Tasmanian Times

The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. No price is too high for the privilege of owning yourself. ~ Friedrich Nietzsche

The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. No price is too high for the privilege of owning yourself. ~ Friedrich Nietzsche


‘Invasion Day …’

On Saturday January 26 – Australia Day – a march of protest against “Invasion Day” was held …


Speaker Sue Hickey addresses the crowd

Vica Bayley is campaign manager of the Wilderness Society

Author Credits: [show_post_categories parent="no" parentcategory="writers" show = "category" hyperlink="yes"]


  1. Christopher Eastman-Nagle

    February 1, 2019 at 12:39 pm

    Russell, I think it quite sufficient to read summaries and reviews of Gammage’s work in order to determine whether I am likely to come across anything that would cause me to review my understandings. Nothing of that nature turned up. So being a busy man who has to ration his time, I have chosen not to read the book. From what I can glean of it I would not be wasting time reading it, but I have other more pressing priorities.

    Now, if you are convinced that I am wrong in this, and using what you know of Gammage’s work, take any of the above list of criteria for agriculture-based economic takeoff that happened in the late neolithic period and show me where I am wrong in my surmise that aboriginal society did not meet those criteria. If you can do that, I will humbly take the time to read the book.

    Beyond that, I have made a quite a number of arguments that you have not rebutted at all. Give it a try.

    But there is a more profound point which you have not addressed at all.

    Pretty nearly everyone on the planet had to adapt to the disruptive growth of capitalism and modern times. It shredded business-as-usual all round. The enclosure movement in Britain eliminated the last of the common land which were the last vestiges of what had once been big enough for wanderments, but had been reduced to minor community foraging. And people who had been on roughly the same land since the first villages were formed were turfed off in droves to make way for the much higher productivity ‘second wave’ agricultural revolution.

    As that revolution spread out across the world, it varyingly compromised with existing land title, depending on how developed the local economy then was. There was very little expropriation in India, but a lot more in Africa and New Zealand. However land use in this continent met all the traditional criteria for terra nullius, ie, unrecognized land title.

    That never meant that nothing was going on of an economic nature. Wanderment had just lost its legitimacy as a result of long standing ‘verdicts of history’. The proto agricultural land practices of the stone age had long been expunged. Had aboriginal societies been anything like the Maori or Melanesians, very different outcomes would have occurred. And you would have heard nothing about terra nullius.

    The same white people, armed with the same values, technology and practices, behaved very differently in New Zealand. And the Maori behaved very differently as well. Maori did have settled title and were indisputably farmers who were far more adaptable than their aboriginal island continent neighbours. And it is just as well that the ditch was wide enough to keep Maori navigators from its shores. The Maori wouldn’t have engaged in fancy-panty legal theorising. They would have slaughtered aboriginals on contact and enslaved the survivors in a manner that the Japanese Imperial Army would have recognised as ‘appropriate’.

    Aboriginals can thank their lucky stars that they got Western Europeans instead, and who were armed with, amongst other things, a liberal ideology .. something they would have had to do without if the Japanese had got here in 1942-43 …

    • Russell

      February 12, 2019 at 10:11 am

      “Russell, I think it quite sufficient to read summaries and reviews of Gammage’s work in order to determine whether I am likely to come across anything that would cause me to review my understandings.”

      So much for someone who pretends to research what he writes! Read the whole book if you want to understand it .. rather than take snippets from other people third or more hand.

      Regarding Japanese and Indigenous Australian relationships .. they were treated much better by them from as early as the 1880s than by the European invaders, and that continues to this day. The same can be said for Muslims who were here and remain since the 1850s. Please don’t talk in hypotheticals, and please stick to the facts.

      Read the book, and free yourself from ignorance.

      • Christopher Eastman-Nagle

        February 12, 2019 at 2:54 pm

        Russell, I have given you a fair opportunity to raise any of Gamage’s evidence or arguments that would contradict the assertions I am making. I am not going any further and not just for that reason.

