pɐǝɹɥʇ lɐᴉɔᴉɟɟoun ǝɥʇ - ɐᴉlɐɹʇsn∀

How about International Read The Whole Thread Before Posting Day?

The question was not "is Sorry Day necessary?".
Key word is "like" not necessary everything.

Also maybe you need to pay attention to the day too because the very reason why we are having this discussion is because of this statement

May 26 recently passed.... Should we be really embarrassed that we have an annual "Sorry Day"?

Will it ever become "I Accept Your Apology Day"?
While the question is, should we be embarrassed. My response of the day being unnecessary makes it obviously that I think we should be embarrassed.
 
My response of the day being unnecessary makes it obviously that I think we should be embarrassed.
You've got a funny way of showing it, since you said that we learn about history in the classroom. Knowledge is meaningless if you do nothing with it. How are we going to be able to address indigenous issues if all we know is "this happened a hundred years ago, and it was bad"?
 
How are we going to be able to address indigenous issues if all we know is "this happened a hundred years ago, and it was bad"?
By focusing on the issues that are happening right now instead of the issues decades ago that have been resolved and should be let go.
 
the issues decades ago that have been resolved
Have they? A lot of indigenous people are concerned that the rest of the country only apologised for the sake of making themselves feel better, have neglected the current issues because they think everything has been resolved, and that history is in danger of repeating itself.
 
What's wrong with people moving on from the past and looking at the resent and the future? If people still want to grief about the past, let them but don't force other people to do the same if they want to be happy and move on to other things.

Can we do away with ANZAC day, Easter and Christmas as well then? Hell, we have Melbourne Cup as a public holiday down here, and that's a way more stupid thing than thinking about aboriginal issues.

I think it's somewhat poorly named, but I think that there's nothing wrong with having a day when we think about the history of the native peoples of our country. Particularly when the dominant culture has :censored:ed them over in some pretty spectacular ways in the past.
 
Have they? A lot of indigenous people are concerned that the rest of the country only apologised for the sake of making themselves feel better.
If they are, how is reminding us about the past going to change thator an annual "Sorry Day" if the indigenous were concerned it was just a publicity stunt?



Also, people who are afraid of history repeating themselves are just acting silly, IMO. Nowadays, anything racist will make you a public enemy, because nowadays it is common sense that you shouldn't be an a:censored:.

, have neglected the current issues because they think everything has been resolved,

That is what I've been talking about, we should address the current issues, things happening right noe. Because addressing thing that happened won't do 🤬 and it just brings people down, because we can't do anything to help if it already happened.

Can we do away with ANZAC day, Easter and Christmas as well then? Hell, we have Melbourne Cup as a public holiday down here, and that's a way more stupid thing than thinking about aboriginal issues.

I think it's somewhat poorly named, but I think that there's nothing wrong with having a day when we think about the history of the native peoples of our country. Particularly when the dominant culture has ed them over in some pretty spectacular ways in the past.
I'm honestly fine with these days existing because some want to think about the history but I think it really should be socially optional. If it is all apart of the past then it shouldn't really matter now, so the people who want to move on should be let to move on.

I do think Anzac Day fits in this too.

As for Christmas and Easter, I think most people just use the day as an excuse to hang out with family and give people things. I mean, unless you are religious, mostly no one else cares about the history of what happened that relates to Christmas and Easter, there is no special moment where you thinkof the past (at least in my Christmas anyway).
 
Last edited:
If they are, how is reminding us about the past going to change thator an annual "Sorry Day" if the indigenous were concerned it was just a publicity stunt?
By reminding us that there are still issues out there to deal with and that the act of apologising did not mean we could simply turn a blind eye.
 
By reminding us that there are still issues out there to deal with and that the act of apologising did not mean we could simply turn a blind eye.
They aren't reminding us of the issues that are still out there, as all this is about what happened not what is happening, there is a difference.
 
They aren't reminding us of the issues that are still out there, as all this is about what happened not what is happening, there is a difference.
Except that the current issues are anchored in history. Indigenous education, health care and incarceration rates are not problems that have developed in the recent past. They go back decades, and many of the social issues facing indigenous communities stem from government policies that saw the likes of the Stolen Generation come about.
 
