Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Aboriginals aren't very visible in Victoria, in either Melbourne or the rural areas I'm familiar with. It seems like they're the least visible minority group, even behind Africans.
I've had Aboriginal neighbours. I didn't see anything that was different from what you'd see from an Anglo family.
What I'd like to see is no more welfare for aboriginals or, more correctly, no more aboriginal welfare. It creates a cycle of dependency and of superiority. Everyone should be equal; yes, you have been disadvantaged in the past but guilt and arrogance (in giving money) won't fix that.
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,144,031 times
Reputation: 11862
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrueDat
When you say visible, do you mean visible as in loitering groups on the street or just people who happen to live in that neighborhood going about their lives? Or both?
I think one of the big misconceptions that Americans have is to compare Aboriginals with African-Americans. By that standard, Australia seems more racist as Aboriginals haven't achieved as much integration/visibility as African-Americans in the US.
A better comparison though is to Native Americans and Inuit (Eskimos), in terms of their percentage of the population and their centers of population being in remote areas though there are some cities -- Albuquerque and Oklahoma City come to mind -- where Native American culture is more visible. Still, most North Americans don't know/work with or even see Native Americans on a regular basis, just as most Aussies don't know any Aboriginals.
Granted, unlike Australian Aboriginals, some tribes have made money through casino gambling, but Native Americans overall are still very much at the bottom of the heap in terms of income, health, and other vital statistics, just like Australian Aboriginals.
Just less visible in general, being much fewer in number and probably more dispersed. I'm not sure there are any suburban areas of Melbourne with a very visible indigenous population...I heard Collingwood was one such place, and the northern and western suburbs are probably others that come close.
I agree. I suppose the plight of African Americans soon overshadowed American Indians because they became greater in number and were a very visible part of American society, while the Indians were increasingly marginalized.
What I'd like to see is no more welfare for aboriginals or, more correctly, no more aboriginal welfare. It creates a cycle of dependency and of superiority. Everyone should be equal; yes, you have been disadvantaged in the past but guilt and arrogance (in giving money) won't fix that.
Superiority?
Do you feel the same way about all welfare? (cycle of dependency etc)
The Close the Gap campaign highlights, that yes, indeed Aborigines are still disadvantaged.
Superiority?
Do you feel the same way about all welfare? (cycle of dependency etc)
The Close the Gap campaign highlights, that yes, indeed Aborigines are still disadvantaged.
I've heard a lot of people make the argument "I pay for them and then they do this (burn the flag)". The whole NT intervention is because the government takes the view that aboriginals can't look after themselves. Would the government have ever contemplated doing that to any other group?
All welfare creates a cycle of dependency but not all on welfare get into that cycle. It's much easier as a non-aboriginal Australian to break that cycle.
What I'm suggesting is that aboriginals be given no special treatment. It's a two street of course, you need to break the entrenched racism toward them, which is something that is changing, albeit slowly.
I've heard a lot of people make the argument "I pay for them and then they do this (burn the flag)". The whole NT intervention is because the government takes the view that aboriginals can't look after themselves. Would the government have ever contemplated doing that to any other group?
All welfare creates a cycle of dependency but not all on welfare get into that cycle. It's much easier as a non-aboriginal Australian to break that cycle.
What I'm suggesting is that aboriginals be given no special treatment. It's a two street of course, you need to break the entrenched racism toward them, which is something that is changing, albeit slowly.
The intervention.... that was/is controversial, I am not convinced that the Howard govt handled it correctly, I am also not convinced that ignoring the stark reality of what is happening in these communities is the right way to go either. ...
what special treatment do they get, that a poor white person doesn't?
which will break first? the so-called dependency for welfare or the systematic racism that is evident (this thread shows it).
The intervention.... that was/is controversial, I am not convinced that the Howard govt handled it correctly, I am also not convinced that ignoring the stark reality of what is happening in these communities is the right way to go either. ...
The intervention was the height of arrogance. If you want to empower people to get up and do something with their lives treating them like children probably won't do it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by artemis agrotera
what special treatment do they get, that a poor white person doesn't?
Aboriginal welfare is far more tolerated by the state than non-aboriginal welfare. When politicians talk about breaking the welfare cycle they are, IMHO, not talking about getting aboriginals in remote outback communities back to work, they're in the too hard basket. It's almost as though aboriginals are viewed as a lost cause so the solution is just to throw money at the problem and try and not think to much about it.
The intervention was the height of arrogance. If you want to empower people to get up and do something with their lives treating them like children probably won't do it.
some elder Aboriginals were glad something was being done. The report highlighted, rampant rape, child sexual abuse, child abuse, alcoholism, ...
These things could not be ignored.
Other parts of the report highlighted: lack of education, kids not attending school, welfare managment, lack of nutrition etc.
These things could have been managed better by the government, or as you said,.... encouraged to empower themselves, I agree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCC_1
Aboriginal welfare is far more tolerated by the state than non-aboriginal welfare. When politicians talk about breaking the welfare cycle they are, IMHO, not talking about getting aboriginals in remote outback communities back to work, they're in the too hard basket. It's almost as though aboriginals are viewed as a lost cause so the solution is just to throw money at the problem and try and not think to much about it.
Agree many put it in the too hard basket. I don't think its always viewed as a lost cause (a difficult cause, yes), and one that is more complex than a white family that isn't going to experience the same racism as say, applying for jobs (even minimum wage/unskilled jobs)
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,144,031 times
Reputation: 11862
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCC_1
The intervention was the height of arrogance. If you want to empower people to get up and do something with their lives treating them like children probably won't do it.
Aboriginal welfare is far more tolerated by the state than non-aboriginal welfare. When politicians talk about breaking the welfare cycle they are, IMHO, not talking about getting aboriginals in remote outback communities back to work, they're in the too hard basket. It's almost as though aboriginals are viewed as a lost cause so the solution is just to throw money at the problem and try and not think to much about it.
My mother was involved in the intervention in the NT back in 2007. She often works in aboriginal communities in the NT, and from what she says it is pretty bad. So I think extreme circumstances call for extreme measures.
some elder Aboriginals were glad something was being done. The report highlighted, rampant rape, child sexual abuse, child abuse, alcoholism, ...
These things could not be ignored.
But what happens when these sort of things occur in non-aboriginal communities? If alcoholic parents are abusing or neglecting their children, the children are removed from that environment. The government doesn't impose a ban on alcohol for the whole community. Infact, the government, in all likelihood, won't even impose a ban on the offending parents.
It's a huge double standard.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
