In Kevin Rudd’s 17th of February 2008 speech, the Australian Prime Minister apologises to the Indigenous Australians for the stolen generations. With this speech, Rudd attempted to ease the disadvantage that affects most Indigenous Australians by pledging that the government would improve their health, education, living conditions and their lifestyle overall. Rudd claims that he is apologetic and remorseful for the treatment the past Indigenous Australians received. He strengthens his speech by using several language techniques to convince the audience that Australia is remorseful for the past events and wishes to amend. the techniques he used include such as his choice of vocabulary and references to time to mention the historical struggle
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
…show more content…
The anaphora of “we apologise” and epiphora of “we say sorry” creates emphasis on how remorseful Australia is and to enforce guilt on the audience. The inclusive language used in “we” is designated to lead the audience to feel as though they are a part of a community and that they must also take responsibility. It also intends to appeal to their emotions by using guilt. Rudd’s vocabulary choice such as “pain, suffering and hurt” appeals to the audience’s emotions by using sympathy. When Rudd says, “To the mothers and the fathers, the brothers and the sisters, for the breaking up of families and communities, we say sorry,” he appeals to the audience by mentioning family, whom they most likely value, creating sympathy for the Indigenous Australians. Rudd uses these language techniques to indicate how apologetic Australia is and hopes to be
The Australian Indigenous community hold extremely significant corrections to the land of Australia, of which they refer to as ‘Country.’ Indigenous people acquire deep meaning from the land, sea and the countless resources derived from them. This special relationship has formed for many centuries. To them ‘Country’ is paramount for overall wellbeing; the strong, significant, spiritual bonds embody their entire existence. Knowledge is continually passed down to create an unbroken connection of past,
People affected by Cronulla Riots in any manner were ‘out of the frying pan, and were into the fire’, when the documentary displayed Prime Minister John Howard declaring the riots as “un-Australian”. He made us believe that his view was optimistic and disagrees that there is underlying racism in Australia.
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.
How the language of ‘We are going and ‘Let us not be bitter’ demonstrates Oodgeroo Noonuccal’s perspective on Aboriginal rights.
A very noteworthy quote in Grant’s speech is easily noticed. He constantly uses repetition to highlight the ideology of “The Australian Dream”, in fact Stan Grant repeats this phrase 11 times throughout his speech. Instead of stating it after speaking of freedom, youth, wealth and joy he instead constantly repeats this expression again and again after describing the oppression, fear of humiliation and hurt of dispossession, injustice suffering and survival. Grant utilises these keywords to draw focus on the lies told by Australians told to themselves everyday. Grant speaks of the Australian anthem and to draw attention on the mockery in many verses of it and appeal to the patriotism of Australian Citizens. He constantly quotes verses from our
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
Keating's speech addresses the changing attitudes to war and to the Anzac legend. When he states: ‘ this Australia and the Australia he knew are like foreign countries’ he is using contrast to show us exactly how much has changed.
After this time, many atrocities occurred, such as the fact that Aboriginals were often killed for sport, and massacres such as Myall Creek were occurring, where 28 Aboriginal men, women and children were murdered near Myall Creek Station in 1838. There was also the problem of the Stolen Generation, when Aboriginal children were forcibly taken from their homes to be raised as though they were white. It was only recently in 2008, that Kevin Rudd, the Prime Minister of Australia at the time, apologised for the actions that the government had undertaken. In another apologetic move, Prime Minister Paul Keating delivered a powerful speech regarding the fact that Aboriginal Communities were still segregated despite the fact that laws had been changed a number of years ago. This shows that the idea of atonement by Australia is quite a new topic. Does this prove the challenges that Aboriginal’s faced nearly 200 years ago are still present in today’s society? It was enough to force the Aboriginal men, women and children to begin act in support of their rights.
I would like to begin this speech by recognising the owners of this land, the true ancestors of the country we call ‘ours’. To the Indigenous peoples of Australia, I acknowledge you, I thank you and most of all I apologise to you for the deep suffering and remorse you are put through. I am ashamed of this country’s treatment towards you. Past and Present.
Terra Nullius was once apparent in Australian society, but has now been nullified with the turn of the century. With the political changes in our society, and the apology to Indigenous Australians, society is now witnessing an increase in aboriginals gaining a voice in today’s society. Described by Pat Dodson (2006) as a seminal moment in Australia’s history, Rudd’s apology was expressed in the true spirit of reconciliation opening a new chapter in the history of Australia. Considerable debate has arisen within society as to whether aboriginals have a right to land that is of cultural significance and whether current land owners will be able to keep their land.
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.
‘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.
Reconciliation is the process of building respectful relationships between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and the wider Australian community. It is about understanding and respecting their culture and heritage and signifies ‘coming together’ to become one nation without racism and with equality for all. There are still vast differences in health, education, employment, and standards of living of the Indigenous peoples as compared to their non-Indigenous counterparts. Even today Indigenous peoples have a significantly lower life expectancy, up to 11.5 years for men and 9.7 years for women . The infant mortality rate for the Indigenous peoples is double the rate for non-Aboriginal Australians. Understanding these inequalities is the first step to reconciling the differences. Policies such as the stolen generation and assimilation policy destroyed Indigenous identity and culture and justified the dispossession of Indigenous people and the removal of Indigenous children from their parents. We can’t change the past but we can make a better future by understanding and learning from the mistakes of the past, reconciliation is about that. Many practical and symbolic strategies have been implemented over the last 50 years to achieve reconciliation such as ATSIC, Northern Territory Intervention and the Mabo decision. However, the most significant ones are the 1967 Referendum, Closing the Gap framework in 2008 and the ‘Sorry speech’. The aim is to improve the five dimensions of reconciliation: race relations, equality and equity, institutional integrity, unity, and historical acceptance.
Speeches are an iconic and widely used means of expression for our political leaders, particularly when discussing issues of importance such as Indigenous Australia. Paul Keating’s ‘Redfern Speech’ and Kevin Rudd’s ‘Apology to Australia’s Indigenous Peoples’ are the two political speeches which I will be analysing in this paper.
For me, as an Australian immigrant, with little experience or contact with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, the most meaningful aspects are understanding the Aboriginal terms of reference (ATR), protocols and deeper meaning of the Welcome to Country and Acknowledgement of Country. Readings and videos, such as First Contact (Sharkey & Weekley, 2016), highlights the Aboriginal people as first Australians and traditional owns of the land, the protocols regarding Aboriginal people and their knowledge, experience and values. Also, I realised the importance of a clear understanding and application of the ATR because it is a holistic approach with set principles, core values and processes that encompasses the cultural knowledge, understanding