        Gammage’s work is completely tangential to my central thesis, which is that the modern paradigm has applied itself across the world in exactly the same way with all peoples, starting in Britain in the 1780s, by rendering all the then extant economic and social arrangements either obsolete or requiring heavy modification, to meet new agricultural and industrial productivity/price/volume criteria and international trade standards.

        Everyone had to scramble to get up to speed. The slow coaches got done like a dog’s dinner. Capitalism has no mercy on losers and it is absolutely colour blind on that one. Thus anyone who didn’t have their head stuck up their arse made it their business to find out what it was the Europeans were having that gave them such a massive amount of leverage, so they could get a piece of the action.

        Modern education was the key to getting a seat at the modern table. All the major nationalist and socialist movements fed from that fountain that also trained new generations of modern professionals, industrialists, traders, bureaucrats, secular intellectuals and native missionaries across the world, including metropolitan, colonial and semi-colonial societies.

        Aboriginal communities failed to respond and slumped instead, which only served to worsen their situation and made the options for anyone dealing with them, very poor. And pandering to their unwillingness to modernize has simply negatively leveraged their historical failure and provided their white liberal interlocutors with aboriginal empathy industry jobs forever.

        The missionary educated David Unaipon, the aboriginal inventor on our $50 note, was a sad and very lonely exception to the miserable inertia of his people.

        That is the case you have to deal with. What Gammage said is irrelevant to that.

        Finally, google up ‘Japanese Imperial Army Atrocities’. The JIA was trained to the kind of brutality that was generally only to be found in the German Waffen SS and the SS internal security forces like the Einsatzgruppen. A more terrifying bunch of men would be hard to find in the annals of history, except perhaps for during the Mongol invasion of China by Ghengis Khan, that quite literally left behind ‘mountains of skulls’.

        The JIA, had it invaded Australia in 1942-3 would have quickly assessed aboriginals as unsuitable for use as slaves, rounded them all up….and shot them all. I know of stories of Japanese officers in Java who crucified servants for not polishing their boots sufficiently….

        • Russell

          March 11, 2019 at 2:58 pm

          You could read his book and properly educate yourself in the same time you spend putting your dog’s breakfast “I’ve heard” version of war and peace together. To do some actual personal face to face, factual (not hearsay) research would be even better, but that might take you away from your beloved pc or blog for too long.

  2. Christopher Eastman-Nagle

    January 31, 2019 at 12:51 pm

    Look Russell, I have tried my level best to engage with you and deliver a set of arguments that might give you cause to reflect, but you plainly do not seem to be able to do.

    I have had a look at Gammage and the surrounding literature available through a Google search, and have found nothing to dissuade me that aboriginal society had not reached the critical point of economic take-off the took place during the first agricultural revolution that took place originally in the late stone age (neolithic).

    Hunting gathering covers a quite wide variety of different practices, some of which were approaching agriculture and more settled ways as a result of more favourable climatic conditions, as in the more temperate and rainfall reliable east coast of this continent.

    Elsewhere, proto or nascent agriculture went on for many millennia before the first agricultural societies actually emerged. And that take off has a plethora of technological and structural signatures that are unmistakable in the archaeological record and are missing in Australia.

    They are the following:

    The creation of settled tenements with marked territorial boundaries
    The domestication of plants into rotated crops planted in fields that are ‘owned’ private property.
    The domestication of food and working animals that helped work/re-fertilise fields.
    Permanent family and collective living structures and defensive walls.
    Food cooking, storage and preservation technology associated with ceramics.
    Cloth/fibre making replaces the use of skins for clothing
    Shoes/sandals appear.
    Expanding tool inventories such as ploughs and sickles.
    Expanding weapons technology such as shields and bows.
    Specialisation of labour.
    The shift from animism to gods.
    Hierarchy replacing egalitarianism.
    The beginnings of taxation to cover new social and economic infrastructure costs.

    Gammage paints a vivid picture of a well organised society that was living very comfortably and utilising natural resources efficiently. But nothing it had done was going to save it from an overwhelming five to ten thousand year time hike when eventually the rest of the world caught up with their glorious isolation.

