Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
An essay on social darwinism
Social darwinism and its impact on social welfare
Struggle of Australian indigenous people
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: An essay on social darwinism
The events surrounding land rights at Noonkanbah in 1980 highlighted the contrasting ideas between the native and non-native people in Western Australia and the incredible lack of rights for aboriginal people at the time. For Western Australia, this was just the beginning of the increasing awareness to the general community of the issues created by white society to the aboriginal people and culture. As stated by Frank Gare, retiring Director of the Department of Native Affairs in 1978, “The basic trouble is that Australia as a whole does not appreciate the enormity of what disinheritance has meant to the aboriginal people... It remains to be seen if the rising Aboriginal leadership will be able to effectively convince the community at large …show more content…
of this.” (Beresford, 2006) The dispute at Noonkanbah and events leading up to it involving Sir Charles Court, premier of the state, his government and the American mining company Amax, called attention to the flaws in Western laws regarding aboriginal affairs, and the immense need of aboriginal land rights in Australia. Although the Noonkanbah community did not achieve the outcome they had hoped for in not having their land mined by Court and the mining companies involved, the events have caused ongoing impact to modern day Western Australia. Over a fifty year period, between the 1800s and 1930s the land at Noonkanbah had been taken from the native owners.
The people who did survive over this time were offered to stay on this land if they worked for the pastoralists, being paid very low wages or on some occasions not at all. In the late 1960’s the industrial law reformed causing the working relationships between aboriginal people and pastoralists to disintegrate which led to the aboriginal people of Noonkanbah to leave the land and move to camp outside the town of Fitzroy Crossing. The aboriginal people dealt with this in two vastly different ways; some became dependent on things such as alcohol and others began to grow independently and organise themselves politically. In 1976, with help from the Aboriginal Land Commission, the Noonkanbah community attained a 385 000 hectare pastoral lease where the “primary aim became ‘to maintain its own culture, free from European influence’.” (Beresford, 2006) The community then had the responsibility to preserve the land back to previous standards. Many people in Perth began to hear different rumours about the Noonkanbah community, although they did not have a true image of what the happenings were. Despite the original success for the Noonkanbah community in leasing their own land, this peace did was not long …show more content…
lasting. Meanwhile, Sir Charles Court, premier of Western Australia, had plans for the north-west of the state with prospects to mine the area.
Although many people deemed the idea to be much too costly, and not worth the money, Court believed there was high potential for the area. Court was aware of the growing political activism in the aboriginal population of Noonkanbah. Changes to the Mining Act 1979 (WA), which enabled miners to enter Aboriginal Reserve Land without permit, could be seen as a prevention act in opposition to these activists. Sir Charles Court had many strong views on the aboriginal community, which many said were based on the outdated idea of Social Darwinism, with one parliamentarian deeming his claims as being “as any nineteenth-century white liberal was sure of the superiority of our culture and religion and he thinks the Aboriginies should join us in due course – get with the strength and join the superior people”. (Beresford, 2006) In 1979 the media began to gain interest for the communities fight for rights against Court and the mining companies. With the Aboriginal Legal Service representing the Noonkanbah community, although not able to stop the situation completely, they successfully put mining prospects on hold in June 1979. However, with physical force and police assistance the plans for mining went through in August 1980, with Sir Charles Court and the mining companies winning their right to the
land. Although losing the battle to Court in the dispute in 1980, the impact of the event did not stop there. There have been various ongoing impacts for each person involved in the Noonkanbah events, particularly for the aboriginal community. Although not gaining rights to the land, the Noonkanbah dispute encouraged many of the rising aboriginal leaders of the time to continue to take a stand for their people. They became role models, and began to take a stand and create a voice into the wider, western community for their issues, wants and needs to be heard. With this, the non-aboriginal community came to be more aware of the reality of the situation for the aboriginal people, who they are, and what the differing world views are. Noonkanbah created a reason for the society of Western Australia to be aware, and begin to bridge the gaps between aboriginal and non-aboriginal people. In conclusion, although the Noonkanbah community did not receive the rights to land which had been their original desired outcome, there have been many positive impacts created by the event. The dispute encouraged many growing aboriginal leaders to be inspired and whose passions for political activism and finding their voice rose, which led them to becoming influential, recognised people in concern of aboriginal rights. Consequently, and with help from the media coverage of the events, a growing awareness of the issues created by white society on aboriginal people and culture was gained by the wider western community. These events at Noonkanbah highlighted the contrast between the beliefs of the aboriginal community and non-aboriginal community, with focus on how these beliefs may clash. Although the aboriginal population in Australia still do not have full land rights, and the Australian population as a whole still do not appreciate the enormity of what disinheritance has meant to the aboriginal people, the Noonkanbah dispute sparked awareness and empowered many people to find their political voice to begin to bridge that gap between aboriginal and non-aboriginal people to find a sense of equality.
