That's an erroneous view through a Colonial lens.They didn't wage war for land, but they did wage it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_frontier_wars#Traditional_Aboriginal_warfare
Depends on how narrowly you define "peacefully"...Bizarrely, but relevant to this thread perhaps there was an item on Radio 4 first thing this morning saying that essentially most societies have co-existed peacefully most of the time, but historians tend to focus on the warring side. eg mixed religions for centuries in eg Palmyra, Syria coexisting peacefully and toleratantly.
Depends on how narrowly you define "peacefully"...
It might also be worth pointing out that a lot of historians focus on other things than just war and politics, it's just that those aspects of history dominate in the media, since they tend to sell better.
People really need to research Aboriginal culture written by Aboriginals - ie dispelling all the unsavoury myths that were created by invaders for ulterior motives.Raiding the neighbours to kidnap their women looks awfully like war to me, even if it was part of a different belief system than ours.
I disagree entirely. "anti colonial theme" is purely your interpretation and I wonder if it says more about your mindset than it does any of the content of this thread?As usual, the anti colonial theme continues and moves increasingly away from conservation.
What did you think of the photo showing the track worn into Uluru by umpteen footprints 'conquering' the summit?