    Now Russell, you can assert the correctness of the High Court re terra nullius, but you have not addressed my argument at all, which is that that court decision represented liberal myth-making that has turned into dysfunctional pulp whose only beneficiaries have been the bureaucratic and pedagogic ruling classes …

    That is why Kate and I both agree that ‘Evasion Day’ is a better nomenclature than ‘Invasion Day’.

    • Russell

      February 1, 2019 at 10:24 am

      So you haven’t bothered to read the book!

      You won’t accept the world’s definition of agriculture, you won’t accept the Journals of those experienced and qualified invaders who saw the country first, you won’t accept that there was food being grown and processed everywhere here when the invasion took place, and you don’t even know what crap you are ingesting now.

      Go back to your racist, fantasy world.

  3. Christopher Eastman-Nagle

    January 30, 2019 at 3:50 pm

    ‘Terra Nullius’ was a legal doctrine defining what the limits of modern land tenement were in relation to hunter gathering. It was a statement of non recognition of ‘wanderments’. It confirmed a very ancient tradition that had emerged out of the neolithic (late stone age) period when modern notions of settled territoriality were being made possible by settled agriculture.

    The early history of modern tenement was taken up in the elimination of wanderments and their incorporation into the new system until the only wanderments left were in areas that were useless for agriculture.

    The notion of ‘Terra Nullius’ automatically came with the first settlers who proceeded to administer in this continent the verdicts of the last 5 to 10 thousand years everywhere else.

    The 1970 Mabo case that overthrew the old precedent purported to restore some of the rights of ownership to their traditional ownership. That was, In my view, a liberal fiction that was in effect trying to bring back the dead. It was attempting to breathe life into a corpse with ideologically sentimental goodwill. The reality was that the ‘traditional lands’ became degenerate holding bays for white and just-off-white administered semi-tribal welfare populations to rot in on an indefinite basis, along with their language, most of their ‘culture’, and hopes for the future.

    More importantly, the overthrow of Terra Nullius not only gave the white and just off white humanities graduates plush intergenerationally secure bureaucracies and funding to keep them in the manner to which they have become accustomed, but delivered a legitimising tool to moralise at their regime corporate opposite numbers and maintain a key narrative for their cultural authority and ideological lockdown on university humanities’ departments that feed the entire system of social administration.

    These people behave in exactly the same way as the Medieval Church just before the reformation, which became ever more overbearing, orthodox, heresy sniffing and full of its rights and privileges as it became ever more corrupt and abusive of the ideology and divine grace it was supposed to be stewarding.

    It is time to pin this on the libertarian humanist wing of Indulgence Capitalism in the same way we do for the environmental and economic misgovernance of its corporate partner. Libertarian humanist malfeasance has destroyed much of what was left of aboriginal society in 1970 and it’s doing the same to the rest of us through the same deregulatory and privatising indulgence culture that parallels the indulgent economic system. The same regime that produced the malfeasant boards of directors in the finance sector has produced the Dylan Vollers and the out-of-control children who have made their way into the juvenile detention system through welfare systems that are drowning in a social milieu that has lost control of its centre, its boundaries and the rules-based environment that connects the two.

    The humanist administrators are no more benign than their corporate opposite numbers. Unrestrained deregulation and privatisation in the end destroys the commons infrastructure it relies on to remain sustainably viable, whether we are talking aboriginal communities, families in general, the nation state or the natural environment.

    • Russell

      January 31, 2019 at 7:48 am

      “Terra Nullius” was quite correctly thrown out by the High Court of Australia. Literally it means “nobody’s land” and that was in fact a blatant lie used by the British, and it still is.

      The British pretended that there was no Law of the land, no land ownership and no agriculture, in order to steal it. ALL these claims were completely false and proven time after time by the very earliest explorers and surveyors, and recorded in all their Journals.

      Whether you like it or not, it is their land and it always will be.

  4. Rob Halton

    January 29, 2019 at 4:44 pm

    An absolute embarrassment to free speech. Just ignore it.

    • Christopher Eastman-Nagle

      January 29, 2019 at 6:11 pm

      My dear Rob, that is a banal excuse for standing out of range and farting in my general direction rather than risking an engagement.

