Be patient with Australians. They have have a terrible tradition of vicious racism.
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.
Acknowledgements of Country are not uncommon on Australian web sites, especially with arts organisations. Sometimes they're in the footer, sometimes as an interstitial. They're also common in speeches/formalities.
Edit: I'd agree though that NZ has a more mature perspective, stronger Maori population and that the condescension is probably fair.
What exactly is supposed to happen though? "Don't be horribly racist" is a nice idea, but it's not like we see people who put these acknowledgements up actually attempting to return the "stolen land"
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.
Well, similarly to how the neo-right slowly shifted the social frame with frog memes and screaming slurs at children on online FPS game lobbies, things like land acknowledgments slowly shift the reference frame of society towords a place where some good outcomes might actually be possible.
> it's not like we see people who put these acknowledgements up actually attempting to return the "stolen land"
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...>.
It _is_ performative (not sure it's nonsense) because it doesn't actually do or intend to do anything. It's cheap.
(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).
> It _is_ performative (not sure it's nonsense) because it doesn't actually do or intend to do anything. It's cheap.
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.
The counterfactual to virtue signaling is genuine, anonymous, or quiet action—acting on moral convictions without seeking public recognition or social status.
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 wonder if there's also less of a stigma and sense of wrongdoing about tricking an LLM versus tricking an employee
We intuitively know that an employee will be punished and may get fired if we trick them. Many of us won't try to trick human employees as a result, because we would feel bad if they had bad consequences as a result of our trickery
There is likely no such hesitation around tricking LLMs. I know I personally wouldn't feel bad about it at all. Mostly because any computerized customer service process is annoying so anything I can do to limit my time dealing with it is a win in my books
The Charter has been used by the courts to shoot down incoming legislation. So, in a way, those pieces of paper mean everything, as without them legislation would pass without the judiciary branch being a check on the Bloc’s powers. Your comment is merely cynical.
In theory these limit the power of the EU, while anything the EU parliament passes can just be undone as easily by a future EU parliament. If you don't believe the EU charter provides any protection, why would you believe an EU law would be any different?
In theory, governments are made up of citizens. In practice, once the citizens are corrupted into corporate shills, they become politicians. They have traded their humanity for business class seats and dining at restaurants that cater to those whose entire personality is talking about their investment portfolio.
Oh, please, stop this tired ‘victim of corrupt bureaucrats‘ framing.
People have real choice in EP elections. There are parties that will always stand up for citizens’ rights. If they had enough seats, they could have voted this item off the agenda.
Yet, people continue to choose the same conservatives and radical right over and over again, because they are enraged about immigrants and identity politics. Blame the voters.
Why continue with the increased migration that the majority of the population has generally opposed then? One could have avoided those discussion points.
Also what you group as the radical right doesn't tend to be supportive of this idea.
They full well know they are at times at the receiving end of web control legislation and drives atm. Same for 'radical left' groups.
It's the conservatives that at times make some fuzz about migration to draw votes from the former whilst keeping said migration going since it favours some of the companies they (and a load of other established parties) draw support from.
Yes, there's lots of blame to pass around; but the system does reward corporate psychopaths which leaves US citizens having to choose — as South Park aptly put it — between a douche and a turd sandwich.
There is a famous German comedian that invented a figure known as "The Kangaroo". It once said:
"Whether left-wing or right-wing terrorism – I see no difference there."
"Yes, yes," calls the kangaroo, "the ones set foreigners on fire, the others cars. And cars are worse, because it could have been mine. I don't own any foreigners."
reply