A Vision of GENUINE Reconciliation: Part 1 - Anglo & Aboriginal History

When the British claimed, named, and settled Australia they broke no laws or moral standards of the time.

Watch The Full Version Here

🇦🇺🇬🇧🇦🇺🇬🇧🇦🇺🇬🇧🇦🇺🇬🇧🇦🇺🇬🇧🇦🇺🇬🇧

A Vision of GENUINE Reconciliation: Part 2 of 4 - Two Founding Peoples

Indigenous peoples' main contribution was to share their land. Though the sharing was usually involuntary, it nevertheless makes ATSI people foundational for the nation. Moreover, that contribution was value-added. Down the millennia Aborigines had shaped the distribution of plant species, especially through frequent controlled burning. They assisted colonists, guiding them to resources and pathways using their superior local knowledge.

Anglo colonists brought vast cultural capital, millennia worth of invention and accumulation across Europe and beyond in the realms of agriculture, science, medicine, industry, religion, law, politics, philosophy, the arts, and literature. The First Fleet brought Western civilisation, and with it the white race's extended phenotype, to the Great South Land.

Click here for the FULL document covering this and more

FOLLOW US 🇦🇺🇬🇧

1 Year's Births From India (24.02 million births in 2021) or China (9.56 million births in 2022) Would Swamp Australia. Who's in Charge in Canberra - and Why Do They Hate Us? With Immigration at RECORD BREAKING Levels, How is This NOT An Invasion?

FOLLOW US 🇦🇺🇬🇧

WE WILL REMEMBER | 11th November | Remembrance Day

A Vision of GENUINE Reconciliation: Part 2 of 4 - Two Founding Peoples

Anglo-Celtic colonists brought vast cultural capital, millennia worth of invention and accumulation across Europe and beyond when they first settled. Particularly in the realms of agriculture, science, medicine, industry, religion, law, politics, philosophy, the arts, and literature.

Click HERE for the FULL video

FOLLOW US on all of your favourite platforms

A Vision of GENUINE Reconciliation: Part 2 of 4 - Two Founding Peoples

Many in the Indigenous rights movement want protection from a constitution that, while not completely indifferent, while raising no impediment to their full participation in politics or society, does not name them, does not recognise that they were here first, nor acknowledges their contribution to national culture and identity. Many Indigenous Australians think that the Constitution should include such recognition.

Anglo-Australians should sympathise with this complaint because the Constitution also barely mentions them. Since the 1970s that document has stood by, so to speak, while hostile elites attacked the country’s founding assimilationist immigration policy.

Click HERE for the FULL video

FOLLOW US on all of your favourite platforms

A Vision of GENUINE Reconciliation: Part 2 of 4 - Two Founding Peoples

Also relevant to reciprocal reconciliation is what both sides contributed to the other in their history together. Both contributed to Australian identity. Indigenous peoples’ main contribution was to share their land. Though the sharing was usually involuntary, it nevertheless makes ATSI people foundational for the nation.

Click HERE for the FULL video

FOLLOW US on all of your favourite platforms

A Vision of GENUINE Reconciliation: Part 3 of 4 - Non Negotiable Terms

Australia has two historic peoples, indigenous and Anglo-Celtic, both worthy of recognition, whether in the Constitution, in legislation, or in educational curricula.

If the Constitution is to be amended to afford recognition to Australia’s founding peoples, it is appropriate that both indigenous and Anglo Australians be recognised. At present indigenous peoples are shown sympathy, while Anglo history and behaviour are often vilified.

Written and spoken by Dr. Frank Salter.

WATCH ON YOUTUBE

FOLLOW US on all of your favourite platforms

A Vision of GENUINE Reconciliation: Part 3 of 4 - Non Negotiable Terms

Dr. Frank Salter highlights FOUR NON-NEGOTIABLE terms regarding GENUINE reconciliation. Can you think of any others?

Click HERE for the FULL video

FOLLOW US on all of your favourite platforms

A Vision of GENUINE Reconciliation: Part 3 of 4 - Non Negotiable Terms

No act of reconciliation should be allowed to threaten national continuity, unity or identity.