      Is that the best you can manage?

      • Rob Halton

        January 29, 2019 at 11:28 pm

        No problems at all Christopher, not your comments in any way just the fact that that Australia day is not too bad is it stands with new citizens being accepted as Australians on the 26th January and most people out and about having a day off work to enjoying it outdoors with their families

        Perhaps I should of said the aboriginal protest march stands as an embarrassment to themselves as it shows they just dont appreciate how well off they are today compared to what the last generation had to put up with.

        There is a certain element of the aboriginal community and serial protesters like Nick McKim who is nothing more than a gutless wonder who hates all manner of conventional government’s approach towards modern Australian life that is why I say just ignore the March as it bears no importance to the way we realy are!

        You bet the next thing they will be slamming Anzac Day as just another excuse to stage their anti Australian ways.

        One Australia, One Nation no pun in a political sense meant.

        • Russell

          January 30, 2019 at 7:46 am

          Here in Tasmania where much of the State is on fire and Australia Day was declared a Total Fire Ban day for good reason, bogan ‘Australians’ still lit open fires in their drunken stupor and attacked fire-fighters who came to extinguish the fires before we had another catastrophe added to the mix. “It’s Straya Day! You can’t have Straya Day without a barbie fire!”

          This is what Australia Day really means .. an excuse for bogans and criminals to get paralytically smashed, disgustingly abusive, and irresponsibly arrogant and ignorant.

        • Christopher Eastman-Nagle

          March 11, 2019 at 10:34 pm

          It is a day for celebrating migration to somewhere that is very good to its newcomers. And I would be very glad to invite our aboriginal brothers and sisters into the halls of its memory and vision for the future, but they need to become migrants too….time migrants; i.e, to become a modern people and citizens within the warm framework of a multicultural society that welcomes all cultures to its feast. But they have to want to do it and they must….they must, make the hard choices that everyone else has had to make, as to how much baggage they will need to leave behind, to make that journey successfully.

          The white liberal narrative of invasion and suffering, while true enough, is a cloying invitation to cling to the past, wallow in their tragedy and become pawns of their white sponsors, who have indulgently colonized them to keep themselves in bureaucratic stipends, fiscal play money, morally ascendance, keep their wretched clients frozen exactly way they are indefinitely and destroyed what was left of responsible moral agency inside aboriginal communities, by systematic deregulation and privatization of their social infrastructure…and turning what wasn’t traveling terribly well in 1970 into chaotic and dysfunctional mush.

          When it comes to aboriginals, their white and just off white libertarian humanist sponsors are simulataneously both truth tellers, and egregious liars in the service of their own interests, and no one else’s, except for some aboriginal identifying, overwhelmingly Europeanized culture-by-book non tribal ideological stooges.

          Funnily enough, the only people who seem to be making any sort of dent in this, are the armed forces, who provide aboriginal kids with live in pre recruitment five month training, which gives them a proper ‘family’, some discipline and education in the absolute basics that they didn’t get at home. It is fantastic the transformations they have managed.

      • Christopher Eastman-Nagle

        January 30, 2019 at 11:56 am

        WP, I have read the information that you have averred to and there isn’t any there of which I wasn’t aware of in the early ’80s when I was teaching Australian history which included a fairly large section on indigenous history. All that has changed since then is the amount of information as a result of further archaeological research.

        The more benign east coast enabled forms of proto agriculture, but it was never able to develop surpluses that would lead to a fully developed permanent settlement pattern that was to be found throughout the rest of the South Pacific. Jarod Diamond in his ‘Guns, Germs and Steel’ gives a very good explanation as to why that was the case, one which was to do with the unavailability of suitably domesticable plant and and animal species.

        Now I am not really having a debate about the extent of the creative whizzbangery of a mezolithic stone age practice. It is fundamentally irrelevant to the case that I am making. The fact is that the Europeans who arrived in 1788 had a five to ten thousand year jump on the locals which was an absolutely overwhelming advantage which rendered instantly obsolete whatever they were currently doing.

