Historical Roots Of The New Zealand

The powerful interaction of power and privilege is thoughtfully explored throughout The Secret River (2015) by Diana Reid which shows the discriminatory ,ethnocentric practices between the Australian Colonizers and the Indigenous people that defines the period. Before Colonization in 1788, Aboriginal Civilization was composed of over 600 different nations that organized the Australian landscape which was more than 40millenbia (Broome 2010). Privilege is a benefit that only a single person or group of individuals usually has because of their position whereas Power is the potential to control the people and events .(Barbara 1994). Several factors lead to power differences between the Indigenous and European cultures that resulted in dispossession

Annotated Bibliography: INDG 1160 Colbung, K., ‘On being Aboriginal: a personal statement’, in Berndt, C. and Berndt, R. (eds.), Aborigines of the West: Their Past and Present, Perth, University of Western Australia Press, 1980, pp. 100-105. In this concise, yet powerful proclamation of self, Ken Colburg a Noongyar man and chair of the Aboriginal Land trust describes growing up in a time of extreme oppression of his people. He depicts the prolific way the Australian government has defined the Aborigines through a series of legislation instead of letting his culture have the freedom to self-identify. This statement was written in 1980 during a controversial time where mining bills superseding the previous land grant legislation.

The British invasion of Australia has unfortunately had multiple negative impacts on all Indigenous Australians, and additionally has created historic legacies that frequently effect the way in which people perceive, and work with Indigenous peoples. One of the historic legacies evident throughout Aileen’s case is the horrific occurrence of the stolen generation. One of the most profound consequences of colonisation, involving the removal of Aboriginal children from their families into missions, reserves or other institutions (Dudgeon, Wright, Paradies, Garvey & Walker, n.d.). This historic legacy can be identified in Aileen’s case, which has potential to impact on the processes taking place, and the decisions being made by the stakeholders.

The first paper by Ladner and Orsini, (2003) gives a detailed account, review and analysis of the First nations governance act. The paper reflects on the act and provides arguments supporting the fact that it is an example of a gentler, subtle form of colonialism that is still in practice today. It argues that although the government has well researched the problems affecting the first nations, it has not efficiently advocated the involvement of these people in their own welfare and improvement.

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

Broome points out in the early 20th century indigenous people were controlled in two ways by the Europeans. First was being controlled by special legislation, known as the ‘Aboriginal protection Boards’ which imprisoned people on reserves, their daily routines and family gathering split that denied aboriginals civil rights. Second control was by unauthorized customary discrimination, known as ‘caste barrier’, which were against aboriginals on their basis of their skin colour. Broome presents the ways of how indigenous people were treated and discriminated from certain areas.

Their struggle is soon brought to court where they requested to be considered citizens of the Nisga’a nation, rather than being considered citizens of Canada. Eventually, a treaty is signed between them and the federal government so the Nisga’a people can claim sovereignty over their ancestral homeland, while still being confined within the nation-state. This article helps answer the question of this essay by showing the effects of globalization through colonization on aboriginal people’s identities. Since their land had been under colonization, the Nisga’a found it absolutely necessary to fight for their national identity to claim autonomy from the colonizers. By having the right to call themselves Nisga’a citizens instead of Canadian citizens, their national identities have immensely strengthened due to oppression (Blackburn 2009).

The foundations of this phase were laid as Britain, and later Canada, claimed sovereignty over the land, largely through the mass settlement of European immigrants and signing of treaties. This paper will briefly compare these two phases of the Canadian colonial project, in order to understand the ways in which imperial and settler colonial projects use Indigenous lands and peoples for economic benefit and profit. This will reveal that under imperial colonial Canada, France and Britain profited off the land by exploiting Indigenous labour, while under settler colonial Canada, Britain and Canada, profited off the land by dispossessing and marginalizing Indigenous

In a recent study by Douglas and Walsh (2013), the historical processes of colonisation, namely the removal policies and practices affecting the Indigenous members of Australian society, have the most to answer for when it comes to the loss of identity and poverty

The first lesson uses the Indigenous Australian’s deprivation from wages in WA from late 19th century to 1970s as a case study to examine the importance of basic labour right protection. The concept can then be generalized and applied to private property rights as the foundation of a market economy. The second lesson proceeds to discuss the role of the government in a market economy. In addition to supplying public and under-produced goods as stated in the curriculum (SCSA, n.d.), the government

In Australia, ‘Closing the Gap’ has become a key focus in the way governments have decided to address indigenous inequality. The term ‘closing the gap’ can be traced back to policy introduced in New Zealand in the 1990s aimed at addressing inequality in Māori communities. Governments in both Australia and New Zealand have tried to bridge perceived gaps between these Indigenous groups and “the rest of society” particularly in relation to gaps in socioeconomic status. However such policies may be problematic as they tend to ignore issues of self-determination and sovereignty sought by Indigenous groups (Cornell 2006:9-10; Muldoon & Schaap 2012:535). Ignoring claims of self-determination and sovereignty may be indicative of ongoing divisions in settler states working to accommodate the needs and outcomes of Indigenous groups given the undercurrent of conflictual and often violent histories that mar the relations between the two groups. As such, this essay seeks to compare these policies regarding inequalities between Indigenous societies and their settler states, as well as the relevant contexts of these policies, in order to highlight issues that emerge in relation to indigenous claims for sovereignty and concepts of nationalism.

For over 200 years Aborigines have endured a long history of suffering due to the unpropitious effects of internationalism and western colonization; in Europeans attempt for cultural assimilation and taking their land to which has caused catastrophic consequences within individuals and the community as a whole by

A Key conflict that endures as one of the most noteworthy events in New Zealand’s early history is the Waikato war of 1863-1864. The significance of the battles lies in the definition of the status of Maori and Pakeha in New Zealand. Particular historic debate surrounds whether the Waikato war was caused more primarily over the dispute of land or sovereignty. Maori were rising against British control and domination over them exhibited by establishment of the Kingitanga movement and the resistance to land sales. Responding in a way they saw that they had the right British invaded the Waikato. The outcomes of these events still hold debate and controversy in the regions of occurrence even today. With large loss of lives on both sides directly from the clashes, as Maori retained their pride refused to surrender to the British’s superior technology. New laws were passed as a result of the resistance involving shameless policy’s which marginalised Maori and there rights further. The consequences of this war were drawn out until the late 20th, when finally reparations were made in full.

The article, Stereotypical Constructions of the Maori ‘Race’ in the Media, written by Melanie Wall (1997), can be summarised as an article focusing on the effect the colonisation of New Zealand had on the Maori as a population. It mainly focuses on the way Maori have been imagined as the stereotypical ‘Black Other’. It speaks of the perpetuation and (re)formation of Maori identities, including the way Maori are constrained by their ‘Black Other’ stereotype within New Zealand. The article talks about representations of race through ‘identity images’, the effect of the Maori Renaissance (in particular its effect on identity formations), and Maori Stereotypes in the Media.

The challenges faced By Indigenous Peoples in achieving justice, are both complex and extensive. These issues stem from successive centuries of asserted colonial power, which consequently has resulted in the undermining of rights for many Indigenous communities, including the Australian Aboriginal Peoples and Maori Peoples of New Zealand. Systemic abuse of power has resulted in the gradual erosion of Indigenous culture, and as thus, rights of Indigenous communities, including Intellectual Property and Cultural Rights, have been neglected. As a result, a growing body of declarations, statements, and other developments both within governmental systems, as well as in the wider international justice arena have been received. However, many