To Gazelle and sghardie , Australia runs under a 2 tiered govt
system - federal and state unlike Singapore. So try comparing it to
USA or Canada.
There is an aboriginal minister in Northern Territory before you
talk out of your bottom again.
http://www.nt.gov.au/ntg/chiefmin.html. Check out Marian Scymgour ,
MLA . Might not be in federal but she is in State government - oh
ya she is STATE MINISTER. There you go Gazelle -
oh the big surprise eh?
So you want to talk about their full political rights? Look at
Singapore - 1965 - independence . Prior to that , the British were
there making all of our great grand parents , grand parents and
parents, second class citizens as long as they are non whites. Yes
now if you look at it again - the migrant population now rules in
majority. So in a way oddly - the migrant population also rules in
Australia besides the descendents of the convict colonies , you
have the people of greek , the arabs , asian ethnicity in politics
- mainly in state government and some in federal
parliament.
If you want to talk about the late abolishment of white australian
policy, considering that Aden Ridgeway (who made Senatorship until
he lost the election), Jack Ah Kit and Marian Scymgour, you would
COMPARE IT apple to apple not Jackfruit to apple. Senatorship has
gone to asians and people of other migrant ethnicities , like Penny
Wong of South Australia.So compare it to USA who also has a similar
model, Australia has made vast improvement.
As for the natives in Singapore, Malays would be considered the
natives. They might have migrated downwards a few centuries ago but
then again the Inuits of Canada migrated downwards from asia
several centuries ago ...and they are considered natives in canada
. The definition of " indigenous" aka natives - there is no
universal, standard or fixed definition, but can be used about any
ethnic group who inhabit the geographic region with which they have
the earliest historical connection. Therefore the Malays
of Temasek were the natives aka indigenous people. So what's your
argument really about?
And a tidbit about the origin of the movement of Malays :
The Malay people are believed to have originated in Borneo and
then expanded outwards into Sumatra and later into the Malay
Peninsula. These people were descendants of Austronesian-speakers
who migrated from the Philippines and originally from Taiwan. The
main foundation of this school of thought lies in the fact that the
oldest Malay settlements have been discovered in Sumatra and not in
the Malay Peninsula. This suggests an upward - south to north -
migratory route. Malay culture reached its golden age during
Srivijayan times. Malays praticed Buddhism, Hinduism, and their
native Animism before converting to Islam in the 15th century.
Sumatra nearby but they also have artefacts found in the Malay
Peninsula about 2000 years old. So that makes the Malays the ethnic
people who inhabit the geograpgical region that has the earliest
historical connection - they are therefore indigenous aka native to
the area. Comprende?
Hey if you want to criticise, fine with me . But fact is there-
they are considered indigenous aka native to Singapore really by
that definitional term. Are you laying claim for the Singaporean
Chinese as the indigenous natives? Try Australia - they have
ancient chinese burial grounds in broome too. See if you can argue
your logic there.
As well for the Singapore's constitution, all races are
equal in constitution as well. So ask yourself why
are there HDB quotas for how many Singaporean chinese and how many
Singaporean malays and Singaporean indians can be in allocated
flats? If it is absolute equality in
truth, there should not be a quota allocated even
not for the reason of making sure social integration happens.
And I can safely tell you - racism happens on the grassroots level,
even in Singapore. In Singapore there are some blacksheep in the
majority who thinks the other races are 'lower' than they are .
Ever heard of people making fun of how some other person of a
different ethnicity smells? Heard of the expression "ah pu nei
nei", "ki ling" and "mangali"? Yup pretty much heard people using
it in Singapore. Those slangs are the equivalent of "chink"
(chinese) and "wog" (greek,italians, arabs of darker complexions)
in Australia. Even in this forum , you have occasional idiots
slinging mud on another race or people with a certain
religion.
In Australia, asians don't make the majority so some Singaporean
chinese think that it is all racist compared to their Singapore .
Well look at it this way....racism happens everywhere to the
minority groups whether one likes it or not because some pathetic
loser human being decides that a different appearance should
acquire some insults.
Oh wait...I am not supposed to know EVEN that much about a country I left
and the country I now adopted as my home.....HAHAHAHAHAH. Shall I
bring up the history of the racial riots which still make some
older Singaporeans of Chinese ethnicity bitter against the Malays
and vice versa? After the riots, that was when the Singaporean
pledge was penned down to support unity and equality. The Sedition
Act just made some blacksheep individuals go underground with their
racist attitudes in Singapore. If Singapore was truly equal in
terms of the attitudes towards all ethnicities and all religion,
you don't need the Sedition Act at all. Try harder with your insults ...after all
...we all studied the same state sanctioned history books in
Singapore. How could I not know?
