An update from Australia about the COVID situation here and recently circulating stories.

Over recent months, a huge amount of misinformation about Australia has been circulating on Freerepublic. In most cases, the person sharing it probably didn't know it was misinformation - they were sincerely and honestly passing on things they'd been told were true. But that doesn't change the fact that a lot of misleading material is being shared and a false narrative is being created that Australia has turned into some sort of neo-fascist state. I've attempted to provide accurate information, and I know I'm not the only Australian doing so, but it's a deeply frustrating uphill battle.

Please note - I am not saying everything has been or is rosy in Australia. In my state of Victoria, the socialist state government has been significantly oppressive - because of the way Australia's constitution works, state governments have control over dealing with anything that is considered to do with public health, while the Commonwealth government has very little power in this area and cannot overrule the states. Peculiarites in Victoria's specific constitutional conventions (peculiarities, incidentally, that American conservatives would likely support without understanding how they'd be implemented here) means that under cover of a public health emergency, the state Premier, Daniel Andrews, has been able to act in a rather dictatorial fashion - there are powers that can be used to reign him in, in extremis, but he has, so far, been careful, not to actually trigger those - the threshold for such intervention is very high. There are real issues in parts of Australia. Unfortunately, though, when these things get exaggerated or things are made up, it becomes harder for us to actually get the real issues dealt with. We have to waste so much time on false information.

Examples of some of these false claims - "Australia is under martial law." This, simply, is not true. It hasn't happened. "There are mobile forced vaccination squads". Completely untrue. Nothing like that exists. "Police have shot and killed a protester in Melbourne." Not true - the man who was supposedly killed doen't remember exactly what happened to him, but believes he was drunk and tried to rob a liquor store, and was injured during his robbery attempt - not by police, but by somebody else. And he's definitely still alive. I could list a lot of false information that is being spread.

I could also list more of the real problems that have happened, but frankly, don't have the energy right now to properly describe them in a way that's likely to be easily understood by people outside of Australia.

Why is so much false information circulating. My theory - and I admit it's a bit conspiratorial - is that Australia is currently the victim of a propaganda campaign that is being waged by the government of Communist China. It's not at all conspiratorial that China doesn't like Australia much at the moment for various reasons. Among those reasons is Australia's close alliance with the United States. China would love to split Australia and America, and doing so by making Americans think Australia is something different than it is, would make sense to them. I should say, that I think the same is happening in reverse - Australians are routinely being fed biased misinformation about America - recent examples include the narrative that Kyle Rittenhouse is a white supremacist murderer, for example. Again, I won't go into all of that - but I do think it is happening in both directions.

It also may have the advantage for China that if they can make it look like a liberal democracy is engaged in widespread human rights abuses when it isn't, it helps mask what goes on in China. And I have seen here on Freerepublic, quite a few people saying things like "Australia is worse than China."

Now, the reason I've been driven to post this message is because I'm really concerned about a lot of posts I've seen recently about a particular incident in the Northern Territory of Australia. Now, this incident is, at its core, real. The basic facts are true. But that doesn't stop it being used in a way that promotes propaganda. Leaving out context, and spinning the story towards a particular slant, makes a big difference.

There are specific reasons why what has happened in the NT has happened there. If these are understood, I think there's a very different complexion on what is going on. So I'm going to try and explain that context.

The basic facts - yes, indgenous people (Aboriginal Australians) from a number of small isolated communities in the Northern Territory who either have COVID or have been exposed to COVID have been moved to a facility just outside, Darwin, the capital city of the Northern Territory. They were not given a choice in this (well, at least, most of them weren't - there may be exceptions). Three boys absconded from this facility for a brief period before they were captured and arrested. That's all true.

But what is left out of that is the reasons these things happened. Now, it's perfectly legitimate to think that there are no reasons that could justify this - I don't agree. I think that's a pretty extreme position. But it's a valid one. If after reading what I'm about to explain, you still feel that way, fair enough - that's your right. But I do think the context makes a lot of difference.

I'll start by talking about the Northern Territory. The name matters in this case - Australia is made up of eight*, mostly self-governing jurisdictions. There are six states, which were the six original colonies that federated in 1901 to create a single nation - all these six states were already mostly independent, mostly sovereign nations before 1901 (they were still technically colonies of the United Kingdom, but the UK had devolved virtually everything except defence and foreign relations to local control - and even after federation, the UK kept control of those things). The two self-governing territories, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory have a slightly more limited form of self-government than the states - the NT has been offered statehood but didn't want it.