        They were confronted by an urban civilisation whose leading city at the time, London, had a population considerably in excess of the entire continental population of a 7 million square km Terra Australis. And to keep it the leading city, during the Napoleonic wars, the British armed forces expended the lives of three hundred thousand of its military and naval personnel, something which also ensured that French penetration into the far South Pacific region was restricted to scientific vessels. That was the going price for real estate at the time, and it points to just how radically out of their league indigenous populations here really were.

        By contrast, the Maori moved very quickly to bolster their position vis a vis the new interlopers. They could do that because they had settled, and militarily regimented, agricultural communities that produced sufficient surpluses to buy guns and steel. They were sufficiently developed and organised to appreciate both the opportunities and threats the newcomers posed for them, and acted on that. That is why they got a treaty, were represented in Pakeha political institutions, developed a European educated upper class and even after military defeat, they kept some of their land.

        And just to reinforce that, check out the really brutal Maori invasion of the Chatham islands in 1835 when they ‘took out’ the Moriori who were Maori who had reverted to a hunter-gatherer community. Had the Moriori preserved their original tribal organisational structure they would have easily repelled the quite small Maori raiding party. The Moriori were still having debates about whether to resist or not when the raiders overwhelmed and slaughtered them without mercy. Indigenous stone age peoples were as out of their depth in dealing with Maori as they were with Europeans, with the difference that the Europeans did not approve of Maori ‘methods’.

        Aboriginal society, unlike the Maori and just about everyone else on the planet, proved to be extremely non-adaptive to the new ‘situation’. They are still struggling with that and frankly, getting extremely dubious ‘help’ from their white liberal sponsors to upgrade their act.

        Maori are the most heavily represented population in the New Zealand tertiary education system, albeit at the TAFE end of the spectrum, because Maori appreciate the value of modern education as a tool of empowerment. Aboriginal populations here need to follow their example. The NZ government does not need to employ special truant officers to get Maori kids to go to school.

        • Wining Pom

          January 31, 2019 at 9:19 am

          ‘I have read the information that you have averred to and there isn’t any there of which I wasn’t aware of in the early ’80s when I was teaching Australian history which included a fairly large section on indigenous history.’

          Well, I don’t think you did Christopher, if you’re still denying what’s written there …

          ‘Moreover, the indigenous people were regarded by the European settlers as having a sophisticated and adept use of plants and animals in ways that would sustain large populations.’

    • Christopher Eastman-Nagle

      January 30, 2019 at 11:57 am

      Sorry, Rob. I thought you were ‘having a go’ at me. Thanks for your contribution.

  5. Wining Pom

    January 29, 2019 at 9:34 am

    It’s embarrassing to see people keep on about Aboriginal culture being Stone Age and Hunter Gatherer. Agriculture had been practiced in Australia for thousands of years. Fish traps were on most rivers.

    But terra nullis had to be defended.

    • Christopher Eastman-Nagle

      January 29, 2019 at 11:10 am

      Wining Pom … aboriginal hunters and gatherers did do some extra planting of edible plants to increase productivity. And yes, there were fish traps, but that was not agriculture.

      The definitive shift was a sufficiently productive planting regime that enables settled life in villages, which meant the emergence of notions of territory and property, permanent structures and defence works, food surpluses and preservation, specialisation of labour, expansion of the tools and materials inventory, and the emergence of political/social hierarchies.

      And it was a very short jump from that to move into metallurgy out of ceramic pot firing which was absolutely decisive in dooming hunter-gatherer societies to either being destroyed or absorbed by the new forms of organisation and capital accumulation.

      The virtue of that happening five to ten thousand years ago was that the differences between the new kids on the block and the old was not all that great, which meant assimilation was not such a huge gap to be bridged. For the great southern continental hunters and gatherers, 26th January 1788 was an instant five to ten thousand year time hike that brutally exposed their real vulnerability and fragility. Even the diseases the newbies brought with them immediately laid them waste.

      Hunting and gathering was rendered immediately obsolete by forces so overwhelming that it had no mechanisms to deal with them. Even the hand of friendship would burn that of the other. That was the price of long isolation and being thousands of years behind the action going on elsewhere, when at last it caught up with them.

