Genocide In Tasmania By Henry Reynolds Summary

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.

The convicts did not follow this conduct and most believed that the Australian natives were ‘barely human’ (MacDougall .A.K 2004). The population ratio of British settlers in Australia to the natives, drastically altered over the century in the result of rapid colonisation and the conflicts which the Commonwealth of Australia Official Year Books explicitly depicts. The British settlers came in masses bringing a new society and culture to the land. The indigenous people were not familiar with an individual possession society and believed that the stock on the land was to be hunted and used as a food source. This is epitomised in a letter sent to the editor of The Sydney Monitor and Commercial Advertiser by Daniel Eaton in 1838, stating that ‘five horses [were] killed, and four others were wounded… a hundred head of cattle killed and the flocks and herds were driven away in all directions by the blacks’ (Convict Creations, 2013). Newspapers from the time showed that the British reacted to the natives by killing them off the land and believed that the ‘Natives should be slaughtered…[because] they are baboons, blood thirsty dogs and black animals’ (Stewart D,1986). The British were not interested in negotiating with the natives of the land and believed their culture was inhuman wasting the land. Governor Gawler stated in a newspaper article, ‘Black men- we wish to make you happy, but you cannot be

The policy of assimilation of Aboriginal people was first developed in 1937, by all of the Australian States and the Commonwealth Government during the Aboriginal Welfare conference. During the course of the meeting, the Western Australian Chief Aboriginal Protector, Auber Octavius Neville, concluded that, “In 50 years we should forget that there were any Aborigines in this country” . This proposal meant the total annihilation of Aboriginal people. At the conclusion of this meeting, the agreed desired outcome was for Aboriginal people to be assimilated into white society.

Prior to the arrival of the first fleet in 1788, it is estimated that there were around 750, 000 Indigenous Australians living in Australia. Between 1788 and 1900 there was a depopulation of Indigenous Australians due to not only conflict and violence from the Europeans, but particularly the introduction of new diseases from them. It was undoubtedly true that in the first decades the spread of unknown diseases was rapid and the resistance was so low it resulted in higher death rates. The decreasing population resulted in demoralisation of Indigenous Australians and overruling by the Europeans. This overruling resulted in British Law, which subsequently proceeded to established acts of legislation such as the Aborigines Protection Act 1909 (NSW). But why was this legislation formed? According to the

Australia was first claimed by Captain Cook in early 1770, but it wasn’t settled until 1788 when the first fleet of 11 ships arrived at Botany Bay, carrying 1,530 passengers - mostly convicts, as well as some marines and officers. They moved to Port Jackson to begin establishing a settlement. Specific prisoners were chosen for the trip, the ones with skills in building, farming and other things that would have been useful to create a “liveable” environment for the new inhabitants. The first “free” settlers only arrived in 1793, thus beginning the colonisation of New South Wales.

At the turn of the twentieth century the systematic forced removal of Aboriginal children from their mothers, families and cultural heritage was commonplace. There were several reasons that the government and white society used to justify the separation but the prevailing ideology of nationalism and maintaining Australia for the ‘whites’ was the over-riding motivation and justification for their actions[1]. Progressive sciences such as anthropology espoused such theories as eugenics, miscegenation, biological absorption and assimilation which legitimated governmental policies relating to Aboriginal affairs[2]. It was

The efficacy and implementation of the Northern Territory Intervention has received wide spread criticism due to the lack of prior consultation with the Indigenous Community leaders as well as the questionable reforms subsequently implemented. Amongst these reforms were the suspension of the Racial Discrimination Act (RDA) (Korff, J, 2016) and forceful leasing of Indigenous land to the commonwealth as documented in The Northern Territory National Emergency Response Act, 2007 (Cth). The Northern Territory Intervention consequently has had numerous negative impacts on the community, “The intervention has had consequences that will have repercussions for generations” (Dodson, 2016)

The battle between the settlers and Aborigines increased when Macquarie became Governor and believed that the Aborigines should be civilised. This is another way of saying to convert Aboriginal ways into European ways. Macquarie tried very hard to teach new techniques or educating them however these failures made him very mad and desperate. In his perspective the rightful last resort was to put the Aboriginal land and people under his control by saying anyone is permitted to shoot Aborigines if they retaliated or resisted.

In the early 1890’s, protectionism gave way to state and commonwealth government regimes of segregation. In the development of the constitution, politicians included sections specifically excluding Indigenous Australians, such as the white Australia policy, ensuring that racism became entrenched in the new nation’s future. Reserves and missions were set up far from white settlements, to exclude and control Indigenous Australians, especially those of mixed descent (Hampton & Toombs, Racism, colonisation/colonialism and impacts on indigenous people, 2013).

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

64, Commonwealth of Australia 2011). Policy then moved towards more assimilationist strategies in which attempts were made to convert Aboriginal Australians into ‘responsible citizens’ (Gilbert 2005, Haebich 2000). The protectionist and assimilationist policies share the core values that Aboriginal culture is inferior and on its way to an ‘evolutionary end’ (Gilbert 2005, p. 64).

When the British moved in the west in 1815 (Flood, 2001 p. 97), Governor Macquarie came across the new settlement of Bathurst on Macquarie River approx. 150 miles west of Sydney (Flood, 2001 p. 97). The Wiradjuri people, numbering over 3000 people, spreading over 97, 000 km of central New South Wales (Flood, 2001 p. 97), which then eventually travelled to Bathurst region in 1820s (Blackburn, 2002 p. 140). Unfortunately, settlement around Bathurst displayed a Wiradjuri group led by Windradyne whom was a known aboriginal warrior and resistance leader for the Wiradjuri group (Buckett & Buckett, 2014 p. 46; Flood, 2006 p. 93). It was expressed how they believed that the settlers weren’t welcome due to how ‘it was their country, the water and land

In 1788 the first Fleet arrived in Australia bringing European soldierse, convicts and settlers. This bought aboriginals in contact with white people for the first time. Some aboriginal groups tried to resist this occupation and they used violence and force the archive it. This essay will explain why that resistance was justified by examining the causes, identifying some examples of Indigenous resistance and will assess short and long term effects of this conflict.

Ironically, the civilised people who brought the ‘improvements’ could not cope to live in peace with the natives, where countless Aboriginal lives vanished under the ‘superior’ governance of the new settlers. Regardless which part of the continent including Tasmania, the history has shown many unfair

The process of colonisation by European powers, as might be expected, has had a radical effect on Aboriginal culture. The settlers viewed the natives as barbarians, seizing tribal land and, in many cases, following a policy of pacification by force. Many others died of disease, starvation, cultural dislocation and neglect. Today, there are fewer than 230,000 Aborigines in Australia, less than 2% of the population.