The journey for the Aboriginals to receive the right to keep and negotiate land claims with the Canadian government was long but prosperous. Before the 1970's the federal government chose not to preform their responsibilities involving Aboriginal issues, this created an extremely inefficient way for the Aboriginals to deal with their land right problems. The land claims created by the Canadian government benefited the aboriginals as shown through the Calder Case, the creation of the Office of Native Claims and the policy of Outstanding Business.
The National Apology of 2008 is the latest addition to the key aspects of Australia’s reconciliation towards the Indigenous owners of our land. A part of this movement towards reconciliation is the recognition of Indigenous Australians and Torres Strait Islanders rights to their land. Upon arrival in Australia, Australia was deemed by the British as terra nullius, land belonging to no one. This subsequently meant that Indigenous Australians and Torres Strait Islanders were never recognised as the traditional owners. Eddie Mabo has made a highly significant contribution to the rights and freedoms of Indigenous Australians as he was the forefather of a long-lasting court case in 1982 fighting for the land rights of the Torres Strait Islanders. Eddie Mabo’s introduction of the Native Title Act has provided Indigenous Australians with the opportunity to state claim to their land, legally recognising the Indigenous and the Torres Strait Islanders as the traditional owners.
Summary of Text: ‘The Redfern Address’ is a speech that was given to a crowd made up of mainly indigenous Australians at the official opening of the United Nations International Year of the World’s Indigenous Peoples in Redfern Park, New South Wales. This text deals with many of the challenges that have been faced by Indigenous Australians over time, while prompting the audience to ask themselves, ‘How would I feel?’ Throughout the text, Keating challenges the views of history over time, outlines some of the outrageous crimes committed against the Indigenous community, and praises the indigenous people on their contribution to our nation, despite the way they have been treated.
In August 2008 a ‘Statement of Reconcilliation’ was released by the Hornsby Shire and Council in conjunction with the local traditional custodians. The statement discusses the policies in which the community alleges to follow including; education to all those within the Hornsby district on the topic of Aboriginal history, to respect the survival of the indigenous and protect all indigenous sites. The reconciliation statement concludes with a an apology to the Guringai people and acknowledges the lost and trauma in which they all went through. This in conjunction with the national apology by Kevin Rudd in 2008, displays a major change within society. The country and local communities were educated in the statement “this was their land and water and that they remain its spiritual custodians.” (NSW Reconciliation Council, 2008).
This essay is about the land rights of of Australia and how Eddie Marbo was not happy about his land been taken away from him. In May 1982 Eddie Marbo and four other people of the Murray Islands began to take action in the high court of Australia and confirming their land rights. Eddie Marbo was a torres islander who thought that the Australian laws were wrong and who went to fight and try and change them. He was born in 1936 on Mer which is known as Murray Island. The British Crown in the form of the colony of Queensland became of the sovereign of the islands when they were annexed in1978. They claimed continued enjoyment of there land rights and that had not been validly extinguished by the sovereign. (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2012)
The ‘Wave Hill Walk Off’ proved an establishment to the liberation of Aboriginal people from the struggles for rights and freedom. The effectiveness of this movement is judged upon the influence on rights and freedom, function of the actions taken, and the outcomes of events within this movement. Through their actions, the Gurindji showed the vitality of Aboriginal desire to achieve a practice that respected their identity, traditions and rights to their traditional lands.
