Responding to an offensive meme of dog whistling lies

This meme I saw shared contains multiple false, misleading, and offensive claims that dismiss the depth and continuity of Indigenous Australian culture. Below the meme is a breakdown of its inaccuracies and the harm they perpetuate.

1. “Dot painting was invented in 1971 by Geoffrey Bardon”

Why it’s wrong

Geoffrey Bardon popularised dot painting on canvas in the 1970s through the Papunya Tula art movement, but dot art has been part of Aboriginal culture for millennia. Traditional dot patterns were used in body painting, ceremonial ground designs, and sand storytelling to encode sacred knowledge and protect cultural secrets from outsiders.

Aboriginal rock art in Victoria and Arnhem Land includes motifs like dots, lines, and hand stencils dating back thousands of years. For example, the Bunjil painting in Victoria and ochre stencils in Gariwerd (the Grampians) predate European contact.

Offensive implication: Denies Indigenous artistic sovereignty and reduces a living tradition to a colonial invention.

2. “Welcome to Country was invented in 1976 by Ernie Dingo and Richard Walley”

Why it’s wrong

While the “modern formalised ceremony” was first performed by Dingo and Walley in 1976 to welcome Māori performers, it draws on pre-colonial protocols for granting safe passage and reciprocity between Aboriginal nations. For example:

• The tanderrum ceremony documented by William Thomas in 19th-century Victoria allowed outsiders to access resources on another group’s land.
• Anthropologists note that pre-colonial Welcomes involved dance, song, and symbolic gestures to acknowledge custodianship.
• The claim ignores oral histories and colonial records of Indigenous diplomatic practices .

Trolling tactic: Uses a technicality about the modern format to erase millennia of cultural practice.

3. “No Aboriginal word for Welcome to Country”

Why it’s wrong

There are over 250 Indigenous languages in Australia, each with distinct terms for custodianship and hospitality. For example:

• Wominjeka (Woiwurrung language of the Wurundjeri people) means “welcome”.
• The Noongar people use Kaya (“hello”) and specific phrases to acknowledge country.
• Comparing it to the Māori haka (a war dance, not a welcome) is a false equivalence designed to confuse.

Harmful intent: Implies Indigenous languages lack sophistication, reinforcing colonial stereotypes.

4. “Smoking ceremonies are recent inventions”

Why it’s wrong

Smoking ceremonies using native plants like eucalyptus have been practiced for tens of thousands of years for healing, cleansing, and spiritual purposes. Early colonial accounts, such as those by 19th-century ethnographers, document their use.

The absence of film evidence pre-1970s reflects systemic erasure of Indigenous practices in historical records, not their nonexistence.

Misinformation source: Relies on Eurocentric definitions of “evidence” to dismiss oral traditions.

5. “No record of ceremonies at events like the 1956 Olympics”

Why it’s misleading

The 1956 Melbourne Olympics occurred during a period of active assimilation policies, where Indigenous cultural practices were suppressed. The absence of Welcome to Country at such events reflects historical racism, not a lack of tradition.

Conversely, Indigenous protocols were observed in community contexts long before mainstream institutions adopted them.

Offensive framing: Blames Indigenous people for their marginalisation in colonial-era records.

Why This Meme Is Offensive and Trolling

1. Cultural erasure: Dismisses Indigenous Australians as incapable of sustaining unbroken traditions, echoing racist dying race narratives.
2. Cherry-picking facts: Focuses on modern adaptations (e.g., acrylic dot paintings) to deny ancient roots.
3. Weaponising “proof”: Demands Western-style documentation for practices that predate colonialism, ignoring oral histories.
4. Political agenda: Likely sourced from anti-Indigenous groups seeking to delegitimise land rights and reconciliation efforts.

Conclusion

The above meme is a textbook example of historical negationism, designed to undermine Indigenous sovereignty and cultural pride. By distorting facts and ignoring context, it perpetuates harmful stereotypes and divisive rhetoric. Always cross-check such claims with Indigenous-led sources and scholarly research.

Further reading

Aboriginal Dot Art, by Artlandish

Dear reader, we need your support

Independent sites such as The AIMN provide a platform for public interest journalists. From its humble beginning in January 2013, The AIMN has grown into one of the most trusted and popular independent media organisations.

One of the reasons we have succeeded has been due to the support we receive from our readers through their financial contributions.

With increasing costs to maintain The AIMN, we need this continued support.

Your donation – large or small – to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969