I've been to Oz three times. I have to say the Aborigines' claims seem, on the face of it, stronger than the Palestinians, since they'd been there for 40,000 years or so.
That said: the settlers are not going to go away, like the French did in Algeria. So it's kinda like having a father who was abusive in your childhood: what can he possibly do to make it right? Endless self-flagellation isn't helpful.
What an amazing writer!!! Thank you! It's a multi-tasking hole-in-one:) I'm a long term loyal New Australian as we used to fondly be referred to. I would say I'm 'patriotic' but that is a four-letter word here. And the small 'i' indigenous term used to 'true blue' but alas that too is passé. Here's a little solo experimental clown-theatre piece of mine about being a Jewish immigrant to 'the lucky country' (with a special nod to the coiner of the term, essay, book Sir Donald Horne). I LOVE living here!!! And dare I say I've seen a few changes my now 40+ years mainly here. That is a few DRASTIC changes!!!! This little experiment was 1993 -https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgTEJCG7yvU Thanks and regards, Ira
So many questions, but I'll attempt to answer. I'm not obsessed with femininity in particular, I do read and write about gender. I don't blame gay men for misogyny, but the set of misogynists includes some men who are gay. I'm not obsessed with transgender people, but I do hope they can be protected from iatrogenic harm to the same degree as the rest of us.
I didn't use the word depressed. Your claim isn't supported by research, including by the authors of the Dutch Protocol. Transition doesn't offer better lives.
I don't know where you get your 'facts' from. The probable reason for the similarity between Palestinian and Canaanite DNA is that conquering armies don't usually take their wives with them. If we follow their mitochondrial lines, we could eventually find the indigenous or Canaanite women that were made pregnant by invading Arab armies, willingly or unwillingly.
Arabs, whose holy city is Mecca of course, are not indigenous to the Mediterranean basin, but their descendants may be in part, due to the history of Arab conquest. If we follow the same mitochondrial line for Jews who migrated into Europe, we find European DNA from intermarriage between Jewish men and local women. It doesn't mean that Arabs who identify as Palestinian have a blood-and-soil territorial claim from the Jordan River to the sea, but Jews do not. The ultimate determinant of terrority is the ability to take it and hold it.
If you think that DNA proves that everyone except Jews comes from wherever they consider their homeland now, you may be disappointed. Northern Europe wasn't even habitable during the Ice Age, and was repopulated afterwards.
I don't follow your argument that Europe was never colonised, but also has a tradition of resistance to colonisation. Please look up Al-Andalus, the history of Sicily or the extent of Genghis Khan's conquest. And of course European powers have long colonised each other, eliminating or forcing to the margins indigenous peoples.
Helen Dale is a very worthy Substacker - I encourage everyone to read her and colleague Lorenzo Warby's work on the woke revolution...
https://www.notonyourteam.co.uk/p/worshipping-the-future
I've been their subscriber for a long time.
Thank-you kindly sir!
Please don't call me sir, I'm not an American. PS You have a cute cat.
I've been to Oz three times. I have to say the Aborigines' claims seem, on the face of it, stronger than the Palestinians, since they'd been there for 40,000 years or so.
That said: the settlers are not going to go away, like the French did in Algeria. So it's kinda like having a father who was abusive in your childhood: what can he possibly do to make it right? Endless self-flagellation isn't helpful.
Endless self-flagellation is helpful *to some*...
Keeps funding, money & lots more flowing.
Yes, I did think of that. All those contracts getting cancelled by DOGE: those are the ones it helps.
It's great to see Helen Dale's article getting introduced to another audience here! I discuss it and Adam Kirsch's book in my article on why "Islamic Settler-Colonialism" would be a more valid application of the term. https://anarrowbridgeburning.substack.com/p/islamic-settler-colonialism-part
What an amazing writer!!! Thank you! It's a multi-tasking hole-in-one:) I'm a long term loyal New Australian as we used to fondly be referred to. I would say I'm 'patriotic' but that is a four-letter word here. And the small 'i' indigenous term used to 'true blue' but alas that too is passé. Here's a little solo experimental clown-theatre piece of mine about being a Jewish immigrant to 'the lucky country' (with a special nod to the coiner of the term, essay, book Sir Donald Horne). I LOVE living here!!! And dare I say I've seen a few changes my now 40+ years mainly here. That is a few DRASTIC changes!!!! This little experiment was 1993 -https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgTEJCG7yvU Thanks and regards, Ira
So, if I've got this right:
1. Descendants of Jews returning to their ancestral home of Zion: settlers
2. Descendants of Africans returning to their ancestral home of Zion on the Black Star Liner: not settlers
3. Descendants of Arabs who conquered the Mediterranean basin: definitely not settlers, fully entitled to carry out armed 'resistance'
4. Europeans who stayed in Europe: complicit with settlers, definitely not indigenous, never entitled to any form of resistance.
From this, I conclude that 'settler' is a euphemism for 'white' which has no bearing on the history of migration or conquest.
So many questions, but I'll attempt to answer. I'm not obsessed with femininity in particular, I do read and write about gender. I don't blame gay men for misogyny, but the set of misogynists includes some men who are gay. I'm not obsessed with transgender people, but I do hope they can be protected from iatrogenic harm to the same degree as the rest of us.
I didn't use the word depressed. Your claim isn't supported by research, including by the authors of the Dutch Protocol. Transition doesn't offer better lives.
I don't know where you get your 'facts' from. The probable reason for the similarity between Palestinian and Canaanite DNA is that conquering armies don't usually take their wives with them. If we follow their mitochondrial lines, we could eventually find the indigenous or Canaanite women that were made pregnant by invading Arab armies, willingly or unwillingly.
Arabs, whose holy city is Mecca of course, are not indigenous to the Mediterranean basin, but their descendants may be in part, due to the history of Arab conquest. If we follow the same mitochondrial line for Jews who migrated into Europe, we find European DNA from intermarriage between Jewish men and local women. It doesn't mean that Arabs who identify as Palestinian have a blood-and-soil territorial claim from the Jordan River to the sea, but Jews do not. The ultimate determinant of terrority is the ability to take it and hold it.
If you think that DNA proves that everyone except Jews comes from wherever they consider their homeland now, you may be disappointed. Northern Europe wasn't even habitable during the Ice Age, and was repopulated afterwards.
I don't follow your argument that Europe was never colonised, but also has a tradition of resistance to colonisation. Please look up Al-Andalus, the history of Sicily or the extent of Genghis Khan's conquest. And of course European powers have long colonised each other, eliminating or forcing to the margins indigenous peoples.