Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| [ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, [5], 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ] |
| Subject: Reading habits | |
Author: Ian (Australia) | [ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
] Date Posted: 12:33:36 12/06/04 Mon A recent survey by the ABC has provided conclusive proof that Australians have thrown off their colonial shackles and developed truly independent tastes in reading. Okay, admitedly the top two on today's list of Australia's favourite books are the same as the top two on Britain's list (J. R. R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings at No.1, and Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice at No.2), but after that, we really assert our independence. Just as an example, George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four came in at No.7 in Australia, compared to No.8 in Britain, and Douglas Adams's The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy came in at No.8 in Australia, compared to No.4 in Britain. Now I can hold my head high, open a can of Fosters and proudly sing: This here is the wattle The symbol of our land You can stick it in a bottle Or you can hold it in your hand. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] |
| [> Subject: Colonial Shackles | |
|
Author: Dave (UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 13:19:17 12/06/04 Mon I was reading an Australian republican website last night and I was informed that Australia had to abolish the Monarchy to remove the last vestige of British colonialism. Only then could Australia cut the umbilical cord and become a self-respecting, confident, modern nation. I would have thought that this is only the first step. Surely, the casting-aside of such colonial symbols as Parliamentary Democracy, Common Law and Habeas Corpus would complete the transformation? [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> Subject: why stop there? | |
|
Author: Ian (Australia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 13:27:26 12/06/04 Mon If we wish to eradicate all traces of British colonialism, we would have to start by abolishing such things as the English language and bread: the possibilities are endless! [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> Subject: British colonialism | |
|
Author: Ben.M(UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 13:44:23 12/06/04 Mon Perhaps all of the non-Aboriginal members of this Republican group would like to 'go back home' to the UK so Australia can finaly be free. :) [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> Subject: Interesting point, that. | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (Venezia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 16:14:14 12/06/04 Mon In the first few decades after the British occupation of Canada, I understand that the British colonists continued to call themselves "British", and only used the word "Canadians" to refer to the French, and did so with the same intonation as, in other parts of the Empire, people used to say "natives". Extending this argument logically, and also pandering to the anti-colonial anti-land-stealing element in Australian political society, it could be suggested that the only inhabitants of Australia who can really be called "Australians" in any meaningful sense are the aborigines, and therefore that the term "Australian" should be removed from the descendents of the evil land-grabbers, and that they should be given a different name. In this context, what name do you think could possibly be appropriate? Oo, I can't think... [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Second Nations? | |
|
Author: Dave (UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 16:17:56 12/06/04 Mon [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Perhaps "pelagorigines"? Or "thalassorigines"? | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (Venezia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 16:58:53 12/06/04 Mon [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Sorry, hideous compounds... | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (Venezia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 17:05:45 12/06/04 Mon Thalassorigines doesn't work. Let me revise those to Pelagorigines and Transmaritanians and, if we aren't being PC, Scelestians. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> Subject: Ah, but... | |
|
Author: Evan [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 22:08:27 12/06/04 Mon The Aborigines aren't even Australian anyway. They moved to Oz from somewhere (we aren't sure where) by boat, and then promptly forgot how to sail. Very odd. Nobody knows how or why they got there or where they came from. But their presence on the great island-continent is, in terms of the history of mankind, relatively recent. Thus, they should leave as well. As should the camels, the rabbits and many of the plant species, which have been there for a shorter time-period than Ian's ancestors. Give Australia back to the koalas! [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |