Northern Territory Intervention

Both subjective and objective violence are present in the findings of the Little Children Are Sacred Report and the Northern Territory Intervention. Yet Zizek’s hypothesis suggests that a focus on subjective violence means that objective violence is often ignored (Zizek, 2008). As a result, this essay asserts that in the case of the Little Children Are Sacred Report, both subjective and objective violence were identified and considered. Yet in the Northern Territory Intervention’s case, the focus on subjective violence ultimately led to the objective aspects of that violence being overlooked, thus proving Zizek’s observation to a large extent. To develop this assertion, this essay will examine the findings of the Little Children Are Sacred

As established earlier, Zizek identifies subjective violence as that which is performed by identifiable agents. The Little Children Are Sacred Report finds that “children likely to suffer neglect, abuse and/or sexual abuse are...particularly apparent in Aboriginal communities,” (Northern Territory Government, 2007, 5). In this case, the Northern Territory Government has identified that the aboriginal community is an agent inflicting violence upon its children. Furthermore, the report cites “alcohol and drug abuse,” as major underlying drivers behind this violence (Northern Territory Government, 2007, 5). Yet on the other hand, factors like “poverty, housing shortages and unemployment,” are identified too (Northern Territory Government, 2007, 5). These factors are all products of the violence perpetuated by the economic and political systems of Australia. As a result, it would appear that the findings of the report identify subjective and objective violence both play significant roles. Furthermore, the report’s 97 policy recommendations also attempt to address economic and political issues within the aboriginal community, thus suggesting some attempt has been made to mitigate the objective violence that has been inflicted upon the aboriginal community. As a result, the Little Children Are Sacred Report does focus upon

For instance, Alcoff notes that “speaking for others,” often leads the oppressed group being spoken for ending by “worse off,” (Alcoff, 1992, 15). What this means is that when a body attempts to act in the interest of the oppressed group, the oppressed group often ends up worse off due to the body’s lack of knowledge regarding the group’s interests. In the case of the Northern Territory Intervention, the government of the Northern Territory attempted to act on behalf of the aboriginal community without any consultation (Watson, 2011). First of all, by interfering in the liberal freedoms of the aboriginal community, the government was using its harms to perpetuate and inflict subjective violence (Mill). It must also be noted that by trying to control the buying habits of the aboriginal community, the government was exerting a degree of biopower over its subjects, thus interfering in their freedoms, which as established earlier, was the way through which the Northern territory government perpetuated objective violence (Foucault, 1976). Yet the government was able to justify its actions by claiming that it was acting in the interests of the aboriginal community, by citing the need to address the subjective violence that was taking place in the community; in this case, the subjective violence was presented in a light