Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

bulletproofmanners t1_izqqqd1 wrote

Reply to comment by Shining_Silver_Star in Native title granted to South Australian Wirangu people recognises it 'always will be Aboriginal land' by DaRedGuy

I love that classic argument, it allows for legitimacy of English people to sail over, conquer, capitalize and constrain the Aboriginals because they must have done so too. But it doesn’t work the other way, if the Aboriginals get armed, fight, push off the current European descendent inhabitants, no one will accept, “well almost all land on this Earth was conquered, they conquered us, I guess we have to accept it now”. Because something might have happened in the past, which is a big claim without evidence, there is no moral argument to do an unjust act.

2

Shining_Silver_Star t1_izqrsgu wrote

Aboriginal intertribal warfare did occur, and it even involved transfers of property in the form of women.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_frontier_wars#:~:text=In%201840%2C%20the%20American-Canadian%20ethnologist%20Horatio%20Hale%20identified,ritual%20trials%2C%20raids%20for%20women%2C%20and%20revenge%20attacks.

See the section on traditional aboriginal warfare

1

WikiSummarizerBot t1_izqru08 wrote

[Australian frontier wars](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_frontier_wars#:~:text=In 1840, the American-Canadian ethnologist Horatio Hale identified,ritual trials, raids for women, and revenge attacks)

>Australian frontier wars is a term applied by some historians to describe violent conflicts between Indigenous Australians (including both Aboriginal Australians and Torres Strait Islanders) and non-Indigenous settlers during the colonisation of Australia. The first conflict took place several months after the landing of the First Fleet in January 1788, and the last frontier conflicts occurred into the early 20th century, with some occurring as late as 1934. An estimated minimum of 40,000 Indigenous Australians and between 2,000 and 2,500 settlers died in the conflicts. Conflicts occurred in a number of locations across Australia.

^([ )^(F.A.Q)^( | )^(Opt Out)^( | )^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)^( | )^(GitHub)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)

2

bulletproofmanners t1_izqv597 wrote

I did & shockingly it happened after the arrival of the Europeans per the link you provided.

2

Shining_Silver_Star t1_izqwn8w wrote

You think the tribes didn’t fight each other before the Europeans arrived?

1

bulletproofmanners t1_izqyre8 wrote

I don’t. But you can provide a link to prove me wrong. Make sure you show me how they would take away whole territories from losing tribes, put them in reservations and try to convert them. Also, a link on how these tribes would sale to Europe to colonize European territories too.

From your link: “The fighting of a war to conquer enemy territory was not only beyond the resources of any of these Aboriginal groupings, it was contrary to a culture that was based on spiritual connections to a specific territory. “

1

Shining_Silver_Star t1_izr0rio wrote

They didn’t do so on account of their not having the ability, not out of moral superiority. They still fought over property, such as a women.

Why do you think they started treating women as property and killing each other only when Europeans came?

1

bulletproofmanners t1_izr1f77 wrote

Your link states it was contrary to their culture to conquer for territory. Was the original point? Why do I think they started women as property? Maybe the Europeans were so deranged from centuries of genocide they tried to brainwash the natives using coercion and threats, the natives felt they had no option?

2

Shining_Silver_Star t1_izr6xv9 wrote

You think the Europeans tried to encourage the natives to attack other tribes for women?

1

bulletproofmanners t1_izr75co wrote

Yes. They had a history of divide & conquer

0

Shining_Silver_Star t1_izr8sl9 wrote

You have no evidence that this policy on native women was ever conceived, let alone implemented.

Also, why do you subscribe to the noble-savage myth? There is plenty of evidence against it.

0

bulletproofmanners t1_izr8ybr wrote

You have no evidence against it, why should I believe in you vs my own opinion? Why do you subscribe to Eurosupremism?

1

Shining_Silver_Star t1_izr9ap6 wrote

Because, hopefully, you care about truth. A claim with no evidence is baseless. Why do you subscribe to Indigenophilia?

0