Talk:Day of Mourning (Australia)

message: I'm not sure how it's possible for the Day of Mourning to have commemorated 'Theft and Genocide' in 1938 when the word genocide did not exist until 1943, according to wikipedia, or 1944, according to the OED. It might commemorate that now, and have done so since soon after WW2, when the term was widely propogated, but as it is, the first sentence of this article makes little sense.
Oh and to be clear, I'm not denying that what happened should be described as genocide, I'm just saying that it's ahistorical to say that that's what the protest was about in 1938. Maussauce 22:52, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a good point, no one else is acting on it so I'll change it and if anyone has a problem with that they can change it back or contest it here. 152.91.9.219 (talk) 23:26, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

text: (I used the proclaimation text for the alternate wording, if someone has a more evocative source include it) 152.91.9.219 (talk) 23:29, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Your argument is interesting yet false. Please allow me to provide evidence as to why. I disagree with the premise of @maussace's argument because of one fundamental flaw. Let us say if a word does not exist during the historical event of the dinosaurs or a political actor during the Italian Renaissance what is the correct vocabulary to describe such events or history. Latin is an old languge yet we use it to describe plants, anatomy, dinosaurs and much more. Is this wrong to do?
Therefore, "genocide" can be the reason why the Day Of Mourning is practiced. The genocide (or massacre in Tasmania) of tens of thousands of First Nations people. How else do we describe events otherwise. What do you suggest?
Secondly, you suggest you do not deny it was a genocide. How can you stand on your first point denying the second? It debunks your argument. That is like saying: "The word for donut was invented in the 20th century however any other donut like objects that were sweet cannot and will not be called donuts." Perhaps a bad example I apologise but I am in a mood to gest.
Can one describe a genocide-like event pre-1944 as anything else? Of course, one could say massacre, slaughterhouse, blood bath, senseless killing, a waste of precious human life, and more. Do you feel genocide or massacre suits the occasion more? @maussauce. One cannot describe historical events with words appropriate to the time and place. That is lunacy and unreasonably strict. Do we now call the slaves and slave drivers in Egypt with the reigning totalitarian pharos rightful spirit heirs and deities of Sun God Ra while the slaves where dedicated workforce helping the conduit achieve spiritual enlightenment. No?! It would be funny to consider this line of thinking though.
Next time please offer an alternative suggestion to the word genocide. It is boring when someone corrects something with a vague premise but does not suggest words to describe an event with accuracy. Sorry for the essay. I research this topic thoroughly KnowledgePeaceIntegrity (talk) 22:47, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Timing

message: While there is plenty of newspaper coverage of the 1938 event, I’m struggling to find any mention of the event in subsequent years. What I did find is that on the Sunday after Australia Day, some churches held an “Aborigines Day”, e.g. ,, but it seems somewhat different in character. Can anyone help with sources that show the Day or Mourning in subsequent years? Thanks Kerry (talk) 16:00, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  annual event since 1938