Comments on: Saturday Salon

By: Paul Burns

Paul Burns — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 01:00:53 +0000

Seems the Australian has declared the History Wars are at an end.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25763534-5001986,00.html

Funny, I thought they were over ages ago, and that we’d long got back to the normal civilized discourse that constitutes historical debate. Ah, well.

By: Roger Jones

Roger Jones — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 11:53:30 +0000

What about science's hottest 100? You have to read about Ada Lovelace's Adventures in Steampunk Computing. Hat tip Eli Rabbett

By: Mark

Mark — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 11:45:25 +0000

To quote a friend of mine on Facebook:

Only 10 songs on the hottest 100 list were made by a band who had any women in it, ever (if we include Massive Attack, who, technically, only ever had female guest vocalists); the highest of these was placed at no. 20 (The White Stripes, “Seven Nation Army”). The only two songs with female lead vocals are the two by Massive Attack. Finally, no solo female artists at all made the list.

By: AdamTucker

AdamTucker — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 11:02:34 +0000

Adrienne, sorry, I didn’t see this and posted the same thing under Sunday! : )

By: Adrienne

Adrienne — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 08:17:51 +0000

Just finished the JJJ Hotest 100. Somebody please tell me I left the room everytime a woman got a place, otherwise, the entire Top 100 seems not to have even one woman in it. WTF?

By: David Irving (no relation)

David Irving (no relation) — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 05:24:46 +0000

Peter Kemp @ 17 and 18, I reckon that’d be wonderful to see. The Rethugs would finally forget how angry they’ve been about Nixon getting “hounded” out of office …

The fallout could be pretty ugly, though – the fuckers have still got teeth.

By: Salient Green

Salient Green — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 03:31:10 +0000

Thanks Mervyn for that piece of verse. I had to read the rest of it and found it here if others should feel likewise.
http://www.nowwethepeople.org/poetry_sacredsites.html

By: Paul Burns

Paul Burns — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 02:23:46 +0000

Mervyn L @ 10,
The historical debate about genocide (ie the debate being conducted by historians) as I understand it, is one concerned with colonial history. I don’t think anyone debates that what happened in trhe 20 C was anything but cultural genocide and, in relation to assimilationist policies a variant of physical genocide, (Not that I’ve read anyway.)
The colonial debate runs something like this: Genocide requires mass extermination of a people by a state.
From about 1860 to c.1915, apart from the activities of the various Native Police organisations, who disguised their massacres of aboriginal people as police actions, when they were in fact massacres, state-organised extermination of Aboriginal people was minimal. Indeed, there is evidence in WA, for example, that by about the 1890s, state governments forbade the killing of Aboriginal people. This didn’t mean state agencies did not engage in massacres, but they weren’t supposed to.
OTOH, the number of Aborigines killed by privately organised settler parties was massive, and, especially in Queensland and WA, such killing sprees seem to be beyond control of state authorities and frequently ignored by local bush magistrates when it was brought to their attention. Though there were one or two magistrates who did prosecute. It is estimated that 10,000 or more Aboriginal people were massacred in the period about 1870-1890 in Queensland alone. Figures are hard to come by, because the settler-murderers almost always tried to destroy the evidence of their crimes by burning or burying the bodies.
There seems to be no debate that there was murder on a massive scale by private citizens in contravention of state laws, or that those privately organised punitive expeditions were often silently condoned by lower level representatives of the state. However, except in the case of the Native Police they were not state-organised. Compared to the action taken by settlers, the murders committed by t Native police were, comparatively, fewer.
Now, that’s the historical debate, which attempts to answer the question re 19C genocide.
To me it all seems a bit of a pointless furphy. Mass murder is mass murder, whatever you label it.. It doesn’t deny what happened, simply questions how its named and defined. its also worth bearing in mind that the actual question of whether it was genocide or not was origunally brought up by RWDBs like Windschuttle, and like it or not, the profession has had to respond to his assertions, and the debate has developed from that. You will be relieved to know that Windschuttle’s arguments have been utterly rejected by almost all worthwhile historians. He is considered to be lacking in humanity.
Thanks to all of you for your suggestions. I’m taking them on board.

By: Rx

Rx — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 02:11:32 +0000

Out to dinner last night. When we got there, the place we intended to eat at was closed due to the footpath out the front being ripped up by the Council. So we headed to the local KFC for a salt ‘n grease fest.

Paid off the calories of one piece of fried this morning by weeding in the garden. Delightful weather to be outdoors.

By: Mervyn Langford

Mervyn Langford — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 01:47:46 +0000

“……Ah White Man! I am searching for the sites – so Sacred unto you
Where you walk is silent worship, and you whisper poems too.
And you tread, like me, in wonder, and your eyes are filled with tears.
As you gaze upon the tracks you’ve trod – down your 100,000 years……..

White Man! I am searching round this country.
I am searching night and day – for the sites to you so Sacred -
That you won’t give them away.
What is Sacred to you White Man? What is Sacred to your Clan?
Are your totems rainbow feathered? Is there dreaming in you man?……”

(Denis Kevans, RIP)