Except that the current issues are anchored in history. Indigenous education, health care and incarceration rates are not problems that have developed in the recent past. They go back decades, and many of the social issues facing indigenous communities stem from government policies that saw the likes of the Stolen Generation come about.
Just because they were "anchored" from it doesn't mean they are relevant to today's issues. People who cause the issues aren't going to look back and say "Well they were 🤬 back then, lets not be 🤬", we need to go about with what the Indigenous are going through today to help resolve the issues, not rely on decade old issues that the people who cause the issue no longer care about.
 
Last edited:
Except that the current issues are anchored in history. Indigenous education, health care and incarceration rates are not problems that have developed in the recent past. They go back decades, and many of the social issues facing indigenous communities stem from government policies that saw the likes of the Stolen Generation come about.
Your apparent high and mighty attitude while venerating wanton racial discrimination disgusts me considering what I've had to contend with in life - stemming from my grandparents being subject to, then escaping, Stalin's Soviet Union only to be held as prisoners in Nazi-ravaged Germany, escaping there as well. On arrival in Australia, they rented a tool shed in someone's back yard and used it as a house for they and my newborn father, because it was all they could afford. Whatever the catalyst, they proved to be very abusive people, and I can attest that the abuse survived to the next generation very much intact, and expanded.

I was born in Australia, my mother was allowed to keep me without a fight. However it wasn't that long ago that unwed mothers were routinely coerced into giving their newborns up for adoption. It was automatic for hospital staff to remove the baby immediately after birth and wait for the mother to convince them that she really wanted to keep the child before they would even consider bringing it back. That's what happened with my sister's birth, but she was retained by my mother despite my messed up junkie of a father being in jail and not there to help. Jail makes it sound bad, but those were the best times in my experience.

So what did the native people have for me then? They were good teachers. I learned to run really fast, ride a bike really fast - turned out that having to escape ran in the family. I learned to not dare stand in one spot for too long, particularly after an attempted rape. I would be often verbally abused, and sometimes physically abused - randomly walked up to, they spat in my face.... "You little white 🤬". I left the family home at sixteen and would sleep wherever was free. Never had to do the street thing but I slept in some pretty messed up places and probably should have street'd it really. Thanks solely to being white though (of course), I turned it around - I did ok. Sure I got a slap in the face when my father killed himself and left the kids responsible for massive debts that he'd accrued, but hey... life's rosy for white people right? Truth is I'm scarred all over, both physically and mentally, at least in part due to the governments that influenced my life.

I could go on, but some of it I'm not ready for. Actually, thinking about it more, I really really could go on. Damn.

I don't get a sorry day from Russia, Germany, or Australia, and I don't want one. I could have used some sort of help at certain stages of life, but even that's fraught. Certain things can come from outside. Other things, like finding true peace, have to be found within (sadly I can only ask that you wish me luck, as congratulations are not in order in the finding peace department). I wouldn't get as much money as an aboriginal person if I was unemployed or studying, but I wouldn't want it. That's "victim money" for people that may or may not actually be victims, and it divides purely on ethnicity. It's so called positive racism, just as the Constitution proposal is - but there is no such thing in reality. Just racism, plain and simple.

I readily admit to being a narcissist, but this post is not an example of it. It's more that the way your attitude comes across with the pompous condemnation of other people suggesting any kind of divide based on race or religion, in conjunction with creating an ethnicity-based divide yourself, incensed me just that bit too much this time. The perceptible self-righteousness combined with cruelly and hypocritically extolling ethnic and not need-based differentiation frankly makes me want to destroy you - but I'd doubtless destroy my membership at the same time. Thankfully I've found at least enough peace to be able to recognise that I have value (despite your constant suggestions otherwise), and I plan to continue contributing here.

Truth about victimhood can be freeing. Constant reassertion of the same truth can be enslaving. I'd say that the content of Kevin Rudd's speech firmly occupied the territory of the former, while annual "sorry day" number 19 is safely in the latter's territory.

Now, go your hardest with the "That's sad but....."
 
Government apology day should be what they should call it, not only do I doubt any of us were alive when the stolen generation happened, but it wasn't the public that was responsible, it was the government.
 
