The Constitution
THE Constitution would be amended to encourage respect for indigenous Australians, and denounce discrimination, if an expert panel’s findings are adopted.
Personally I’m of the “respect is earned” school but I am against race based discrimination.
The report calls for the removal of sections 25 and 51 and the inclusion of a new section 51A that recognises that the continent and its islands now known as Australia “were first occupied by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
I have just read section 51 and the only mention of race is section xxvi that says The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to:
-The people of any race, for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws:Why would the expert panel recommend the removal of all of section 51 rather than just the sub section that deals with race? Anybody? Section 25, however, deals explicitly with race;
25. For the purposes of the last section, if by the law of any State all persons of any race are disqualified from voting at elections for the more numerous House of the Parliament of the State, then, in reckoning the number of the people of the State or of the Commonwealth, persons of the race resident in that State shall not be counted.I can see a case to remove section 25 but not to remove all of section 51. The panel want a new new section 51A that recognises that the continent and its islands now known as Australia “were first occupied by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.” I don’t get the point of that. If you did that in European countries their constitutions would simply be a litany of races that have been through their countries. On first glance I would be happy to support removal of sections that specifically mention race but not any inclusions of same just to point out they were here before us.
Facebook
Twitter
In the race to fight racial descrimination we should firstly abolish all forms of sport/competition that is reliant on participants establishing either their genetic origins or racial preference by the swearing of allegiance to a particular flag or sovereign. Remove the reason for racial abuse at sports venues, both on and off the field. These competitions require racism to exist in a lot of cases….soccer, cricket, World games, Olympics, Commonwealth Games, Rugby to name a few. The belief that one country/race is better than another is pushed into your psyche continually through participation and barracking as a spectator. Tongue in cheek.
I haven’t read the constitution but can you tell me Kev whether each of the “invading hordes” that have since settled in this country has a special mention, or perhaps the person who introduced the wheel to this fine country? Or is the constitution inclusive of all races and creeds? Bearing in mind that it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of race in this fine country then s. 25 as you quote is no longer relevant and could be repealled without need for further change. An inclusion of a particular race in the Constitution to the exclusion of all others would be decriminatory in itself, I would have thought. Ah, but of course there are exemptions to the laws on discrimination aren’t there?
“Why would the expert panel recommend the removal of all of section 51 rather than just the sub section that deals with race?”
It’s an efficient drafting solution, and helps the whole document hang together. You could compare it with writing the second edition of a book – you take the opportunity to refine and clarify.
“If you did that in European countries their constitutions would simply be a litany of races that have been through their countries.”
Not a valid comparison. European countries were not colonised.
This provides an historical context – http://www.humanrights.gov.au/constitution/reform/constitutional_reform2011.pdf
This is the Constitution we are talking about editing, not the old Army Law Manual. To remove an entire section because one sub section offends certain minorities doesn’t make sense. The people, of course will never allow that.
I don’t agree with the intent of your link. I believe in one nation, one people, one flag – I don’t even like the Aborigine flag.
European countries were not colonized – So the Romans were in Britain for R&C? The Romans also conquered and colonized Gaul – now known as France and nearly everywhere else. The entire history of Europe revolves around power changes and keep in mind, if Australia wasn’t an island we wouldn’t have any indigenous aborigines. they would have all been put to the sword by the pacific version of Ghengis Khan and replaced by a more advanced civilization.
Should France mention the Gauls and Francs as first occupiers in their Constitution?
Should Britain do likewise with Normans, Saxons and a host of other invaders?
I don’t think so.
I’m happy to remove any racial discrimination from our constitution but am against inserting any.
“Not a valid comparison. European countries were not colonised”…..GOOD POINT BOBBY….the word conquered comes to mind. Lucky the Spaniards didn’t take this vast continent seriously or we wouldn’t have a need for changing the Constitution in the format mentioned.
I would support the the removal of the words
“of any race”, hence removing the racial discrimination.
The preamble to the constitution, should historically recognise the creation of Australia, by its mixtures and different purposes original inhabitants, transportees and settlers (colonial status to Australia as an identity), not the sections of powers.
