Terry – listen darky, fuck off back to Singapore (Sorry, it’s just that Roland keeps telling me I’ll go to heaven for being so bloody nice about everything and seeing as you are pretty close to calling me a racist I thought I’d really give you some ammunition – now stop taking our jobs!!!).

Yes, there is a great problem with notions of the ‘noble savage’. They are patronising, paternalistic and tend to over look problems within the culture you are talking about. Its power is to be equally racist despite what are often good intentions. Perhaps the stolen generation suffered this fate.

When I talk about self determination and land rights for indigenous Australia it is not so much a case of privileging one culture over another – unless you are talking about a very ‘liberal’ equal playing field where everyone can achieve the great dream of upward social mobility if only you got off your arse. I don’t buy that and I don’t think you do. What I am doing is acknowledging a few very important points. Firstly the Australian Aborigines where here first. We have systematically destroyed every aspect of their existence. They therefore deserve special recognition and various other things. Secondly they are the most disadvantaged group of people in Australian society and this is the direct effect of point one. Thirdly it is accommodating of some particular needs that are specific to the Aborigines and I believe we should be as accommodating as possible of these sorts of things – providing they do not impinge on the liberties of others.

With all these things in mind the only way to achieve them is through land rights and self determination. It is my understanding that these are the demands of our indigenous population.

If you are referring to my point about knowledge systems then I think you have misunderstood me – this is my fault. My blog is about the revolution I’d like to see and hope is happening. This requires a new knowledge system to create a new modernity/epoch.

Indigenous knowledge systems are, almost coincidentally, very close to the ideas that I think we should be organising our society around. This does not mean reverting back to a nomadic life style. It is more about an understanding of the land and how we are a part of it and a decentralised, reasonably non-hierarchical organisational structure. There is much variation between different Aboriginal groups in Australia and many of their practices and beliefs are not something I think that all of Australia should accommodate. This is not to say that they can’t or shouldn’t. A trivial example would be corporal punishment. I can’t advocate spearing someone in the leg because they slept with my wife (although if I had a wife I’m should that is what I’d like to do).

I have arrived at these conclusions through highly ‘western’ train of thought. It is almost coincidental that I have arrived at these conclusions. I don’t think I should be not using them for fear of glamorising indigenous Australia.

Make sense?

Well with my new counter in place I am convinced that a few people are glancing over my blog. Even if they are not commenting.

Roland assures me that this is for a lack of controversial material and opinion. It is also fair to say that I don’t contribute as much as I would like.

Well today is Sorry Day. A week or two ago it was Mabo day. Neither have received much attention. Why not and are these days significant? And what about the whole ATSIC issue.

Sorry day marks the anniversary of the handing down of the stolen generation report: Bringing them Home. I don’t think that anyone could seriously deny the atrocities and genocidal policies that were forced onto our indigenous population. No doubt this plays a large part in the massive overrepresentation of indigenous Australia in all the horrible statistics. A recent report said that Australian Aborigines were the second most disadvantaged group in the world (possibly the OECD). The report recommended that the Australian government say ‘sorry’ for this. To the best of my knowledge every state government has done this but we are still waiting for the prime miniature.

But I think we’ve all moved on from an apology. Fuck it, it’s not worth the effort. Let’s move on to ‘practical reconciliation’. See problem here is that one of the better indigenous leaders (Mick Dodson for example) starts saying things like ‘practical reconciliation’ and has some great ideas around that. Then little Johnny picks up on it and starts throwing around. It is now a phrase devoid of meaning because it is now more about avoiding responsibility.

Then Mark Latham says (with what I am pretty sure are good intentions) that ATSIC should go. I don’t think that anyone other than Geoff Clark can seriously defend the actions of ATSIC in their later phase – however their call for a treaty some years back was great. So Johnny fuck wit goes ‘ah ha, a window of opportunity for my racist prejudices – now I can abolish ATSIC and further diminish my critics’. Now ATSIC was ineffectual and nepotistic. I support it’s dissolution but Indigenous Australia needs an indigenous voice, not the government ‘consulting’ indigenous communities and them fucking them in the arse again.

We need a new body with a new name run by indigenous Australians for indigenous Australia with a voting system vastly different to ATSIC’s and one that prevents nepotism. This new body should help fund and finance native title claims.

If the government was serious about reconciliation it would abolish the Wik Act – the high court decision did not need to be legislated on and the legislation that Howard introduced was racist, pandered to mining interests and effectively overturned what should have been a more important decision than Mabo. Self determination is inseparable from land rights. Land rights are the only true way to reconciliation and emancipation. Land not money is what is needed.

Germaine Greer was spot on in her recent quarterly essay saying that non-indigenous Australia can learn a lot from indigenous Australia in terms of a method of organising (similar to a cacophonous democracy) and in terms of their understanding and relationship with the land. By that I do not mean that we all have to become a ‘gatherer – hunter’ society but understand our connection to the land, or perhaps more accurately that we are part of the land.

I think Mabo day should be a national holiday – replace Australia day with it if you’d like.

Adbusters Contest.

Last years’ entries are now up on the adbuster site.

I think my Favourite is this one: http://www.adbusters.org/abtv/contest/winners2003/epiphanies/branding/index.html

It’s clever and reminds us all that the protest movement that we are currently witnessing all started with brand based politics. I like that we’ve moved on from there but it was an important starting point. For the first time since the late 60s there was a movement that recognised that it was the same forces at work that were oppressing both the north and the south, the east and the west and developed and the majority worlds.

We lost our way and got wound up in out identities but not for long – we’re back and more pissed off than ever because this time you’ve branded our essence. Irony is now habitual and lost it’s charm.

So three cheers for Kelle Lasn.

Happy May Day for last week

I have just come across this: http://randomfoo.net/oscon/2002/lessig/

It is superb and the world needs to see it. So let us start with my blog (I’d like you to feel it is your blog as well though).

It is a 30 min flash presentation and does take a while to download. However you will be aptly rewarded.

The presentation is a lecture given by Lawrence Lessig, a professor at the Stanford Law School and is regarding copyright and how it restricts creativity.

His four key premises are:

• Creativity and innovation always builds on the past.
• The past always tries to control the creativity that builds upon it.
• Free societies enable the future by limiting this power of the past.
• Ours is less and less a free society.

My key interest it the implications it has for democracy which are many and very thought provoking.

It’s also thought provoking with regards to its implications for a historical determinist like my self. “The past always tries to control the future” is a challenging statement. However it is perhaps easily remedied by thinking about it as the powers that be, the dominant ideology etc, control the past in many ways. In this context they control the “text” or “code” so that its use today is controlled by corporate interests. Perhaps its not so challenging after all. But thought provoking none the less and a call to arms for the open source movement.