Having survived The Great Purge of June 2016 (eternal thanks for the nods of support), I'm going to simplify things and re-ask a single question of @prisonermonkeys - Considering your description of The Constitution's purpose, what exclusive references do you think should be made to aboriginal Australians in it?
 
I stumbled across pre-polling this weekend and got voting out the way - took all of 5 mins.

Have to laugh at Labour's centerpiece; a lie about Medicare and a 16.5b higher deficit than the Libs. We're going into a period of global economic instability and they want to spend their way out of the problem :odd:
 
a lie about Medicare
I'd rather trust a lie about the Libs' intentions than trust the Libs with Medicare because at least I know that the lie is a lie.

a 16.5b higher deficit than the Libs
As for the deficit, the only way out might be down. Abbott and Hockey rushed to try and restore a surplus - I think they felt the pressure of getting it back quickly given that Howard and Costello did it - and everything became unsustainable. We would have gotten back to surplus, but it would have been pretty hollow. The Libs love to position themselves as the most responsible economic managers, but they've never made any progress in turning it around.

We're going into a period of global economic instability and they want to spend their way out of the problem
It worked last time. Why do you think we weathered the global financial crisis so well? Go to Europe and they were pretty interested in Swann's tactics - spend ourselves into a deficit and essentially go into a controlled descent. I know the Libs like to believe that they could have avoided a recession altogether, but that's the kind of thinking that landed some of the Europeans in hot water.
 
It worked last time.
:lol:
Yes, that's right, giving people $900 to buy a new telly saved us from the GFC. Had nothing to do with the RBA and our relative lack of market exposure. Pro tip - money isn't endless, eventually Australia needs to generate it's own income via growth. Labour has zero plans for growth, just expenditure.

I'd rather trust a lie about the Libs' intentions than trust the Libs with Medicare because at least I know that the lie is a lie.

That is a ridiculous statement to make. Anyway, the faceless man will had a hard time defending his austerity inviting budget with Brexit on people's lips this week.
 
Yes, that's right, giving people $900 to buy a new telly saved us from the GFC.
You know as well as I do that that wasn't the only part of the plan. If it was as badly thought-out as you imply, why did it catch the eye of the Europeans as the way to manage a similar situation in the future?

Labour has zero plans for growth, just expenditure.
It's better than Turnbull's obsession with the "ideas boom", investing in STEM subjects to the detriment of everything else. It's as short-sighted as Gillard's plan for 40% of the population to hold a university degree.

That is a ridiculous statement to make.
Right, because the Libs have never tried to meddle with health care in the recent past.
 
I stumbled across pre-polling this weekend and got voting out the way - took all of 5 mins.

Have to laugh at Labour's centerpiece; a lie about Medicare and a 16.5b higher deficit than the Libs. We're going into a period of global economic instability and they want to spend their way out of the problem :odd:

So you think libs have the best intentions?

They wasted so much tax payer money on stupid things like subs which was given to france to build rather than australia which would create jobs and keep the port kembla steel works going and fighter jets, who will attack us for the need to get them?

They wasted so much money on the NBN they screwed up by doing FTTN and using copper, yes lets use an outdated form of communication so in 5 years it needs to be replaced wasting more money.

The politicians using tax payer money for helicopter rides and other things like more plane rides than labour, they were run by an inept big eared onion eating fool and now they are run by someone who thinks he knows I.T|

And what about that thing the libs did back in the howard era, the government sponsored rape(Went under the name of Baby Bonus), Yeah how many teens under 18 got pregnant just for that baby bonus?
 
Last edited:
And what about that thing the libs did back in the howard era, the government sponsored rape(Went under the name of Baby Bonus), Yeah how many teens under 18 got pregnant just for that baby bonus?
How many? By the by, Canada has had a baby bonus since I was a baby...and that's a long time.:sly:
 
So you think libs have the best intentions?

They wasted so much tax payer money on stupid things like subs which was given to france to build rather than australia which would create jobs and keep the port kembla steel works going and fighter jets, who will attack us for the need to get them?

Common sense says our Navy is going to be more and more important given the growth of China and their Actions of recent. Keep in mind we are a country that has no control of our foreign policy Strategy if we want to protect our trade, right now Americas Navy is being used to protect our interests with the cost of following their disastrous foreign policy objectives.