Section 25 is anachronistic in modern Australia and has no relevance as a bygone reflection when Australia had racial segmentation. It appears completely redundant.
additionlly, personally I have had no problem with our convict transportee past, so what if we were settled as cargoe and not super cargoe.
At least the convict transportee came with papers, signed by the best Judges in England and secured for the trip and perusal by port authorities on arrival.
White slaves in fact and therefore the reason we are different to the US and England both.
Australia needs to get comfortable in its own skin.
John,
I believe Britain sent over 50,000 convicts to its American colony, and surely would have sent more had there not been a dust up betwen the two, which was won by the Americans.
Perhaps,
But american history since the 50s has been about the dark slavery matters. Transportation was not only about the exile but after servitude a full pardon or manumission if you like occurred.
Secondly as my wife pointed out one of her fore bears a great great grandfather. Was transported for theft or something.
He did his servitude, and among many things was a post master and ran a pub. Sired a heap of children.
So for us if anything our fair go ethic is intrinsic to us. This is our difference.
No transportee relative is seeking apology or recognition of injustices and I daresay there were a few as flogging was quite common.
I’m just remarking in the main and agree in principle with the post.
“European countries were not colonised”
WOW aren’t you a teacher?
I guess you call all Europeans Anglo Saxon then.
Gary
Occasionally, secondary students are asked to compare the Roman occupation of Britain with British colonisation of this country. This is done by beginning history teachers substantially to encourage their students to read.
There are so many pitfalls apparent in comparing events nearly 2000 years apart, that it’s not an exercise pursued at tertiary level.
Comparative history died out as an area of study in the 1950s, and Toynbee copped a lot of flak because he maintained it was a valid science.
Generally, people (no matter where they come from) have names, and that’s what I call them.
“…Comparative history died out as an area of study in the 1950s”
What a load of crap. As usual 17 bobby red-herring doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Comparative History is alive and well in universities all over the world.
10 seconds in Google:
Comparative History of Famines – Melbourne University
Comparative History of Immigrant Peoples – Catholic University
And to stay on topic:
Comparative history of aboriginal litigation research in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States – University of British Columbia.
European history is replete with invasions, occupations and colonisations. From the Romans to the bloody Normans and the Goths to the Moors.
We are witnessing the beginning of the end of Europe’s economic colonisation by Germany whilst a new ‘tribe’ of Muslim North Africans is springing up in colonies from Stockholm to Marseilles.
“To know nothing of what happened before you were born is to remain forever a child.”
Cicero.
17 bobby red-herring obviously knows nothing of what happened before or after his birth.
You can find just about anything on Google – much of which has a life nowhere else – proves nothing except a basic misunderstanding of how a search engine works.
Comparative history, as a discipline, has come and gone. There are some subjects taught with “comparative” in their nomenclature, but as a discipline worth a faculty or resources – not since the 50s – there may be a department here or there in some of the less progressive institutions or where there is a legacy paying for it.
That was all your search revealed.
Do it properly – try searching on the exact phrase with inverted commas. You will note that you get no results.
And I’m still wondering what Muslim immigation to Europe has to do with this topic, which as I understand it, is about the constitution.
Don’t bother, This is clearly an attempt of diversion away from his blunder.
“diversion, a form of logical fallacy known as a general irrelevancy, a violation of sound reasoning”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversion
“Fallacies can be used to win arguments regardless of the merits. Among such devices, discussed in more detail below, are: “ignoring the question” to divert argument to
unrelated issues using a red herring”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy
“Do it properly – try searching on the exact phrase with inverted commas. You will note that you get no results.”
“comparative history” – 731,000 results.
Looks like another own goal for 17 bobby red-herring.
“… I’m still wondering what Muslim immigration to Europe has to do with this topic…”
About as much as your condescending and wholly inaccurate post regarding “comparative history”.
As for the topic: “Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good.”
Thomas Sowell
My only comment in summary would be:
The Australian Constitution, is not a history book, so comparative or other history is not the issue. There has been a tad too much license given on too many historical issues.
Post modernism has no relevance to the Constitution.
Comparative history has no relevance, this is the over arching set of legal principles for Australia and therefore changing the constitution needs well thought out principles not activism masking itself as principles.
