Comments on: Sorry

By: corey

corey — Wed, 27 May 2009 11:26:22 +0000

In 2008 all South Australians continue to face challenges left over from the colonialism and racism of the past. The impact of 170 years of removal from land, culture and family has left a legacy of disadvantage that communities, state and commonwealth governments must address. Aboriginal communities are forming originations such as the Aboriginal Alliance Coalition Movement, Nunkuwarrin Yunti, Reconciliation SA, Link Up, and Tandanya to heal the wounds of the past and address the needs of the future.

DOES THAT SOUND “FAIR” 2 U

By: corey

corey — Wed, 27 May 2009 11:20:49 +0000

do you think the “sorry” speach is good enough?
I dnt because It is hard to imagine a more cruel and hurtful way to exacerbate the pain of thousands of aboriginal Australians whose basic human rights were denied by Australian Governments and who, for decades, have been struggling to recover from the dreadful pain of a childhood without family and love.

By: BobTurbo

BobTurbo — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 02:21:28 +0000

But wait, didn’t John Howard acknowledge the same thing but just didn’t use the word ‘sorry’? From what I read, the entire argument was that his speech was not good enough because the Aboriginal people said that ‘sorry’ was a special word to them, despite the fact that sincere regret expresses the same emotional aspect of the word. That is what alerted my suspicions of compensation as the main goal, and these claims now seem to be surfacing.

By: BobTurbo

BobTurbo — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 02:13:12 +0000

Hmm OK I have seen the light.

By: LizS

LizS — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 04:08:55 +0000

I feel strongly with Kathryn on this, and I found the formal apology very moving. Two things stand out to me as one-liner replies to Stuart and Bob above – first, an institution is made up of real people and can be as good as its people; secondly, to see how many Aboriginal people were deeply moved by the apology cermenony is an answer in itself, to my mind – it sank home, it alllowed thos aboriginal people to begin to be spiritually healed….

Liz

By: Kathryn Greenhill

Kathryn Greenhill — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:27:40 +0000

Hi Bob, I got more out of the speech than you did. To me it is a strongly worded official attempt to acknowledge at the highest level that white people damaged the lives of Indigenous Australians.

Nothing can heal or atone for the utter devastation that was caused, and every action will be inadequate in the face of the injustice that happened.

I think that the apology was done in the spirit of trying to do the best that could be done, and reflected the desires of many of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders who lobbied for it.

By: Kathryn Greenhill

Kathryn Greenhill — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:20:04 +0000

Hi Stuart. I think this is one of the reasons the last government refused to say sorry, along with fear of litigation if “sorry” could be construed as accepting responsibility.

I’ve been trying to address the “institutional apology” issue you raise and going around in ever decreasing circles of logic until I have no more logic left.

I’ve concluded that it’s obviously within the legal power of the Australian Parliament qua Parliament (not individual members acting together) to make an apology like this. It must therefore involve the same kind of legal fiction that allows a corporation to be a “legal person”. The apology isn’t attributing human qualities like remorse to the Parliament ..but is much more ceremonial…

This view does, of course, substantially weaken the apology.

There seems to be no easy answer. Don’t apologise and you are constantly criticised like the previous government. Do apologise and you are only making a token gesture at best.

By: BobTurbo

BobTurbo — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 11:36:29 +0000

I think the speech does nothing other than promote the victim mentality and make some white kids feel good for a day. You don’t get “spiritually healed” or the ability to “move on” after some convulted human-made construct known as “government” apologises for the actions of some other government. This is more nonsense than I can handle in one day to be honest.

By: Stuart Weibel

Stuart Weibel — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 22:40:33 +0000

I have an uncomfortable feeling about institutional apologies, as they perpetuate the ill conceived notion that organizations have the same attributes as people… are trustworthy, or not, have compassion, or not, seek justice, or not. These notions lead us astray more often than guide us to truth.

Reading this statement, though, I found it eloquent and hopeful and full of leadership (which *IS* an attribute of governance… or not). It acknowledges wrong, expresses a people’s ideals, and articulates a future worthy of a great and heterogeneous people.

I wish all of my Australian friends every success in achieving it.