Our isolated massive land is basically our downfall when it comes to Defence and it's forced us to be involved in things we really should be staying the **** away from, to make alliances.

an interesting video:
 
Last edited:
How many? By the by, Canada has had a baby bonus since I was a baby...and that's a long time.:sly:

Not sure on the number but it got to the point that instead of offering a lump sum, they gave it in instalments if you were under 18.
So still the libs wanted teens who were most likely still in school to have a baby.
 
Not sure on the number but it got to the point that instead of offering a lump sum, they gave it in instalments if you were under 18.
So still the libs wanted teens who were most likely still in school to have a baby.
That's a poor assumption, for starters if your offering a Baby Bonus would you disallow under 18s from getting any?

If anything they would likely need it more, baby Bonus or not underage pregnancy is still going to happen.

I'm fully against the Baby Bonus anyway, as the reality of the situation means the main people that take advantage are the ones already on welfare, as the rest of the Country obviously looks at many other factors then a simple one time lump sum payment.
 
So still the libs wanted teens who were most likely still in school to have a baby.
That's like arguing that a fork = a spoon on the basis that they are both kitchen utensils. By your logic, Labour want's everyone to be unemployed because they objected to the Libs implementing a process of dole-bludgers having to look for work to claim benefits.

PS: I am anti any Family bonus scheme from a taxation perspective. Why must my taxes pay for other people's kids :sly:.
 
Last edited:
In light of the talk we've had in this thread regarding Adam Goodes/AFL/racism previously, I thought this story would be an interesting (and farcical) follow up.
Fox Sports TV coverage of the Suns' 26-point loss to Hawthorn in Launceston on Sunday clearly picked up a member of the crowd yelling abuse after Hall was awarded a free kick.

"Can you even see that far, you monkey," the fan said during the third quarter.

It is unclear if the comment was directed at Hall or an umpire.
Despite the part in bold, they ran with a headline that deemed the remark racist.

I checked, and all of the umpires were white. Now I can't state that the spectator won't be held to account if it turns out the comment was directed at the umpire in question (the wording of the "jibe" very much suggests it was), but it is an interesting situation considering the following....
Quick question, would it still be racist to boo if Adam Goodes was White?

That's called a straw man argument. It's a logical fallacy. The question cannot be answered, and you know that the question cannot be answered, and so you will use that as "proof" that booing Goodes is not racist even though it proves nothing.
Someone was called a monkey. It may well be a white person that was. Was it automatically racist if it was directed at the player (Aaron Hall, of Fijian descent)? Was it racist if it was directed at the umpire? If yes, was it racist towards the umpire and/or all white people, or towards another racial or ethnic group, or both? Was it racist towards anyone at all if the spectator had no consideration of race when making the comment?

There's no "strawman" shut down to lean on this time.
 
it is an interesting situation considering the following
You know what would be even more interesting? Actually knowing who the comment was aimed at so that the question can be answered properly. As it is, you're just floating hypotheticals in the hopes that someone will trip up and fall into a contradictory statement. And yes, it really is that transparent.
 
You know what would be even more interesting? Actually knowing who the comment was aimed at so that the question can be answered properly.
Some might read that as "so that I can properly consult my guide on how to give the 'right' answer, circa 2016".

You obviously wouldn't be treating them (player and umpire) equally, as otherwise it wouldn't matter who is was aimed at. Which is not necessarily a bad thing. Generalisations are more often seen as a negative when engaged, but sometimes they allow us to have increased awareness of the potential for hurt. Based on my view of the world's people, I would more expect that a black person (or Fijian) would have had "monkey" thrown their way than a white person would. Far from fool proof, but while I can't imagine ever being tempted to use the term at all, I'd be that much less likely to use it when talking about/to a black person. If the comment in question had no racial consideration, it wasn't racist. That wouldn't mean it wasn't in poor taste though, and may be more in poor taste if it was directed at the player.

Phew, I hope I navigated the terrifying, ever-deadly process of dealing with a hypothetical.
 
20160702_123409.jpg
It's election day, so democracy sausages for
all!
Yep
 
Back