No nation would be wise to alter its constitution of powers without intense transparent national debate and not an appointed workshop of collectivism, we have had a bit too much of that of late.
Pitching the Roman conquest of Britain against the colonization of Australia is a classic case of fallacious comparison. The two events have no connection or relationship. The facts that they are separated by nearly 2000 years, that they deal with different and vastly contrasting civilisations, and that the variation in the reliability of available source accounts are so wide, render the comparison ludicrous. In other words – a classic red herring….
The issue being considered is whether or not the recommended changes in the constitution will help in engendering respect for indigenous Australians.
Unfortunately, given the level of loathing and complacency evident in the public discourse on this topic, on this site and others, the answer is that it will make probably no difference to some. No matter – it will make a difference for fair minded Australians.
Any gesture, symbolic or otherwise, which seeks to advance respect for, and the quality of life of indigenous Australians, is worth considering. In the end, decent Australians will support it. The referendum of 1967 was only the beginning.
Pitching the Roman conquest of Britain against the colonization of Australia is a classic case of fallacious comparison.
Possibly true but I, for one, wasn’t doing that. I was simply countering your statement that European countries weren’t colonized.
They were!
..the level of loathing and complacency evident brings to mind that a racist is someone who has won an argument against a leftie.
It is not racist or loathing, or complacency when I recommend that all mentions of race should be removed from the Constitution. Any solutions to the problems Australians of any racial background suffer should be based on need, not the constitution.
Kev,
As you know, 1735099 is not always right but he is never wrong….just ask him. Just as Juliar does not always tell the truth, but never lies.
They have something in common they are left on both sides.
“A racist is someone who has one an argument against a leftie”
I doubt Charlie Teo would agree with you.
Now we have Teo in the subject matter, I would like to point out that it has been reported that Teo has indicated that racism in other countries (not specified) is a greater problem than in Australia. I read that to mean that racism is a lesser problem in Australia than in other countries. And still we the popularise the idea that racism is a huge concern in Australia and bear the brunt of criticism of many countries that openly have huge racism problems. Don’t interpret me incorrectly…..racism is not something we want in a perfect world but I believe that we have overdone the politically correct approach in attempting to eradicate an attitude adopted by all peoples. The only way to remove racism in a society is to isolate the groups. While there are differing cultures,religions,colours shapes and appearances and political beliefs there will be racism….show me where it does not exist. We have to find a way to co-exist peacefully. Ball’s in your court, academic.
By the way Bobby school master, you should have cut and pasted the quote (one for won).
“show me where it does not exist”
It did not exist in my rifle section. We had a West Indian, a Pole, A Pom, two Murris (one from Blacktown and one from the Alice), and a Sri Lankan in our crew.
“…two Murris (one from Blacktown and one from the Alice)…”
Really ? A Murri from the Alice – long way from home.
And Sri Lanka didn’t come into being until 1972.
Tsk, tsk – attention to detail 17 bobby red-herring.
And a “Pom”?
Interesting ‘racist slur’ there 17 bobby red-herring. You take care to spell ‘Murri’ correctly and then use a derogatory term for a person hailing from Great Britain.
How transparent your prejudices are – typical of the self loathing left though.
Unlike PeterW, I’m not arrogant enough to put my own labels on individuals. I’ve always asked them what they like to be called and used that. Tracker came from the Alice and liked to be called a Murri – so that’s the term I used. He may have originated from what we now call Queensland – I never asked him.
It matters not when Sri Lanka came into being – this bloke calls himself Sri Lankan – that’s good enough for me.
“I’m not arrogant enough to put my own labels on individuals.”
Another worthless red-herring from 17 bobby red-herring. But why the smokescreen? Yup, as usual 17 bobby red-herring has been caught out displaying his absolute ignorance of history – even his own apparently.
“It matters not when Sri Lanka came into being.”
He just can’t help himself. Yes it does. Before their country was re-named in 1972 people from Ceylon would say they came from Ceylon, but describe themselves as Sinhalese. It’s a name drawn from their language, culture and racial identity. Even today many Sri Lankans will say they are from Sri Lanka, but also identify as Sinhalese or Tamil depending on their racial background. So as you were in a rifle-section well before the country was re-named, your story is full of shit.
