Invasion or what?

[Twisted Tenon]

No not really "permissible banter" TT. It was during our very first conversation, and I asked him if that was an OK term to which he replied "hell yeah, I love being referred to as a Black Fella - because I am!".

So you asked and he approved? Sounds like you were both ok with it.

TT

[Sturdee]

Like they did in South Africa? Yeah right and there are fairys at the bottom of my garden.

The dutch settlements in South Africa were to provide fresh food and victuals to the ships on the way to the Dutch East Indies and India and the Chinese trade and the settlers lived peacefully with the local natives.

But when the diamonds were discovered all the territories were conquered by the English. Remember the Boer wars where the English, and regrettably Australians as well as part of the British empire, annexed the country by defeating the settlers through the first use of concentration camps.

Don't blame the Dutch for what happened after that.

Peter.

[FenceFurniture]

So you asked and he approved? Sounds like you were both ok with it.

Yes, he was quite black and white about it.

[Big Shed]

They'd just take the monday off.
Token resistance? There is ample written evidence that those that survived the initial diseases were shot to pieces, burned out and pushed over the Hawkesbury Cliffs. The last recorded massacre was in the NT in 1928. No one was charged. No wonder there is a residual anger.

TT

Not quite sure how your points relate to resistance at the time of invasion, but yes I fully agree that the our British forefathers treated the existing notice population beyond the pale and yes I get that even after 230 years there is a lot of anger still.

Having said that the British behaved no different here in Australia than they did elsewhere, as in Peter's South African example. History is full of European nations, particularly the British, trampling over other peoples and pillaging their countries.

We only have to look at North Africa and the Middle to see that the world is still paying the price for the sins of their forefathers, as are the people living in those countries.

Some academics coming up with pretty words won't change history, calling sh*t excrement won't make t smell any better.

[Twisted Tenon]

Not quite sure how your points relate to resistance at the time of invasion, but yes I fully agree that the our British forefathers treated the existing notice population beyond the pale and yes I get that even after 230 years there is a lot of anger still.

Having said that the British behaved no different here in Australia than they did elsewhere, as in Peter's South African example. History is full of European nations, particularly the British, trampling over other peoples and pillaging their countries.

We only have to look at North Africa and the Middle to see that the world is still paying the price for the sins of their forefathers, as are the people living in those countries.

Some academics coming up with pretty words won't change history, calling sh*t excrement won't make t smell any better.

I guess I should have clarified what your definition of "token resistance" is.

The last recorded massacre occurred in 1928. My parents were alive then. It's no wonder there is still palpable anger in the descendants out there.

What "pretty" words did you have in mind?

TT

[chemfish]

Semantics and time really, you never hear about the Anglo-Saxon invasion of Britain but I'm pretty sure the native Celts were not happy. Romans invaded.... but then they didn't manage to keep the place. Norwegians invaded, but never managed to stay long. Normans conquered, but they kept the land and made the rules…. How about a compromise and we call it the English conquest of Australia?

In all seriousness though it matters not what you call it and you can blame the English for creating the nation of Australian but we can only blame ourselves for the wrongs that happened after that. The stolen generation and white Australia policy both being famous post federation events.

Also blaming Europeans in specidfically for expanding their territories through less than sporting methods is narrow minded, China wasn't "unified" through a giant love in. The Arabs didn’t settle most of their nations with smiles and handshakes. We can’t forget the Japanese attempted expansion during the second world war. Then there is the whole history behind the Israel / Palestine #%$^ throwing contest. People from everywhere are unified by one thing, a bloody history modified only by how long ago it happened and who was left standing to take notes.

In the end of the day though the terms settled and invaded are not mutually exclusive. Teach the facts, move on and make things better, improve health care, improve education, stop the us and them culture. And don't forget, try not to judge generations long dead too harshly and pretend that you are perfect because people 300 years from now are going to be calling us neolithic apes for our actions and opinions as well.

[A Duke]

The dutch settlements in South Africa were to provide fresh food and victuals to the ships on the way to the Dutch East Indies and India and the Chinese trade and the settlers lived peacefully with the local natives.

But when the diamonds were discovered all the territories were conquered by the English. Remember the Boer wars where the English, and regrettably Australians as well as part of the British empire, annexed the country by defeating the settlers through the first use of concentration camps.

Don't blame the Dutch for what happened after that.

Peter.

The Dutch were out of South Africa after the American war of Independence, the Boer war was with the Boer settlers who had set up republics in the Transvaal an Orange Free State to get away from British rule. Afrikaans is 16th century Dutch, that is how long the Dutch were out of it.

On a side too many people have swallowed the Anti Apartheid proper gander hook line and sinker to even try to have a discussion on S. A.
Regards

[rwbuild]

Playing with words won't change history and only serves to make some feel good, some feel bad and gives credence to disadents and opportunist's to get what ever they can out of it.
What is said or written in what ever terms or context will not change history.
The roll of humanity is to treat everyone with respect,honesty and compassion.
Those who don't need to be treated accordingly but we should strive to leave this world a better place for future generations. Rewriting past events will not achieve this.

[bsrlee]

Small historical point - James Cook did NOT settle/invade Australia, that occurred some time later with Arthur Phillip and the First Fleet. James Cook was just the first European to survive and publish a description of the Eastern Parts of Australia. A short camping trip/ beach party does not constitute a real invasion.