The reasons, NT is a territory not a state are relevant here. It's down to the fact that it's a very large area of land, with a relatively small population. We're talking about a quarter of a million people living in an area a little under twice the size of Texas. 150,000 of these people live in Darwin, and there's only about three towns besides Darwin that have more than 10,000 people. The population of the Northern Territory is about 30% Aboriginal Australian (I'm going to use the term indigenous from now on to refer to these people, as it's the currently preferred term - Aboriginal isn't offensive, but it's generally seen as a little old fashioned - technically speaking, not all indigenous Australians are Aboriginal, but nearly all of those in NT are).

Like a lot of countries, Australia's historical treatment of its indigenous people contains some negative features and that still has an impact on some things today.

But today, most policies are based on respect for these people and for their rights. And that is actually part of what is going on here, contrary to the spin.

It is now accepted that indigenous people should be able to continue to live on their ancestral lands if they choose to. In the past, there were policies of rounding people up based on race and sending them wherever governments wanted them to go, that disconnected people from their country. That has not been acceptable for a long time.

But one of the results of this is the Northern Territory, which has a much higher proportion of indigenous people than the rest of Australia is spotted with tiny indigenous communities that are really not viable in a normal sense. They are too small and isolated to be normally functional communities.

And these are the types of places that these people who've been moved to Howard Springs come from.

I'll be blunt. These places are slums. Governments built standard Australian three or four bedroom homes intended to house families of five people - but the indigenous people choose to have twenty people living in them. This is their choice. We do not stop them doing it.

Overcrowding and poor sanitation means these places are not places where any civilised society would leave sick people. It has been long understood - by the indigenous people themselves - that if they become sick, they will be moved to a place where they can be treated. While, in this specific case, because of quarantine rules, they don't always have a choice, it's routine to move people like this voluntarily. It's expected. The indigenous people would be outraged if we didn't do this under normal circumstances because it would basically mean leaving sick people in the desert to die. That's what used to happen. Indigenous health groups - made up of indigenous people - are supporting the actions of the NT government in doing this. If they objected, their objections would be taken into account - but they are not. They want this done. They would go nuts if we didn't do it, and would paint it as white Australia neglecting indigenous people - that would be a human rights violation.

So moving these people to where they can be treated is, in my view, absolutely defensible and reasonable. What's the alternative? Building a world class health facility in every little 200 person village in the desert for occasional use?

This is how rural Australia works - for whites as well as indigenous people. One of the most sacred institution is the Royal Flying Doctor Service that was specifically set up so people in isolated areas could be moved when they needed it.

Other relevant factors - partly because of history, indigenous Australians have a much higher level of a wide variety of medical problems than non-indigenous Australians. They are at particular risk of complications from infectious disease. These are medical facts. This makes it even more important that these people get help when they need it, but it also means that in a community where 30% of people are indigenous, governments do have to be particularly alert to the risk of contagious disease spreading.

The Northern Territory - the entire Territory - only has about 20 ICU beds. In normal times, this is all they need, but at the moment, it means that if they have any type of large COVID outbreak, their hospital system is likely to be rapidly overwhelmed. So far, they have avoided that - there's been less than 300 cases of COVID in the Territory over the entire pandemic. In this situation, their isolation is an advantage that most places don't have. This is one of those places that realistically does have a very good chance of keeping the spread very low. But it wouldn't take much for that to fail.

Now, they've moved infected people from isolated communities, hundreds of miles from any large city to a location on the edge of the only large city they have. Again, I think it's perfectly understandable that measures are taken to stop these people who are either infected themselves or who were living in the same house as infected people - because that's who has been moved - infected people or their primary close contacts) just being able to get out into a city of 150,000 people who they could infect. Yes, these three kids have currently tested negative. I hope they stay negative. Statistically though, that's unlikely. They may not get seriously ill, but it's very likely they've been exposed and will develop the disease while in quarantine.

They are being kept in good conditions. Howard Springs isn't a holiday resort, but it's certainly not a slum - nor is it any sort of concentration camp. Our Olympic athletes quarantined there after returning from Tokyo and Australia pretty much worships its athletes.

Now, you may have read all this and still think it's unjustified. You may feel any restriction on any thing any time is unwarranted for all I know. Fair enough if that is your position.

But personally I don't see it that way. My mother was one of Australia's more prominent Aboriginal rights activists back in the 1960s - she had to tone it down a little because it had the potential to damage my father's military career, but she was still pretty active. And I became so myself - I started being an advocate for their rights when I was about ten and have been consistently ever since. I've spent time in some of these communities. I'm involved in trying to get kids from these communities access to decent education (and just like health care, sometimes the only practical way of doing that involves taking them away to school - I went to boarding school myself... it's not that bad). I'm a strong advocate for helping indigenous people. If I thought these people's rights were being violated in a serious way, I'd say so. As it is, I would regard not doing what's being done currently as a greater violation. Maybe we could do better - maybe we could have hospitals in every tiny community, for example. Doesn't seem practical to me, but maybe it would be better than taking people hundreds of miles to protect them.

