When in conversation with conservative journalist Andrew Bolt, One Nation senator Pauline Hanson questioned the way Australia defined Aboriginals.
“What defines an Aboriginal?” Senator Hanson asked Andrew Bolt.
“If you marry an Aboriginal, you can be classified as an Aboriginal.
“Or if the community or the elders accept you into that community, you can be defined as an Aboriginal.”
In response, the contrived outrage activists have taken to their keyboards and come up with another trendy twitter hashtag.
This time, it is #DefineAboriginal, and it has allowed all the self- appointed high priests of morality to publicly showcase their wonderful talent.
Predictably, the Aboriginals who did promote this cause and produced tweets such as; “Another white person telling us what it means to be Aboriginal. It doesn’t work like that” were among the most Caucasian looking Indigenous people in existence.
As we have seen previously, if a politician makes a courageous yet honest comment on ethnic minorities, the Regressive Left proceeds to character assassinate and pull apart the messenger, rather than the message.
For if the core of what Senator Hanson’s message was actually considered by these Leftists, some uncomfortable home truths might be discovered.
So should there be a more clear legal definition of Aboriginal people established?
Absolutely, when considering the current system that allows particular political, cultural, economic and health benefits to be granted exclusively for Indigenous people.
Is it really right or fair, that persons with 1/16th Indigenous ancestry who may be privileged and live in inner city areas, receive the same entitlements that those living in impoverished, remote communities do?
#DefineAboriginal, is also problematic as it ignores the internal problems of Aboriginal communities.
In fact, the issue of defining what entails ‘us’ and ‘them’, is particularly prominent in such communities.
I have observed this culture in personal experiences.
For example, in my home town if an Aboriginal proceeded to work full time in predominantly white industries, they were often be deemed by the Indigenous community to be ‘coconuts’.
Essentially, this meant that Aboriginals with higher professional aspirations were regarded as being black on the outside, and white on the inside. So to be deemed a ‘coconut’, did mean that you were considered less of an Aboriginal.
Of course, my notice of this shaming culture does not mean it is necessarily emulated in every Indigenous community across Australia. Regardless, it remains an issue and herein lies the problem of #DefineAboriginal.
It might feel fantastic for these SJW’s to proclaim their moral superiority through such a public forum.
However, contemptuous gloating over the perceived ignorance of Senator Hanson’s comments, does nothing to solve issues for real Aboriginals who live in tragedy- laden regions.
If anything, this virtue signalling only makes the problem worse, as it refocuses discussion along symbolic lines rather than on the substantive issues faced by Indigenous Australians.