      • Wining Pom

        January 29, 2019 at 5:28 pm

        Christopher, education is fun. Here’s a sample that you can learn much more from: https://agrieducate.com.au/2017/05/29/the-first-farmers/

        ‘The world’s oldest grindstones dating back to 30,000 BCE, plentiful harvests as far as the eye can see and rolling pastures of green straight out of a golf course. An idyllic image bringing up the idea of an ancient civilisation straight out of the cradle of civilisation. But this isn’t some distant people and land. This is an Australian story, one of indigenous agriculture right here in Australia – the oldest story of agriculture and baking anywhere in the world.’

        • Christopher Eastman-Nagle

          January 29, 2019 at 11:38 pm

          My dear WP, hunting and gathering is not without its refinements. Aboriginals had it down to a fine art. Their pharmacopeia was impressive and we are still yet to learn some of it. Within its terms of reference, their hunting and gathering came with a lot of bells and whistles. But what it did not have were the features of a society able to generate the surpluses necessary to start the process of economic growth and capital accumulation.

          With no invasive predators or high productivity plants or domesticable animals that could lead to disruption to the status quo, aboriginal society was able to live comfortably in small traveling groups, using very low productivity techniques on a multi millennium basis .. until they couldn’t.

          The Maori were an agricultural people, were able to generate surpluses and could afford to buy modern implements when they became available. like ploughs and muskets. And more importantly, they were interested and alert enough to see the value in these things, and wanted to acquire the suite of knowledge on how to not just use these things but to make and maintain them themselves. They took to literacy in their own language immediately. They rapidly Christianised because they saw the leverages it offered.

          Very early in the history of Sydney, Maori appeared wanting to find out as much as possible about the newcomers and to enter into trade. Governor King schmoozed them with freebies and aid because he wanted them to grow potatoes, which they did, so that they could buy the new technological goodies.

          Aboriginals never did because they just weren’t in that space. And a lot of them still aren’t .. which is a huge problem for them now.

          • Wining Pom

            January 30, 2019 at 8:05 am

            So I take it that you didn’t read any of the Agrieducate article then, Christopher.

            I know it’s hard to understand that all you believe in is, in fact, not factual, but the truth is seeping through.

    • Ralph WessmanRalph Wessman

      January 30, 2019 at 10:26 am

      Hi, Wining Pom.

      I was fortunate to hear Bruce at an occasion in Rosny — maybe three years ago – speaking very passionately about ‘Dark Emu’, his book that had just taken out the NSW Premier’s Literary Award, and Aboriginal systems of food production and land management.

      An outstanding writer, he boasts a literary pedigree reaching back to the early eighties when in another capacity he published the highly successful quarterly ‘Australian Short Stories’ with a print run of around 20,000 per issue. (With the possible exception of ‘Quadrant’, who’d ever heard of that?)

      • Wining Pom

        February 1, 2019 at 7:46 pm

        Hi Ralph, Yes, a mindblowing read. Annabel Crabb tweeted that it was the best thing that she read last year. I agree.

        It makes one wonder if people who still say that Aboriginal society was Stone Age are in fact, in that bracket themselves.

        Intellectually that is.

  6. Christopher Eastman-Nagle

    January 29, 2019 at 9:33 am

    My dear Russell, could I humbly suggest that you actually find something out about ‘fascism’ before you throw that term around?

    You use it as a meaningless negative stereotype and cliche, as is your use of ‘right wing’. These days the latter has degenerated into a term indicating lack of empathy and the right kind of ideological massage oils, and I willingly own to that as a badge of honour.

    As to your claims to some kind of ideological ascendancy representing ‘the wave of the future’, all I can say is that that is delusional. Take a look at what, and who, are making all the moves right now, and the post World War II liberal consensus is getting a well deserved hiding. Hadn’t you noticed, Russell? Why do I have to point out the obvious to you when it is right under your nose? You are as much in a state of denial about the impending bankruptcy of your social world view as the Tony Abbotts are about climate change.

