Analyzing Kevin Michael Rudd's Speech 'Sorry'

Since the time of federation the Aboriginal people have been fighting for their rights through protests, strikes and the notorious ‘day of mourning’. However, over the last century the Australian federal government has generated policies which manage and restrained that of the Aboriginal people’s rights, citizenships and general protection. The Australian government policy that has had the most significant impact on indigenous Australians is the assimilation policy. The reasons behind this include the influences that the stolen generation has had on the indigenous Australians, their relegated rights and their entitlement to vote and the impact that the policy has had on the indigenous people of Australia.

The Australian Prime Minister uses several language techniques to acknowledge the terrible treatment Indigenous Australians suffered from. Rudd constantly references time in, "the oldest continuing", 'today we honour" and "their past treatment", which intends to indicate how long the historical struggle

In a world surrounded by media, people are reliant on truthful and honest information to form accurate conceptions of current events and issues. Australia is a self-proclaimed multicultural country who aims to achieve equality and equity. However, through the analysis of the comparative text between, Stan Grant’s ‘The Australian Dream’ and Pauline Hanson’s, “Maiden Speech” it is clear that the truth is juxtaposed with the reality of the present Australia, who is still a country with racism and inequality. Despite two people stating the arguing issue, there are different perceptions of truth of who is the most vulnerable. In which Grant places great significance on the racism rooted in the Australian Dream and Hanson’s stance for non-Indigenous people inequality.

Only in recent years have we seen the recognition that the stolen generation deserves and the essential part it has play in the struggle of Aboriginal rights. Since the end of the stolen generation, numerous organisations and government agency has come out and said sorry for what happened for seventy years and as a result Aboriginal rights are becoming more apparent. The famous “I’m sorry” speech said by Kevin Rudd was the first Parliament apology to the Stolen Generation and was seen as a huge leap forward in the recognition of the Stolen Generation. The Bringing Them Home Report in 1997 was a strong campaign for The

Kevin Rudd’s apology was to the Aboriginals; but in particular, to the Stolen Generations. From 1909-1969, the Australian Government forced a policy know as assimilation upon the Aboriginals. Assimilation is the forced integration of minority groups onto the dominant society. Inhumane acts were inflicted upon these proud people because of the ‘Aborigines Protection Board’ which entailed that the Australian Government had full rights to forcibly remove half-caste children from Aboriginal care without parental consent nor a court order.

Although many of these children were later adopted and had experienced an extensive education, the emotional and social cost was too high. The heartache experienced was detrimental to the growth and to their very survival. The ‘Stolen Generation’ has had significant effects upon the Australian history and culture and destructive effects upon the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples affected.

The Stolen Generation refers to the many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children who were forcibly removed from their families and assimilated into European communities between 1880 and 1970. These children were made to adopt white culture in attempt to allow aboriginal people to “die out”, through forced rejection of their heritage and banning the use of their own language. Children faced physical, psychological and sexual abuse, sexual and labour exploitation, racism, grief, and suffering. Between 1 in 10 and 3 in 10 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children were taken by government, church, or welfare authorities and placed into institutional or foster care with non-Indigenous families.

Mr Rudd opened his speech in parliament with the words “We honour the Indigenous peoples of this land, the oldest continuing cultures in human history” (2012). It is true that Mr Rudd took the first step in reconciliation however he has not progressed as far as hoped. There has been little compensation made to the stolen generation. Was the apology a sincere one? Perhaps? His intentions were clear and precise. Rudd had said he would apologize and he did. He did not say he would compensate the Indigenous Australians in any form which would have gone a long way to begin the healing process. Especially due to the inconceivable horrors that were enacted against the Stolen Generations.

