Home > Australia, Culture, Politics > >The consequences of saying sorry

>The consequences of saying sorry

>So Australia has said sorry to the so-called Stolen Generations.

Leaving aside the fact that there is no such thing as the Stolen Generations it does show the power that white-man’s-guilt lobby groups can have when they work as hard and as long as they have to achieve this outcome, enabled by the left wing ‘elites’ in this country and an agenda driven media. It’s like water dripping on stone; after enough time the water wins.

The real story of the ‘stolen’ Mary Hooker (via Andrew Bolt):

Hooker’s mother was in fact taken to hospital unconscious from an overdose of pills, and Hooker says she didn’t wake up for two weeks.

She left behind her 12 children in a house that welfare officers found had plenty of rubbish but little food: “The only food available was three sausages and a small piece of steak.”

There is no mention of any man in the house, but the documents show the dad of seven of the children was a prisoner at the Mount Mitchell Afforestation Camp, a low-security jail.

There is also no mention of abuse in what documents I could read, but Hooker last week admitted on ABC radio “there was also abuse going on in the community”, and that she had been “raped”…

These documents confirm Hooker and three of her 11 siblings were removed not because they were Aboriginal, but because a magistrate found proven a complaint that ”they were neglected” and without a guardian.

Another of the Stolen Generation, Helen Moran, was interviewed on ABC’s 7.30 Report last night. She was removed from her parents, who had apparently abandonded their children, at age 18 months.

SHARON ONEILL: Do you believe that you were taken as a child because of your Aboriginality?

HELEN MORAN: I do, absolutely. Maybe not because of our Aboriginality. Maybe because of our non Aboriginality.

Removal of Aboriginal, or half-caste, children was never government policy in any jurisdiction in Australia. If it was then Helen Moran could be quite clear that she was taken because she was half-caste. The fact that she “believes” means that she doesn’t “know”.

Now here’s a thought to ponder.

If well-intentioned people who had the committment and means to help children whose parents physically abused them, whose uncles and cousins sexually abused them, who lived in squalor with little food to eat, whose parents were too drunk to care to send them to school or who had been abandoned by their families sat back and did nothing then would the white-man’s-guilt lobbyists now not be talking about the Stolen Generations but about the Genocided Generations? Or the Abandoned Generations?

Abandoning these children to a certain negative fate was never an option to those committed to helping.

Which takes us to the present day.

The situation in Aboriginal communities all around the nation is at its most dire. Alcohol, violence, sexual abuse and abandonment are rife in spite of the huge sums of dollars of ‘sit down’ money paid to these communities and in spite of well meaning but wrongheaded advocates who promoted the idea that Aboriginies were best served by adhering to their traditional cultural norms and standards, which took precedence over the laws and standards governing the rest of Australia.

Now that we have said sorry for helping out children in exactly the same situation 40 years ago, what are the chances of at risk children being removed now?

About none.

A tragedy for them. A shame for Australia.

(Nothing Follows)

Categories: Australia, Culture, Politics
  1. February 13, 2008 at 11:55 am

    >Your denial that indigenous peoples in Australia ever suffered any kind of mistreatment or harm at the hands of European settlers is equivalent to denying that Jews in Europe ever had a hard time.

  2. February 13, 2008 at 4:51 pm

    >My name is Rabiya Limbada and I am a journalist on a BBC World Service radio programme called, World Have Your Say. We will be talking about exactly this subject on Thurs 14th February and I would really like you to take part. Please send me an email with your contact number to rabiya.Parekh@bbc.co.uk and I will give you a call back with more details about the programme..You can also cehck out our blog, worldhaveyoursay.com

  3. February 13, 2008 at 5:39 pm

    >The Australian government has made a formal apology for the past wrongs caused by successive governments on the indigenous Aboriginal population. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, apologised to all Aborigines for laws and policies that “inflicted profound grief, suffering and loss”. But the Aborigines want more. They want money and are calling the apology a ‘cut-price sorry’.Back in 1998, in a meeting with Tony Blair, the Japanese Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto offered “an expression of deep remorse and heartfelt apology to the people who suffered in the Second World War”. But Britain’s war veterans wanted more. They had been hoping for an apology from the entire government as well as further compensation on top of that received in 50 years ago.Two years ago Tony Blair expressed his “deep sorrow” for Britain’s role in the slave trade. But representitives of those with ancestors victimised by the slavery wanted a formal apology (which Blair ruled out) and, of course, financial compensation.So what’s the point? Most country’s governments have been violent and oppressive at some time in their history. Where does the guilt stop? In fact, all of these apologies are meaningless. The groups are obviously resigned to their martyrdom, and nothing short of a financial pay-out will really satisfy them. And no modern day leader has the right to apologise for wrongs committed by previous generations anyway, however horrific.My suggestion is that these powerful governments concentrate on dealing with the poverty and oppression happening around the world this very minute, rather than worrying about past misdemeanours that are cemented into history, and impossible to correct.www.charlesletterman.com

  4. February 14, 2008 at 2:34 am

    >Fudgie,When did I ever deny that indigenous people were poorly treated from the time of European settlement? The majority of them were well treated, too, which tends to be overlooked.My comment relates to the ahistoric Stolen Generations issue.

  5. February 14, 2008 at 8:43 pm

    >Fucky: you came out with this gem a while ago while denying that any systematic killings of indigenous peoples had ever occurred.If genocide occurred then how is it that both populations of indigenous peoples are so high?Your touching belief that the forced removals of aboriginal children from their parents was an act of kindness is akin to believing that Jews were forced into ghettos because the accommodation was better quality. Your very vocabulary indicates a lack of comprehension of what it means to be conquered. The majority of them were well treated? And yet by 1900 the indigenous population was only 10 per cent of what it had been prior to 1788. Almost half the Jews in Europe survived the holocaust so I guess they were even more kindly treated than the Aborigines.

  6. February 14, 2008 at 8:59 pm

    >Fudgie,I used to think that you might have actually known something.Your latest comment proves that I was wrong.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: