Two faces of racism, are NOT the only views. …

Comment on Do these two people live in the same country? by Paul Parker.

Two faces of racism, are NOT the only views.
Jenny Macklin maintains Commonwealth claim for 67 years it lacked authority to assist whilst at same time they practiced apartheid.
Richard Downs and others believe they advantaged from Commonwealth apartheid policies.
Hundreds of millions of public money spent perhaps could have achieved more if just given as compensation to all the intended beneficiaries of these programs.
Recipients made wealthy who then wasted it could at least look in their mirrors to see whom to blame.
Past 44 years Commonwealth busily promoted segregationist programs.
Schooling is about attending school, with nothing to do with racial identification.
Took government to make attendance a racial issue, then being government they wasted more public money.
Bilingual education was about teaching people to read, using words they understood, whilst also teaching them to speak English, the language of modern Australia.
People remain – in civilized societies – free to study any languages they like, as long as they have the basics needed to live in the wider Australian community.
Bilingual Education was NOT about expanding languages from our past to incorporate explanations of modern science, medicine, technology or quantum mechanics.
The Commonwealth Attorney-General told Parliament NO racial tests exist in Australia.
Yet Commonwealth racist actions include on almost every Australian a form our Commonwealth’s racial test.
Coldly, deliberately, refusing to all a chance to “decline to answer” questions to do with their racial identification. Any those who do not answer are then deemed to have answered NOT.
Why is our answer “Australian” NOT acceptable?
Such is the approach of our racists.
The Commonwealth promotes, supports and imposes also segregation upon families based on racial testing.
Proposed Commonwealth Constitutional proposal is NOT about helping people to fix past wrongs – have already wasted billions doing this.
Proposed Commonwealth Constitutional proposal is to widen up ability of Commonwealth to claim it has Constitutional authority and power to discriminate between Australians using racial identification as the measure.
Commonwealth denies legal support – when required by the Courts, to those who challenge this purported existing authority.
Australians at Federation, then again in 1967, overwhelmingly voted to extinguish, to eliminate, stop ALL racial discrimination between Australians, not widen opportunities for their Commonwealth to practice same.

Paul Parker Also Commented

Do these two people live in the same country?
Our politicians and governments refuse to accept Constitutional restriction on their ability to qualify the rights or responsibilities of Australians using race as their measure.
Commonwealth “NT Intervention” problems continue earlier Commonwealth mass-treatment applied by racial measurement.
Commonwealth obstructs relevant judicial determination processes.
Commonwealth claims it held no Constitutional authority to qualify rights and responsibilities on basis of race, yet it busily did and continues to do so.
Today’s problems result from earlier racial discrimination.
Australian’s Constitution sort to outlaw ALL legislation which qualified Australians rights or responsibilities using racial measurements.
Yet many opposing Commonwealth “NT Intervention” act with concerns for their preferred flavor of racism, not eliminating racism.
The Commonwealth Attorney-General advised Parliament Australia has NO racial tests.
Yet the Commonwealth supports, promotes and practices racism using racial measures.


Do these two people live in the same country?
[****Correction to my earlier comment awaiting moderation.]

Few people disagree some people do need their income managed – partly or fully, to ensure they maintain a roof over their head, and provide them money each week for food.

People go to welfare about this out of desperation, not desire.

The Commonwealth claims Australians’ identification of themselves with any of Australia’s many racial-sub-cultural groups is their valid measure to determine assistance.

IMHO (“in my honest opinion”) most Australians strongly disagree.

IMHO most feel Australians need protection from government assistance, particularly when racism is used as a tool.

IMHO most Australians do trust our Courts in making these decisions, as their state welfare authorities MUST PROVE THEIR CASE for each intrusive management to be imposed upon the citizens thus denying their civil liberties.

Courts can require privacy of parties to be protected, whilst allowing relevant facts be published. We no longer see enough reporting, so not enough public discussion of issues which are raised in courts. Result is less effective, less responsive legislation.


Recent Comments by Paul Parker

Three men escape from gaol
Low level security for the Cottages is appropriate, indeed important, part of educating and assessing residents.
Video is needed to monitor movements outside theCottages along with various options to respond, even some low level internal monitoring.
While many informally learn to live comfortably in a home, accepting balance of rules and rewards, it is something many inmates failed to learn.
IMHO we need to extend village accommodation approach, with more self-contained single person units, with structured releases for various appropriate daily activities.
Each stage of release onto parole, to full release, needs to encourage living in units, from the Cottage to town or community. Each needs support and follow up.
Each benefit felt contributes to learning and moderation.


‘Government’s secret decision making’
So decisions are made behind closed doors.
So they refuse to explain their decisions.
Many believe such is evidence of corruption.
Q.1: Is each representative making these decisions individually corrupt?
Q.2: Is the Parliament corrupt when letting them refuse to explain their individual decisions?
Q.3: Is it party policy, party membership, which demands such corruption ?
Elected Parliamentarians are granted considerable authority – with accountability, to make decisions.
Such authority requires clear explanations for each of their decisions.
It is the duty for all Members to ensure each answers the questions.


