28
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2023
28 points (96.7% liked)
Australia
3579 readers
99 users here now
A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.
Before you post:
If you're posting anything related to:
- The Environment, post it to Aussie Environment
- Politics, post it to Australian Politics
- World News/Events, post it to World News
- A question to Australians (from outside) post it to Ask an Australian
If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News
Rules
This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:
- When posting news articles use the source headline and place your commentary in a separate comment
Banner Photo
Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition
Recommended and Related Communities
Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:
- Australian News
- World News (from an Australian Perspective)
- Australian Politics
- Aussie Environment
- Ask an Australian
- AusFinance
- Pictures
- AusLegal
- Aussie Frugal Living
- Cars (Australia)
- Coffee
- Chat
- Aussie Zone Meta
- bapcsalesaustralia
- Food Australia
- Aussie Memes
Plus other communities for sport and major cities.
https://aussie.zone/communities
Moderation
Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.
Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
You and I appear to have a differing understanding of sovereignty and what that word means.
The Australian Government has sovereignty of Australia, no one else, not even the supposed Monarch.
You can argue all day about historical legalities and it doesn’t matter a damn bit because the Australian Government holds absolute authority in Australia and that is reality.
If you're redefining what the word sovereignty means please let me know.
Again, the Welcome to Country ceremonies are literally for welcoming GUESTS. I am not a guest, I am a citizen, and these ceremonies are extremely insulting.
These ceremonies are divisive because they’re treating citizens like temporary guests who are being begrudgingly welcomed.
Let me repeat, I am not a guest or a visitor. I was born here and I’ll die here. This is my home. Any insinuation otherwise is insulting to the point I would consider them fighting words if they were uttered in a pub.
That is entirely separate to recognition of the history of invasion and genocide which the Indigenous population suffered under British and then Australian governments, which I am fully aware of and recognise.
I think so, because you seem to believe that only one form of sovereignty exists - that of the modern international legal system, which was itself developed by Western colonial states. To suggests this indicates a significant lack of perspective. You also claim you are fully aware of Australia's history, in which case you should know that the legal claim of terra nullius by the British Crown, upon which modern Australia was built, was not only incorrect at the time but has since been overturned by modern Australian courts. To assert, based on this unlawful claim, that there is only one form of sovereignty in this country and that it is undisputed is to be ignorant of our history.
The reality is that, as I alluded to, there are two competing forms of sovereignty in Australia. Regardless of whether you are willing to accept it, indigenous sovereignty continues to exist in this country and is of importance to First Nations peoples. They have the right to express this sovereignty and Australia, as a signatory to the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, has committed (in principle) to acknowledging and supporting this.
The fact that otherwise rational, often socially left-leaning, non-Indigenous Australians have a complete mental breakdown as soon as anyone challenges their outdated and bigoted ideas around sovereignty is a clear indication of the cognitive dissonance I am referring to. Expressions of indigenous sovereignty should not feel like a threat, and if they are then you need to go away and do some thinking about why they make you feel that way.
So long as I am treated as a “guest” in the language and actions of the people pushing for these changes I will never accept or recognise any form of sovereignty from them.
Simple as.
Sovereignty isn’t some colonial European concept, it is a concept which all States and leaders have understood throughout history. Chinese and African history are full of the establishment, maintenance and collapse of Sovereignty long before modern Colonial powers even existed.
My understanding of sovereignty isn’t based on a legal system it is based on power, the power to effectively govern within ones declared borders and maintain those borders against foreign powers.
Sovereignty was never ceded because it was LOST through conflict.
To be honest, that's pretty lame. It sounds like just because you feel weird about them calling you a guest, you won't accept their clear sovereignty in Australia.
Define sovereignty, because clearly we don’t mean the same thing.
My position on my status as a citizen and not a “guest” is clear and also very reasonable, if you have a problem with it please elaborate.
I agree with other commenters' definitions of sovereignty. In Australia there are competing sovereignties. An imperial one -- "Australia", conquest, absolute power. And an Indigenous one -- spiritual connection, ancestry, sacred ties. In each of these sovereignties, the word "sovereignty" has a different definition and is deployed for a different purpose.
Indigenous sovereignty existed for 60 millennia, and then the British stole the land and denied that sovereignty in place of their own. The Australian state has the means to enforce its own sovereignty through things like laws, police, prison, disenfranchisement, poverty, but Indigenous sovereignty still exists. This is a fact. If I stole something from you and claimed it as my own with a threat of violence, it'd still be yours, even after thousands of years.
Under Australian sovereignty, you're certainly a citizen. Under Indigenous sovereignty, it's more complicated, and from what I understand Indigenous people have a variety of perspectives. I haven't heard anyone use the term 'guest', but I have heard 'invader'. It's an uncomfortable label, but it's entirely reasonable given the colonial history of Australia. Others have more inviting perspectives on this conflict between sovereignties.
Here's an article about it if you're interested: https://www.smh.com.au/national/what-s-indigenous-sovereignty-and-can-a-voice-extinguish-it-20230113-p5ccdk.html
Thank you for sharing your perspective on what sovereignty means, it’s more than the other person I was trying to discuss this with did.
All Im really seeing from that article is that sovereignty according to some activists means
-spirituality -connection to land
Which matches closely to the original Western interpretation of
-derived from god -occupation of land
I really don’t see much difference, and I don’t see much worth in either. Realised sovereignty, the effective ability to enforce it, is the only thing that matters at the end of the day.
These activists are making out like in 60,000 years they never went to war, never stole land, and never enforced their claim over another group of people.
Of course they did. Then it happened to the lot of them. That sucks for them but that’s how it goes.
That’s why everyone spends so much on Defence.