    And that is the thing, Russell. Both the social humanitarian and corporate sides of Indulgence Capitalism are suffering from the same disease as a result of 50-60 years of systematic deregulation and privatisation in the name of freedom.

    And now it is starting to catch up with you all. Your race ideology is so plastered with excuses for the effects of your now junk ideology that you can’t see the difference between liberating people and colonising them with values that systematically destroy them in ways that paternalism never did.

    The libertarian humanism that took bureaucratic control of Aboriginal affairs in the late ’60s has screwed them more comprehensively than anything that happened before, and the only beneficiaries of that have been the white bureaucratic controllers and their just off-white so called ‘aboriginal’ stooges.

    I am calling your bluff, Russell. Calling me nasty names only encourages me. I crumble ideological cliches and name callings over my breakfast wheaties every morning.

    See if you can manage to intellectually engage. Or am I being a bit optimistic? Is the ideological party line the only thing left in humanities departments these days?

    • spikey

      January 29, 2019 at 11:39 am

      ‘I am calling your bluff, Russell. Calling me nasty names only encourages me. I crumble ideological cliches and name callings over my breakfast wheaties every morning.’

      I ‘hafta’ wonder what indulgence capitalism tastes like on Wheaties.

    • Russell

      January 30, 2019 at 7:54 am

      Please explain to all we plebeians how it was possible that all the early Australian surveyors and explorers found mile after mile of millet gathered in stooks and bulk grain supplies, and rode for days through millet with heads as large as wheat up to their horses’ shoulders?

      These same areas are now barren, saline and drought-stricken due to non-Indigenous farming methods.

      You could try engaging with fact instead of presenting your usual baseless fascist, racist rants.

      Educate yourself, and read “The Biggest Estate on Earth” before you bother replying.

      • MJF

        January 30, 2019 at 11:59 am

        Yes, Mr Langfield. That’s easily solved.

        That would be native millet which grows and regenerates quite happily on its own as some early surveyors discovered. It’s one of the endemic panic grasses. Given the indigenous people’s reliance on bush tucker, its little wonder they eventually found a way to process and eat native millet seed. Processing native foods into an edible state is certainly inventive, but its a long throw of the spear to brand it agriculture.

        Can you quote anything that hasn’t come from Gammage?

        Now, if you’re going to be abusive, uncouth and demanding in responses again .. don’t bother, thank you.

        BTW, a plebeian is a commoner. I don’t see how that fits with the subject matter. Being a commoner doesn’t preclude possession of some knowledge, does it?

        • Russell

          January 31, 2019 at 8:59 am

          Have you read Gammage’s book yet? Why don’t you do so before you reply with absolutely no substance in your comment. It’s a collection of writings of the earliest British explorers’ and surveyors’ Journals. I quote it because it is FACT, pure fact recorded of the time you pretend to know about but show little to no actual understanding.

          Agriculture: * the science, art, or occupation concerned with cultivating land, raising crops, and feeding, breeding, and raising livestock; farming.
          * the production of crops, livestock, or poultry.

          ALL these things were, and STILL are, purposely and intensively carried out by Indigenous Australians.

          ALL civilisations farmed the same way at one stage or another, and so your claim that it can’t be recognised as “agriculture” is completely deluded and non-factual, or just plain hypocritical.

          Unlike today’s Strayans, the Indigenous didn’t rely mostly on imports from China and Asia for their food. Read the labels of the ingredients and poisons you buy which are sold as so-called ‘food’ on your next shopping trip. Indigenous Australians even exported and traded with their foods and other products with Indonesia. They had an established and known trade system right throughout the breadth of Australia.

          They were never short of food, even in droughts, because they ate what belonged here naturally which was always plentiful and extremely healthy. They work/ed WITH the land, not AGAINST it. All the surveyors and explorers exclaimed time and time again that what they saw all over Australia (even in parts that today are laid waste and barren) was “a Gentleman’s Park” which at those times compared, to them, with landholdings of only the richest of nobility back in Britain.

          In fact ‘bushfoods’ today return much higher incomes than any introduced exotic crap, and they are more sought after because they are regarded as “superfoods”.

