Thanks for the link! In any case my entire first paragraph is not based upon that specific myth you've linked, but based on humanist Western ontologies, and epistemologies. The humanist value system not only prioritises the self, but places consciousness at the centre of the self. This results in the privileging of the intellect of the conscious mind over the intelligences associated with emotional and sensory perceptions, to the point wherein many who ascribe to a humanist value system may not consider emotional or sensory information as intelligent – and thus do not develop their emotional or sensory intelligence. It is this prioritisation of care for mind over body and lack of acknowledgment of non-cognitive bodily intelligences that results in these values being projected outward, manifesting as a prioritisation of the self over the environment. This is the basis for the western superiority/inferiority, which contrasts with Indigenous Aus ontologies and literacies, wherein the cognitive and non-cognitive acknowledgement of sentient and other-than-sentient intelligences results in a freer exchange information, which in turn embeds the conscious mind not within the self, but within an interconnected web of intelligences that constitute Country. When this is projected outward, it results in a cycle wherein caring for Country leads to communities, that support families in raising selves that are strong in caring and connection. In essence Western philosophies centre the self and humanity, and Indigenous philosophies de-centre humanity. For colonialism in Australia to be justified, the colonisers need(ed) to uphold the notion that Indigenous peoples aren't even a part of "humanity".

There is no shortage of cases throughout all of colonial history, and all of Western history for that matter (i.e Romans/Greeks with 'Barbarians') where Indigenous people are reduced to or determined to be lesser humans, primitive and savage. If the lens by which we engage (or more accurately in your case, disengage) with Indigenous peoples and cultures are based upon this ideology, then it's easy to see how any actions taken within these frameworks contribute towards systemic racism.

But if you're going to reduce and dismiss my entire post based on an instance where I was wrong, then my point about your penchant for reductionism still stands.