Indigenous People. In evaluating the Legal System’s response to Indigenous People and it’s achieving of justice, an outline of the history of Indigenous Australians - before and during settlement - as well as their status in Australian society today must be made. The dispossession of their land and culture has deprived Indigenous People of economic revenue that the land would have provided if not colonised, as well as their ... ... middle of paper ... ...
Their main vision is to empower the idea of a shared country and encourage opportunities for growth. With the perplexed requirements set out by the Native Title Act, this tribunal has helped claimants by providing legal aid to increase the chances of regaining lost land. For example, the Wik Peoples v Queensland (1996) 187 CLR 1 case was successful in recognising the lost land of the Wik people of Cape York. “They claimed native title over land that had previously been leased by the State Government to farmers for pastoral use” (Woodgate, Black, Biggs & Owens, 2011, p.354). The court then decided by a 4:3 majority that pastoral leases did not necessarily extinguish native title. This means that, in some cases, native title rights will co-exist with the rights of the pastoralists. Therefore, through progression and more native title cases heard, the laws surrounding the Native Title Act will adapt to further assist the Indigenous Australians in reclaiming their land. For instance, the processes surrounding Native Title issues are constantly being refined. As more and more people and political parties become aware of this process, the easier court litigation will become (Dow, 2002)
Of the 8 successful, the 1967 referendum which proposed the removal of the words in section 51 (xxvi) ‘… other than the aboriginal people in any State’ (National Archives of Australia ND), and the deletion of section 127, both, which were discriminative in their nature toward the Aboriginal race, recorded a 90.77% nationwide vote in favour of change (National Archives of Australia, 2014). As a result, the Constitution was altered; highlighting what was believed to be significant positive political change within Indigenous affairs at the time (National Archives of Australia, 2014). Approaching 50 years on, discussion has resurfa...
Struggles by Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander people for recognition of their rights and interests have been long and arduous (Choo & Hollobach: 2003:5). The ‘watershed’ decision made by the High Court of Australia in 1992 (Mabo v Queensland) paved the way for Indigenous Australians to obtain what was ‘stolen’ from them in 1788 when the British ‘invaded’ (ATSIC:1988). The focus o...
...rial covered in the unit Aboriginal People that I have been studying at the University of Notre Dame Fremantle, Aboriginal people have had a long history of being subjected to dispossession and discriminatory acts that has been keep quite for too long. By standing together we are far more likely to achieve long lasting positive outcomes and a better future for all Australians.
Barsh, R. 2005. Aboriginal peoples and the justice system: Report of the national round table on Aboriginal justice issues (Book Review). Great Plains Research, 359-362.
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
Since the time of federation the Aboriginal people have been fighting for their rights through protests, strikes and the notorious ‘day of mourning’. However, over the last century the Australian federal government has generated policies which manage and restrained that of the Aboriginal people’s rights, citizenships and general protection. The Australian government policy that has had the most significant impact on indigenous Australians is the assimilation policy. The reasons behind this include the influences that the stolen generation has had on the indigenous Australians, their relegated rights and their entitlement to vote and the impact that the policy has had on the indigenous people of Australia.
Key events in Aboriginal Australian history stem from the time Australia was first discovered in 1788. For instance, when Federation came into existence in 1901, there was a prevailing belief held by non Aboriginal Australians that the Aborigines were a dying race (Nichol, 2005:259) which resulted in the Indigenous people being excluded from the constitution except for two mentions – Section 127 excluded Aborigines from the census and Section 51, part 26, which gave power over Aborigines to the States rather than to the Federal Government. Aboriginal people were officially excluded from the vote, public service, the Armed Forces and pensions. The White Australia mentality/policy Australia as “White” and unfortunately this policy was not abolished until 1972. REFERENCE