Alice town camps need not be places of misery
The tern “traditional owner” is past is past use-by-date, much like the early colonial government’s various introduced systems of “protective” reserve areas.
All are of little benefit in terms of use and occupancy, effectively without rights and responsibility, other than through a confusing accountability maze to where management hides.
In 1860 South Australia legislated for a first Chief Protector appointed to watch over interests of Aboriginal people.
In December 1907, soon after Federation, Prime Minister Alfred Deakin and South Australian Premier Tom Price executed a formal agreement to transfer the Northern Territory to South Australia.
The South Australian Parliament passed the Northern Territory Surrender Act 1908.
The Commonwealth in 1910 re-introduced its Northern Territory Acceptance Bill, it eventually passed, enabling the Commonwealth to assume responsibility and authority from January 1, 1911.
All relevant South Australian legislation and regulation remained in force within the Commonwealth Northern Territory until it was changed by the Commonwealth.
The South Australian “protective” rules were accepted, maintained, enforced by the Commonwealth.
The Commonwealth Aboriginals Ordinance 1911 and successive Commonwealth legislation made the Chief Protector the legal guardian of every Aboriginal child under the provisions of this Ordinance.
The Chief Protector was replaced by the Director of Native Affairs with passing of the Aboriginals Ordinance 1939.
We are still claiming legal guardianship over all Aboriginal children, still usurping authority of parents, still subjecting all to near-total control over their lives, still maintaining their denial of basic legal rights as Australians.
The Commonwealth claims it held NO legal authority to protect Australians of Aboriginal descent.
Yet at the same time the Commonwealth claims legal authority to regulate, to deny equality of rights, to manage apartheid upon fellow Australians, using the racist term Aborigine.
Racism in Australia, since Federation, is mostly product of Commonwealth racist actions and in-actions.
Racism within Australia since Federation is contrary to specific intent of Australians voting for their Constitution.
Their opposition to racism, apartheid, upon fellow Australians, was even more clearly re-expressed in 1967.
Today the Commonwealth still uses subterfuge, confusion, to qualify, to deny, to Australians their equality of rights, responsibility, accountability, and thus equality of opportunities for better lives.
The Commonwealth still segregates, still separates, Australian families using racial identification as its measure.


Alice town camps need not be places of misery
The 1960s campaigns were to achieve equality of rights, equality of responsibilities, and equality of opportunities.
It is clear obstructive forces still delay this.
There was, there is, and shall continue to be recognition, consideration, to descendants of those who lived here before western society arrived.
When Captain Arthur Phillip established government his instructions were to recognize, to support, to defend, ongoing use and occupation by “native” populations of their respective lands, with their rights to continue living traditional lifestyles, with exception where those “native” customs and practices clashed with laws of the Crown.
This egalitarian approach traces back to 1066 AD when William Duke of Normandy conquered England. Later came perhaps more significant advances upon the customs and laws in the history of the UK.
The Mabo and other judgments by the High Court reflect ongoing concerns for egalitarianism.
Prior to establishment of the Commonwealth various Australian state legislatures enacted requirements for youths, eventually all youths, to be educated.
Government(s) regularly fail to ensure all Australian youths obtain education at least to where each can learn further themselves. The governments blame the families.
There remain far too many believing it is not appropriate to require Australians with “Indigenous” ancestry to be educated to read, write and count, to enable them to achieve their potentials within our wider Australian community. They are forces of darkness.
Is not helpful to suggest individuals identified by racial tags can achieve their potential, can rehabilitate or develop themselves, develop their living culture upon their own lands, on their own terms, without their achieving wider understanding of our shared wider Australian society, our entire world and universe around us.
Bilingual education was not to promote mono-lingual education.
Bilingual education was to ensure each student commences their learning to read, write and count using language they understand.
Bilingual education at same time was to teach each student to speak, read, write, confidently express their views with Australia’s primary English language, for that a necessity for individuals to truly advance.
Some still believe “Indigenous” are zoo exhibits, limiting their opportunities, obstructing their becoming part of our wider egalitarian Australian community.
Segregation and obstruction deny opportunities, showing the fallacy of claims residents are in charge of planning, building these towns, able to build better lives.
Corporate Land Trusts using Commonwealth’s ongoing apartheid maintain these communities, the residents, not as landowners making using of their own resources, rather as addicted suckers from the public monies purse.


Zoning: Racial segregation can start in primary school
Zoning encourages class level approaches, to advantage or disadvantage schools, rewarding wealth as a filter on education. The wealthy are able afford to do better, disadvantaging those who cannot.
David Gonski’s recent report promotes a move to individual learning paths for all students.
This will assist many Australian students who fail to reach their potential at school.
That is changing focus from year-level progression, to school focus, so each student advances towards their maximum potential advance in learning each year.
Gonski with Turnbull Government support expects teachers to use the online assessment tool to diagnose accurately levels of literacy, numeracy, and subject knowledge, each student actually achieves.
They expect all of them to advance.
This even more important where students start with reduced oral and written English competence.
Our focus on education needs be continuous, real-time measurement of each student’s individual achievement, with support where they fail to progress, to ensure each progresses from their own efforts.
Schools need to prepare us all for ongoing learning. Education does not end when we leave school.
The NAPLAN tailored online test will present different questions for each student, questions determined by answers they provide. This is disruptive, reduces benefit from rote learning test questions to raise average school scores.
Our focus shifts to actual student understanding controlling their progress.
Education shifts from the class focus, to each individuals progress focus.
Improved internet access is required.
Which, if any, NT schools currently lack required internet access?
To improve internet access for individual schools, the NT needs address improved internet access to all NT communities, for students, their families, and so all those who left school can continue to interact, participate and learn.


Be Sociable, Share!