          Unlike Indigenous Australians, the invaders ignored the bounty already here and proceeded to destroy the balanced landscape and to fill the land with totally unsuitable plants, animals and destructive practices which required enormous amounts of extra water which has now seen the Darling River system and others dry up and kill most of the aquatic life in and around it.

          What was once one vast Estate of fertile land is now a carved up collection of almost completely barren, saline, poisoned, waterless dust bowls. And the ‘farmers’ continuously have their begging bowls out, scratching their collective dull or greedy heads, and wondering what went wrong!

          Non-indigenous farming also is unable to succeed in production without using massive amounts of energy, salts, chemicals and other poisonous inputs which sees our current population full of diseases, something never seen before on this land prior to invasion.

          Also unlike Indigenous Australians, you don’t even know NOW how to process your own exotic foods to make them edible, which is another reason why so many people in this country are sick and diseased.

          It is a well known FACT that ALL grains, seeds and nuts must be soaked before eating them. It is a well known FACT that non-human milk is mostly indigestible unless it is fermented. It is a well known FACT that most ‘modern’ food processing practices kill all the vitamins and many minerals with their high temperature and high pressure treatments which destroy the very fabric of what is supposed to be food. It is a well known FACT that most of your numbered ‘food’ ingredients listed on the packagings are extremely poisonous or carcinogenic .. all in order just so that they can sit on your supermarket shelves or in warehouses for years to be sold whenever.

          In most cases you’re better off eating the cardboard boxes these poisons are sold in. Even your own ancestors “eventually found a way to process and eat (their) native (foods).” It’s only recently that you lot have lost the plot, and all that knowledge, and begun gorging yourselves on garbage which I wouldn’t even feed to my chooks.

          I would say to you that it’s YOUR modern agriculture and society that is the backward one, and it’s all there proven right before your blinkered myopic eyes.

          Just for once Martin, do some research, educate yourself properly and use your brain before your mouth is given permission to speak.

  7. Russell

    January 29, 2019 at 7:58 am

    This is the new paradigm, Nagle. Get with it or get left behind because as you say “Nobody gets permanent tenure for anything, ever, anywhere.”

    You and your right-wing’s time has come, and the rise of the fascists is about to come to a crunching halt.

  8. Christopher Eastman-Nagle

    January 28, 2019 at 3:54 pm

    The Catch Up and New Opportunity Day when modern times belatedly arrived instantly rendered hunting and gathering an obsolete practice that it had been elsewhere since the late stone age when agricultural practice and sedentary villages first formed.

    Nobody gets permanent tenure for anything, ever, anywhere. No one owns anything they cannot defend against someone who would take it from them. Length of tenure is meaningless once it is over. When one is out of time, one is out of time …

    ‘Invasion Day’ is an evasion of the real issue, which is adaption to the new paradigm that everyone on the planet has had at some point had to wrestle with and resolve. ‘Invasion Day’ is a spurious attempt to get some kind of return to the past that avoids the necessity to join the present. It is a gross form of cultural denialism and the price of it is a privileged welfarist place in the trash can of history.

    And the only beneficiaries of that are the white, and just off white, administrators of and excuse makers for aboriginal failure, dysfunction and ethnic atavism whose handsome bureaucratic stipends will continue to be inherited by their humanities-trained petty bourgeois descendants ad nauseam, because real change and cultural embrace of modernity isn’t on their agenda.

    The white liberals are cultural panderers and indulgencers whose ‘race’ strategy empowers no one else but them.

    The damned white petty bourgeois frauds have the front and the cheek to make out as if they represent some kind of cutting edge progress; that is, their bureaucratic and pedagogic progress and ever larger budgets for the negligible benefit of their wretched clients and ideological pawns who legitimise their white sponsor’s ever thinning veneer of legitimacy …

    • Kate

      January 29, 2019 at 8:59 am

      I would not worry about it too much, Christopher.

      I think they meant to call it “Evasion Day” … because this group of people appears to be in a perpetual state of evading the facts!

Leave a Reply

To Top