Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Peoples

The Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander people are Australia’s first people. They’re the Indigenous and traditional owners of our beautiful land. However, until the last few decades, this hasn’t always been recognised. The Indigenous people of Australia have faced colonization, oppression, the Stolen Generation, and all kinds of disrespect to their cultural heritage.

The discourse of whiteness began at Colonisation when Indigenous Peoples were dehumanised. To legitimise the colonisation Moreton Robinson (2004) and Phillips (2005) state the traditional owners of the land needed to be ‘othered’, thus lacking innately human characteristics and, therefore, of unequal civil status. Othering of Indigenous Peoples enabled Australia to be defined as ‘Terra Nullius’, and according to McGrath (1995) and Crowley (1980), the myth of Terra Nullius is central to the discourse of whiteness and the white epistemology of Australia. The invasion and subsequent Colonisation

Describe and explain Australian Indigenous people’s historical and contemporary connections to land and sea and the resources derived from them. How have settler discourses associated with colonization affected these connections to country?

After many years of European settlement in Australia, many Aboriginal people had been removed from their families and placed into schools with white Australians. This was due to the ‘protection policy’ laws that encouraged the removal of Indigenous children. Because fewer indigenous children were able to learn about their own culture, there was a slow decline in the culture of the indigenous people. As a result of this, there were continued tensions between the free settlers and Indigenous people as they had no roles in the government and couldn’t vote. This made them feel as if they were excluded from greater society and had long term negative impacts upon their sense of belonging to the new

In 1788 when the European settlers “colonised” Australia, the Australian land was known as “terra nullius” which means “land belonging to no-one”. This decision set the stage for the problems and

Let's take it back to the 27th of May, 1967. The Australian Referendum, called by the Holt Government is about to decide whether or not citizens of Australia believe that Indigenous Australians should be given the right to vote. Although this was a successful referendum, in the government's eyes, this was going to give the recognition that the Indigenous Australians wanted. But it didn’t. The goal was to achieve a transformative lobby to concede the adverse wrongs of our colonial past. If that is so, how is it that 50 years later, this multicultural country and its government are still continuing to fail the First Australians, and ignoring the recognition they deserve - to be recognised in the Constitution.

Aboriginal people, since British settlement, have faced great inequalities and much racial discrimination on their own soil. Aboriginal Australians through great struggle and conflict have made significant progress in the right to their own land. To better understand the position of the Aboriginal Australians, this essay will go into more depth about the rights that Aboriginal people had to their own land prior to federation. It will also include significant events and key people who activated the reshaping of land rights for Indigenous Australians and how that has affected the rights Aboriginal people now have in the 21st Century, in regards to their land.

Aboriginal peoples of Canada have suffered exponentially throughout the entirety of history and proceed to do so in modern society. Much of the continued suffrage of aboriginal peoples is as a result of the Sixties Scoop and the Residential School System, as well as the lack of resources available to them. This has wreaked extensive havoc on the mental health of Aboriginal peoples, and has left excessive amounts of stigma and racism attached to Aboriginal Peoples, explicitly seen in the cases of missing and murdered Indigenous women.

Each example given has also shown how self-determination was and continues to be a major struggle for Aboriginal people. Beginning with the Whitlam government, the Land Rights Act was going to be the national recognition that Aboriginal people had been waiting for, however the swift dismissal of the government and subsequent changes to the bill meant that an uninformed government would dictate claims of Aboriginal land rights. This was continued in the Heritage Protection Act for Western Australia in which no monitoring of abuses of power within the authoritative ministry was assessed; hence damage to heritage sites for the development of industries occurred. Finally the Racial Discrimination Act although making racial discrimination illegal has clearly been violated by the government in the Northern Territory interventions and hence is not valued by Australia despite the international commitments made to recognising Indigenous rights. Although legislation has been introduced to recognise Indigenous rights, there seems to always be a catch. A final reoccurring theme in the legislation discussed is the uninformed views of the non-Indigenous government as decisions are made on behalf of Aboriginal people; hence two major statements were discussed that precisely define Aboriginal self-determination by Aboriginal