But even if that's the case - we don't have that system now and we can't magically create it. We have to do the best we can with what we have.

* it's actually a little more complicated than this - but the additional complexities are totally irrelevant here.

Thanks for your report. I sincerely appreciate the first hand account.

Good luck,

Specific gangs that have been identified as heavily engaged in organised crime are being restriction.

Groups that just ride motorcycles aren’t.

I don’t see much problem with targeting criminal organisations and don’t think they get protected just because they use a legitimate hobby as a cover.

Why is so much false information circulating.

Because a professional group of grifters have been catering to the lunatic tinfoil hat crowd and qtards. Places like the Grifter Pundit, Real Raw News, The Daily Expose, Jack Posobeic ect… these people and websites lie without consequence to generate clicks from the dumbs.

Thank you for your perspective. While I don’t post often on FR, I’ve regularly checked in for decades because I believe it is a key resource to my finding truth and perspective. I must say, I have been troubled and consternated by what I have been seeing on Australia and covid.

We have the same situation here with a lot of native tribes. Let’s take the Navajo for example here in Arizona. If the state govt were to build a quarantine facility outside the control of the Navajo and send Navajo there for all the same reasons you stated, there would be the same outrage by pretty much all sides. Quarantine camps are not acceptable here though they might be in Australia.

Thanks.

Opting to forgo statehood under the circumstances makes complete sense. Canada has three territories for similar reasons. Nearly empty land with remote communities requires managing things differently, and extreme conditions require methods that might seem extreme elsewhere.

Boarding schools used to be what all the English Elite were treated to, and however one may view them, what was being given was what the ruling class itself was accustomed to using.

Appreciate your report. It’s pretty much what I’ve suspected. However, the vehement anti-vaxxer community will ignore it because it doesn’t adhere to their narrative that the virus is a made to order hoax designed to deprive them of their freedoms.

Thanks for a “Boots on the ground” report.
The devil is in the details isn’t it and context, when withheld, changes everything.
Good luck our Brother Down Under.

As I said, in this instance, most didn’t have a choice.

But this type of thing is routinely done voluntarily and very few people refuse. I suspect in this case, refusal would have been very unlikely.

People in these communities generally want to be moved somewhere they can get treatment when they need it. It’s part of the structure that allows them to generally continue living in the middle of nowhere.

Thanks for your insight. It’s just one more reason why I love being a freeper. We have members from all over the world posting here, and I literally learn something new everyday on this site.

I follow and understand and can concur with most of what you wrote with the exception of:

"Again, I think it's perfectly understandable that measures are taken to stop these people who are either infected themselves or who were living in the same house as infected people - because that's who has been moved - infected people or their primary close contacts) just being able to get out into a city of 150,000 people who they could infect."

Justifiable for smallpox or other terrible communicable diseases. Not for this.

When you need more than a few lines or a couple of paragraphs to explain something, you cut and pasted it. Australia is now in a fascist style lockdown. There are concentrations camps holding people for “their protection”. Now there is no free expression ala biker insignias and tatoos. You need government permission to own a weapon, there is no free expression, and America is headed down the same toilet drain as you are.

You are welcome to your perspective, but I think you and the other fella are pissin’ on my leg and telling me it’s rainin’.

The thing is, this facility was not built to house indigenous people. It was actually set up to deal with illegal immigrants - boat people. Australia doesn’t currently have that problem in any significant way but there have been periods in the recent past when thousands were arriving every year, and because the Northern Territory is about the closest point of Australia to South East Asia, they got the brunt of the arrivals.

Because it’s there, it’s being used. In other parts of Australia, when people are quarantined - and they sometimes are - it’s generally in hotels. And that hasn’t always worked well (99% of Victoria’s second wave was directly linked to two breaches of hotel quarantine).

Australia is now in a fascist style lockdown.

No, it isn't. Most of Australia isn't in any sort of lockdown. Parts have been in the past, but most of Australia has never experienced any significant lockdown and the exceptions nearly all exited lockdown quite a while ago now.

You obviously don't have a clue what is actually going on here if you believe Australia is now in lockdown. And that's the point.

RE: Australia is under martial law.” This, simply, is not true. It hasn’t happened.

You don’t have to be officially under martial law to experience the attributes of martial law.

That’s like saying a married couple is not divorced even when their marriage is hell. They might not be officially divorced but if they live apart, don’t talk to each other, are seeing other people, even as they never legally divorced, they might as well be.

I live in New York during the “lockdown” of 2020 and even then, I was able to move about and travel 50 miles outside my home and hike in the woods ( without masking ) without being harassed by the police. Do you have that kind of lockdown in Victoria?

So “not officially under martial law” are just words. What do you have IN EFFECT? THAT IS THE QUESTION.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.