Thread: Sadly our history has some very dark parts

Originally Posted by incisor

up front, i have no idea how true this is.... which is why i am asking

a relative i would normally trust, was saying just recently, it is usually the case that if a country has been invaded there is no provision in international law for lands rights for the original occupants

but

if a country is settled then there is provision in international law for land rights for the original occupants


anyone know the facts?

Exactly what a bloke at work was telling me the other day, he had seen some expert on tv who stated the above...so I suppose it comes down to whether that expert is correct in his interpretation of these things.

I should perhaps point out that "international law" has no standing whatever, except to the extent that it is a treaty signed, ratified, and enacted in the legislation of the country involved.

regardless of the law, the current system has de facto control.
moving forward, what would people like to see? and to what end? changing the date seems trivial.

on the other hand, if people dont want to celebrate the PH, they dont have to.

I am of the opinion that changing the date/name of the Australia Day PH has More to do with a minority groups ambition to gain political power and influence than anything else.
As far as I am concerned Australia Day is the Most patriotic public holiday of the year and any attempt to ban or demean this date is very Un Australian.

But what's actually wrong with minority groups wanting more influence and control over their own fate when it creates a more equal society?

“A nation’s greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members.”

Originally Posted by incisor

up front, i have no idea how true this is.... which is why i am asking

a relative i would normally trust, was saying just recently, it is usually the case that if a country has been invaded there is no provision in international law for lands rights for the original occupants

but

if a country is settled then there is provision in international law for land rights for the original occupants


anyone know the facts?

That's what the Mabo judgement was about.
The invaders (that's us) claimed the Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders had not inhabited the land (terra nullius) but had merely roamed over it and so had no grounds.
The claimants produced numerous evidences of a settled inhabited association going back thousands of years.
The High Court accepted they had a legitimate claim to have inhabited the land and they won.
That's a brief summary. It's worth more reading time.
Australian politics explainer: the Mabo decision and native title

Originally Posted by trout1105

I am of the opinion that changing the date/name of the Australia Day PH has More to do with a minority groups ambition to gain political power and influence than anything else.
As far as I am concerned Australia Day is the Most patriotic public holiday of the year and any attempt to ban or demean this date is very Un Australian.

i agree. changing the date wont make a difference. we'll still celebrate and any day its on will be criticised as oppression day.

Originally Posted by Classic88

..when it creates a more equal society?

i disagree that it creates a more equal society. so far all its done is drive us apart.