The First Fleet only succeeded because they arrived a generation or so after a major smallpox epidemic had (more than) decimated Aboriginal populations across Australia, unintentionally spread by Malay traders - we call them Indonesians these days. Happened every century or so, trackable through South East Asia from the mainland down the island chains. This is also not politically popular. Now Influenza is another thing, along with Scarlet Fever and a host of other 'minor' diseases that killed plenty of Europeans as well, and there is no need to borrow North American revisionism ascribing every disaster to European malice.

[Twisted Tenon]

As usual Waleed Aly has a thoughtful balanced comment in the Herald.

TT

[Twisted Tenon]

Small historical point - James Cook did NOT settle/invade Australia, that occurred some time later with Arthur Phillip and the First Fleet. James Cook was just the first European to survive and publish a description of the Eastern Parts of Australia. A short camping trip/ beach party does not constitute a real invasion.

The First Fleet only succeeded because they arrived a generation or so after a major smallpox epidemic had (more than) decimated Aboriginal populations across Australia, unintentionally spread by Malay traders - we call them Indonesians these days. Happened every century or so, trackable through South East Asia from the mainland down the island chains. This is also not politically popular. Now Influenza is another thing, along with Scarlet Fever and a host of other 'minor' diseases that killed plenty of Europeans as well, and there is no need to borrow North American revisionism ascribing every disaster to European malice.

bsrlee, The Captian Cook link was a beat up by The Tele. I fell for it too. Are you saying that the eventual colonists walked into an empty continent? Here's an article that challenges the Malay traders theory.

TT

[Bendigo Bob]

So much hand wringing going on in the press these days. Waleed seems to hate the country that has given him so much.

Not me, all that we should be worrying about is how to get on with each other NOW! Not one of us can change the past. (Hmm, maybe I should send him the little poem my dad used to share while we worked away in his workshop back in the 60's, it was by a Persian/Muslim scholar a thousand years ago too (Omar Khayyam)

“The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.”

May my beloved Australia learn to 'move on' from all this hand wringing.

[Greg Ward]

So much hand wringing going on in the press these days. Waleed seems to hate the country that has given him so much.

Not me, all that we should be worrying about is how to get on with each other NOW! Not one of us can change the past. (Hmm, maybe I should send him the little poem my dad used to share while we worked away in his workshop back in the 60's, it was by a Persian/Muslim scholar a thousand years ago too (Omar Khayyam)

“The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.”

May my beloved Australia learn to 'move on' from all this hand wringing.

BOB.
A great response and apt.

The Roman empire is much lauded these days by Historians. Always on the History channel and SBS. A much loved period of history

Now let's discuss conquest and slavery and see where that takes us.....

Greg

[Bushmiller]

To my mind we are getting things a little confused. There are a number of issues that have raised their head as a result of the OP. Also it is quite clear that most of us, and I include myself in this, are very poor historians. We either remember incorrectly or have been taught incorrectly: Probably both.

We quite rightly allude to other historical disgraces that occurred throughout history to either support of deny out standpoint. Sometimes they are valid and sometimes not.

I believe we are offended, as a nation, at the suggestion we used any force back in the latter part of the eighteenth century to annex Australia to what was then the British Empire.

However, it seems undeniable that force occurred. If you doubt that, ask the Tasmanian aborigines: Oh, sorry, that won't be possible. I think you know why. Instances of supreme force were not limited to that island, but of course occurred on the mainland too.

Yes, the similar outrageous atrocities were happening all over the world. But we are not children and should be big enough to acknowledge exactly what happened.

I recall a friend at school announcing that he couldn't come to terms with history any more because he discovered Henry VIII had died not of "excesses," but syphilis. Actually the real reason in his case was that he wasn't very interested in history. We are not children. We can be told and can acknowledge the truth however painful it might be.

We were quick to pick up that Captain Cook probably did not "invade" Australia. He visited and caused little harm. We were just as quick to ignore that his countrymen who arrived later, were not nearly as polite. They came and then they took over and used extreme force as required.

Why do we have so much trouble acknowledging what happened? It is there for all to read in black and white. Sure, today we need to move on, but that is not facilitated by historical denial any more than if the USA denied that the slave trade never occurred or their civil war was merely an intellectual disagreement.

If a person or group of people rock up to your doorstep, they are a visitor, if they stay in your home they are a visitor, if it is with your permission, but the moment they intimidate you or even force you out, they have invaded (in fact the term "home invasion" is now commonplace).

I believe we need to get over our self righteous indignation and embarrassment.

No, I was not born in Australia (Australian now), but I am descended from the pommie bastards that committed such atrocities all over the world including Australia.

Regards
Paul

[Christos]

......The rightness or wrongness of the past and the wording of historical events are of little consequence, they may be interesting discussion points, that's all. What is important is the future, the past cannot be changed........

The past cannot be changed, just a small sentence but a very powerful one. Even if I had a way of going back in time, I would not change the past. This may seem very harsh and cold and I make no excuse for this. I accept that I cannot control what has happened in the past.

I may not like it but I accept it.

....... Teach the facts, move on and make things better, improve health care, improve education, stop the us and them culture. ......

Know what has happened in the past. TRY not to allow this happen in the future and come together as a community. This last sentence might seem a little out of place considering that I live in Australia. There is no open conflict between groups of citizens in this country.

There are a fair amount of improvements that are needed in this country. We all have a small part to play in this world try not to let it go to waste.