Tag Archives: White Aboriginals

The Australian War Memorial scandal

Posted on by
Reply

The AWM and Historians’ Made-up Wars

Robert Hill, Quadrant, Aug 28 2026

On November 14, 2025, Rachel Perkins and Henry Reynolds came to the Australian War Memorial to launch The Australian Wars, a collection edited by Perkins, Stephen Gapps, Mina Murray and Reynolds. There is nothing remarkable about a work of military history being launched at the War Memorial; it is precisely where one might expect such a book to be presented and sold. What was remarkable was that The Australian Wars does not establish its subject as military history so much as assert it. The book presents a politically and ideologically charged reconstruction of colonial violence as warfare, yet the military characteristics necessary to sustain that classification are not merely contested: when examined, they are strikingly absent. Its launch inside the Memorial, and its inclusion within the Memorial’s bookshop, therefore, did more than promote a book: it bestowed institutional legitimacy upon the conclusion before the historical case had been made.

The issue is not whether violence occurred on the British colonial frontier in Australia — hereafter, the “British frontier”. Aboriginal people were killed, settlers were killed, massacres occurred and reprisals followed. The far larger claim is that these events amounted to wars: conflicts properly belonging to the same historical category as the wars and military operations commemorated within the Australian War Memorial. That distinction matters. Much of the alleged warfare occurred not on the frontier of an Australian nation, but on the frontiers of separate British colonies under the Crown. To place those conflicts within the Australian War Memorial therefore requires more than demonstrating colonial violence. It requires demonstrating that the historical threshold of war was actually met. That proposition deserves something stronger than repetition, moral force or modern consensus.

It requires proof. 

In my earlier article at Quadrant Online, The ‘Wars’ That Weren’t, I demonstrated that once the constituent incidents are disaggregated, the national “Frontier Wars” narrative loses its military coherence. What remains are separate episodes of killing, reprisal, policing and local resistance. Here I reach the same conclusion from the opposite direction. If these really were wars, where is the military footprint they should have left behind?

Read the rest HERE . . .

The endemic violence in primitive societies

Posted on by
Reply

Before Settlement, a Blood-Soaked Land Part I

Robert Hill, Quadrant Aug 20 2026

Australian history has been distorted by lies, fabrication, exaggeration and selective evidence. Out of that distortion has emerged one overwhelming story: that the British arrived in 1788 and turned a peaceful continent into a land of violence, massacre and war.

The truth begins in exactly the opposite place.

The British did not enter a peaceful continent. They entered a continent occupied by peoples living in what, in the older anthropological sense, was one of the most materially primitive and socially fragmented forms of human organisation still surviving on earth: thousands of small, mobile, familial groups, without settled agriculture, cities, writing, courts, police or any authority standing above them capable of ending feud and revenge. It is difficult to conceive of a substantially simpler enduring form of human social organisation. Below the small local group lies little more than the immediate or extended family itself. But no human population could remain reproductively isolated at that level for generation after generation: sustained mating within such a narrow circle would inevitably produce repeated close-relative unions and increasing inbreeding. Survival therefore required some network of bestowal, female transfer, and contact between otherwise small and politically separate groups.

Revenge killing, payback, punitive expeditions, sorcery killing, ritual punishment, conflict over women and armed fighting between neighbouring groups were already part of the continent’s human landscape. Within the societies in which these practices operated, much of this violence was not regarded as aberrant criminality but as culturally sanctioned conduct, expected, legitimate and, in some circumstances, obligatory. I refer collectively to these recurring forms of socially embedded killing as “cultural lethal violence”. So too, in different places and circumstances, were infanticide, the abandonment or killing of elderly and incapacitated people, and other brutal responses to the material constraints of subsistence life. Practices varied between regions, and no single pattern can be attributed uniformly to every Aboriginal group. But the underlying forms of violence are well attested.

Read the rest HERE . . .

Read Robert Hill’s The myth of Invasion

Questions missing from the census

Posted on by
Reply

While completing my online census questions last night, I realised four vital questions were missing:

Are you a full-blooded Aboriginal, living the traditional life of the Aboriginal in all its primitiveness, without recourse to any support from modern Australian society? YES/NO

Are you a full-blooded Aboriginal taking advantage of all that modern Australia has to offer? YES/NO

Are you a reinvented white-Aboriginal, predominantly of European ancestry, having no connection whatever with the traditional life of the full-blooded Aboriginal? YES/NO

Are you a reinvented white-Aboriginal, indistinguishable from your fellow Australian of Anglo-Celtic origin? YES/NO

The dreamtime enters history

Posted on by
Reply

The ideological concoction of history

*****

Pemulwuy: Coward, Thief, Killer

Robert Hill, Quadrant, Aug 07 2026

No Aboriginal figure has acquired greater symbolic importance in the modern construction of the “Frontier Wars” than Pemulwuy, and no episode associated with him has been more heavily mythologised than the confrontation now called the “Battle of Parramatta” in 1797. The elevation of a brief, unattributed colonial account into a major military engagement has supplied the emerging frontier-war narrative with both a commanding hero and a foundational battle.

