The way a society is organised can create conflicts or creating some difficult conditions for survival for others, which can increase the chances of having conflict between different cultures and societies. The Arrival of the first fleet in 1788 was the beginning of a conflict era. Aboriginal people are living in Australia for thousands of years. When British arrived in Australia they did not understand the lifestyle of Aboriginal people and they did not realise the deep connection that Aboriginal people had to the land. The non-indigenous started to use the land in their own way because Australia was seen as unused and this led to a concept of Terra Nullius (land belong to no one or land that no one owned). The new settlement of whites had devastating impact on indigenous people. Vast number of aboriginal people died after involvement in devastating conflicts with modern settlers and the exposure to diseases also contributed in numbers of deaths. The aboriginal population in 1788 was 1,000,000 (estimated) and by 1900 it had been reduced to 60,000 and there was a threat that this race will extinct soon. The ignorance of whites in past was resulting in creating more difficulties for Aboriginals to survive. An eye for an eye principle means a person who has injured another person will receive the same treatment but to describe the revenge taken by whites from indigenous can be more than one eye. The murder of a European in WA in 1926 was lead to the killing of 30 Aboriginal people in revenge. Similarly another European death led to the deaths of about 70 Aboriginal people. The concept of Terra Nullius led down to the destruction of Aboriginal culture and the way Aboriginals were using the land was not valued for white settlers. ... ... middle of paper ... ...d so the justice is achieved. “No issue… is more important for Australia than resolving the relationship between the indigenous peoples and the non-indigenous communities. We have had 205 years of either pretending that there are no issues to be resolved or attempting to resolve them according to non-indigenous ideas of what is best” a very true statement by Garth Neitteim (as cited in Bottmley 1994). This is a very true statement that describes the ignorance of Whites in the past. New settlers did whatever they wanted without caring about the effects on indigenous society. But now we’ve taken the responsibility to shape better future for the indigenous people and by just apologising for the past, we cannot return the severe losses made to indigenous community but now we can stand with them and create an environment where equality and justice is the surrounded.
Jeff Lambert also explains the European attitudes towards Aboriginal and Torres islander sovereignty. Jeff Lambert states Europeans perceived Torres Islanders and Aboriginals as ‘inferior’ (Lambert 2012. pg.12). Lambert (2012. pg13) suggests that “There were some who asserted that terra nullius implied that unoccupied land was not the only meaning of the phrase and that it could also be interpreted as an absence of civilised society.”. The principle of terra nullius means no-man’s land, therefore after the Governor Bourke Proclamation Aboriginals had no legal ownership of land.
“The more you know, the less you need.” The attitude from White Australians towards Indigenous Australians was extremely unfriendly, and due to the fact that Aboriginal Australians had knowledge about things the European settlers believed did not matter they treated as if they were uneducated nuisances. The aboriginal people believed that the land they had lived on for generations belonged to them; however the White Australians came and took the land. This also means that the Europeans took what the Indigenous people valued most, and that was their land. Authors and directors convey different attitudes, values and beliefs in different ways, however it still has the same impact.
Terra Nullius was once apparent in Australian society, but has now been nullified with the turn of the century and the changes of societal attitudes. With the political changes in our society, and the apology to Indigenous Australians, society is now witnessing an increase in aboriginals gaining a voice in today’s society. Kevin Rudd’s apology as described by Pat Dodson (2006) as a seminal moment in Australia’s history, expressed the true spirit of reconciliation opening a new chapter in the history of Australia. Although from this reconciliation, considerable debate has arisen within society as to whether Aboriginals have a right to land of cultural significance. Thus, causing concern for current land owners, as to whether they will be entitled to their land.
Throughout the history of Canada the indigenous population of the country have been voiceless. They have been both suppressed and oppressed by the Federal and various Provincial governments within Canada. Many organizations tried to provide a voice for the native population but failed in their attempt. These organizations eventually merged together to become what is now known as The Assembly of First Nations. The Assembly of First Nations gives voice to the issues and problems facing the different components of the aboriginal community in Canada.
As European domination began, the way in which the European’s chose to deal with the Aborigines was through the policy of segregation. This policy included the establishment of a reserve system. The government reserves were set up to take aboriginals out of their known habitat and culture, while in turn, encouraging them to adapt the European way of life. The Aboriginal Protection Act of 1909 established strict controls for aborigines living on the reserves . In exchange for food, shelter and a little education, aborigines were subjected to the discipline of police and reserve managers. They had to follow the rules of the reserve and tolerate searchers of their homes and themselves. Their children could be taken away at any time and ‘apprenticed” out as cheap labour for Europeans. “The old ways of the Aborigines were attacked by regimented efforts to make them European” . Their identities were threatened by giving them European names and clothes, and by removing them from their tra...
Why are terms such as Aboriginal peoples, American Indian, Indian, Indigenous Peoples, First Nations and Native American all used to describe the original inhabitants of North and South America? Why are some of these terms considered controversial? What terms to you feel are most appropriate, and why?