You still haven’t apologised for using a racial slur against the Englishman in your section by the way.
PeterW’s perseverating again.
I know a good trick cyclist – email me and I’ll send you her details.
So far he’s invented three new red herrings and we’re still counting. His last three posts have nothing to do with the topic.
Yawn…..
“His last three posts have nothing to do with the topic.”
17 bobby red-herring tried to make a point regarding another poster’s question: “show me where it [racism] does not exist?”
17 bobby red-herring indignantly claimed: “It did not exist in my rifle section. We had a West Indian, a Pole, A Pom, two Murris (one from Blacktown and one from the Alice), and a Sri Lankan in our crew.”
His memory is obviously faulty or he is telling fibs. Murris don’t come from the Alice (or Blacktown), there was no such place as Sri Lanka when he was in a rifle-section and he used what is commonly regarded as a derogatory appellation for an Englishman.
A casual reader of this blog could be excused for thinking 17 bobby red-herring made the whole rifle-section recollection up and used the ‘Pom’ slur because his own prejudices are so ingrained he can’t help himself.
17 bobby red-herring’s howler combined with his demonstrably false claim that ‘comparative history’ as a discipline ceased to exist in the 1950s would add to our casual reader dismissing 17 bobby red-herring’s posts as just inconsequential ravings typical of a member of the self-loathing left.
Regular readers however are not so charitable we know he’s a cock and routinely dismiss his fantastic claims as the vapid inventions of an irrelevant left-wing whinger.
“His memory is obviously faulty or he is telling fibs. Murris don’t come from the Alice (or Blacktown), there was no such place as Sri Lanka when he was in a rifle-section and he used what is commonly regarded as a derogatory appellation for an Englishman”
My memory’s fine – PeterW has a fevered imagination which he uses to make up fairy stories to suit his cock-eyed view of the world. The term Murri is used traditionally to describe people from the area that is now called Queensland, but of course (as I found when working with people from Alpurrurulam (Lake Nash) near the NT border who called themselves Murris, tribal movement patterns pay no attention to state borders. The Allewarre people from the Urandangi area (where we opened a school in 1993) were happy to call themselves Murris, and they travelled East-west. Essentially people from that neck of the woods were happy to be identified as brown water people to distinguish themselves from the blue water people who came from coastal country. Charlie’s family were from this area, and he wanted to be called a Murri. He certainly wasn’t a Koori.
PeterW finds it impossible to think beyond his limited understanding – which is obviously gained from Wikipedia.
Another bloke in my rifle section was born in the country which is now called Sri Lanka. PeterW’s mindset is stuck in the last century. He probably calls people from Iran Persians.
Perhaps south of the border where PeterW comes from, the term “Pom” is considered derogatory. It isn’t here in Queensland. Our hides are thicker, and our self-respect healthier than to be bothered. There is a meanness of spirit characteristic of many Victorians best understood by their tendency to descend upon us in the cooler months, with a clean shirt and a fifty dollar note neither of which they change during their (hopefully brief) stay. At a guess, I reckon PeterW comes from Victoria.
“The Allewarre people from the Urandangi…”
Red-herring.
“…as I found when working with people from Alpurrurulam…”
Self-aggrandising red-herring.
“He certainly wasn’t a Koori.”
Red-herring.
“Essentially people from that neck of the woods…”
That ain’t the “Alice”.
“Another bloke in my rifle section was born in the country which is now called Sri Lanka.”
Ah… The story changes. That’s the problem with porkies. Those who tell them find it hard to keep track of them. No one from Ceylon was identified as a ‘Sri Lankan’ at the time 17 bobby red-herring’s amazingly racism free rifle-section is alleged to have existed. Pity his invention wasn’t based on a few facts instead of his usual inaccurate nonsense. He might have got away with it then.
“Wikipedia…”
The leftist’s bible.
“… the term “Pom” is considered derogatory….”