The modern Pemulwuy is not merely the product of generous interpretation. He has been constructed through the cumulative enlargement of fragmentary, unattributed and often much later accounts. Hearsay became fact. Raiding became warfare. A clash became a battle. A notorious local outlaw became the commander of a resistance movement.

A short article cannot examine every contradiction and embellishment within that transformation. It can, however, expose its essential structure. The contemporary evidence does not securely establish Pemulwuy as the commander of an Aboriginal army, the leader of a regional political coalition or the architect of a sustained military campaign. Even the killing most strongly associated with him rests upon an identification that is plausible rather than conclusive.

Read the rest HERE . . .

The Desecration of the Australian War Memorial

Posted on by
Reply

The Capture by Stealth of the AWM

Robert Hill, Quadrant, 20 July 2026

“A major feature on Frontier Wars will piss off the majority of Australia’s 600,000 veterans.” So warned Major General Greg Melick in 2022, when he was National President of the RSL and a member of the Australian War Memorial Council.

“The fundamental element is that the War Memorial was built in sacred recognition of wars that Australians fought as a nation, unified against an external foe. It is not to be a memorial for conflicts within Australia,” Barnaby Joyce said in 2022.

These statements expose the question the Memorial has never honestly answered: if a major Frontier Wars display would so profoundly disturb the veterans whose service the Memorial exists to honour, why has the policy been advanced without a clear public announcement, published legal advice, or a frank explanation of how it fits within the Australian War Memorial Act?

I am not a military man. I do not claim the authority of service. But my love for this country could not be greater. I know sacrilege when I see it.

The Australian War Memorial is the last place still standing largely outside the ideological capture of our national institutions. It is where politics is meant to fall silent before the dead; where the nation goes not to be lectured, corrected or re-educated, but to remember those who served and those who died.

Yet we are living inside a national fog of exaggeration and fabrication surrounding the so-called Frontier Wars. Claims unsupported by military reality are forced upon us as settled truth, even where no war existed.

The more immediate question is how this contested project became institutional policy. It was not advanced by open argument, but by stealth: through an ideological sequence and in a vacuum of justification. No clear public mandate was sought. No legal reasoning was published. No serious explanation was offered to veterans or the wider public as to why a contested account of colonial violence belongs within the statutory war memorial.

Read the rest HERE . . .

Auntie Lisa’s first Welcome to Country

Posted on by
Reply

Lisa Jane Spencer has suffered a monumental mob attack since her recent satire on Aboriginal identification. Fortunately, she hasn’t caved in. Indeed, she’s determined to push on, as the reel HERE demonstrates.

I commented previously that her parody was based on accurate evidence. The rules for Aboriginal identification are so loose as to require a mere feeling of being Aboriginal. Check the rules if you don’t believe me.

***

White-Aboriginals

Posted on by
Reply

I’ve been pointing out for years that you cannot distinguish many people who claim to be Aboriginal from people with British ancestry. You even have people like lily-white Bruce Pascoe, who are proven to have not a jot of Aboriginal in them, prancing around in souvenir-shop fur and waving a K-mart spear. It would be a joke if there weren’t the serious question of power acquisition involved. These white-Aboriginals obviously have grown up and been educated in normal white Australian society. They’ve been given the playbook of Aboriginal agitation, which they mindlessly reel off at the slightest provocation.

Really, are they surprised at someone parodying their fakery?

It’s a total farce – a big con

Posted on by
Reply

Most of those calling themselves, or being called, Indigenous, First Nations (the preferred term because of its connotations), and less often Aboriginal, have demonstrably had the same upbringing and education in the same social environment as most Australians.

Their behaviour, speech and educational level give them away as belonging to the mass of the Australian population with the same social gradations. There are poor, white, uneducated people, as there are poor, uneducated people with Aboriginal ancestry, a great many of them indistinguishable in appearance from Australians with British and European backgrounds.

This is less a case of race relations than it is of the usurpation of power by one particular body, party, club – call it what you will – in Australia. And it’s hurried along at great speed by the Marxists in the ABC and SBS, the great apologists for all things woke. The ABC and SBS are on the frontline, promoting the First Nations coup, which aims to reshape Australia according to their concocted Aboriginal culture and history.

$1.48 million for fishing in the very best modern diving equipment? Nice work if you can get it – as the song goes.

Tell Pauline Hanson you’ll vote for One Nation if she and her party undertake to get rid of farces like this.

Welcome to Country is an insult

Posted on by
Reply

Excellent video. It makes all the right points about Welcome to Country, land rights, invasion, and all the nonsensical claims about Australia’s history by reinvented White-Aboriginals. What do people expect when a person states, as an introduction to Anzac Day, that most of the people listening are not legitimate on the land they’re standing on?