Grant utilises traumatic anecdotes, allusion to contemporary issues and his first person’s point of view to bring forth the readers values and attitudes of accountability for the past, and criticalness of previous actions against Indigenous people. For example, Grant details personal tales of how his grandmother was turned away from the hospital because “she was giving birth to the child of a black person”. The anecdote attacks the latter part of the Australian Dream, stating “(..)deep sense of belonging that allows all Australian to thrive” which was unfortunately not the case where Grant’s elder was reprimanded of her right to treatment. Furthermore, Grant talks about his grandfather who fought wars for Australia but came back to a nation where “he couldn’t even share a drink with his digger mates in the pub because he was black”. The anecdotes again contradicts core Australian values of mateship and equality as Grant’s grandfather who served alongside his caucasian friends was not recognized as a citizen thus was denied the ability to socialise with his soldiers.
This correlates to the ideology of heritage and identity within Australia. Australia was known as terra nullius (land unoccupied) when European settlers colonised due to their belief that indigenous Australians were a different race similar to fauna (Byrne 2003). Jones and Harris (1998) expand on this notion with the idea that European settlers deemed themselves the first occupiers of Australian land due to their discourse surrounding the permanency and entitlement of land ownership. This Euro-centric construct of land ownership is discussed within the article with specific importance placed colonials concept of being an inheritor of the land rather than an invader and also the historical European concept of racial identities and their link to ‘the nation’ (Byrne 2003, p. 78). It was seen that because the indigenous Australians didn’t comply to the settler’s social construct of home, then the land wasn’t owned and therefore any remains were also free for the taking.
Reynolds exposes the persecution of Indigenous People, describing the entrenched belief in Aboriginal inferiority common in 70s North Queensland, recalling one school principal who said he ‘did not expect much from [Aboriginal children] because they had smaller brains’. The ‘confidence and complete certainty’ with which the comment was made conveys how deeply negative ideas about Aborigines had been ingrained. These attitudes resulted in an assumption of superiority by white citizens, who Reynolds writes expected ‘lowered eyes and a submissive downward tilt of the head’. Reynolds’ personal voice resonates with condemnation for the oppression faced by Aborigines, illustrating how his perspective has been shaped by his experience of race relations. By sharing this account, Reynolds raises questions about the historical origins of the racial tension he experienced.
This reliable primary source written by an Australian jurist, shows that Indigenous people especially Grant, didn’t feel like they were respected enough during World War 1. The source is useful in showing that Douglas Grant was prepared to die because he and all other Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander felt like they weren’t being treated as equal individuals. Discrimination against Indigenous communities was faced on a daily basis during the War and even continued to when it ended, showing how disrespected and disregarded Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people
The speech was made as the prime minister had some concerns about the daily challenges that the Indigenous people had to tackle. It was made to capture the harsh truths about Australian history, and to use them as a beginning for building trust in the government’s motives among Indigenous Australians. The speech was created not only to help those Indigenous to help the civil rights movement but also to challenge what it would be like if those average white Australians experienced such injustices. It had been an historical event because it was the first time an Australian Prime minister had widely spoken about Indigenous discriminations that they have or had been experiencing. “Recognition that it was we who did the dispossessing.
From this time, there were many momentous events that exacerbated the issue of Aboriginal Civil Rights in Australia and widened the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people. The governments implementation of Protection and Assimilation policy had a major negative impact not only on Aboriginal Civil Rights but also created considerable disadvantage and disparity that today
Protection and segregation is the policy targeting to indigenous people within around 1890s to 1950s, it is ‘a policy of despair. ’(Hasluck, 1953). In this period of time, Indigenous people are suffering from the beginning and formal institutional racism in the society. The aim of policy are so called protecting and assisting indigenous people by segregate them. In late eighteenth century, ideology of people who are more ‘primeval’ will eventually extinct as the development traced by the European was dominant in Australia society.
With the acknowledgement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders in the Commonwealth constitution, Australia may not be perceived as a country racist towards the indigenous in regard to the constitution, and indigenous families and may feel a greater sense of acceptance and belonging within their community and
This article discusses the speech given by an Indigenous journalist, Stan Grant who participated in a debate where he spoke for the motion “Racism is destroying the Australian Dream’’. Hence, the main points of this article are mostly evidence given by Grant in his debate to support his idea that the Australian Dream is indeed rooted in racism. One of the main points is that the indigenous Australians are often excluded and disregarded as non-Australians simply due to their race and skin colour. Grant pointed out the incident where AFL player Adam Goodes was publicly jeered and told that he did not belong to his country as he was not an Australian despite the fact that Australia indeed is the land of his ancestors.
This sudden change still has an enormous effect on today’s Indigenous population. How is it fair that the oldest population of people die a decade younger than non-Indigenous Australians? The perpetuation of racism which is manifested in our society has left many Indigenous Australians in a disadvantaged position. Including through, limited access to education with adult literacy rates of just 30 percent and literacy rates of children under 15 more than 48 percent lower than non-Indigenous Australians, consequently means lower educational achievement rates and higher unemployment rates of 17.2 percent compared to 5.5 percent for non-Indigenous Australians (Australian Bureau of Statistics , 2013 ). These facts must be recognised to ensure real equality and a fair-go for Indigenous people.
One of the most important changes was the acceptance that Aboriginal People could be assimilated into ‘White’ culture. Although blatant racial discrimination was disappearing, systemic racial discrimination remained . ‘White’ culture was seen to be the quintessential ideal for Australian society with Aboriginal Australians seen to be unsophisticated and in need of industrialization
Since colonisation in 1788 Europeans believed the Aboriginal peoples to be a primitive race with no societal structures in place because their system did not resemble one that was recognizable or fit within it did not resemble a system that was recognizable by white settlers. National identity is believed to be a general concept that referred to a broad set of codes with a shared understanding within a nation, and the sense of belonging that is reinforced through myths, symbols, media activities, and everyday practices (Carter, 2006, p. 7; Van Krieken et al., 2017, pp. 234-244). Australia is now regarded as a diverse country with an identity that has evolved over time and will continue to do so. For Indigenous Australians to conform to this national identity, they had to assimilate and give up their values, beliefs, and cultural rights to become more like white Australia.
Exclusion from workplaces and social events also plays a major part in the racial discrimination. Do we really want Australia to be seen as such a racist and prejudiced nation? What can we as individuals do to stop this racial hate from going on? All of this is happening because we stole the Aboriginal people’s land. If we had
With that said, the British went through with the plan of establishing a penal colony in New South Wales and in 1788, the First Fleet led by Captain Arthur Phillip arrived in Sydney Cove. This essay will focus on the effects of racism towards the Aboriginal population of Australia in the past and today. Between 1788 and 1900, a large part of Australia’s indigenous population has lost their lives due to miscellaneous diseases. Aboriginal people were introduced to illnesses like smallpox, measles or tuberculosis, which were brought by the British convicts. Indigenous Australians had no immunity to these sicknesses, which led to the diseases spreading at a rapid speed and eradicating a large part of Australia’s indigenous population.
Australia is known as a country of freedom and fairness, however many groups such as youth, the unemployed, aged, and ethnic groups tend to become marginalised because of their minority status. Certain groups are marginalised because they are perceived as being different or undeserving of equality in society. This is called stereotyping and it leads to prejudice and discrimination. This essay explores three marginalised groups and discusses some of the reasons why they are marginalised and the effects on those within these groups. Exclusion from areas such as employment and other services and opportunities that other Australian 's take for granted, is a result of the marginality of indigenous Australian 's, woman, and those with
