Inquiry finds British committed genocide on Indigenous Australians
Inquiry finds British committed genocide on Indigenous Australians
It is the country's first formal "truth-telling" inquiry that ran for four years from 2021.
And Tasmanians, and Native Americans, and Indians, and Kenyans, and Irish...
There's an Australian Canadian co-production that goes into some of the atrocities the British got into:
Tasmanians
Tasmania is a state of Australia, all Tasmanian are Australian. Tasmanian Aboriginal peoples are the same as mainland Aboriginal peoples.
Torres Strait Islanders are the other indigenous peoples in Australia.
Probably other brits...
Various forms of Gaelic are hardly languages anymore
We did all of those that identify as Celt, one way or another.
The sky is blue, moon is a rock in space, earth is a stupid name for a planet. Tell me new things
The Inquiry:
*Opens a 7th grade social studies class textbook.
What's happening behind Pikachu?
Probably the British, sneaking up.
Brock is just standing behind him
They needed an inquiry?
And here I thought folks just let the Brits displace them because they're so nice!
Certainly the posh ones will tell you they value your input as you scream from the pain due the knife they plunged into your back.
If this inquiry has no power to actually do anything about this finding, I’m not sure I understand the point.
Anyone who ever read a history book already knows about the multiple genocides. The issue is what happens now?
I guess the point would be for everyone involved to say "never again" and if someone quotes Hitler they should not win elections.
They'll formally apologize, as talk is cheap, and then do nothing further.
And no, I'm not at all kidding or exaggerating: this is THE most common strategy in British Political and Social Elite circles for getting rid of such "problems" when denying it doesn't work.
Deny it, deny it was a problem, deny it was systemic, apologize and claim it was too long ago and it's pointless to do anything about it now, is a well travelled multi-step strategy in British politics (THE main strategy, even) to avoid actual consequences for their actions or lack of action.
True. This is what I am also thinking ? Everybody knows the colonial powers or imperial powers did lot of atrocities, exploitation. It is there in books.
for the same reason that everyone is entitled to due process even when things are incredibly obvious… it’s important to follow a process, to document formally, etc
Just wait 200 years and the West will also admit to all the contemporary genocides. And will make some very touching museum to them, while committing new ones and silencing anyone opposed to it.
The genocides will continue until the morale improves.
south_park_sorry_nipples.gif
And the elites over there still think Genocide is absolutely fine as long as its Whites doing it to non-Whites, hence their support for Israel and its Genocide.
Britain is maybe the best example there is of an European country which culturally didn't evolve much from 19th century thinking, at various levels (their political system, too, is an earlier, partial form of Democracy easily subverted).
Plenty of people over there do have a XXI century mindset, but those aren't the ones with actual Power.
Elita support genocide as long as they get paid.
Which kind of takes out the racism, but I'm not sure it makes it better. See also them turning their head to Rwanda, the Arabs slavery and so on, as long as they invest in western companies.
Palestinian fault's was apparently to not invest in some shitty football team
I think the profound contrast between the reaction from the British "Authorities" to the Russian invasion of Ukraine and to the Israeli Genocide in Gaza, disproves the idea that it's all about money, especially given that there was a lot more money being made from Russia than can be made from Israel.
I mean, a musician is right now being investigated by the British Police for shouting his desire for death to the invader, genocidal army that's purposefully mass murdering children - that of Israel - whilst nobody in Britain was ever investigated by police for wanting the death of members of the invading Russian army in Ukraine, even though the latter is barelly targetting civilians and never explicitly children (unlike the former).
Racism, extreme and profound Racism even, is the most reasonable explanation for such a massive disconnect in their reaction to those two different aggressors in proportion to the crimes they're committing, more so given that a money reason would yield an unbalanced reaction in the very opposite direction.
This is news?
for real. i thought this was common knowledge how ravenous the British were throughout history
And the American settlers genocided the native Americans. All the western super-powers are built of slaughter, rape and pillage.
My dude, pretty much all countries have been founded by genocidal settlers.
Problem is that some of them can't get past it and keep being genocidal settlers.
Absolutely true, but the point isn't whataboutism (well, sometimes it is, but it shouldn't be). The point should be admitting and owning our mistakes and doing what we reasonably can to:
a) admit that we did and validate the experience of the people who suffered from it
b) make sure we're not still doing it (way too often we still are, just through subtler means)
c) try to make reparations if we canEven getting to step 'a' is a big fucking step. Nobody's innocent, but honesty is the foundation on which improvements can be made.
Exactly.
The problem is those countries were the 19th century colonialist mindset isn "something we fortunately left behind" but instead is alive and well.
