Collonization Of Australia And Indigenous Australian People

The history wars of Australia is an area of great controversial debate. Throughout the course of Australian history, the public has been mainly subjected to one perspective that focused on the glorifying moments of European settlement and its progress such as its involvement in world wars and the transition of the nation into a globalised continent. As a result, there is a rigid dichotomy between the perceptions of white Australians and the indigenous population on subjects such as the colonisation or invasion of Australia. History told from the perspective of Aboriginal people greatly contrasts what is written in the history books and also what is exposed or encouraged towards the public. It focuses on the dispossession of indigenous people, the massacres and the attempted eradication of culture. This view of Australian history has been labeled as 'black armband history', which was first used during an interview by a historian, Geoffrey Blainey.

I argue that the ideologies behind The Assimilation Policy were evident since the first white settlers had arrived in 1788. Since first contact, Aboriginal people’s values, customs, beliefs and traditional way of life began to erode. From the 1850s onwards, Aboriginal people were forced onto reserves, and then into towns and cities in the mid 20th century . Many people feared that the ‘Australian’ culture was being affected by immigrants. Since the early 1900s, there had been a ‘White Australia’ policy and assimilation was expected upon arrival. However, Aboriginal people did not immigrate, so their policy, dictated by the Australian States and Commonwealth Government was known as The Policy of Assimilation. Assimilation policies were supported by racist assumptions and represented by settler nationalist imperatives . In the 1950s, assimilation policies for Aboriginal people were supported by the

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

“In what ways did Indigenous peoples resist the non-Indigenous settlement of Australia in the frontier period and how did non-Indigenous peoples retaliate? In your answer, discuss and analyse the initial and ongoing impact on Indigenous communities.”

Understanding how the historical factors have influenced Indigenous Australians helps operationalise the sociological imagination. The history of Indigenous people is important as many of the disadvantages they endure today is connected to the past. A historical awareness influences individuals to understand how organisations and institutions impact the health and wellbeing of a minority (Germov, 2002).The existence of Indigenous Australians well begins before the European invasion and colonisation of Australia. Aboriginal people were the native land owners, as they have been in Australia for over 60,000 years, prior to the British settlement in 1788.3 (workingwithindigenousaustralians.info, 2017). Indigenous Australians have been living off

On the 26th of January 1788, Australia was settled by the British who came in the First Fleet. The First Fleet was made up of 11 ships, holding 1,350 convicts, soldiers and settlers. Australia became the new penal colony as prisons were overflowing in Britain due to America’s Independence and refusal to take more convicts. Recently, there has been much debate over whether this colonisation of Australia was an invasion or settlement. An invasion is an unwelcome intrusion into another’s domain. Whereas a settlement is the process of establishing a settlement or settlements. Clearly, when considering these definitions, it can be seen that the colonisation of Australia was intended to be a peaceful settlement, but soon turned

‘Australia’ also showed how the government controlled how children of Aboriginal descent were brought up with language used such as “The mixed raced children must be dislocated from their primitive full blooded Aborigine, how else are we to breed the black out of them”. This presented again the reason as to why the Aboriginal children were taken away from their own cultures to be raised in something completely different.

Human rights are the rights of humans, regardless of nationality, gender, race, or religion. We should all have this in common as we are all part of humanity. However, Indigenous people did not always have these rights (Ag.gov.au, 2015). Aside from basic human rights, Indigenous people also have their own rights specific to their culture. Before 1967, Indigenous people had different rights in different states and the Australian federal government did not have any jurisdiction over Aboriginal affairs until Australia’s constitution was amended for this purpose in 1967 (Moadoph.gov.au, 2015). Between 1900 and the present time, there have been significant changes to the rights of Indigenous Australians. The effects of the European Settlement on the Indigenous people of Australia have been devastating. When white people began arriving in Australia, the Aboriginal people believed them to be ghosts of ancestor spirits. However, once they realised the settlers were invading their land, the Aborigines became, understandably, hostile (Slater & Parish, 1999, pp.8-11). In 1788, the total Indigenous population was believed to be between 750,000 and one million. By 1888, the Indigenous population was reduced to around 80,000 Australia wide (Korff, 2014). The three main reasons for this dramatic decline were the introduction of new diseases, violent conflicts with the colonisers, and settlers acquiring Indigenous land (Digital, 2015). In 1848, the Board of National Education stated that it