It is by Englishmen. It was used as a deliberate ‘racist insult’ by unprincipled people like 17 bobby red-herring to belittle people who emigrated to Australia from England at the time he was in a rifle section. By using it in this thread 17 bobby red-herring shows he is prejudiced to the core.
“He probably calls people from Iran Persians.”
Many Iranians prefer to be identified as Persians. They don’t want to be identified as either Arabs or with the current Iranian regime. 17 bobby red-herring’s pompous self-aggrandising is a very thin cover he affects to hide his appalling lack of knowledge about… well anything. Especially history.
“There is a meanness of spirit characteristic of many Victorians…”
Red-herring. But instructive of 17 bobby red-herrings’ prejudiced mind-set.
I’m a Western Australian.
“The story changes”. Really? You have a comprehension problem. I identified him as a Sri Lankan when I posted a few days ago. The country is called Sri Lanka now – in case you haven’t noticed – he calls himself a Sri Lankan now. Tell me what’s changed.
I’m beginning to review my diagnosis of perseveration. It’s closer to Tourettes – bursts of obscenity laced with repetitive tics.
“I’m a West Australian”.
That explains a lot. WA is a great state. Two of Australia’s greatest Labor leaders (Curtin and Hawke) despite being born in Victoria and South Australia respectively, spent significant portions of their lives there. On the other hand, a cesspool of right wing extremists also abides in WA. Refer the activity of Combat18 recently – http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/news/7346142/neo-nazi-in-court-over-mosque-shooting/
Perhaps PeterW is affiliated?
“It did not exist in my rifle section. We had a West Indian, a Pole, A Pom, two Murris (one from Blacktown and one from the Alice), and a Sri Lankan in our crew.”
What period in Australia’s history was 17 bobby red-herring referring to when he tried to make his trivial discussion point? “It did not exist in my rifle section.” That’s right, way back when 17 bobby red-herring was press-ganged – well before Ceylon changed its name to Sri Lanka. Therefore the person in his rifle section he inaccurately described as Sri Lankan is correctly described as Ceylonese, Sinhalese or Tamil. Or would Mr History tell us Julius Caesar was Italian? Or that Boadicea was English or, given his track record, a member of the EU.
“It matters not when Sri Lanka came into being – this bloke calls himself Sri Lankan – that’s good enough for me.”
No he didn’t. Not way-back-when. He would have said he came from Ceylon and was either Ceylonese, Sinhalese or Tamil.
“…he calls himself a Sri Lankan now. Tell me what’s changed.”
17 bobby red-herring’s entire story – it’s crumbling away piece by piece. A few posts ago his made up friend was a Sri Lankan in his rifle section way-back-when, but all of a sudden it’s “he calls himself a Sri Lankan now.” Still inaccurate though. If he has lived in Australia since way-back-when, how can he be a citizen of Sri Lanka? Sri Lankan is not a racial, religious, language or even a societal group one can join at a whim. It’s a nation. To be Sri Lankan one has to be or have been a citizen.
Little has changed since Ceylon was renamed Sri Lanka. The people of that island still identify with their racial, religious language and societal groups. The majority are Sinhalese. Most of the rest are Tamils. It probably escaped 17 bobby red-herring’s laser beam width view of current affairs there was a war in Sri Lanka recently between… Can he guess? No, he can’t do it? Here I’ll help. Between the Singhalese majority and the Tamils who occupied the north of the island.
“Curtin” was a panicked PM who sold Australia’s sovereignty down the gurgler to the yanks. Hawke was okay for a while then he got rolled by the recession we had to have.
What a pitiful attempt at slurring Western Australians. 17 bobby red-herring’s link is to a newspaper article about three yobs appearing in a magistrates court and being dealt with firmly. That’s what happens in WA. Unlike Queensland where they’d probably be employed by the Health Department or as teachers in Toowoomba. Or holding a ‘Hammered Music Concert’ in Brisbane. I hear 17 bobby red-herring has tickets, he just lurrrvvvsss a bit of leather and a forest of sweaty bald heads rockin’ to his rhythm.
Still no apology to the tens of thousands of Englishmen who have served in Australia’s armed forces though. Why does 17 bobby red-herring hate them so? Is it just because he’s of the dissolute Malthusian left or did one insult him when he was a conscript?
