University tells students Britain "invaded" Australia

[Sky High]

I mean, that's not wrong. same way the America's were "invaded".

[Macaquerie]

It does seem like the Anglosphere in general has a pretty poor track record in terms of integrating indigenous populations even compared to other colonial empires, with only New Zealand having any modicum of success in that regard. Granted, Australian natives probably had it the worst of all just due to the fact that they had been isolated from the rest of the world for so long, but there has to be some kind of policy that they can put in place to help fix the problem.

[Mormolyce]

I read/write Latin like any person with an education my age.
Tracing the etymology back to "ab origo" or something similar is trivial to anyone that speaks romance languages. Like I do.
That they are different peoples is not only outlined in the guide, but is just about the first thing one learns when reading about them all.


So you tell me
What if you told me trivial knowledge that I already possess?.
What are you trying to get across to me?.

Are you satirizing the future of these universities? necessitating to explain the obvious, fearing students can't figure that colonization implies invading shit?
Like... what is the point of this response, exactly? I don't get it.

So... we agree?

[Zenotetsuken]

To be fair, we kind of did.

But we had a flag and they didn't, so it was all good under the rules...that we invented. Hey ho.

[Slybak]

The problem I have is with the policing of language, when an institution decides how people can express themselves in an academic setting, written guidelines for what can and cannot be said.

Promulgating new and more effective terminology is part and parcel of academia. No one is being silenced here anymore than a professor of psychiatry is silenced when the American Psychiatric Association updates the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or a medical school doctor is silenced when the New England Journal of Medicine publishes a study that up-ends previously held orthodoxies in the medical field.

[Dhrizzle]

It does seem like the Anglosphere in general has a pretty poor track record in terms of integrating indigenous populations even compared to other colonial empires, with only New Zealand having any modicum of success in that regard. Granted, Australian natives probably had it the worst of all just due to the fact that they had been isolated from the rest of the world for so long, but there has to be some kind of policy that they can put in place to help fix the problem.

Isn't Canada doing a decent job?

[Techno-Druid]

It all comes down to western society for some reason having adopted the notion that it's good to feel guilty for what 'our' ancestors did hundreds of years ago.

As far as I'm concerned the world was full of mongrels back then, everybody was a barbaric asshole and some people were more successful than others. We're the descendants of the lucky ones, lucky us.

Not exactly true.

The rise of civilizations was really do the environments that the people inhabited. Unlike Afro-Eurasia, Australia had little large fauna that could be properly domesticated. Unlike the Americas, Australia had in the form of domesticated plants.

[nextormento]

So... we agree?

Why would I care to agree or disagree on anything. I don''t even know what your point is.

[Techno-Druid]

It does seem like the Anglosphere in general has a pretty poor track record in terms of integrating indigenous populations even compared to other colonial empires, with only New Zealand having any modicum of success in that regard. Granted, Australian natives probably had it the worst of all just due to the fact that they had been isolated from the rest of the world for so long, but there has to be some kind of policy that they can put in place to help fix the problem.

You're post made me think about this.

[muwatallis]

Well, they literally did. Britons invaded Australia. Just because they didn't find an opposing army before them, it doesn't mean they had the right to occupy the entire damn continent which belonged to millions of indigenous aboriginal people already living on it peacefully.

[Deleted]

Well, they literally did. Britons invaded Australia. Just because they didn't find an opposing army before them, it doesn't mean they had the right to occupy the entire damn continent which belonged to millions of indigenous aboriginal people already living on it peacefully.

It was a time where having the right didn't really matter.

[Blobfish]

The University is Correct. The British Invaders of Australia committed Genocide..A War Crime.

Here is a list of Aborigine massacres by the White Settlers to Australia.. There are lots of recorded Aborigine Massacres in most Australian States.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...us_Australians

The Black War in Van Diemen's Land (now Tasmania) refers to a period of intermittent conflict between the British colonists, whalers and sealers (including those of the American sealing fleet) and Aborigines in the early years of the 19th century. The conflict has been described as a genocide resulting in the elimination of the full-blood Tasmanian Aboriginal population.

[Tackhisis]

What makes it a state?

Laws. Government. Structures of coercion.

I can claim that your house belongs to me. What can protect you from my claims? Only a state.

If you have no state, your territory claims are void.

[Deleted]

So your telling me the native people had laid claim to the entire continent of Australia? Give me a fucking break. So by virtue of existing on said continent the whole thing is to be considered claimed? Did they have any type of boarders or did they make any claims to certain parts of lands to the English? Did the savages do anything when they saw the English? Did they even have a concept of land claim and if not did they even care some other people came?

We have "native" people in Sweden too the Sami. Although they where not the first to settle what we now call Sweden despite their claims. We didn't invade their lands or anything of the sorts. They colonized parts of it and the Swedes another.

[GennGreymane]

Gotta keep things PC, cant offend people with words.

[skitzin]

Invaded is technically the correct term. Whilst it is true that the original belief was that the land was unoccupied ("terra nullius") once they discovered it wasn't they pressed on with occupation anyway. Typically we refer to it as "colonisation" since it encapsulates what happened better than just "invaded".

And despite the opinions of people on the internet - in 1992, the Australian High Court declared the legal concept of "terra nullius", which the settlers used to take the land, to be invalid. So whether you think they did or didn't have ownership or claim to land the fact is that highest court in Australia says they did. This ruling has been used since to creat the Native Title Act which gives recognition of land ownership to the Traditional Owners (or decendants there of). So guess what if you want to set up a mine in an area that is claimed by native title then you need to engage the local owners - typically employing indigenous people and/or paying royalties for the land.

[Alski]

I've heard that Australia was a penal colony. :-)

It still is.

[Mumba]

Well, they did?

[Mormolyce]

Laws. Government. Structures of coercion.

I can claim that your house belongs to me. What can protect you from my claims? Only a state.

If you have no state, your territory claims are void.

This is a roundabout way of saying we take territory by force of arms and states and laws are just a sham.

[zenkai]

When a bird built a nest in my tree, I had no idea I was being invaded.