• jqubed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      20 days ago

      Was it actually uninhabited or were the aboriginal people there but as far as the Australian government was concerned they “didn’t count”? Genuine question, by the way

      • flandish@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        20 days ago

        You already know the answer… the indigenous people were not actually people in the eyes of the colonists.

      • Onno (VK6FLAB)
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        20 days ago

        I found hundreds of maps of the First Nations People of Australia, including language groups, but was not able to discover any official map, which is not surprising given how counting the population worked in Australia. All maps show that the “uninhabited” area was just as densely populated as the rest of the continent.

        (Trigger Warning: heavily racist policy descriptions)

        How the population of Australia was counted: https://www.nma.gov.au/defining-moments/resources/first-nations-peoples-census

  • tisktisk@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    20 days ago

    Why did no one congregate near the North where the closest other populations of other countries would be closest?

    • klu9@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      20 days ago

      Not an expert but my suspicion: fresh water, or lack thereof.

      Australia’s so damned flat that most moisture-laden air just flows right over it without dropping any rain.

      The few significant hills and mountains that cause the humid air to churn and precipitation to form and fall are in the southeast. Which is thus where the biggest rivers are, and thus where the most people are.

      On the north coast, the rivers seem few and far between, and pretty small, too.

    • DUMBASS@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      20 days ago

      Imma go with heat, it’s hot as hell up there. Also, maybe we didn’t want to talk to the rest of you lot, we’re too busy having barbies and skulking back some cold beers.

        • MCHEVA@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          19 days ago

          It’s generally not sold here, it has been in the past it doesn’t do well. It’s mostly an export beer that’s brewed under license by foreign breweries so it doesn’t come from here either. The Foster brothers were American. It’s mostly branded as being Australian but arguably isn’t.

          Beers here vary by state, most of those beers are owned by multinational corporations ie inbev and Lion Nathan (kirin) these days.

          While someone in Western Australia might drink Swan or Emu whereas someone in Victoria would drink Carlton or VB. Every state had/has there own big home brewery/beer.