PeterW – the clockwork Wanker – wind him up, and away he goes……..
:-)
Poor ole 17 bobby red-herring reduced to his baser self and him wot is an academic too.
So how did his self-proclaimed academic prowess fare on this thread?
1) “European colonies were not colonised.” False.
2) “Comparative history died out as an area of study in the 1950s. False.
3) “…people (no matter where they come from) have names, and that’s what I call them.” False. He calls them Sri Lankans, Murris, Poles and the derogatory term “Poms”.
4) “Do it properly – try searching on the exact phrase with inverted commas. You will note that you get no results.” False – 731,000 hits.
5) “…the level of loathing and complacency evident in the public discourse on this topic, on this site…” False. No such “loathing” is evident.
6) “It did not exist in my rifle section. We had a West Indian, a Pole, A Pom, two Murris (one from Blacktown and one from the Alice), and a Sri Lankan in our crew.” False. Murris don’t come from the Alice (or Blacktown). Sri Lanka was formed long after his notional rifle section broke up – ergo his pal was Ceylonese, Singhalese or a Tamil.
7) “It matters not when Sri Lanka came into being…” False. See point 6.
8) “I’m not arrogant enough to put my own labels on individuals.” False. See quote in point 6 – “a Pom” looks like a label, sounds like a label… Yup it’s a label.
17 bobby red-herring’s score to date? Oh dear, a big fat zero – and he’s an academic.
Maybe all that head-banging he does at his favourite ‘Hammered Music Concert’ has scrambled his grey matter into a kind of leftist wanker soup.
“Anger and avarice, lust and delusion, arrogance and passion tighten their grip on him. He obeys his own impulses refusing to reckon any law outside of himself. He never cares to listen to the word of the Guru or the advice of the holy.”He is lost in the wilderness of his own delusions and passions manmukhi bharami bhavai bebani” (GG, 941). Forgetting the Giver, that is God, he chases material goods all the time. The longer he remains under the sway of his baser self (man), the farther he drifts from God`s grace.”
Manmukh, the ego guided person, as opposed to gurmukh`who is Guru guided.
Now we know what the “W” stands for – careful you’ll go blind……..
“Now we know what the “W” stands for…”
Ho ho ho ho… What an amazing comeback. He’s a clever little academic – 17 bobby red-herring certainly didn’t waste his free years at university.
“Ho ho ho ho…”
But wait – there’s more – now PeterW’s channelling Santa Claus.
“…channelling Santa Claus…”
Here you go 17 bobby red-herring a whole ITV site for your favourite fictional character: http://www.santatelevision.com/
Santa would be right at home in your magic racism free rifle-section.
Ficta voluptatis causa sint proxima veris.
“…a classic red herring.”
Writes 17 bobby red-herring. Hilarious.
There is no need to recognise anyone or anything in the preamble – it’s a nonsense. Remove the few words regarding ‘race’ and be done with it.
What next? A list of all the hominids thought to have ‘occupied’ this bit of dirt? Why stop there? What about the rest?
Are we to be so discriminatory that we deny the right of other members of our genus to their equitable place in our constitution?
I suspect that Charlie’s disappointment stems from the trouble that has been caused by too many of the Muslims we have allowed in.
I further suspect that unreasonably, but understandingly, the dislike for Muslims and their ways is being taken out on all who look different.
Much more banging on by the eye dabbers about our Aborigines will probably produce a significant backlash there as well.
In the meantime I plan on fitting a Rolls Royce washer to my Land Rover.
Based on the “right” to determine one’s race, I reckon I should be able to determine my Landy is now a Rolls. Can’t get fairer than that. Any buyers for a 4WD Flying Lady?
17 bobby red-herring doesn’t know much about anything and he’s a lefty so you’re in with a chance there HRT.
I have been pondering the reply by 1735099???? in relation to “It did not exist in my rifle section. We had a West Indian, a Pole, A Pom, two Murris (one from Blacktown and one from the Alice), and a Sri Lankan in our crew.”.
