No one is asking you to feel guilty. We’re asking you to acknowledge the past, and to acknowledge the privilege that brings you. To use that to help forge a path of reconciliation forward together as a nation.
I’m all for that. But I think many people feel more responsible for righting the wrongs of their ancestors than of other wrongs. I think we should help all those struggling, independent of who caused it.
To use that to help forge a path of reconciliation forward together as a nation.
Not having a go here, genuinely. I genuinely want to know: what does this mean?
I voted yes, but it was a lot of vague comments and a voice to parliament all sounds great. but no ones ever said
“here’s 3 simple things we should be working on”.
Three things to work on would be truth, treaty and voice? Those aren’t simple though.
I think the nation accepting the voice would have been a step towards reconciliation, since it would have been a sign showing the nation accepts wrongs that exist in its history.
no, they are buzz words that could apply to a number of things given different context. A list of actionable items makes things achievable. Voice is dead in the water, Murdoch and limp dicked support from the albo government saw to that. So what can we actually DO to help here.
They really aren’t buzzwords, it’s a short way of describing what the Uluru statement proposed. The issue is that the failure of the voice both encouraged the right wing to shit on indigenous issues and tell labor that it’s not worth the political capital to touch you indigenous issues.
Sometimes it’s not even about denial of what happened, but rather a mindset that the past doesn’t affect the present anymore.
I often-enough hear people saying things along the line of, well, past generations took the land but society is better and less racist now, we collectively apologised, and my family weren’t even here at the time, so we have no obligation to do anything now. Almost like if my dad stole your car ten years ago, died after, and I say well I’ve never stolen anything in my life, it was my dad’s car, this car is mine, stop complaining about the past. It doesn’t make sense to start acting like equal treatment is fair after so much is stolen and so little is given back. But I know people who believe morality is that own individual behaviour, whether they are doing hurtful acts, and disregard their own position in society, how they got there and who suffered to allow that to happen.
Guilt isn’t what people are asking for, guilt actually doesn’t do anything useful, but rather we need people to realise that it doesn’t matter that we personally didn’t commit massacres and seize land, because the consequences of those acts still disadvantage current generations of the victims, and it’s not resolved if we dismiss the consequences as someone else’s sins.
No one is asking you to feel guilty. We’re asking you to acknowledge the past, and to acknowledge the privilege that brings you. To use that to help forge a path of reconciliation forward together as a nation.
I’m all for that. But I think many people feel more responsible for righting the wrongs of their ancestors than of other wrongs. I think we should help all those struggling, independent of who caused it.
Not having a go here, genuinely. I genuinely want to know: what does this mean? I voted yes, but it was a lot of vague comments and a voice to parliament all sounds great. but no ones ever said “here’s 3 simple things we should be working on”.
Three things to work on would be truth, treaty and voice? Those aren’t simple though.
I think the nation accepting the voice would have been a step towards reconciliation, since it would have been a sign showing the nation accepts wrongs that exist in its history.
no, they are buzz words that could apply to a number of things given different context. A list of actionable items makes things achievable. Voice is dead in the water, Murdoch and limp dicked support from the albo government saw to that. So what can we actually DO to help here.
Thats the part I never see articulated.
They really aren’t buzzwords, it’s a short way of describing what the Uluru statement proposed. The issue is that the failure of the voice both encouraged the right wing to shit on indigenous issues and tell labor that it’s not worth the political capital to touch you indigenous issues.
If you want concrete policy goals then you could look at the royal commission into aboriginal deaths in custody and email your MP to act on the recommendations. Or see if you get anything out of the reports from the yoorrook commission if you’re in vic.
Who’s denying any of that though?
Sometimes it’s not even about denial of what happened, but rather a mindset that the past doesn’t affect the present anymore.
I often-enough hear people saying things along the line of, well, past generations took the land but society is better and less racist now, we collectively apologised, and my family weren’t even here at the time, so we have no obligation to do anything now. Almost like if my dad stole your car ten years ago, died after, and I say well I’ve never stolen anything in my life, it was my dad’s car, this car is mine, stop complaining about the past. It doesn’t make sense to start acting like equal treatment is fair after so much is stolen and so little is given back. But I know people who believe morality is that own individual behaviour, whether they are doing hurtful acts, and disregard their own position in society, how they got there and who suffered to allow that to happen.
Guilt isn’t what people are asking for, guilt actually doesn’t do anything useful, but rather we need people to realise that it doesn’t matter that we personally didn’t commit massacres and seize land, because the consequences of those acts still disadvantage current generations of the victims, and it’s not resolved if we dismiss the consequences as someone else’s sins.