MUNGO MAN...SHOULD WE GIVING THIS MORE PRIORITY?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bob10

And living in denial helps no one. We can't selectively sweep under the carpet things that don't paint the picture we would love to see. Believe me, I've seen both sides of the picture, the very good, and very bad. And it is cultural and racial identity that is paramount in the Mungo debate.

---

Who’s living in denial of what?

Bob, see my edit to previous post if you’re interested in what’s been swept under the carpet, but it’s a totally separate matter.

The article you you posted has nothing to do with Mungo. Neither does the one I posted.

Mungo man is an entirely separate matter. With Mungo it is about everyone recognising that the oldest known human remains found so far on this continent should be honoured.

It is a fact that non-Aboriginal people took Aboriginal bones away. That is the only cultural content of the debate. Not whether Aboriginal people everywhere are good or bad!

...Now that the remains have finally been repatriated, it’s about making amends by honouring and respecting the people whose ancestor Mungo man is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeros

Yes some people from all cultures / nationalities all over the world do bad things. Selectively sharing an article that happens to be about someone who is Aboriginal is not helpful.

Again, this has nothing to do with a persons cultural or racial identity, unless what is alleged was actually racially motivated.

This however does: Aboriginal massacre sites uncovered in first forensic science study - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
...and I doubt these are the 12 unsolved deaths your previous article relates to.

If you must select articles, let’s see some balance.

---

I'm sorry, but you speak in riddles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeros

Who’s living in denial of what?

Bob, see my edit to previous post if you’re interested in what’s been swept under the carpet, but it’s a totally separate matter.

The article you you posted has nothing to do with Mungo. Neither does the one I posted.

Mungo man is an entirely separate matter. With Mungo it is about everyone recognising that the oldest known human remains found so far on this continent should be honoured.

It is a fact that non-Aboriginal people took Aboriginal bones away. That is the only cultural content of the debate. Not whether Aboriginal people everywhere are good or bad!

...Now that the remains have finally been repatriated, it’s about making amends by honouring and respecting the people whose ancestor Mungo man is.

---

Please go back and read my posts. Then make another judgement. I'm not turning this into another AULRO tit for tat. I started by posting about aboriginal culture in order to help those who had no knowledge, and somehow it morphed into your argument. I think it may have been when a member accused me of never been to the NT, and knew nothing about the subject. And in the time honoured AULRO way, we then went on a DNA journey, and spending millions of dollars for memorial in Canberra, [ for which there is already provision for that at Mungo lake. ] And as for the good or bad , [and the 12 dead?] I do not understand your reasoning. I will not take this conversation in the direction you seem to be pushing it, Although I'm sure it would be interesting. I recommend a book, if you want to read further , that is called Blood on the Wattle, Massacres and maltreatment of Aborigines since 1788. A depressing read. I think we have concluded that Mungo man and Mungo lady should have some recognition , where they were found, but if the local people wish for that not to happen, so be it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bob10

Please go back and read my posts. Then make another judgement. I'm not turning this into another AULRO tit for tat. I started by posting about aboriginal culture in order to help those who had no knowledge, and somehow it morphed into your argument. I think it may have been when a member accused me of never been to the NT, and knew nothing about the subject. And in the time honoured AULRO way, we then went on a DNA journey, and spending millions of dollars for memorial in Canberra, [ for which there is already provision for that at Mungo lake. ] And as for the good or bad , [and the 12 dead?] I do not understand your reasoning. I will not take this conversation in the direction you seem to be pushing it, Although I'm sure it would be interesting. I recommend a book, if you want to read further , that is called Blood on the Wattle, Massacres and maltreatment of Aborigines since 1788. A depressing read. I think we have concluded that Mungo man and Mungo lady should have some recognition , where they were found, but if the local people wish for that not to happen, so be it.

---

Thanks Bob, yes I've read Blood on the Wattle and many significant books. However I've also spent decades across this continent working with Aboriginal people. IMO such long term direct experience is more relevant than most written histories.

You seem to think I don't know what I'm talking about, when it's pretty clear I have more knowledge about this stuff than you, particularly given you say you haven't been to Mungo. Having said that, I'm not denigrating your contribution, just critiquing it, because it seems to have moved on to some other WA based trial by media beat up story, rather than staying on point in terms of Mungo.

If you care to read the article you posted in full, it reports that there are approx 12 unsolved missing persons cases in the Kimberley region. My post was aimed at balancing yours, whereby at one massacre site alone there were at least 12 people killed. My point is that there are many more missing persons as a result of massacres in the region over the past century than have ever been recognised - they are certainly not part of the 12 reported unsolved cases!

Back to Mungo:

I've been to Mungo many times and worked with people there over many years.

There is no provision for a Mungo Man keeping place or proper memorial at Mungo - just an outdated display of artifacts in an inadequate building. It's a national disgrace that any human remains were removed without permission, let alone the oldest known on the continent; also that it's taken so long to return them and now people from everywhere but Mungo are expecting to have a say in how these remains are repatriated! How many more times will these people be insulted? It's entirely up to the traditional owners how the remains of their ancestors be repatriated and housed. They deserve nothing but the utmost respect from all of us, including significant government funding to lay them to rest appropriately.