Bearing in mind that I am by birth Australian, I was forced to prove my Australian Citizenship prior to being accepted into the Service.
Can Bobby, the wit indicate which of these members of his section was not an Australian? I understand that the Armed Services descriminate on the basis of race when recruiting, with very limited exceptions, applicants or conscripts must be Australian citizens. I don’t think that many exceptions would have accumulated in one rifle section. The terms used by Bobby to describe his section are either terms of endearment or designed by him fallaciously to prove the unproveable….that racism did not exist in his section. As previously indicated by other writers here he appears to display his own traits by the use of derogatory terms. The fact that so many diggers in one section of such varying backgrounds work well together is another indication of the ability of hardworking training staff at RTB and Corps training establishments, and in the case of the bulk of conscripts marched in to Seven RAR (who did no Corps training) the effort put in by the Officers and NCOs at SEVEN. Up the Red Rooster.
“Can Bobby, the wit indicate which of these members of his section was not an Australian?”
They were all Australian, and all conscripts with the exception of the West Indian.
It is entirely possible to be Australian and to have a different heritage. It’s called multiculturism, and it works pretty well. This is the bit that Bolt and his ilk lack the wit to understand. What makes us strong is what makes us different and how well these differences are tolerated. What we all have in common is our humanity – which is why I object to terms such as “feral” applied to groups of people.
“the bulk of conscripts marched in to Seven RAR (who did no Corps training)”
I don’t know about “the bulk” but I was marched into 7RAR with a group of 14th and 15th intake Nashos, most who came with me from Corps training at Singleton. We worked well a as a section because we respected each other’s common humanity, although back then we wouldn’t have used those words to describe it. Over forty years later, those of us who are still around (the Polish bloke was shot by Tasmanian SOG in 1991, and one of the Murris died in the nineties) still share that respect.
“It is entirely possible to be Australian and to have a different heritage. It’s called multiculturalism…….”
No it isn’t. What you have described is assimilation and integration – that is why your section worked.
“Divided We Stand and Divided We Fall” could be the motto of multiculturalism, while it is best described as tribalism – it encourages the retention and pursuit of one’s original culture while living in another.
It does not work, which is why the UK, France, Germany and the Netherlands are abandoning it.
Its cost is a restriction on free speech and its price is the creation of state and federal enforcers. For some Australian background research the setup of “the two pastors” by Victoria’s Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Council (HREOC), and the events leading to the resignation of Chris Puplick from his position as head of the NSW Anti Discrimination Board.
For some Canadian background on the restrictions which multiculturalism brings, watch the segments on YouTube containing the confrontation between Ezra Levant and Canada’s unlovely HRC. Mark Steyn, another Canadian, is worth reading on the subject.
For mine, the sooner we are rid of this divisive policy the better for all.
“it encourages the retention and pursuit of one’s original culture while living in another”
So Hogmanay, St Paddy’s Day, Yom Kippur and Hanukkah, Paniyiri, and Tet – all vigorously celebrated here, must be figments of my imagination.
Assimilation – abandoned in the 70s – responsible for enormous suffering and grief, and driven by the same eugenics that Hitler’s Germany found so attractive –
“We have power under the act to take any child from its mother at any stage of its life… Are we going to have a population of one million blacks in the Commonwealth or are we going to merge them into our white community and eventually forget that there were ever any Aborigines in Australia?”
A O Neville, Chief Protector of Aborigines, WA
Native Welfare Conference, 1937
David Hollinsworth in his book Race and Racism in Australia quotes:
“Generally by the fifth and invariably by the sixth generation, all native characteristics of the Australian aborigine are eradicated. The problem of our half-castes will quickly be eliminated by the complete disappearance of the black race, and the swift submergence of their progeny in the white.”
Those were the days……
It’s interesting that collectivism, so loathed by Conservatives, has its purest expression in the military. The notion that the needs of the individual must be suppressed in the interests of the group is fundamental to the efficient functioning of a rifle section.
“…and driven by the same eugenics that Hitler’s Germany…”
Drivel. Godwin’s law – fail.
“…all native characteristics of the Australian aborigine are eradicated.”