Click HERE for the FULL video

FOLLOW US on all of your favourite platforms

A Vision of GENUINE Reconciliation: Part 3 of 4 - Non Negotiable Terms

Australia must settle indigenous grievance and minority assertiveness in general, or it will be less able to navigate the hazardous regional environment that is coming in the near future.

Click HERE for the FULL video

FOLLOW US on all of your favourite platforms

MULTICULTURAL HYPOCRISY

In multicultural politics, it's not only normal but appropriate for individuals to be conscious of their cultural or ethnic identities and active in defending them, but the white majority is punished for expressing ethnic identity and preferences.

FOLLOW US on all of your favourite platforms

A Vision of GENUINE Reconciliation: Part 4 of 4 - Negotiable Terms

In order to establish trust, Aborigines should apologise to Anglo-Australians, when appropriate, for transgressions committed by members of their communities.

An Aboriginal apology would not at all excuse instances of bad behaviour towards indigenous people or nullify prime minister Rudd’s apology. But it is surely reasonable that indigenous leaders should apologise for patterns of bad behaviour shown by their own local communities.

CLICK HERE for the FULL video

FOLLOW US on all of your favourite platforms

🇦🇺 ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THE HISTORIC AUSTRALIAN NATION 🇦🇺

We acknowledge the Anglo explorers,
pioneers and their descendants
who planted the British flag and
Western Civilisation on this continent,
creating the Australian nation.

We acknowledge the Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander peoples
who have lived here since the Dreamtime.

And we acknowledge the
Federal Commonwealth of Australia,
created by the nation under the Crown
to guard the nation and
the liberty of all citizens.

CLICK HERE for more content

FOLLOW US on all of your favourite platforms

Immigration Referendum? White British Becoming an Ethnic Minority is Bigger than Brexit, yet no vote

https://youtu.be/f1KlOeaybmE?si=3VnwiOIrv_iWMQcU

Freedom of Speech is the first casualty of mass indiscriminate immigration.

Dr. Frank Salter discusses this and more at the Round Table Forum hosted by Western Heritage Australia.

FOLLOW US on all of your favourite platforms

Will YOU Answer The Call?

Your support is crucial in defending Anglo-Celtic Interests at all levels and preserving our identity and culture.

🛡️ JOIN THE BAC TODAY 🛡️

🇦🇺 FOLLOW US 🇦🇺

A VISION OF GENUINE RECONCILIATION: Part 4/4 - NEGOTIABLE TERMS

Senator Jacinta Price points out that in 2016 only 8 percent of the 1,082 indigenous-specific programs had been evaluated. Of those that were evaluated, the methods used were anecdotal and did not measure effectiveness. Price concludes that the “close the gap” industry has failed.

Administrative irrationality begins with the failure to analyse the “gap”, meaning indigenous disability. Poor indigenous outcomes in education, income, child care, and criminality remain unexplained by government agencies. It is assumed that differences in outcome must be due to externally-imposed unfair disadvantage.

Click HERE for the FULL video

FOLLOW US on all of your favourite platforms

A VISION OF GENUINE RECONCILIATION: Part 4/4 - NEGOTIABLE TERMS

Truth-telling should also involve indigenous leaders. They should cease blaming Anglo-Australia for all their ills and stop supporting those who cast that slur or who belittle the nation.

They should not allow themselves to be used as battering rams by Anglophobes and others who would harm the Australian nation.

Click HERE for the FULL video

FOLLOW US on all of your favourite platforms

A VISION OF GENUINE RECONCILIATION: Part 4/4 - NEGOTIABLE TERMS

This paper has been arguing that any form of recognition, including a voice, should be designed and enacted equitably. That includes financial contributions.

If indigenous people have agency, should not those who participate in a voice pay some of its cost? After all, the proposed voice is designed to be a private ethnic good. None of its advocates have provided justification for having non-indigenous citizens provide all the funding. What could be such a reason?

Click HERE for the FULL video

FOLLOW US on all of your favourite platforms