The Mabo decision of 1992 was hailed as a landmark case in the history of indigenous-white relations in Australia. Overturning centuries of injustice, as well as the myth of right by ‘terra nullius’, the case prompted the passing of the Native Title Act of 1993, which affirmed native title and asserted that native Australians possessed their land under common law, and in doing so ushered in a new era of equality in Australian society. However, though correctly lauded as a milestone in recognition of aboriginals as valid legal entities, the act was not without its problems, and in truth has had little impact on Australian society as a whole. As we shall see, the trend of positive reform existent in the act was not supported in practice, and aboriginal Australians remain at the mercy of Western courts when it comes to their land. Though the Mabo decision and the subsequent Native Title Act went some way to correcting past injustices, its actual impact on Australian society has been negligible.

Since European invasion in 1788, Indigenous Australians have fought to retain their rights and freedoms and to have governments recognise them. From 1788 and onwards the British created settlements on land that Aboriginal people previously used and controlled. Throughout the 19th century the government applied policies of ‘protection’ that have segregated Aborigines from Australian society by denying them equality and opportunity. They have achieved some significant changes in the brawl for acknowledgment (Anderson, 2014). Certain key developments that are significant in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders struggles for rights and freedoms are ; 1967 referendum, Mabo decision, bringing them home(stolen generations) and the apology. These four main key developments have been momentous developments for the Australian Indigenous population that are now allowed they’re human rights and freedoms.

The ‘colonisation' of Australia by Europeans has caused a lot of problem for the local Aborigines. It drastically reduced their population, damaged ancient family ties, and removed thousands of Aboriginal people from the land they had lived on for centuries. In many cases, the loss of land can mean more than just physical displacement. Because land is so much connected to history and spirituality, the loss of it can lead to a loss of identity. This paper will examine the works of Tim Rowse and Jeremy Beckett as well as other symbols of identity that are available to modern Aborigines in post colonial Australia.

Since British arrival, Aboriginal people have experienced marginalisation and extreme disadvantage within Australian society. Urban-based Aboriginal people, even more than those living in remote communities, have been subject to the impact of racism and discrimination on self-identity. Nonetheless, many urban-based Aboriginal people proudly identify with their Aboriginality, asserting their identity. In this case study, I will examine the identity of Aboriginal Australian’s, comparing this construction from the time period of colonisation in Australia to the current time period in Australia. Perhaps the most salient features of this construction are the impact of Australian colonisation, along with the effects of the Stolen Generation.

Since the beginning of European colonization in 1788, Aboriginal people have experienced displacement, have been the targets of genocidal policies and practices, and have had families destroyed through the forcible removal of children. Decades of colonial exploitation and a prolonged systematic attempt to destroy Aboriginal people and culture have led to legislations and policies that are punitive and restrictive towards Aboriginal people. Such legislation reflects the dominant society’s perceptions of Aboriginal people and how they ought to be

Across the world, countries such as New Zealand and Canada recognise their Indigenous cultures in their respective constitutions. Indigenous Australians don’t have this same treatment, with there being no mention of indigenous peoples in the Australian Constitution. Currently in all forms of Australian Government, there is a formal ‘Acknowledgement of Country’ before proceedings, though this remains a formality rather than a necessity. The Australian Government also introduced the Native Title Act (1993), which repeals the title of ‘Terra Nullius’ (no-man’s land) that was given to Australia at the time of British discovery. The Native Title Act also presents a process in which Indigenous Australians can make claims onto land that they can prove to be culturally significant to their respective tribe or community. Furthermore, ‘Sorry Day’ and ‘Reconciliation Day’, which are both nationally recognised events that commemorate and pay respects to the Indigenous people mistreated in the past.