Not according to judge Mordy…
“It’s interesting that collectivism, so loathed by Conservatives, has its purest expression in the military.”
More drivel. Is there no end to this fool’s ignorance?
It might suit the North Koreans to reduce their infantry sections to the base rule of collectivism, to crush individualism and institute blind obedience. But on our side of the fence intelligence, initiative, physical fitness, tolerance, humour, loyalty, teamwork and self-discipline are characteristics valued by the Australian Army.
The collectivist left shouts in unison ”we are all individuals.” The digger pipes up with ”I’m not.”
“The advocates of collectivism are motivated not by a desire for men’s happiness, but by hatred for man… hatred of the good for being the good; …the focus of that hatred, the target of its passionate fury, is the man of ability.”
Ayn Rand
Quoting Ayn Rand? You’ve got to be kidding.
Even Conservatives have pegged her pretty accurately – “The news about this book seems to me to be that any ordinarily sensible head could possibly take it seriously, and that apparently, a good many do. Somebody has called it: “Excruciatingly awful.” I find it a remarkably silly book.”
Whittaker Chambers reviewing “Atlas Shrugged”.
He’s summed it up pretty well. To read the rest of his article go here – http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2705853/posts
“More drivel…”
More name-calling.
In PeterW’s simple binary world, there are only goodies and baddies. Therefore he believes that collectivism is “bad” when practised by (for example) the North Koreans, but “good” when practised by the Australian military.
Reminds me of a blue heeler I once owned – great dog, but capable only of entertaining one thought in his woolly head at a time……
Why am I not surprised that you seek to quote Chambers?
“But “good” when practised by the Australian military.”
Silly 17 bobby red-herring, he’s the only one claiming the Australian Military practices ‘collectivism’ like his buddies in North Korea.
Ayn Rand may be loopy, but her quote fits 17 bobby red-herring’s philosophy to a ‘T’.
No self-respecting blue heeler would allow itself to be owned by 17 bobby red-herring. Given his predilection for fantasy he was probably Scooby Doo’s little buddy – the characters lefty goatee is quite fitting.
Here 17 bobby red-herring, relive your cartoonish past: http://scoobydoo.kidswb.com/games
A nice make believe friend like those amazing non-racists in his amazing magic rifle-section with its time travelling Sri Lankan.
“I see in Communism [the left] the focus of the concentrated evil of our time.”
Whittaker Chambers
Great clarity from a homosexual communist who recanted his ways and became a homophobic, Christian anti-communist perjurer – so there’s hope for even 17 Bobby Red-Herring, but not for the NSW Greens and Lee Rhiannon.
“So Hogmanay, St Paddy’s Day, Yom Kippur and Hanukkah, Paniyiri, and Tet – all vigorously celebrated here, must be figments of my imagination.” No Bobby they are not figments of your imagination, but Christmas and Easter may well be, in the not too distant future. The education system and local government bodies taken over by predominantly non-Christian groups will ensure it.
Don’t you mean…
The notion that the wishes/wants of the individual must be considered secondary to the needs of the group to ensure as far as is humanly possibly the survival of the group, is fundamental to the efficient functioning of a rifle section
Well done – you got the first sentence correct.
However, from there I think you rode off in at least two different directions at once.
Here is a mathematical parallel to your response.
Let a = 1 and b = 1
This means a = b
Multiply both sides by a, which gives:
a² = ab
Subtract b² from both sides, which gives:
a² – b² = ab – b²
Factorise this equation, which gives:
(a – b)(a + b) = b(a – b)
Divide both sides by (a – b), which gives:
a + b = b
Therefore 2 = 1
I reckon that sums up the logic of your response.
So, what your saying is that 1735099 has the logic of a female mathematician, who would be very angry at that comparison.
“So, what your saying is that”
Should read “So, what you’re saying….”
Gender has buggerall to do with mathematics………
Got a rise out of you Robert…..I stand corrected. Have we spelt bugger all correctly?
Are you using a dictionary or a thesaurus or common useage as your reference?
You seem to have missed the point of my post.
So wot yur sayin 17 bubby red hurring is that youse cant help your self and youse have to prove your a nit picking wanker at least wunce on evury thred.