is possibly many, MANY more 1,000's of years more ANCIENT than their small minds are able to comprehend!

A few years ago, my son was an underground diamond driller for deBears, up in the Arctic Circle, and from one mile down, he brought to the surface a piece of wood that was later dated to being 50 million years old! It WAS NOT petrified! It looked and felt like it was just felled. The Earth holds Her secrets close to her chest.

So back to your 1st question - Our First Nation people MIGHT have actually been the Nation's first people - or not! we can NEVER know the answer. I fully recommend Tim Flannery's book "The Future Eaters". I know you will find it riveting and full of answers for more of your questions I know that you have.
P.S Please vote 'yes' and give us back our Voice <3
Tim Flannery also uttered these words of wisdom some years back......
  • Climate change is so catastrophic and imminent that only nuclear power can save us.
  • [2008] The water problem is so severe for Adelaide that it may run out of water by early 2009.
  • [2004] I think there is a fair chance Perth will be the 21st century's first ghost metropolis.
  • [2008] Just imagine yourself in a world five years from now, when there is no more ice over the Arctic.
  • [2007] Even the rain that falls isn't actually going to fill our dams and river systems. Not really someone I would take advice from!!
 
I agree with jo Jo’s, Albanese has no plan , they just make it up as they go.
Also Turnbull knocked on the door of the Labour Party , they did not want him and then went to the Liberals Bad choice
Albanese wants to be in the good books with the indigenous people with his crocodile tears .as long as he get the votes..
Says it all ........see below
 

Attachments

  • 275583130_10224348187265783_3448595186323331572_n.jpg anal.jpg
    275583130_10224348187265783_3448595186323331572_n.jpg anal.jpg
    17.1 KB · Views: 0
  • Like
Reactions: Linwar
so, let me get this right, you would PREFER to have NO VOICE in Parliament? interesting! Silence might be golden, but I've learned that it's the best way to get crushed and beaten up, if you don't scream and yell! We teach kids to "Yell and Tell" when they are being abused. This might be a lesson for adults to learn as well?
You say....''We teach kids to "Yell and Tell" when they are being abused.'' Then why is it still happening in Aboriginal communities throughout the country.......it would seem to be a cultural problem that should have been addressed and eliminated years ago by the respective communities.As to your other question....''You would PREFER to have NO VOICE in Parliament? 'Let me quote Jacinta Price.....
''The activists trying to stuff the dangerous and divisive Voice to Parliament into your Constitution keep saying Indigenous Australians don’t have a voice.

Really?

When you think about it, it’s a strange thing to say. In fact, it’s pretty close to a bare-faced lie.

I have a voice – and so do the 10 other Indigenous Australians in the Parliament.

But let’s leave that aside.

Let’s just focus on the other voices.

There’s over 100 Indigenous-specific official advisory bodies and organisations.

There’s what they call the “Coalition of Peaks” – a body representing over 80 Aboriginal community groups.

And don’t forget Indigenous Australians have their own voice – the same as any Australian – at the ballot box.

But now activists are pushing to put up another voice – this time in the Constitution.

And what do we get for all the billions of dollars spent on the hundreds of voices?

An economic crisis, youth crime in the NT, and no better outcomes for Indigenous Australians.

Not only that: so many of these “voices” are out there attacking Australia Day, disrespecting Anzac Day, and pushing their activist agenda into every part of your life.

It’s time to say enough is enough.

It’s time to say No.

The Voice to Parliament is a dangerous and divisive proposal that will cost the earth to give a small handful of politicians and activists another platform to push their views on you''. Sounds like the VOICE OF REASON to me....She certainly gets my NO vote!!
 

Join the conversation

News, deals, games, and bargains for Aussies over 60. From everyday expenses like groceries and eating out, to electronics, fashion and travel, the club is all about helping you make your money go further.

Seniors Discount Club

The SDC searches for the best deals, discounts, and bargains for Aussies over 60. From everyday expenses like groceries and eating out, to electronics, fashion and travel, the club is all about helping you make your money go further.
  1. New members
  2. Jokes & fun
  3. Photography
  4. Nostalgia / Yesterday's Australia
  5. Food and Lifestyle
  6. Money Saving Hacks
  7. Offtopic / Everything else

Latest Articles

  • We believe that retirement should be a time to relax and enjoy life, not worry about money. That's why we're here to help our members make the most of their retirement years. If you're over 60 and looking for ways to save money, connect with others, and have a laugh, we’d love to have you aboard.
  • Advertise with us

User Menu

Enjoyed Reading our Story?

  • Share this forum to your loved ones.
Change Weather Postcode×
Change Petrol Postcode×