Eliza a Play by Tom Holloway
mtc.com.au
mtc.com.au
The indigenous people of Australia were only considered part of Australian society (e.g. counted in the census) in 1967. As a New Zealander visiting Australia the casual racism of white Australians is mind blowing. New Zealand is not free from racism, far from it. Australia is next level
It will take a few generations for Australians to come to terms with living on stolen land, and to adjust to being colonisers. (White New Zelanders, Pākehā have been doing this for over thirty years, it is a process)
It is odd to put that declaration on a web page, how a digital asset is comparable to standing on land is clearly something the Australians are working on. Good luck to them, move on and let it be.
Edit: I'd agree though that NZ has a more mature perspective, stronger Maori population and that the condescension is probably fair.
I think it makes sense to put it on the website if you're going to do it though, since it's a website about, basically, a building in melbourne.
It's a humiliation ritual that legitimizes claims of theft and invites stochastic violence against the people outing themselves as colonizers.
It's like apologizing for dubious rape allegations; once you apologize for it you've admitted guilt, and invite retribution from everybody positioned to impose it.
Forgiveness is never offered so there's no point to going along with any of these charades. They condemn you either way.
Land acknowledgements are the ultimate in virtue signaling; once they actually mean something, they suddenly end. Two overlapping tribal claims in New Brunswick cover 100% of the province. Thus, New Brunswick provincial employees ordered to not make land acknowledgements while working, because of legal case <https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/first-nations-n...>.
I think you need to rethink what you expect!
While virtue signaling is a public, often insincere display of moral superiority (a "recognition desire"), the true alternative is "walking the walk" through tangible deeds.
(I personally think it's also _disingenous_, because you can't undo things done 100+ years ago -- not because they are no longer "bad" but because you can't figure out how or who to undo it to, and you should instead focus on "who needs help today", because they are alive).
Yes, that's my point. Once some risk—however small—came to be of land acknowledgements within New Brunswick actually having some legal or practical ramification, poof there they went.
Given how widespread tribal territorial claims are in Canada (the entire city of Richmond BC, for example), I expect more such prohibitions.