One of the first acts of the Commonwealth Government of Australia was the implementation of the White Australia Policy. This shows that the newly federated nation was built on fear and racism. The White Australia policy was a law that changed Australia and has shaped the way it is today. This essay will reflect how the policy was implemented, how it affected the nation as a whole, why the Australians feared the Chinese and how Australia was viewed from other federated nations, as a result of implementation of the policy.

Colonialism in Australia places a detrimental threat to the health of Indigenous Australians. Inherent in colonialism were scientific racisms, institutional racism and structural violence. These factors continues to persist in the fabric of Australian society today and limits the life chances of Indigenous Australians. This essay illuminates colonialism as a major contributor to the social marginalisation and low socioeconomic status experienced by indigenous Australian. An analysis of Aboriginal infant mortality rate, a health indicator highlights the difference between biomedical and sociological approach and the embedded negative impact of social marginalisation and low socioeconomic status on the health of Indigenous Australians. The

Noel Pearson’s speech ‘an Australian history for us all’ discusses his approach to trying to solve some of the most systemic problems facing Australian Aboriginals today. The speakers are successful in understanding the ideas and values of the speech. Through the uses of various language techniques and context, Pearson’s speech details the struggles of the relationship between the first European settlers and Aboriginal Australians.

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.

The Social Work professional would benefit from completing SCS130 because they would gain insight into the impact of British colonialism on Indigenous Australians and how the laws of control and protection forced them to become dependent, this, enables an understanding in terms of the present situation of disadvantage. Hollinsworth (2008) maintains that the historical impact of colonisation by Europeans on Indigenous Australians, is the basis for contemporary racism in Australia (pp. 35,67,77,79-80,83-84,97). This is supported by, The Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody (1991) report, which, highlights the impact of European settlement on the dispossession and institutional racism of Indigenous peoples. This racist ideology is based on the belief of superiority of the dominant group, in Australia this was enforced by racist legislation (Hollinsworth 2008, p. 47,77,79-80,97). Australia does have a racist history and as a consequence, these racist ideologies still exist today. This has resulted in Indigenous Australians experiencing racism through the oppressive effects of marginalisation in political, economic and social structures (Hollinsworth 2008, p.9,14,20,38,83-84,100). Therefore, it is imperative to the Social Work profession to complete a course such as SCS130 to enable comprehension of the present disadvantage experienced by Indigenous Australians in the context of the impact of European settlement.

From the first colony established for penal settlement in 1788 at Port Jackson, it all seemed to begin peacefully in the start. In reality, as the white settlers expands their territories with more colonies established, those movements destroyed not only the lives but also the trusts from the aborigines, unlike such as initially when Governor Arthur Phillip issued the Letters Patent establishing the colony of South Australia in 1836 with the confidence that “nothing should affect the rights of the natives in regard to their enjoyment or occupation of the land” . Over the past, Aborigines had their own complex social organisation, yet they had different language and customs in various tribes but have managed to live peacefully with one another. Still the British settlers saw the Aborigines as an inferior and a primitive group, simply because they have a lack of what they are used to, westernization. Such as a visible administration and therefore, they introduced the nation-state and complex political institutions along with the rise of new class, race, and gender concepts, which these are all parts of the preface towards modernity and civilisation.

The British were renowned for their ability to colonize due to their strong naval resources and ambition. Among the lands colonized were New Zealand and Australia. Although they are next to each other on the map, England’s territory-grabbing past begs the question – “To what extent does the colonization of Australia differ from the colonization of New Zealand?” The focus of this investigation is to analyze the reasons for the British colonization of both areas and determine the similarities and differences between the two.