this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2025
133 points (100.0% liked)

Australia

4488 readers
96 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

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:

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:

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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
lodion@aussie.zone
bestusername@aussie.zone
eatham@aussie.zone
Nath@aussie.zone
133
Hit-run driver Jake Danby spared jail time by NT Supreme Court after describing victim as an 'oxygen thief' (www.abc.net.au)
submitted 2 days ago by hanrahan@slrpnk.net to c/australia@aussie.zone
21 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

A 24-year-old man who hit two Aboriginal pedestrians with his car and sped away, later bragging to his friends he'd run down an "oxygen thief", has been spared actual jail time

The court heard Danby sent a series of "disgusting" text messages to his friends in the hours after the crash, in which he labelled the crash victims as "dogs" and "n***ers".

No jail ? Lucky he didn't run Charke Kirk down I guess.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 3 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

Fyi there is no "attempt" at cultural genocide. Genocide is a crime in the act itself, regardless of the success of lack thereof in the outcome.

[–] Nath@aussie.zone 3 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

You aren't wrong, but they didn't think like that at the time. The racism was off the charts by today's standards. It's ghastly to look back on and the psychological damage this policy did is immeasurable and ongoing. But beyond all that, they truly were attempting to improve the lives of "the savages" as they saw it.

"The Board may assume full control and custody of the child of any aborigine, if after due inquiry it is satisfied that such a course is in the interest of the moral and physical welfare of such child. The Board may thereupon remove such child to such control and care as it thinks best."

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 points 1 hour ago

Oh yeah I get it. They didn't think there was anything wrong with what they did at the time. I was merely addressing one part of your own comment:

which was effectively an attempt at cultural genocide

There's no such thing as "an attempt at...genocide". If the act was carried out with the intent to eradicate (even if, as was the case in Australia, they believed the eradication was in the best interests of the individuals), then the action is genocide, whether or not the targeted group actually ceases to exist.

If you think about it, that has to be the case. Otherwise we would say there has never been a genocide in history. The Nazis only attempted genocide against the Jews, Roma, gays, etc. But we don't say that, we say what the Nazis did was genocide, even though Jews, Romani, and gay people still exist today. (And likewise, the genocide Israel is currently perpetuating against Palestinians is a genocide, not an "attempted" one, which is why the common genocide denialist's attempt to point to numbers killed as a sign that it's not genocide is irrelevant.)