This political perspective is undertaken by Johannes Bjelke-Petersen (JBP) and John Howard (JH). The text is set in North Queensland which JBP represented as a political power. JBP represented himself as the spokesman for the average Queenslander, its farmers, pastoralists and older generation of Australians. The text presents the shared perspective these groups as the past should be left in the past. In relation to the Aboriginals, this means that in the eyes of such people that the Aboriginals have no special claim to land and furthermore, the Aboriginals have done nothing to deserve as such. JBP is quoted by a newspaper in the text when he shares his perspective on the matter. “The Aborigines were the ‘most lucky lucky people in the world’ because ‘we [the white Australians] fought and died for this country, not them’.” (pg. 171) This quote is an example of the shared political perspective of a specific group of people presented in the text. JH is of a similar view when Henry Reynolds (R) says, “In an article in the Sunday Telegraph with the headline ‘Teacher “Thuggery” Distorts History’, [PM John Howard] accused the [Teachers] Federation of attempting to distort history to make a contemporary political point’.” (pg. 160) This is another example of

The National Inquiry into the separation of the children concluded that 'between one-in-three and one-in-ten Indigenous children were forcibly removed from their families and communities in the period from approximately 1910 until 1970' (Wilkie, 1997). It was the 1960s, at the earliest, when the various 'protection' Acts were either abolished or discontinued.

Kevin Rudd had quoted “Today we honour the indigenous people of this land. The elders continuing in human history. We reflect on their past mistreatment, we reflect in particular on the mistreatment of those in the stolen generation. This blemished chapter in our national history. The time has now come for our nation to turn a new page.

This article gives the reader an inequitable view of Indigenous Australians, defending Tony Abbot’s point of view and the audience is encouraged to agree with mainstream media in regards to whether or not Tony Abbott is racist. Article B from the Koori Mail condemns Tony Abbott’s viewpoint as not only racist but he is insulting the very culture that he is representing. Article B states that Tony Abbott does not understand Indigenous culture and how important land is to them “Connection to country is everything to Aboriginal people – defines Aboriginal people and sustains us in a cultural and spiritual sense and can play a vital role in building economic independence, self-determination and healing” (Greg Cromelin, Article B). With Article B the audience is encouraged to get angry at Tony Abbott’s comments and make him out to be racist.

“We apologise for the laws and policies of successive Parliaments and governments that have inflicted profound grief, suffering and loss on these our fellow Australians. We apologise especially for the removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families, their communities and their country. For the pain, suffering and hurt of these Stolen Generations, their descendants and for their families left behind, we say sorry. To the mothers and the fathers, the brothers and the sisters, for the breaking up of families and communities,

Rudd informs the audience of his intention to equalize the opportunities for all Australians regardless or origin. An extended metaphor runs throughout the speech of a book with Rudd making reference to this many times. This is shown through remarks like, "new page in history", "the next chapter in the history of this great country," and "it screams from the pages." The use of this metaphor allows the audience to attach a visual image to Rudd's vision of Australia's future and his re-presentation of the past. The speech is structured into 3 basic parts. The formal motion at the beginning directed towards the government. Justification on the importance of the apology, in relation to some questioning the need, "Why apologise?" Finally the apology itself where the simple, direct language makes clear to everyone what Rudd is trying to communicate. This reiterates the belief that Rudd's political motivations are explicit without any pretence. Effective use of Language features and techniques are evident throughout his monologue. The use of inclusive language, 'we', allows Rudd to speak for all Australians, no matter indigenous background, and how they have mutually band together to move forward. Alliteration and the rule of threes is used in the following line, "mutual respect, mutual resolve and mutual responsibility." The rule of three's allows view points to be better presented while the reputation of the word, 'mutual' describes Australia must remain united together, further adding to the sentence

At first arrival to Australia, my knowledge about history of Indigenous Australians and in particular about “Stolen Generations” was limited. After research, I have leant about history of Australia’s First Peoples and the struggles they have faced. In February 2008 Prime Minister Kevin Rudd delivered an apology to the “Stolen Generations” that was addressed to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians who had been forcibly removed from their families under government policies.