The rights and freedoms achieved in Australia in the 20th and 21st century can be described as discriminating, dehumanising and unfair against the Indigenous Australians. Indigenous Australians have achieved rights and freedoms in their country since the invasion of the English Monarch in 1788 through the exploration and development of laws, referendums and processes. Firstly, this essay will discuss the effects of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on the Indigenous Australians through dehumanising and discriminating against them. Secondly, this essay will discuss how Indigenous Australians gained citizenship and voting
Indigenous Australian land rights have sparked controversy between Non Indigenous and Indigenous Australians throughout history. The struggle to determine who the rightful owners of the land are is still largely controversial throughout Australia today. Indigenous Australian land rights however, go deeper than simply owning the land as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders have established an innate spiritual connection making them one with the land. The emphasis of this essay is to determine how Indigenous Australian land rights have impacted Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, highlighting land rights regarding the Mabo v. the State of Queensland case and the importance behind today’s teachers understanding and including Indigenous
“Today we honour the Indigenous peoples of this land, the oldest continuing cultures in human History. We reflect on their past mistreatment. We reflect in particular on the mistreatment of those who were Stolen Generations—this blemished chapter in our nation’s history. The time has now come for the nation to turn a new page in Australia’s history by righting the wrongs of the past and so moving forward with confidence to the future. We apologise for the laws and policies of successive Parliaments and governments that have inflicted profound grief, suffering and loss on these our fellow Australians” (apology by Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, 16th November 2009, Parliament House, Canberra.)
The Stolen Generation has had a profound impact on every aspect of the lives of Indigenous communities. It has jeopardised their very survival. It has impoverished their capacity to control and direct their future development. The Stolen Generation has corrupted, devastated and destroyed the souls, hopes and beliefs of many Australian lives through damaging assimilation policies established in an attempt to make a ‘White Australia’ possible. Discrimination, racism and prejudice are some of the many permanent scars upon Indigenous life that will never be repaired. However, recently Rudd and the Australian public have sincerely apologised for the detrimental effects the Stolen Generation had caused. The Stolen Generation has dramatically shaped Australian history and culture.
The Doctrine of terra nullius is “land that is uninhibited” or “land that belongs to no-one” was used in association with the original British Settlers. When the British settlers arrived, a lot of issues had risen as they ignored the indigenous Australians and regarded them as “not human” who owned land even though they had practiced traditions and customs for hundreds and thousands of years. The British treated Australia as terra Nullius. However due to the doctrine of Terra Nullius it states that Indigenous Australians could not sell or assign any land, nor could any individual person to retain or acquire it, besides from the distribution of royalty. According to international law the British were only able to take possession of a country through only 3 different ways. 1- If the country was uninhabited meaning that British could claim ownership of that land 2- if the country was inhabited Britain would have to seek permission from the owners of the land. In this case it would be the Aboriginal people and they would have to purchase it for ...
This paper will discuss the Native American culture and briefly review their history, some beliefs and roles in society today. A short description into their culture with References will be used to show how Native Americans have been affected throughout hundreds of years. The trauma this culture endured has created many barriers, yet one often seen today is their extreme problem with the disease of Alcoholism. The Native American culture has gone through endless struggles, which has cost them to lose so much and still continues to impact them today. They are slowly moving back toward getting benefits that should have been available long ago, but in today’s world Native Americans still battle with many barriers not only in society, but in getting appropriate treatment for mental health or addiction issues.
Australia had been imperialized by the British for their natural resources, and had used the aboriginal people there as well. They took their land, their people’s lives and their way of life, for Britain’s own gain. The aboriginal population has gone down due to these events, but with the help of organizations like NACCHO, and Oxfam Australia, the aborigines are able to make an attempt to regrow their population. They will also, try to keep hold as well as reteach their cultural beliefs.
Cultural competence is a skill essential to acquire for healthcare providers, especially nurses. Cooperating effectively and understanding individuals with different backgrounds and traditions enhances the quality of health care provided by hospitals and other medical facilities. One of the many cultures that nurses and other health care providers encounter is the American Indian or Native American culture. There are hundreds of different American Indian Tribes, but their beliefs and values only differ slightly. The culture itself embodies nature. To American Indians, “The Earth is considered to be a living organism- the body of a higher individual, with a will and desire to be well. The Earth is periodically healthy and less healthy, just as human beings are” (Spector, 2009, p. 208). This is why their way of healing and symbolic items are holistic and from nature.
It is important to recognize Indigenous people’s right to self-determination and self-governance because it involves the state’s obligation to protect the rights of all its people. The government has a legal obligation to consult with Aboriginal groups when it involves activities that interfere with their treaty rights. Academic critics of Aboriginal rights and Indigenous self-government, such as Tom Flanageans, have argued that Europeans used individual title to property as a method to “dismantle indigenous communities” by separating the land from collective ownership to individual property (Coates, 2008, p.12). The depth of concern on these issues should not be underestimated since it involves fundamental concepts of fairness and equality within the justice