I agree with you in criticizing the ridiculous proposal to spend so much money on the war memorial in Canberra in comparison. Trying to leave politics out of it, because this is a fundamental discussion about cultural respect - but successive governments have shown highly offensive misjudgement in terms of recognising Aboriginal rights over decades, not to mention imbalanced spending priorities.

This is clearly my opinion, because I am writing it. Anyone else can either listen or not, take it or leave it.

I think if we can spend $500 million tarting up the War Memorial, which I think is a great place even though it totally ignores Australia's longest war, the 150 year conflict between invaders and indigenous, then we can certainly spend a few million to honour Australia's oldest human remains, the Mungo people. How many well-deserved hundreds of millions have we spent honouring our war dead in Europe?
But again I ask, what do the indigenous in the Mungo area want?
Anything else is just paternalism. Let the indigenous decide.

Er, at war with the indigenous for 150 years, nope don’t think so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weeds

Er, at war with the indigenous for 150 years, nope don’t think so.

---

Weeds, wars are not only physical. They are also cultural, psychological, histories falsely benign.

Aboriginal people have had to fight for their rights for more than 160 years. The war began here and it continues:
Australia's 'history wars' reignite

Indeed the conservatives are even at war over their own culture! In favour of nothing short of the ‘Anglosphere’!
In Australia'''s relentless culture wars, Tony Abbott strikes again

If anyone thinks this is not offensive to Indigenous people they are made of stone and they are deliberately perpetuating the war..

During the last ice age in Australia the indigenous population was decimated and the survivors moved to small pockets of areas in the continent.
Mungo man is 40,000 years old and who is to say that the people that are now living in that area has any relationship at all to this 40,000 year old cadaver given that the last ice age was only about 20,000 years ago.
It is a pretty long stretch of the imagination to think that anyone can claim that a set of fossilised bones from 40,000 years ago are from one of their family members.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeros

Thanks Bob, yes I've read Blood on the Wattle and many significant books. However I've also spent decades across this continent working with Aboriginal people. IMO such long term direct experience is more relevant than most written histories.

You seem to think I don't know what I'm talking about, when it's pretty clear I have more knowledge about this stuff than you, particularly given you say you haven't been to Mungo. Having said that, I'm not denigrating your contribution, just critiquing it, because it seems to have moved on to some other WA based trial by media beat up story, rather than staying on point in terms of Mungo.

If you care to read the article you posted in full, it reports that there are approx 12 unsolved missing persons cases in the Kimberley region. My post was aimed at balancing yours, whereby at one massacre site alone there were at least 12 people killed. My point is that there are many more missing persons as a result of massacres in the region over the past century than have ever been recognised - they are certainly not part of the 12 reported unsolved cases!

Back to Mungo:

I've been to Mungo many times and worked with people there over many years.

There is no provision for a Mungo Man keeping place or proper memorial at Mungo - just an outdated display of artifacts in an inadequate building. It's a national disgrace that any human remains were removed without permission, let alone the oldest known on the continent; also that it's taken so long to return them and now people from everywhere but Mungo are expecting to have a say in how these remains are repatriated! How many more times will these people be insulted? It's entirely up to the traditional owners how the remains of their ancestors be repatriated and housed. They deserve nothing but the utmost respect from all of us, including significant government funding to lay them to rest appropriately.

I agree with you in criticizing the ridiculous proposal to spend so much money on the war memorial in Canberra in comparison. Trying to leave politics out of it, because this is a fundamental discussion about cultural respect - but successive governments have shown highly offensive misjudgement in terms of recognising Aboriginal rights over decades, not to mention imbalanced spending priorities.

This is clearly my opinion, because I am writing it. Anyone else can either listen or not, take it or leave it.

---

Mate, you are on a crusade. I'm on your side but if you want to have the majority listen to you and you have a story to tell, don't be so intense. Tell your story, educate people. But make your story educational if you want to be an advocate for Aboriginal Australia, and you sound like you would be a good one. Don't be like me and be easily taken off on a tangent . Keep it straight, keep it in focus, and just remember sometimes you have to give the punters just a little bit of what they want to hear, to keep them interested. But don't stop talking. Aboriginal Australians need more like you, as long as you don't lose the plot.[smilebigeye]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trout1105

During the last ice age in Australia the indigenous population was decimated and the survivors moved to small pockets of areas in the continent.
Mungo man is 40,000 years old and who is to say that the people that are now living in that area has any relationship at all to this 40,000 year old cadaver given that the last ice age was only about 20,000 years ago.
It is a pretty long stretch of the imagination to think that anyone can claim that a set of fossilised bones from 40,000 years ago are from one of their family members.

---

Sorry Trout but that’s just rubbish. Have you been to Mungo?