Well, once you've had your country invaded by rabid psychopaths, there's bound to be some gene admixture (to put that far too mildly) and so you've a chance that their descendents, even if it's recessive and rare, will have the desire go on to do the same.
Of course, rabid psychopathy and the urge to invade other places can also come about on its own, but when you look at the way the Vikings and their Germanic cousins invaded western Europe a thousand years or so ago, and then note what happened a few hundred years later, it has to make you wonder whether it might have only happened the once.
You think other empires weren’t. No slaves in Russia, Persia or china. Rest of the world was peaceful and dainty.
How about the americas pre Columbus. Do you think they were peaceful and had not slaves.
I mean, idk about the Aztecs but the Incas didn't. But regardless, chattel slavery is a purely Western creation and for at least two millennia the European man has been the main source of grief and destruction in the world. Idc if you refute it, I understand why you would, but it's neither productive nor honest.
And most of us Aussies voted no to recognise the indigenous voice in our constitution. It just never ends.
I voted yes, and got called racist by some dink simping for Lidia Thorpe in the Green and Pleasant subreddit. The immature trashy twat who campaigned No because she said it was tokenistic.
I don't know what to think anymore.
Yeah bunch of cunts, I'm a Ngombur man and it was incredibly disheartening to talk to anyone out and about and hear how they didn't want to vote yes for what really boiled down to racist fear.
I'm so sorry, mate.
looks at Canada, then the US
Guess the apple really doesn't fall far from the tree
My Aussie mate back in England told me that the British killed the First Nations and took their land, like his ancestors just turned up here to find swathes of unoccupied land and were like “crikey, what’s been happening here!” and immediately started doing Acknowledgement Of Country at the start of every office meeting.
I legit do not understand your comment.
My Aussie mate back in England told me that the British killed the First Nations and took their land,
With you this far. Yes your Australian friend (who was in England at the time) told you that the British killed the first nations people and took their land.
like his ancestors just turned up here to find swathes of unoccupied land and were like “crikey, what’s been happening here!” and immediately started doing Acknowledgement Of Country at the start of every office meeting.
Now you're saying your Australian friend was foolish to ideate that his ancestors just turned up in Australia to find swathes of unoccupied land.. and then start making Acknowledgement of Country statements.
First of all - how is this not contradictory to the first part of your analogy? He didn't ideate that.
Second, the Acknowledgement of Country statements didn't start until 200 years after colonisation.. So this is really disingenuous representation you make of your "Aussie mate's" position.
I think they assume Anglo-Australians separate their own ancestors from the British colonisers.
If his ancestors were Irish and were forced to Australia in the 1850s due to the famine, for example, the comment makes sense
What a shocker! The British are bad people?!
They also found the sky is blue and water is wet. (I know, technically it's not)
So now what ? Are the families or descendents of those indigenous australians alive today in australia ? After so many years what kind of compensation will be provided or what kind of justice will be provided ?
LIES!!
Europeans traveled the globe to spread the love of God and everyone they encountered they treated with the utmost respect because they realized these people, like themselves, are God's creation, created in His image. That's the beauty about Christians throughout the ages, you can safely trust upon their moral compass because they adhere to the laws of God and God only. If Europeans weren't truly guided by God, and ever behaved in bad ways as is suggested here, you would expect to see examples of such unprovoked death and destruction across the globe all throughout the age of exploration and colonialism. But what we see, for the most part, is harmony and bliss, ever lasting peace and prosperity, like a mirror image of the Kingdom of Heaven brought to earth. And people across the globe converted because they were impressed by the moral superiority of the white man, saviors of humanity, chosen by God himself to guide us to His perfect light. And yes, of course, in some instances, when indiginous people would threaten this harmony, the good Christians needed to defend it, as warriors of God, and sometimes harsh measures needed to be taken. But to frame this genocide, ethnic cleansing, rape, torture, theft, etc. as immoral is shortsighted. They raped and tortured in self defense, or if not that, in His defence. Sometimes it may not be immediately obvious how these actions by Christians are part of Gods plan, but God and his true believers in His name, work in mysterious ways, and to question these ways, whether guided by hatred or logic, is to disrespect God, because it shows you have no faith. When you act out of faith in God, this requires no logic, no justification. The actions of the Christian man are it's own justification. Submit and all will be well. But if you resist you deserve everything that's coming to you, fire and brimstone, whether it's in Hell or here on earth, you will burn, as the abomination you are.
Say it with me, 'for the Grace of God, DEATH TO ALL NON-BELIEVERS!'
/s (obviously..)
Shocking